HomeMy WebLinkAbout09835 ORD - 07/08/1970AN ORDINANCE
CLOSING THE HEARING ON STREET IMPROVEMENTS FOR SOUTH
ALAMEDA STREET FROM MONTCLAIR DRIVE TO EDGEWATER DRIVE:
FOR CARSON DRIVE FROM ENNIS JOSLIN ROAD TO SOUTH ALAMEDA
STREET: FOR ENNIS JOSLIN ROAD FROM CARSON DRIVE TO SOUTH
ALAMEDA STREET: AND FOR THE INTERSECTIONS OF SOUTH ALAMEDA
STREET WITH TROY DRIVE, HAROLDSON STREET, PALMETTO DRIVE,
COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE AND EBONWOOD DRIVE, AND FINDING AND
DETERMINING THAT PROPERTY ABUTTING SAID STREETS WILL BE
SPECIFICALLY BENEFITTED AND ENHANCED IN VALUE IN EXCESS
OF COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, AND LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT:
FIXING A CHARGE AND LIEN, THE MANNER AND TIME OF PAYMENT
AND COLLECTION: AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
WHEREAS, the City Council of Corpus Christi, Texas, by duly enacted
ordinance passed and approved on May 27, 1970, determined the necessity for,
and ordered the improvement of South Alameda Street from Montclair Drive to
Edgewater Drive; for Carson Drive from Ennis Joslin Road to South Alameda
Street; for Ennis Joslin Road from Carson Drive to South Alameda Street;
and for the intersections of South Alameda Street with Troy Drive, Haroldson
Street, Palmetto Drive, Country Club Drive and Ebonwood Drive, in the manner
and according to the plans and specifications heretofore approved and adopted
by the City Council by ordinance dated May 27, 1970, a duly executed notice
of said ordinance having been filed in the name of said City with the County
Clerk of Nueces County, Texas; and
WHEREAS, said City Council of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas,
after having advertised for and received bids on the construction of said
improvements for the length of time and in the manner and form as required
by the Charter of said City and the Laws of the State of Texas, and after
having duly and regularly made appropriation of funds available for such
purpose to cover the estimated cost of said improvements to said City, all
as provided by the Corpus Christi City Charter and by Law, did award a con-
tract for the construction of said improvements to South Texas Construction
Company on their lowest and most advantageous bid and said contract has been
heretofore duly executed by said City of Corpus Christi and South Texas Con-
struction Company and is dated July 1, 1970, and the performance bond required
by said contract has been properly furnished by said South Texas Construction
Company and accepted by the said City Council of said City as to form and
amount as required by the said City Council of said City and the laws of the
State of Texas; and
9835
WHEREAS, the said City Council has caused the Director of Public
Works to prepare and file estimates of the cost of such improvements and
estimates of the amount per front foot proposed to be assessed against the
property abutting upon the aforesaid streets, within the limits herein
defined, to be improved, and the real and true owners thereof, and said
Director of Public Works has heretofore filed said estimates and a statement
of other matters relating thereto with said City Council, and same has been
received, examined and approved by said City Council; and
WHEREAS, said City Council, by duly enacted ordinance dated
May 27, 1970, did determine the necessity of levying an assessment for
that portion of the cost of constructing said improvements on the above -named
streets within the limits herein defined, to be paid by the abutting property
and the real and true owners thereof, and by ordinance dated May 27, 1970,
did order and set a hearing to be held at 3:00 o'clock P.M. on June 17, 1970,
in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at Corpus Christi, Texas, for the
real and true owners of the property aubtting upon said streets, within the
limits above defined, and for all others owning or claiming any interest in,
or otherwise interested in said property, or any of said matters as to the
assessments and amounts to be assessed against each parcel of abutting pro-
perty and the real and true owner or owners thereof, and as to the special
benefits to accrue to said abutting property by virtue of said improvements,
if any, or concerning any error, invalidity, irregularity or deficiency in
any proceedings, or contract, to appear and be heard in person or by counsel
and offer evidence in reference to said matters;. and the City Council did
by said ordinance order and direct the City to give notice of said hearing
to the owners abutting upon said streets as shown by the current ad valorem
tax roll by mailing such notice to such owners and publishing said notice
at least three times in the Corpus Christi Times before the date of the
hearing, such notice by mail and by publication being in compliance with
the provisions of Article 1105b of Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes of Texas;
and
WHEREAS, such notice was given said owners of property as shown
on the current ad valorem tax roll within the limits of the streets being
-2-
improved by mailing such notice at least fourteen (14) days prior to the
hearing to such owners and by publishing three times notice of such hearing
in the Corpus Christi Times, the first of which publication was at least
twenty -one (21) days prior to the date of said hearing; both forms of notice
being in compliance with and containing the information required by Article
1105b, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes; and
WHEREAS, after due, regular and proper notice thereof, all as pro-
vided by law and the Charter of the City of Corpus Christi, said hearing of
which notice was given, was opened and held on June 17, 1970, in the
Council Chamber at City Hall in the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, in accord-
ance with said ordinance and notice, at which time an opportunity was given
to all said above - mentioned persons, firms, corporations and estates, their
agents and attorneys, to be heard and to offer evidence as to all matters
in accordance with said ordinance and notice, at which time the following
appeared and offered the following testimony:
-3-
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
June 24, 1970
Page 6
Mayor Blackmon announced the scheduled public hearing on paving assessments for the
improvement of Alameda Street from Ocean Drive to Montclair. He explained the procedure to
be followed, and asked that it be noted that a quorum of the Council and the required Charter
officers were present. He stated that each member of the Council had been presented with a
copy of the Preliminary Assessment Roil, and that Assistant City Attorney Amador Garcia would
conduct the public hearing.
Mr. Garcia explained the purpose of the hearing, and stated the Staff would offer
testimony from the City Engineer and evaluation testimony from a real estate appraiser to sub-
stantiate the assessments which appear on the Preliminary Assessment Roll, and that the hearing
was to form a basis on which the Council, acting as a legislative body, would determine or
establish the assessments on the abutting properties.
Mr. James K. Lontos, First Assistant Director of Public Works, presented the plans for
the proposed street improvements; testified as to the nature and extent of the specifications;
explained how the assessment rates had been determined in accordance with the assessment policy
of the City; stated that the total cost of the construction was $471,647.83; that the City's portion
was $391,667.38; and that the property owner's assessment was $79,980.45. He described the
extend of the project as being (1) South Alameda Street from the northeast right of way line of
Montclair Drive to the west right of way line of Edgewater Drive; (2) Carson Drive, from the
north right of way Tine of Ennis Joslin Road to the south right of way line of South Alameda
Street; (3) Ennis Joslin Road from the south right of way line of Carson Drive to the intersection
of the south right of way line of South Alameda Street; and intersections of Troy Drive, Haroldson
Street, Palmetto Drive, Country Club Drive, and Ebonwood Drive.
Property owners in the audience were given the opportunity to question Mr. Lontos as
to the construction aspects of the project, at which time the following property owners made
inquiries as to their specific pieces of property relative to access, type and width of pavement,
driveways, drainage facilities, width and location of sidewalks, credits allowed for existing
improvements, and consideration for trees and shrubbery: Mr. John Stokes, Mrs. Mowery Vickers,
Mr. Eliot C. Walker, and Mr. Otto Neuner. Mr. Lontos explained and answered all questions
in detail.
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
June 24, 1970
Page 7
Mr. Garcia called Mr. Harold Carr to testify as the City's expert witness. Mr. Carr
stated his background and experience which he felt qualified him as a real estate appraiser
for all types of properties in this City; testified that he had personally viewed and understood
the extent and specifications of the proposed improvements; that he had personally viewed the
preliminary assessment roll and each of the properties to be assessed, and that in his opinion,
each of the properties so assessed would be enhanced in value at least to the extent of the
proposed assessment, with the following exceptions:
Item #46 , J. C. Rackley, Lot 8, Block 8, Edgewater Terrace - Mr. Carr stated that
because of its irregular shape should be reduced to $749.15, of which amount $436.65 is for
paving, curb and gutters, and $312.50 is for sidewalk improvements;
Item #47, Samuel Frech, Lot 7, Block 8, Edgewater Terrace - He stated this property
faces Edgewater Terrace and driveway entrance is from Edgewater Terrace with proposed paving
on back side of the property; that it has an irregular shape, and that the assessments should be
reduced to $338.06, of which amount $197.03 is for paving curbs and gutters, and $141.03
for sidewalks;
Item #66, Ferdinand C. Irrgang, Lot 3, Block 15, Edgewater Terrace - Mr. Carr
explained that the property fronts on Alameda, and that the paving portion of the assessments
should be deleted entirely and assessed only for the driveway which is $200.14;
Item #67,Letha A. Agnew, Lot 2, Block 15, Edgewater Terrace - Mr. Carr explained
that this property has a driveway from Ennis Joslin Road and that the paving assessment of
$484.50 should be deleted and should only be assessed for the driveway in the amount of
$160.36;
Item #68, Arlie M. Estes, Lot 1, Block 15, Edgewater Terrace - He stated the property
faces on Ennis Joslin Road and the entire assessment of $574.75 should be deleted.
Mr. Carr stated that some of these adjustments had been made on the Revised Preliminary
Assessment Roll.
Mayor Blackmon stated he would call the names of the property owners as they are listed
on the assessment roll and invited each property owner to state his approval or objection to any of
the proposed improvements or assessments to his or her property. The following persons appeared:
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
June 24, 1970
Page 8
Item #3, Charles J. Kaler, Lot 1, Block 1, Montclair 02 - Mr. Kaler inquired as to
the width and location of the sidewalk, and requested that it be placed next to the curbline if
possible. He pointed out that the street is narrow at this point, and in his opinion, the location
of the turning median as shown on the plans, would create a greater traffic hazard which would
force traffic closer to the curb. He also stated that the proposed parking restrictions would be
an inconvenience to him since he would not be able to continue parking on Alameda; that it is
his opinion that the benefit and enhancement should be to the property owner and not entirely
to the public, and that he does not feel the improvements will enhance the value of his property.
Item 010, Eliot C. Walker, Lot 30, Block 1, University Place - Mr. Walker inquired as
to the location of the sidewalk, stating he preferred no sidewalk at all but would be more
interested in having the alley improved. He inquired if the drainage in the alley would be
improved as a result of the proposed improvements.
Mr. Lontos explained that it is hoped that the installation of the proposed drainage
system will improve the drainage of the alley.
Item 019, Mowery Vickers, Lot K -R, Waverly Estates 03, Mrs. Vickers stated their
property is commercial and that they also own and operate an apartment complex at this location;
that they now have some off - street parking, but due to an architects error, they do not have
enough, and that if they are not permitted to continue using the street for parking, they will
suffer a loss; that their business will be damaged if the construction is continued over a long
period of time unless a break in the construction could be arranged by completing one -half up
to their property, leaving one -half open for access. She also inquired if an assessment could
be added to that of one reluctant property owner to participate with other property owners for
paving the alley. She further stated that they felt the assessments were excessive and should be
about one -half as shown on the assessment roll.
Mayor Blackmon explained that on- street parking would be prohibited at this location;
that it is not the policy of the City to assess for paving alleys; and that the City Staff would make
an effort to cooperate with the property owners and give as much consideration as possible to
providing access during construction.
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
June 24, 1970
Page 8
Item #3, Charles J. Kaler, Lot 1, Block 1, Montclair #2 - Mr. Kaler inquired as to
the width and location of the sidewalk, and requested that it be placed next to the curbline if
possible. He pointed out that the street is narrow at this point, and in his opinion, the location
of the turning median as shown on the plans, would create a greater traffic hazard which would
force traffic closer to the curb. He also stated that the proposed parking restrictions would be
an inconvenience to him since he would not be able to continue parking on Alameda; that it is
his opinion that the benefit and enhancement should be to the property owner and not entirely
to the public, and that he does not feel the improvements will enhance the value of his property.
Item #10, Eliot C. Walker, Lot 30, Block 1, University Place - Mr. Walker inquired as
to the location of the sidewalk, stating he preferred no sidewalk at all but would be more
interested in having the alley improved. He inquired if the drainage in the alley would be
improved as a result of the proposed improvements.
Mr. Lontos explained that it is hoped that the installation of the proposed drainage
system will improve the drainage of the alley.
Item #19, Mowery Vickers, Lot K -R, Waverly Estates #3, Mrs. Vickers stated their
property is commercial and that they also own and operate an apartment complex at this location;
that they now have some off - street parking, but due to an architects error, they do not have
enough, and that if they are not permitted to continue using the street for parking, they will
suffer a loss; that their business will be damaged if the construction is continued over a long
period of time unless a break in the construction could be arranged by completing one -half up
to their property, leaving one -half open for access. She also inquired if an assessment could
be added to that of one reluctant property owner to participate with other property owners for
paving the alley. She further stated that they felt the assessments were excessive and should be
about one -half as shown on the assessment roll.
Mayor Blackmon explained that on- street parking would be prohibited at this location;
that it is not the policy of the City to assess for paving alleys; and that the City Staff would make
an effort to cooperate with the property owners and give as much consideration as possible to
providing access during construction.
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
June 24, 1970
Page 9
Item #21, William H. Kalbfleisch, Lot 1, Block 9 - Mr. Kalbfleisch stated he owns a
4 -unit apartment at the comer of Waverly and Alameda with a service road which k improved
with curb and gutters, and inquired if he would be given credit for these improvements.
Mr. Lontos stated the question of giving credit for improved service roads is valid in this
instance since it appears to be a dedicated road, and that the same situation exists on Items #21
through #27.
Item #23, Manor House, Lot 3 through 7, Block 97 Mr. Bill Granberry, attorney representing
the Manor House property, pointed out the existence of the off - street service rood and questioned
the assessment of the property which does not front on Alameda. He stated he felt credit should
be given for the existing curb and gutters.
Mayor Blackmon stated that it is a question of law as to whether or not the Council has
the authority to assess owners of property who have paid for improvements of service roads when
they purchased their properties within the subdivision.
Assistant City Attorney Garcia stated that with relation to the platting, the subdivision
limits come all the way {ip to Alameda Street, and that the service road is within the subdivision .
Item #29, R. L. Shafer, all of Lot 8 and E. 20' of Lot 9, Block 14, Edgewater Terrace -
Mr. Shaffer stated he was hopeful that parking would be allowed on all property which extends
onto Alameda.
Mr. Lantos stated the plans show that parking would be provided up to the entrance of
Mr. Shaffer's driveway, but explained that these are only preliminary plans.
Item #30, George Roberts; Lot 7, Block 14, Edgewater Terrace - Mr. Roberts inquired
as to how much the improvements will lower Alameda Street, and Mr. Lontos stated it would be
lowered approximately one foot from the centerline.
Item #34, M. H. Lovelady, Lot 22, Block 9, Edgewater Terrace - Mr. Otto J. Neuner
appeared and stated he had recently purchased the subject property and inquired as to plans in
general specifically location of the sidewalk and driveway, and also access from Ocean Drive.
Mr. Lontos explained that the problem of entrance from Ocean Drive is an unresolved
problem, and asked Mr. Neuner to consult with the Staff on this matter.
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
June 24, 1970
Page 10
Item #37, John F. Stokes, Lot 19, Block 9, Edgewater Terrace - Mr. Stokes stated
he is dissatisfied with the plans for location of the medians at this point, stating that it would
create a serious traffic hazard; would block his ingress and egress, and that his property would
suffer a loss if the medians are installed as planned. He also stated that he is opposed to the
amount of the assessment since his property will not be enhanced in value.
Mayor Blackmon advised Mr. Stokes that he will have an opportunity to discuss the
problem of egress and ingress with Mr. Lontos before construction, and directed_that Mr. Lontos
confer with the Council later relative to location of the medians.
Item #38, Thomas McCoy Craig, Lot 18, Block 9, Edgewater Terrace - Mr. Craig stated
he has the same problem as that of Mr. Stokes, and concurs that the property will not be enhanced.
He inquired as to what disposition will, be made of the shrubs and trees.
Mr. Lontos stated that an inspector will be assigned to the project before and during
construction, and that a determination will be made as to whether or not shrubbery and trees are
located on private property or in the right of way,and that the property owner will be approached
again before construction begins.
Item #39, G. A. Davis, Lot 17, Block 9, Edgewater Terrace - Mrs. Davis stated the 100 -
foot frontage on which the assessment was calculated is in error and does not coincide with the
footage on which she is being taxed. She stated that this some situation exists on Item #40,
Barney K. Kay, Lot 16, Block 9, Edgewater Terrace.
Mr. Joe Pierce, stated that the front footage figures were preliminary, and that attention
would be given to resolve that question.
Item #42, Bill R. Brady, Lot 14, Block 9, Edgewater Terrace - Mr. Brady stated that the
original assessment roll showed two driveways for his property and pointed out that there should be
only one. He inquired as to the location of the sidewalks, and where the rural type mailboxes
would be relocated.
Mr. Lontos explained that the driveway provision had been reduced to one on the final
plan, and that the mailboxes would probably be relocated into the yards. He further explained
that the sidewalks at this point will be five feet in width and placed next to the curb.
Minutes
Regular Cosincil Meeting
June 24, 1970
Page 11
Item 043, Thad H. Pollard, Lot 13, Block 9, Edgewater Terrace - Mr. Pollard stated
he was concerned as to whether or not the proposed improvements would alleviate the dangerous
traffic problem in this area. Mr. Lontas stated that the project was designed with that purpose
in mind.
Item 051, Knights of Columbus, Club Home Inc., Lot 5, Block 7, Club House Place -
Mr. J. B. Self spoke on behalf of the subject property and stated they did not oppose the
assessments but inquired if all assessments on the project were the same per square foot; if
sidewalks will be constructed across the Oso Golf Course City -owned property, and if he will
be assessed for sidewalks.
City Manager Townsend explained that in instances where there are four -foot existing
sidewalks and are replaced with five -foot sidewalks, the property owner will only be assessed
for four -foot sidewalks, and that the plan calls for placement of sidewalks up to the entrance
of the Oso Golf Course in front of the nursery.
No one else appeared to be heard in connection with the proposed street improvements.
Motion by Sizemore, seconded by Bradley and passed, that the hearing be closed.
Motion by de Ases, seconded by Roberts and passed, that the matter of assessments on
Alameda, from Ocean Drive to Montclair, be tabled for further consideration.
City Manager Townsend presented pending items and the following actions taken:
Motion by Sizemore, seconded by Bradley and passed, that the recommend • '•n of the
City Manager be concurred in and that excess right of way, being the eas - 20 feet of Baldwin
Boulevard right of way extending from David northwestward to 5• ' a Street, and 30 feet extending
from Sarita Street to Cleo Street, be closed and revert = e abutting property owners subject to
the payment of the appraised values less the e ated current value of the assessments previously
paid; Portion of Lot 1, Block 4, So est Heights Addition, $2,200; Portion of Lot 16, Block 4,
Southwest Heights Addition 00.00; Portion of Lot 1, Block 5, Southwest Heights Addition,
$500.00; Portion o of 16, Block 5, Southwest Heights Addition, $500.00; Portion of Lot 1,
Block A fillips Addition, $1,500; and Portion of Lot 16, Block A, Phillips Addition, $1,500,
There being no further testimony offered or any further parties
appearing to be heard, upon proper motion, buly seconded and unanimously
carried, the said hearing was declared closed; and
WHEREAS, no further parties appearing and no further testimony
being offered as to the special benefits in relation to the enhanced
value of said abutting property as compared to cost of the improvements
of said portion of said streets proposed to be assessed against said
property, or as to any errors, invalidities or irregularities, in the
proceedings or contract heretofore had in reference to the portions of
said streets to be improved; and
WHEREAS, said City Council has heard evidence as to the
special benefits and enhanced value to accrue to said abutting property,
and the real and true owner or owners thereof, as compared with the cost
of making said improvements on said streets, within the limits above
defined, and has heard all parties appearing and offering testimony,
together with all protests and objections relative to such matters and
as to any errors, invalidities or irregularities in any of the proceed-
ings andcontract for said improvements, and has given a full and fair
hearing to all parties making or desiring to make any such protest,
objection or offer testimony and has fully examined and considered all
evidence, testimony and statements, said City Council finds that each
and every parcel of property abutting upon the aforesaid streets,
within the limits to be improved as herein defined, will be enhanced in
value and specially benefitted by the construction of said improvements
upon the said streets upon which said property abuts, in an amount in
excess of the amount of the cost of said improvements proposed to be,
and as hereinbelow, assessed against each and every said parcel of abutting
property, and the real and true owners thereof, and said City Council
did consider and correct all errors, invalidities or deficiencies called
to its attention and did find that all proceedings and contracts were
proper and in accordance with the Charter of said City and the laws
of the State of Texas, under which those proceedings were being had
-4-
and the proceedings of said City Council heretofore had with reference
to such improvements, and in all respects to be valid and regular; and
said City Council did further find upon said evidence that the assess-
ments hereinbelow made and the charges hereby declared against said
abutting property on the aforesaid streets, within the limits defined,
and the real and true owner or owners thereof, are just and equitable
and did adopt the rule of apportionment set out below and the division
of the cost of said improvements between said abutting properties,
and the real and true owner or owners thereof, as just and equitable,
and as producing substantial equality considering the benefits to be
received and the burdens imposed thereby, and that all objections and
protests should be overruled and denied except the corrections and
changes as appear on the final assessment roll included in this ordinance:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS:
SECTION 1. That there being no further protest or testimony for
or against said improvements, said hearing granted to the real and true
owners of abutting property on said streets within the limits above defined,
and to all persons, firms, corporations and estates, owning or claiming
same or any interest therein, be and the same is hereby closed and all
protests and objections, whether specifically mentioned or not, shall be,
and the sane are hereby overruled and denied.
SECTION 2. That said City Council hereby finds and determines
upon the evidence heard in reference to each and every parcel or property
abutting upon the aforesaid streets, within the limits defined, that the
special benefits in the enhanced value to accrue to said property and the
real and true owner or owners thereof, by virtue of the construction of
said improvements to said portion of said streets upon which said property
abuts, will be in excess of the amount of the cost of said improvements
as proposed to be, and as herein assessed against said abutting property
and the real and true owners thereof, and finds that the apportionment
of the cost of said improvements, and that all assessments hereinbelow
made are just and equitable and produce substantial equality considering
-5-
the benefits received and the burdens imposed thereby, and are in
accordance with the laws of the State of Texas, and the Charter pro-
visions of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, and that the proceedings
and contract heretofore had with reference to said improvements are in
all respects regular, proper and valid, and that all prerequisites to
the fixing of the assessment liens against said abutting properties,
as hereinabove described and the personal liability of the real and
true owner or owners thereof, whether named or correctly named herein
or not, have been in all things regularly had and performed in compliance
with the law, Charter provisions and proceedings of the said City Council.
SECTION 3. That in pursuance of said ordinances, duly enacted
by said City Council, authorizing and ordering the improvements of the
above described streets, within the limits defined, and in pursuance of
said proceedings heretofore had and enacted by said City Council, in
reference to said improvements and by virtue of the powers vested in
said City with respect to said street improvements by the laws of the
State of Texas and the Charter of said City, with particular reference
to Chapter 106 of the Acts of the First Called Session of the 40th
Legislature of the State of Texas, known and shown as Article 1105b of
Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes of Texas, as amended, there shall be,
and is hereby levied, assessed and taxed against the respective parcels
of property abutting upon the aforesaid streets, and against the real
and true owners thereof, whether such real and true owner or owners be
named or correctly named herein or not, the several sums of money
hereinbelow mentioned and itemized opposite the description of the
respective parcels of said property, the number of front feet of each
and the several amounts assessed against same and the real and true
owner or owners thereof, and names of the apparent owners thereof, all
as corrected and adjusted by said City Council, being as follows, to -wit:
-6-
ALAMEDA STREET IMPROVEMENTS
This project is known as Alameda, Ocean Drive to Montclair, Project No. 220 -67 -87
and includes improvements to the following streets:
1. South Alameda Street from the north /east right -of -way line of Montclair
Drive to the west right-of-way line of Edgewater Drive
2. Carson Drive, from the north right -of -way line of Ennis Joslin Road to the
south right -of -way line of South Alameda Street
3. Ennis Joslin Road from the south right -of -way line of Carson Drive to the
intersection of the south right -of -way line of South Alameda Street; and
4. The intersections of:
(a) Troy Drive
(b) Haroldson Street
(c) Palmetto Drive
(d) Country Club Drive
(e) Ebonwood Drive
The project is to be constructed by excavating the streets to a width and depth to
permit the laying of 6" standard curb and gutter section and the installation of
pavement consisting of:
1. 11" Lime Stabilized Base
2. 31/4" Type "B" Asphaltic Concrete
3. 11" Type "D" Asphaltic Concrete
In addition, reinforced concrete sidewalks are also to be constructed on this pro-
ject, varying in width from 4' to 5' depending on whether they are located next to
the property line or next to the curb. The sidewalks are to be reinforced and 4"
thick. The concrete driveways, where needed and where requested by property owners,
are proposed as well as storm sewers for the purpose of draining the street. The
plans also incorporate, together with the drainage system on Alameda, the drainage
for Phase I of the Edgewater Terrace storm sewer system. In addition, the replace-
ment of a 12" water line with a new 12" water line the entire length of the project
is also proposed.
The assessment rate has been determined by using the unit prices taken from the low
bid submitted by South Texas Construction Company and applying those unit prices to
the front footage of the abutting property in accordance with the assessment policy
of the City of Corpus Christi.
The rates are as follows:
Curb, Gutter & Pavement $12 17 per L.F.
Driveways 1.17 per S.F.
Sidewalks 68 per S.F.
Maximum Rate for Property for Residential Use 4 75 per L.F.
Total Construction Cost $471,647.83
Total Assessments . . 76,994.68
Total City Portion $394,653.15
ASSESSMENT ROLL
PROJECT: Alameda Street Improvements
CONTRACTOR: South Texas Construction Company
Assessment Rate
Assessment Ratei
Assessment Rate
BASIC RATES
Curb, Gutter & Pavement per 1.f. _
Sidewalk per s.f. _
Driveway per s.f.
Maximum Rate for. Property for Residential Use per 1.f. _
$12.17
.68
1.17
4.75
ITEM
NO.
OWNER &
PROYSRTY DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY
ASSESSED
DESCRIPTION
OF ASSESSMENT
RATE
AMOUNT
TOTAL AMOUNT
ASSESSED
•
Alameda
Street
Beginning at
Montclair Drive
Nor-.11
Side
1.
T. G. White (33) *
66.00 L.F
C., G., & Pvmt.
4,75
156.75
Lot 32, Block 2 (132) *
264.00 S.F
Sidewalk
.68
89.76
Montclair it
- 0 -
Driveway
-0-
- 0 -
*credit existing imp.
246.51
50% assessed
2.
Norval I. Sommers, Jr.(53.5,;*
107.00 L.F
C., G., & Pvmt.
4.75
254.12
Lot 1, Block 2 (214)
* 428.00 S.F
Sidewalk
.68
145.52
Montclair 42
- 0 -
Driveway
-0-
- 0 -
*50% assessed
399.64
Poenisc
Drive Intersection
3.
Charles J. haler (53.5)*
107.00 L.F
C., G., & Pvmt.
4.75
254.12
Lot 1, Block 1 (214)
* 428.00 S.F
Sidewalk
.68
145.52
Montclair 42
- 0 -
Driveway
-0-
- 0 -
*50% assessed
399.64
4.
Norman E. Norton (53.5)•x
107.00 L.F
Pavement
2.20
117.70
Lot 1, Block 3 (214)S.
428.00 S.F
Sidewalk
.68
145.52
Montclair 42 F.
16.00 S.F
Sidewalk
.68
10.88
*credit existing imp.
- 0 -
Driveway
-0-
- 0 -
50% assessed
274.10
Troy Drive
Intersection
5.
Bertram E. Beecroft (53.5)e
107.00 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
117.70
Lot 32, Block 2 (214)S.
428.00 S.F
Sidewalk
.68
145.52
Ocean Terrace F.
16.00 S.F,
Sidewalk
.68
10.88
.
*credit existing impr.
- 0 -
Driveway
- 0 -
- 0 -
50% assessed
274.10
6.
Tony Bonilla (53.5)
107.00 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
117.70
Lot 1, Block 2 (214)S.
428.00 S.F
Sidewalk
.68
145.52
Ocean Terrace,
16.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
10.88
*50% assessed
- 0 -
Driveway
-0-
- 0 -
274.10
Haroldson Street
Intersection
7.
Robert J. Cotichelli (53.5)x
107.00 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
117.70
Lot 32, Block 1 (214)S.
428.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
145.52
•
Ocean Terrace F.
16 ;00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
10.88
*credit existing impr.
- 0 -
Driveway
-0-
- 0 -
274.10
Page 2
PRO,TPCT: Alameda Street Improvements
GEM
).
OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
•
•
QUANTITY
ASSESSED
DESCRIPTION
• OF
ASSESSMENT
RATE
AMOUNT
TOTAL
AMOUNT
ASSESSE
8.
Max J. Snider (53.5)
**107.00 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
117.70
Lot 1, Block 1 (214)
S.428.O0 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
145.52
Ocean Terrace
F. 44.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
29.92
*credit existing imp.
- 0 -
Driveway
- 0 -
- 0 -
50% assessed
293.14
Palnetto
Drive Intersection
9.
Dellene N. Vaughan (65)
* 130.00 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
143.00
Lot 1, Block 1 (260)S
520.00 S.F.
Sidewalk .
.68
176.80
University Place
- 0 -
Driveway
- 0 -
- 0 -
*credit existing imp.
319.50
50% assessed •
10.
Eliot C. Walker (65)
* 130.00 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
143.00
Lot 30, Block 1 (260)0
520.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
176.50
.
University Place
- 0 -
Driveway
.68
- 0 -
- 0 -
*credit existing impr.
319.80
50% assessed ,University
Drive intersection
11.
Floyd E. Lambert (65)
* 130.00 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
143.00
.
Lot 1, Block 2 (260)S
520.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
176.80
University Place
- 0 -
Driveway
- 0 -
_ - 0 -
*50% assessed
31
12.
Charles H. Krusewski 65)
* 130.00 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
143.00
Lot 30, Block 2 (260)
S.520.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
176.80
University Place
*50% assessed
Claremore
- 0 -
Drive Intersection
Driveway
- 0 -
• •
- 0 -
.3 9.50
13.
T. R. Lister (70.04)
* 140.07 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
154.08
Lot 46 (244.11•)
5.488.28 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
166.01
Aero Village -
* - 0 -
Driveway
1.17
- 0 -
*credit existing impr.
320.09
507 assessed
14,
Ned Kirby (70.11)
* 140.22 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
154.24
Lot 31 • 256.44)
512.88 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
174.37
Aero Village
* 99.06 S.F.
Driveway - 12'
1.17
115.90
*credit existing impr.
4:4.51
50% assessed Homecreat
Drive Intersection
15.
James A. Craft (70.28)
140.57 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
154.62
Lot 16 (257.14)
514.28 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
174.85
Aero Village
299.06 S.F.
Driveway - 12'
1.17
349.90
* 50% assessed
679.37
16.
Julius Paul &
Robert Racusin (70.46
140.92 L.F.
Pavement
2.20
155.01
Lot 1 . (281.84)
563.68 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
191.65
Aero Village
- 0 -
Driveway
1.17
- 0 -
*50% assessed
346.66
Glenmore
Drive Intersection
17.
Phillips Petroleum Co.
* 172.50 L.F.
C., G. & Pvmt.
12.17
2,099.32
Lot 13, Block 1
342.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
232.56
Waverley Estates
1,400.12 S.F.
Driveway 2 -35'
1.17
1,638.1+
*includes V.G. return on Glen-
65.00 L.F.
Header Curb
2.98
193.7)
more Dr. Valley Gutter charged
rate of C., G., & P
,163.t
18.
Maverick Market, Inc.
101.97 L.F.
C., G., & P
12.17
1,240.97
Lot L R, Block 1
207.88 S.F.
Sidewalk
• .68
141.35
Waverley Estates 3
1,020.12 S.F.
Driveway 2 -25'
1.17
1,193.54
35.00 L.F.
Header Crub
2.98
104.30
2
PRO.TFSr :
Alameda Street Improvements
ITEM
NO.
OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY
ASSESSED
DESCRIrr1ON
OF
ASSESSMENT
RATE
TOTAL
AMOUNT
AMOUNil ASSESSED
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
Mowery Vickers
Lot K -R
Waverley Estates 3
R. Lacy, Inc.
Lot A., Block 1
Waverly Estates 3
*S /W return of Waverley Dr.
credit existing C & G
William H. Kalbfleisch
Lot 1, Block 9
Waverley Estates 3
*reduced by Council action
Ray J. Lumsten
Lot 2, Block 9
Waverley Estates 3'
*reduced by Council action
Manor House
Lot 3 thru 7, Block 9
Waverley Estates 3
*reduced by Council action
J. E. Bradford
Lot 8, Block 9
Waverley Estates 3
*reduced by Council action
Melvin G. Montgomery
Lot 9, Block 9
Waverley Estates 3
*reduced by Council action q
Ivan Wood
Lot 10, Block 9
Waverley Estates 3
27. John Robert Hodgens
Lot 11, Block 9
Waverley Estates 3
28.
James F. Boudreau
Lot 9 except E. 20' Block 14
Edgewater Terrace
190.11 L.F.
680.44 S.F.
415.06 S.F.
153.00 L.F.
*4 142.42 L.F.
4 457.68 S.F.
L,210.13 S.F.
71.00 L.F.
C., G., & Pvmt
Sidewalk
Driveway 20'
Header Curb
C. G., Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway 2 -30'
Header Curb
Waverley Drive Intersection
29. Richard L. Shafer
AU Lot 8 & E. 20'Lot 9, Blk.i
Edgewater Terrace
30.
George E. Roberts
Lot 7, Block 14
Edgewater Terrace
331• Fred D. Anderson
Lot 6, Block 14
Edgewater Terrace
75.00 L.F.
- 0 -
0 -
60.00 L.F.
- 0 -
300.00 L.F.
- 0 -
- 0 -
60.00 L.F.
- 0 -
-0-
60.00 L.F.
- 0
- 0-
65.00 L.F.
• 0
- 0 -
65.32 L.F.
- 0
0 -
167.70 L.F.
670.80 S.F.
- 0 -
120.00 L.F.
338.00 S.F.
355.06 s.F.
100.00 L.F.
400.00 S.F.
- 0 -
100.00 L.F.
440.00 S.F.
155.06 S.F.
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk,
Driveway - 16'
C. G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk - 5'
Driveway - 12'
12.17
.68
1.17
2.98
12,17
.68
1.17
2.98
* 6.09
*6.09
6.09
- 6.09
6.09
-4.75
X4.75
2,313.
462.
h85.
455.
64
70
52
94
1,733.
311.
1,415.
211.
3,717.90
25
22
35
58
3,671.90
. 456 75 456.75
- 0
- 0
x+56 75
-
- 0
1,82
-o
- 0
365.75
.00
1,$27.00.
36540
365.40
- 0
365.40
365.40,
308. 5
- 0
0
308,75
310. 7
- 0
- 0
310.27
4.75 796.5
.68 456.1
- 0 -
4.75 570.0
.68 229.8
1.17 415.
1,252, 71
4.75 475.0
.68 272.0
- 0 -
4.75
.68
1.17
1,215.26
•
747.00
475.0
299.2
181.42
•
•
955.62
Page 4
PROJECT:
Alameda Street Improvements
IT. OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
N0.
32-
QUANTITY
ASSESSED
DESCRIPTION
OF
ASSESSMENT
RATE
AMOUNT
TOTAL
AMOUNT
ASSESSED
J. W. Elledge
Lot 5, Block 14
Edgewater Terrace
* includes return on C.C. Dr.
50% assessed
F.
(12.5)
33. Jerry Migl
Lot 23, Block 9
Edgewater Terrace
* includes ret on C.C. Dr.
50% assessed
34. Otto John Neuner, Jr.
Lot 22, Block 9
Edgewater Terrace
100.00 L.F. C., G., & Pvmt.
25.00 L.F. c., G., & Pvmt.
500.00 S.F. Sidewalk - 5'
- 0 - Driveway
Ocuntry Club Driv
100.00 L.F.
(12.5) S. 25.00 L.F.
414.40 S.F.
- 0 - S.F.
35. John F. Koepke
Lot 21, Block 9
Edgewater Terrace
36. J. M. Enders
Lot 20, Block 9
Edgewater Tdrrace
37. John F. Stokes
Lot 19, Block 9
Edgwater Terrace
38 Thomas McCoy Craig
Lot 18, Block 9
Edgewater Terrace
39 G. A. Davis
Lot 17, Block 9
Edgewater Terrace
40 Barney K. Kay
Lot 16, Block 9
Edgewater Terrace
1 C.D. Sloneker (Mrs.)
Lot 15, Block 9
Edgewater Terrace
42 Bill R. Brady
Lot 14, Block 9
Edgewater Terrace
43 Thad H. Pollard
Lot 13, Block 9
Edgewater Terrace
44 Andrew M. Strauss
Lots 12 & 11, Block 9
Edgewater Terrace
*inc. return on Ebonwood
ve Intersection
C., G., & Pvmt.
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway
100.00 L.F. C., G., Pvmt.
352.00 S.F. Sidewalk - 4'
137.06 S.F. Driveway = 12'
100.00 L.F. C., G., Pvmt.
312.00 S.F. Sidewalk - 4'
* 57.06 S.F. Driveway - 22'
100.00 L.F. C., G., & Pvmt.
340.00 S.F. Sidewalk - 4'
162.56 S.F. Driveway - 15'
100.00 L.F. C., G., & Pvmt.
352.00 S.F. Sidewalk- 5'
*- 0 - Driveway- 12'
100.00 L.F
336.00 S.F
171.06 S.F
100.00 L.F
288.00 S.F
252.12 S.F
100.00 L.F
300.00 S.F
282.62 S.F
100.00 L.F
352.00 S.F
149.06 S.F
100.00 L.F
340.00 8.F
177.56 S.F
100.00 C.,
352.00 S.F
149.06 S.F
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk - 5'
Driveway - 16'
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk - 5'
Driveway 2 =14'
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk - 5'
Driveway 1 -12'
1 -13'
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk - 5'
Driveway - 12'
C., G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk - 5'
Driveway-15'
G., & Pvmt.
Sidewalk
Driveway 1 -12'
241.00 L.F J C., G., & Pvmt.
964.00 S.F Sidewalk - 5'
- 0 - Driveway
4.75
4.75
.68
4.75
4.75
.68
475.0o
59.37
340.00
- 0 -
874.37
475.00
59.37
281.79
-o-
816.16
4.75 .
.68
1.17
4.75
.68
1.17
4.75
.68
1.17
4.75
.68
4.75
.68
1.17
4.75
.68
1.17
4.75
.68
1.17
4.75
.68
1.17
4.75
.68
1.17
475.00
239.36
160.36
874.72
475.00
212.16
66.76
753.92
475.00
231.20
190.19
896.39
475.00
239.36
- 0 -
717.36
475.00
228.48
200.14
903.62
475.00
195.84
294.18
475.00
204.00
330.66
965.02
1,009.66
475.00
239.36
174.40
888.76
475.00
231.20
207.75
913.95
4.75
.68 ,
475.00
239.36
174.40
888.76
4.75 1,144."5
.68 655.52
- 0 -
1,800.27
Page 5
• PROJECT:
Alameda Street improvements
CM
OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY
ASSESSED
DESCRIPTION
OF
ASSESSMENT
RATE
AMOUNT
TOTAL
AMOUNT
ASSESSED
Ebonwood
Drive Iitersection
+5.
M. L. Gardner
* 48.00 L.F.
C., G., & Pvmt.
4.75
228.00
228.00
Lot 9, Block 8
Edgewater Terrace •
.
* return on Ebonwood Drive
a6.
S. C. Beckley
138.03 L.F.
C., G. & Pvmt.
4.75
*436.65
Lot 8, Block 8
690.15 S.F.
Sidewalk - 4'
.68.
250.00,
Edgewater Terrace
*reduced
- 0 -
Driveway
- 0 -
by Council .action
..
.
.
-686:65-
gr.
Samuel Frech '. (172)
4 244.00 L.F.
C., G. & Pvmt.
4.75
197.03
Lot 7, Block 8 (1488)
,976.00'S.F.
Sidewalk - 4'.
.68
112.80
Edgewater Terrace
- 0 -
Driveway
- 0 -
*Not total footage of Lot, only
to existing improvements
309.83
5o% assessed
*reduced by Council action
End North Side
' Alameda Streit
Beginning a:
Montclair Drive
South Side
43.
Sage Properties Carp.
660.00 L.F.
C., G. & Pvmt.
12.17
8,032.20
Lots 1 & 2, Block 6
2,312.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
1,572.16
Club House Place
•
•
•
1,663.18 S.F.
Driveway 1 -25'
1 -28'
1 -29'
1.17
1,945.92
11,550.21
9.
Coastal Bend Shrine Club
180.00 L.F.
C., G. & Pvmt.
12.17'
2,190.60
Lot 3, Block 7
620.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
421.60
Club House Place
510.06 S.F.
Driveway -25'
1.17
596.77
.
3,x.9
0.
Little Theater of Corpus Christi
150.00 L.F.
C., G. & Pvmt.
12.17
1,825.50
Lot 4, Block 7
520.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
353.60
Club House Place
415.06 S.F.
Driveway - 20'
1.17
485.62
•
2,664.72
2,664.72
1.
Knights of Columbus
330.00 L.F.
C., G. & Pvmt.
12.17
4,016.10
Club Home Inc.
1,142.00 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
776.56
Lot 5, Block 7
453.06 S.F.
Driveway 2 -22'
1.17
530.08
Club Rouse Place
5,322.7
• Carson
Drive Intiersection
•
•
•
•
•
Rene 6
PROJECT: Alameda Street Improvements
ITEM
NO.
OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
•
QUANTITY
ASSESSED
DESCRIPTION
OF
ASSESSMENT
RATE
AMOUNT
TOTAL
AMOUNT
SESSE
52.
Zeb Carson Const. Co.
• 105.26 L.F.
Pvmt. only
2.20
231.57
Lot 4 Bik 15
421.04 S.F.
Sidewalk
.68
286.30
Edgewater Terrace
-
-87_
7.
*cr. ex. imp.
53.
Ferdinand C. Irrgang
102.0 1.f.
C.G.&P. • •
4.75
484.50
484.50
Lot 3 Bik 15
408.0 s.f.
Sidewalk •
.68
277.44
Edgewater Terrace
:
•
761.94
54.
Lethe A. Agnew
102.0 1.f.
C.G.&P.
4.75
484.50
Lot 2 Bik 15'
86.06 S.F.
D /W -12'
1.17
100.69
585.19
Edgewater Terrace
*cr.
360.00 S.F.
Sideaa.lk
.68
244.80
ex. D/4T
829.99
55.
Arlie M. Estes •
117.0 1.f.
C.G.O.
4.75
555.75
Lot 1 Bik 15
182.06 s.f.
D/W - 14'
1.17
213.01
Edgewater Terrace
x+21.04 s.f.
Sidewalk
.68
280.16_
'
'
ENNIS JOSLIN
"MAD INTERSECTION
1J048.92
56.
Samuel Frech - ..
200.0 lf.
C.G.&P.
4.75
950.00 950.00'
Lot 12 & 13 Bik 2
•
Edgewater Terrace
.
-
57•
Landon C. Arnim • .
Lot 11 Blk 2
.
100.0 1.f.
C.G.&P.
4.75
475.00 475.00,
Edgewater Terrace
•
•
•
58.
J. R. & A. C. Padilla
Lot 10 Bik 2
100.0 1.f.
C.G.&P.
4.75 .
475.00 475.00
Edgewater Terrace
• •
.
59.
Cedric Priday
Lot 9 Bik 2 •• ..
100.0 1.f.•
'
C.G.&P.
4.75
475.00 475.00
Edgewater Terrace.
.
- -
60.
C. H. & Olga Plomarity
Lot 7 Blk 2 • •
100.0 1.f.
C.G.&P.
4.75
475.00 475.00
Edgewater Terrace.
•
61.
Kathryn Shepard •
Lot 6 Bik 2 •
•
100.0 L.F.
C.G.&P.
4.75
475.00 475.00
Edgewater Terrace
"
2.
J. R. & A. C. Padilla
Lot 5 Bik 2- -
'
*85.0 L.F.
C.G.&P.
4.75
403.75 403.75
Edgewater Terrace
.
*imp, short of P.L.
•
END SOUTH SIDE
ALAMEDA
•
•
END A7AMEDA S EREET
•
•
•
?age 7
PRO,+; Alameda Street Improvements
TEM
O.
OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY
ASSESSED
DESCRIPTION
OF
ASSESSMENT
RATE
AMOUNT
TOTAL
AMOUNT
ASSESSE
CARSON DRIVE
:MPROVEMENTS, FROM
ENNIS JOSLIN
ROAD
TO ALAMEDA STREET
- BEGINNING AT
ENNIS JOSLIN
ROAD
WEST SIDE
63.
F. L. Dauenhauer (121.5) S.
*243.0 L.F.
C.G. &P.
4.75
577.12
Lot 8 Blk 15 F.
1.25.0 L.F.
C.G. &P
118.75
Edgewater Terrace
695.87
*includes return on 'Ennis Joslin
Rd.
ALAMEDA INTERSECTION
END WEST SIDE
CARSON DRIVE
•
'
CARSON DRIVE,
FROM ENNIS JOSLIN
ROAD
TO ALAMEDA -
3EGINNING AT ENNIS
JOSLIN ROAD
EAST SIDE
64.
Zeb Carson Const. Co. (77.0)
Lot 9 Blk 15 •
154.0 L.F.
Pavement Only
2.20
169.40
169.40
Edgewater Terrace •
50% assessed
65.
Zeb Carson Const. Co. (73.93)
147.85 L.F.
Pavement only
2.20
162.64
162.64
Lot 4 Blk 15
Edgewater Terrace
504 assessed
,
ALAMEDA INTERSECTION
END EAST SIDE
CARSON DRIVE
END CARSON DRIVE
ENNIS JOSLIN
40AD IMPROVEMENTS FROM
• •
CARSON DRIVE
PO ALAMEDA STREET,
BEGINNING
AT CARSON DRIVE,
NORTH SIDE
66.
a
• I CrE
T
Ferdinand C. Irrgan�d4i �e40r
Ij
102.0 1.f.
C.G.&P.
4.75
- k84r59
Lot 3 Blk 15 r °f
171.06 S.F.
D/W - 16'
1.17
200.14
Edgewater Terrace -
Zu0.f4
671
Letha A. Agnew ('Y,'�Q ion
102.0 -L,F.
C.G.M.
h.75
>18'l.50
137.06 S.F.
1.17
160.36
pM,t
Lot 2 Blk 15 c.0,'
D/W 12'
Edgewater Terrace
!40036
68.
•
Arlie M. Estes (rl t( Ac 4. or'
..u�.�...:��...r,.:a=
,s:..
�«..�...r.4c7::
Lot 1 Blk 15 /'��,,,C) L
•
Edgewater Tei, Vie -
ALAMEDA STREET
INTERSECTION
END NORTH 511.3
ENNIS JOSLIN ROAD
•
ENNIS JOSLIN
ROAD IMP. FROM CARSON
DR. TO
ALAMEDA ST.
.
BEGINNING AT
ARSON DRIVE, SOUTH
SIDE
69.
Dorothy H. Blakeney, Est.
100.0 L.F.
C.G.&P.
4.75
475.00 475.00
Lot 18 Blk 2
Edgewater Terrace
70.
H. E. Hipps
100.0 L.F.
G.G.&P.
4.75
475.00 475.00
Lot 17 Blk 2
Edgewater Terrace
PROJECT: Alameda Street Improvements
[TEM
N0.
OWNER & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY
ASSESSED
DESCRIPTION
OF
ASSESSMENT
RATE
AMOUNT
TOTAL
AMOUNT
ASSESS=
71.
72.
nary E. Grisham
Lot 15 Blk 2
Edgewater Terrace
Joe Simon
Lot 14 B1k 2
Edgewater. Terrace
•
•
100.0 L.F. •
100.0 L.F.
ALANLN'DA STREW.?
END SOUTH SIDL
END ENlIS JOSLIN
C.G.U.
C.G.W.
INTERSECTION
EIINIS JOSLIN ROAD
ROAD
•
4.75
4.75
•
475.00
475.00
475.00
475.00
SECTION 4. Be it further ordained that in the event the actual
frontage of any property herein assessed shall be found upon the completion
of said improvements to be greater or less than the number of feet herein -
above stated, the assessments herein set against any such property and
against the real and true owner or owners thereof, shall be, and the same
are hereby declared to be increased or decreased as the case may be, in
the proportion which said excess or deficiency or frontage shall bear to
the whole number of front feet of property actually improved in accordance
with the front foot rule or rate of assessment herein adopted, it being
the intention that such parcel of property and the real and true owner or
owners thereof abutting on the aforesaid streets, within the limits
defined, shall pay for said improvements under the "FRONT FOOT RULE
OR PLAN ", which rule or plan is hereby found and determined to be just and
equitable and to produce a substantial equality, having in view the special
benefits to be received and the burdens imposed thereby; and it is further
ordained that upon final completion and acceptance of said improvements
on said streets, all certificates hereinafter provided for, issued to
evidence said assessments against said parcels of property abutting upon
said streets and the real and true owner or owners thereof, shall be
issued in accordance with, and shall evidence the actual frontage of said
property and the actual cost of said improvements, the amount named in said
certificate in no case to exceed the amount herein assessed against such
property unless such increase be caused by an excess of front footage over
the amount hereinabove stated, such actual cost and such actual number of
front feet, if different from the hereinabove shown in Section 3 hereof,
to be determined by the Director of Public Works upon completion of said work
on said streets, and the findings of the Director of Public Works shall be
final and binding upon all parties concerned.
SECTION 5. That the several sums mentioned above in Section 3
hereof assessed against said parcels,of property abutting on the portion
-7-
of the aforesaid streets, within the limits defined, and the real and true
owners thereof, whether named or correctly named herein or not, subject to
the provisions of Section 4 thereof; together with interest thereon at the
rate of six and one -half (6 -1/2 %) per annum with reasonable attorney's fee
and all costs and expenses of collection, if incurred, are hereby declared
to be made a first and prior lien upon the respective parcels of property,
against which same are assessed from and after the date said improvements
were ordered by said City Council, to -wit: May 27, 1970, and a personal
liability and charge against the real and true owner or owners be named or
correctly named herein, and that said lien shall be and constitute the first
and prior enforceable claim against the property assessed and shall be a
first and paramount lien superior to all other liens, claims or title, except
for lawful ad valorem taxes; and that the same so assessed shall be paid and
become payable in one of the following methods at the option of the property
owner:
1. All in cash within 20 days after completion or acceptance
by the City; or
2. Twenty percent (20 %) cash within twenty days after the
completion of said work and its acceptance by the City,
and 2J% respectively on or before one year, two years,
three years and four years after the completion of said
work and its acceptance by the City, with interest from
day of such completion and acceptance by the City until
paid at the rate of 6 -1/2% per annum; or
3. Payments to be made in maximum of 60 equal installments,
the first of which shall be paid within 20 days after the
completion of said improvement, and the acceptance there-
of by the City, and the balance to be paid in 59 equal
consecutive monthly installments commencing on the 1st
day of the next succeeding month and continuing there-
after on the 1st day of each succeeding month until the
entire sum is paid in full, together with interest
from the date of said completion and acceptance by the
City, until paid, at the rate of six and one -half percent
(6 -1/2 %) per annum; provided, however, that the owners of
said property availing themselves of Option "2" or "3"
above shall have the privilege of paying one, or all, of
such installments at any time before maturity thereof by
paying the total amount of principal due, together with
interest accrued, to the date of payment.
SECTION 6. That for the purpose of evidencing said assessments,
the liens securing same and the several sums assessed against the said par-
cels of property and the real and true owner or owners thereof and the time
and terms of payment, and to aid in the enforcement thereof, assignable
certificates shall be issued by the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, to itself
upon the completion of said improvements in said streets and acceptance there-
of by said City Council, which certificates shall be executed by the Mayor
in the name of the City attested by the City Secretary with the corporate
seal of said City, and which certificates shall declare the amounts of said
assessments and the times and terms thereof, the rate of interest thereon,
the date of the completion and acceptance of the improvements for which the
certificate is issued, and shall contain the names of the apparent true
owner or owners as accurately as possible, and the description of the prop-
erty assessed by lot and block number, or front foot thereof, or such
other description as may otherwise identify the same, and if the said prop-
erty shall be owned by an estate or firm, then to so state the fact shall
be sufficient and no error or mistake in describing such property or in
giving the name of any owner or owners, or otherwise, shall in anywise
invalidate or impair the assessment levied hereby or the certificate issued
in evidence thereof.
That the said certificate shall further provide substantially
that if default shall be made in the payment of any installment of principal
or interest when due, then at the option of the City, its successors, or
assigns, or the holder thereof, the whole of said assessment evidenced
thereby shall at once become due and payable, and shall be collectible
-9-
with reasonable attorney's fees and all expenses and costs of collection,
if incurred, and said certificate shall set forth and evidence the personal
liability of the real and true owner or owners of such property, whether
named or correctly named therein or not, and the lien upon such property,
and that said lien is first and paramount thereon, superior to all other
liens, titles and charges, except for lawful ad valorem taxes, from and
after the date said improvements were ordered by said City Council, to -wit:
May 27, 1970, and shall provide in effect that if default shall be
made in the payment thereof, the same may be enforced, at the option of
the City, or their successors and assigns, by the sale of the property
therein described in the manner provided for the collection of ad valorem
taxes as above recited, or by suit in any Court having jurisdiction.
That said certificates shall further recite in effect that all
the proceedings with reference to making said improvements have been regu-
larly had in compliance with the law and Charter in force in said City and
the proceedings of said City Council of said City, and that all prerequisites
to the fixing of the assessment lien against the property therein described,
or attempted to be described, and the personal liability of the real and
true owner or owners thereof, evidenced by such certificates, have been
regularly done and performed, which recitals shall be evidence of all the
matters and facts so recited and no further proof thereof shall be required
in any court.
That said certificates shall further provide in effect that
the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, shall exercise all of its lawful powers,
in the enforcement and collection thereof, and said certificates may
contain other and further recitals, pertinent and appropriate tfiereto.
It shall not be necessary that said certificates shall be, in the exact
form as above set forth, but the substance and effect thereof shall suffice.
SECTION 7. That all such assessments levied are a personal
liability and charge against the real and true owner or owners of the
property described, or attempted to be described, notwithstanding such
owner or owners may not be named or correctly named, and any irregularity
-10-
in the name of the property owner, or the description of any property or
the amount of any assessment, or in any other matter or thing shall not
in anywise invalidate or impair any assessment levied hereby or any
certificate issued, and such mistake, or error, invalidity or irregularity
whether in such assessment or in the certificate issued in evidence thereof,
may be, but is not required to be, to be enforceable, at any time cor-
rected by the said City Council of the City of Corpus Christi. Further
that the omission of said improvements in front of any part or parcel
of property abutting upon the aforementioned streets, which is exempt
from the lien of said assessment, shall in no wise affect or impair the
validity of assessments against the other parcels of property abutting
upon said streets, and that the total amounts assessed against the respective
parcels of property abutting upon said streets within the limits herein
defined and the real and true owner or owners thereof, are the same as,
or less than, the estimate of said assessment prepared by the Director
of Public Works and approved and adopted by said City Council and are in
accordance with the proceedings of said City Council relative to said
improvements and assessments thereof, and with the terms, powers and
provisions of said Chapter 106 of the Acts of the First Called Session
of the 40th Legislature of the State of Texas, known as Article 1105b of
Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes of Texas and the Charter of the City
of Corpus Christi, Texas, under which terms, powers and provisions said
proceedings, said improvements and assessments were had and made by said
City Council.
SECTION 8. The fact that the above described streets have become
heavily traveled streets and the fact that the present condition of said
streets within the limits defined, is dangerous to the health and public
welfare of the inhabitants thereof creates a public emergency and an
imperative public necessity, requiring the suspension of the Charter
Rule that no ordinance or resultuion shall be passed finally on the date
of its introduction, and that said ordinance shall be read at three
several meetings of the City Council, and the Mayor having declared
that such emergency and necessity exists, and having requested that said
Charter rule be suspended, and that this ordinance be passed finally on
the date of its introduction and take effect and be in full force and
effect from and after its passage, IT IS ACCORDINGLY SO ORDAINED, this
the 6q474) day of July. 1970.
ATTEST:
City Sec tar
APPIIVED:
J1 DAY OF JULY, 970:
ting City Att
R
THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS
Corpus Christi, exas
day of , 19 70
TO THE j,1EMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Corpus Christi, Texas
For the reasons set forth in the emergency clause of the foregoing
ordinance, a public emergency and imperative necessity exist for the suspen-
sion of the Charter rule or requirement that no ordinance or resolution shall
he 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,
request that you suspend said Charter rule or requirement and pass this ordi-
nance finally on the date it is introduced, or at the present meeting of the
City Council.
Respectfully,
OR
THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS
The Charter rule was suspended by the following
Jack R. Blackmon
Gabe Lozano, Sr.
V. A. "DicW"Bradley, Jr.
Eduardo E. de Ases
Ken McDaniel
W. J. "Wrangler" Roberts
Ronnie Sizemore
vote:
The above ordinance was passed by the £ol wing vote:
I
1,
Jack R. Blackmon
Gabe Lozano, Sr.
V. A, "Dick" Bradley, Jr.
Eduardo E. de Ases
Ken McDaniel
W. J. 'Wrangler" Roberts
Ronnie Sizemore
Y: