Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 11/27/1967 - Special14-44A PRESENT: MayorJack R. Blackmon Mayor Pro Tem Ronnie Sizemore Commissioners: Dick Bradley, Jr. Dr. P. Jimenez, Jr, Gabe Lozano, Sr. Ken McDaniel W. J. Roberts MINUTES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING November 27, 1967 2:00 P. M. City Manager Herbert W. Whitney City Attorney I. M. Singer Assistant City Attorney Tom McDowell City Secretary T. Ray Kring Mayor Blackmon called the Special Meeting to order and stated that the purpose of the meet- ing was to hold public hearings on two zoning applications and any other business as may properly come before the Council. City Secretary T. Ray Kring called the roll of those in attendance. Mayor Blackmon noted the fact that the Council Chamber was overflowing its capacity, and recommended that the meeting be recessed to be reconvened in the Exposition Hall in order to accommodate the number of persons wishing to hear and be heard in connection with the scheduled zoning cases. Motion by Bradley, seconded by Roberts and passed that the meeting be recessed briefly to be reconvened in Exposition Hall. Mayor Blackmon called the recessed meeting to order and stated that the Council had agreed to consider the two Applications of Benjamin Eshelman, Jr. and Lorine Eshleman Vogt, #1067-4 and #1067-5, at the same time since the two adjacent areas of request are owned by the same persons and explained the procedure to be followed. He pointed out that because of the wide publicity connected with these applications, those within the 200' notification area will be heard first. Mr. William Anderson, Director of Zoning and Planning, presented the applications stating that the applicant had applied for change of zoning from "R -1A" One -family Dwelling District to "R-2" Two-family Dwelling District for a townhouse project on 4.707 acres, more or less, out of Lots 3 & 6, Section 1, Flour Bluff & Encinal Farm & Garden Tracts, being File #1067-4, and that Application #1067-5, requested a change of zoning from "R -1A" One -family Dwelling District to "B-4" General Business District for exclusive apartments, specialty shops and prestige office space integrated within a marina complex, on 6.311 acres, more or less, out of Lot 3, Section 1, Flour Bluff & Encinal Farm & Garden Tracts, being a tract of land fronting on Ocean Drive at Airline Road 314' x 385'. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 2 Mr. Anderson described on a map the zoning and land use of the surrounding area; stated that these two applications were heard by the Zoning and Planning Commission October 24, 1967; that some 16 persons had appeared at the hearing and spoke in opposition; stated that it was the recommendation of the Zoning and Planning Commission that Application #1067-4 be denied, but in lieu thereof, a Special Permit for a 30 -unit townhouse project be granted in accordance, generally, with the site plan as presented on Scheme #3, to be approved by the Zoning and Planning Staff, and with parking facilities to be located under the units as shown on the site plan; stated that it was the recommendation of the Zoning and Planning Commission that on Application #1067-5, "AT" Apart- ment Tourist District zoning be approved. Mr. Anderson stated that in connection with Application #1067-4, the Staff reported 19 notices were mailed, five were received in opposition and none in favor, that 23 notices were received from property owners outside the 200' notification area and two letters, making a total of 30 opposed; stated that relative to Application #1067-5, the Staff reported six notices were mailed, two received against and none in favor, that 20 additional letters were received from property owners outside the 200' notification area in opposition. He stated that since the hearing there has been considerable communication with the City Manager and the Council in opposition; that as of this forenoon, several petitions had been received, one containing 134 signatures and another containing approximately 600 signatures in opposition. Mr. Edmond J. Ford, attorney, representing the applicant, stated that Mr. Anderson had presented the technical nature of the applications, but pointed out that the nature of the requests are not in the most technical form, and stated that in order for the Council to have a clearer picture of the proposed development, he would call on Mr. TomValentine, architect,to describe the nature of the proposed development. Mr. Valentine displayed and described in detail sketches of layouts of both proposed developments; explained that the townhouse section would be limited to 30 Condominium Units which will be sold to individuals and would range in price from $40 to $50 Thousand Dollars; stated that the project proposed for the water side area would have three 14 -story towers for apartments, office suites, marina, club, restaurant, specialty shops and underground parking facilities; stated that the undergound parking was a landscape feature and that the entire concept of design will be of residential character in keeping with the residential area. He presented brochures of the projected Scheme #3. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 3 Mr. Ford stated that his clients had bought this property in 1925 before the area was annexed; that it is his firm conviction that this will be an extremely desirable development in the interest of the City and the public; that it appears to him that the major concern of the Council is to be convinced that this project will be completed as proposed; stated that he has been authorized to state whatever assurances necessary that it will be completed as proposed, and that the design of this development is in a flexible state; that they are willing,within the limits of reasonable flexibility, to accept con- ditions that would tie down the project so as to provide protection to the surrounding area; stated that there has been a revised estimate of $100,000 for a feasibility study, and that the entire complex is estimated to be an investment of $16 to $20 Million Dollars, and would be developed in stages; stated that the townhouse project is not contemplated to be completed before a period of two years, and that no work of any kind or character would be begun on the other project before a period of six years. Mr. Ford explained that immediately north of Airline Road, both sides of Ocean Drive are zoned as Apartment -Tourist District; that multi -story apartment projects now exist; stated that the question of whether or not high-rise apartments can be erected on Ocean Drive is not actually the question for the reason that that point has already been determined for this immediate area and for two miles north; stated that the arguments of the opposition that the approval of this request would open Ocean Drive to additional requests for similar zoning changes is not valid because the land virtually disappears by the time it reaches the South Shore Estates. He further stated that the property in the area will not be deteriorated in value if the zoning is changed but that this well-developed tract as proposed will enhance the value; stated that at the time Camden Place was developed, the area north of Airline was already zoned for high-rise apartments; that the City's Master Plan calls for Airline, as well as Ocean Drive, to be a major street with six lanes; that the Intersection of Ocean Drive and Airline and surrounding land is therefore not suitable for single-family development; that it would seem inevitable that some future Council will rezone the property for uses other than now proposed, and perhaps by a different owner; that the proposed plan would benefit the area, while if denied, there is a chance that there will in the future be a development which would be injurious to the area. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 4 Mr. Ford gave a detailed description of adjoining subdivisions, Camden Place, Tanglewood, Hewit, and the Seaside Memorial Cemetery; pointed out the "AT" zoning on both sides of the Street to the north; and stated that apartment districts have not damaged additions such as Hewit Place and on Santa Fe. Mr. Ford stated that with respect to the traffic hazards, the property has 1,000' of land for entry onto Ocean Drive. He pointed out the advantages to the City in taxes, stating they would probably amount to some $200,000 net each year; pointed out the magnitude of the project as to creating jobs during the construction period; pointed out the amount of money the City spends each year to attract new residents and tourists, and the uniqueness of the Bayfront combined with the sophisticated development as proposed as the kind of asset most needed to attract tourists and retired residents to this City; pointed out that along Airline Road and Ocean Drive is not an ideal area for children; stated that because of the high value of the land at this intersection, estimated at $50,000 an acre, it is his belief that it is not suitable for residential development; stated that high-density areas are inevitable, and that this particular intersection is ideal for this type of development. He stated that if increased traffic is the major argument, then there can be no high-density develop- ments anywhere. Mr. Ford stated that Mr. Eshleman had recently purchased a tract with 100 feet of frontage immediately south of the one on which the development is proposed; that this tract would be kept clear as an open buffer area. Mr. Ford stated that it was regrettable that the Traffic Safety Advisory Board saw fit to make a recommendation on the applications without giving the proponents, as they did the opponents, a chance to be heard. He stated that figures show that the traffic burden from multi -unit dwellings is actually less than what normally comes into a single-family residence. Mr. Ford showed slides of evidence that the view of the Bayfront is already obstructed by solid walls, trees, shrubbery, and buildings. He particularly pointed out the homes of Frank Smith, Arnold Morgan, Bruce Collins, Mrs. Carr; the Riviera Apartments; the 4600 Apartments; the Jamaica Apartments; and the Guy Warren home.. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 5 Mr. Ford concluded his remarks by stating that it is his belief that this project, as proposed, would be in the best possible interest of the community and is totally suited for the site, and that in his opinion, the project is something of which the Council and the general public should be proud Mayor Blackmon stated that nine communications had been received from persons favoring the proposed development; that a petition containing approximately 419 signatures had been received in opposition; that 57 letters and affidavits, one resolution from Corpus Christi Council of Garden Clubs, and a recommendation from the Traffic Safety Advisory Board, all in opposition to the pro- posed development had been received and were on file in the office of the City Secretary; were made a part of the record, and are available for examination by opponents and proponents. Mayor Blackmon invited those in the audience within the 200' notification area whofavorthe requested zoning change to speak at this time. No one spoke. Mayor Blackmon invited those in the audience from the general public who wished to speak in favor of the subject zoning matter. Mr. Robert P. Wallace, 345 Grant, who is in the savings and loan business, stated he had had an opportunity to analyze the application on his own and stated the proposal appears to be a first-class development; emphasized that change is inevitable, and that the "favored few" cannot deny others use of the Bayfront; pointed out that there were those present in the audience who had resided in this area since 1934, and would have to admit that the area is not the same and that it is not possible for it to remain the same. Mr. Arnold Morgan,3344 Ocean Drive, stated the type of development as proposed in this application is something the City needs and must have. Mr. Morgan pointed out that it is not possible to build and progress as a City if too many restrictions are imposed on developers; that a Tourist City must have attractions and things to do; and that the bay is already obstructed from view of residents in many places. Mr. Jack Ryan, 7 Hewit Place, stated it was his belief that the location at Airline Road and Ocean Drive particularly lends itself to the type of development proposed; that it will be a real addition to this City; and that the traffic problem can be satisfactorily worked out. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 6 Mr. Bevo Garnett, 715 Upper Broadway; and Sheldon Katz, realtor, of 715 Upper Broadway, stated that the project is "a natural" in that it improves undeveloped property and does not damage adjacent properties. Mayor Blackmon asked for a show of hands of those in the audience who favored the develop- ment, and approximately 26 persons indicated their approval. Mayor Blackmon stated the Council would, at this time, hear from those wishing to speak in opposition. Mr. James P. Ryan, attorney and spokesman, representing a group of property owners within the 200' notification area , other residents who live in the vicinity of the subject property, and other parties interested in seeing these applications denied, spoke in their behalf. Mr. Ryan stated that Ocean Drive is residential in character all the way from Louisiana to Alameda junction with one major exceptionexisting in the AT district just north of Airline and two other minor exceptions; stated that the developed tracts were annexed as non -conforming uses and when the Zoning Ordinance was revised several years ago the AT district was written specifically for the area to recognize existing uses, but not to expand the area; stated that the firm drawing a Master Plan for the City - Harland Bartholomew and Associates - has recommended that the residential area for which rezoning is being sought in these applications be continued as it is for the forseeable future, and pointed out that the Zoning and Planning Staff had recommended that the subject requests be denied on the basis that this area should be maintained as a detached single-family district, with Airline Road acting as a good boundary street for single-family dwellings. He further stated that if the requests are granted, additional requests for rezoning will be filed; that confidence in the area as a prime residential area will be undermined and will be in a state of transition with residential development going elsewhere; that there will be insufficient demand for non-residential uses and all the area will suffer. Mr. Ryan stated that the Eshleman tract has had a residential zoning classification since after it was annexed in 1945, that millions of dollars of residential development has taken place since such time in reliance upon such area retaining its residential zoning classification. He stated that the property in question is well suited for subdividing as a residential development and that no hardship would exist since the deed to the tract is dated August 3, 1967, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Secretary. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 7 Mr. Ryan stated that the laws of the State require that a public benefit be shown when the comprehensive zoning ordinance is amended and that none has been shown in this case; stated that if a need does exist for the type of developments proposed, then there is already ample property else- where with the proper zoning. Mr. Ryan cited as examples Emerald Cove and property on Corpus Christi Beach on which the Council is encouraging development. Mr. Ryan referred to the sketches as presented and described by Mr. Tom Valentine as elaborate, but stated the plan, in fact, is not feasible; that if it were feasible, the value of the property would be of artificial value because the value would be made by taking value away from properties in the area. Mr. Ryan stated it is his feeling that the granting of this zoning request would very seriously affect the market value of the residences on Ocean Drive; that such a decision of the Council would be setting a precedent. Mr. Ryan displayed a zoning map of Corpus Christi showing all the shoreline of Corpus Christi from Alameda junction to Louisiana Avenue, stating that this 5 -mile strip is under our comprehensive zoning ordinance and zoned one -family district with the three exceptions stated previously. He stated that the reconstruction of Ocean Drive was planned on the basis of Ocean Drive remaining a residential area and that the Traffic Engineer had stated that the development as proposed would significantly increase traffic; also stated that it should be kept in mind that a study is under way to determine whether an off -shore freeway paralleling Ocean Drive will be needed in the future; stated that preliminary sketches show Airline Road as a major terminus, and that if the expressway is built it would be necessary to condemn the expensive Eshleman tract. Mr. Ryan stated that the Sage Development Corporation envisions that one of the high-rise towers be built over submerged land and introduced a letter from Land Commissioner Jerry Sadler, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Secretary, whose office controls use of sub- merged land belonging to the State, and quoted Mr. Sadler as saying the use is impossible since State submerged land is restricted to industrial development. Mr. Ryan stated that in regard to the statement previously made by the proponents that Ocean Drive has changed remarkably since 1934, stated that from a residential standpoint, there has been no change except there has been more money invested for the building of more and expenseive homes, in which they all take great pride. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1957 Page 8 Mr. Ryan, in showing that property in the area will be devalued, stated that the property of Mr. Charles Butt was acquired for residential use, and it is understood that he opposes the rezoning becpuse he feels it will ruin his property for residential use, and he will file a rezoning request if the subject request is granted. He also cited other similar cases in which the owner will file for rezoning if the subject request is granted, including Arnold Morgan who it has been said is having plans drawn qt this time for a similar use around the S -Curve. In predicting a statement to be made by Mr. Horner Hoyt, Land Economist from Washington, D. C. concerning the subject location being an ideal one for the proposed type of development, Mr. Ryan stated that the City has had the expert counsel of the firm of Harland & Bartholomew & Associates for the past ten or fifteen years in what comprises the comprehensive zoning ordinance, and when they reviewed this plan they indicated this classification should not extend south beyond Airline Road, stating that Airline Road would be a logical barrier. Mr. Ryan also pointed out that recently Harland & Batholomew & Associates had studied the zoning under their contract with the Area Development Committee, and had made a similar report. From the standpoint of traffic, Mr. Ryan stated that the Traffic Safety Advisory Board had formally recommended to the City Council that no action be taken except denial unless a study is first made to determine the impact of additional traffic after the paving improvements on Ocean Drive are completed. Mr. Ryan called attention to the fact that the applicants have made it obvious that they are interested in some sort of compromise, which would indicate that they are asking for as much as they can, but would settle for a "foot in the door" enabling them to come back at a later time and ask for what they really wanted in the first place. In summing up his statements, Mr. Ryan commended the Council for their efforts on sub- mitting to the voters a bond issue and in proceeding with the paving and widening of Ocean Drive, which was badly needed, but stated that the plans for the improvement of Ocean Drive were not prepared for the type of development and high density use proposed by the applicants on the subject property; pointed out that there are people who are at the threshold of building programs, but are being held up pending action of the Council on this matter, and urged the Council to make a speedy decision. Mr. Ryan further stated that approximately 575 written objections have been filed Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 9 for record, and stated that there are two applications filed technically, but pointed out that under the statute it is one project, and it is his opinion that everyone within 200 feet of either of these properties has a right to protest in connection with the twenty per cent rule. Mayor Blackmon stated that the question of application of the 20 per cent rule regarding the two applications is a legal question and stated the Council will await briefing on this matter from City Attorney Singer, but stated if the applications are denied, the matter of the 20 per cent rule becomes immaterial . Speaking in opposition to the request, Mr, A. L. Waggoner, 8 Camden (within the 200 foot notification area) stated that he is Personnel Manager of a major industry and that many families are brought into the City by industry and they depend upon sound administration of the zoning ordinance when selecting a location for a home, Mr. John Zerr, 7 Camden, spoke in opposition and stated that he concurred wholeheartedly in the statements of Mr. Jim Ryan, specifically stating that the proposed zoning would open the door for changes in all directions from the intersection of Airline Road and Ocean Drive. Mrs. E. B. Robbins, Jr., 11 Camden, stated she is definitely opposed to the granting of either of the subject applications. Mr. Ralph Hall, speaking as an associate of Charles Butt who owns land adjacent to the subject property, quoted Mr. Butt as saying that he wants the land to remain residential, but will file p rezoning application if the request is granted, as this will result in no logical boundary. Mayor Blackmon stated that at this time the Council will hear from those in the audience in opposition who are not within the 200' notification area , Mr. Binford Arney, attorney, 5005 Ocean Drive, appeared and stated that his horde is located approximately two blocks from the land involved in the applications; stated that when all the debate is over, the fact will still remain that the Council is bound by the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and the State laws; stated that there can be an amendment only when the public interest requires it and when it is within the scope of purposes of zoning as set out in the Zoning Ordinance. He further stated that this plan, as proposed, is a beautiful one, but should be built in an area zoned for apartments; stated that ingress and egress to Ocean Drive should be a major consideration and that Ocean Drive belongs to all the people, and that part of their right to enjoy the Bay is to be able to see it. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 10 Mr. Arney called the Council's attention to a skeleton memoranda on the power of a City Council to amend the Zoning Ordinance, which he had prepared for his own use for the examination of the files on the subject of applications, and read portions thereof in support of his statement that there can be an amendment only when the public interest requires it and when it is within the scope of purposes of zoning. Mr. Arney stated a copy of the memoranda had been attached to his written objection in which he had stated that it was his belief that to amend the Zoning Ordinance as requested by the applicants or to issue a Special Permit and to amend the Zoning Ordinance to "AT" use as recommended by the Zoning and Planning Commission,would be arbitrary and unreasonable in that such applications and recommendations bear no substantial relationship to the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community. Mr. Patrick J. Horkin, speaking as a member of the subcommittee of the Area Development Committee that,studied zoning, stated that the area in question was considered, and that it was unanimously concluded by this subcommittee that the present Apartment -Tourist classification should not be extended south beyond Airline Road. Mr. Horkin further stated that if these applications are granted, there will be serious deterioration of our Zoning Ordinance as a whole, and respectfully requested that the Council deny the requests. Mr. Robert Keeling, attorney, 331 Poenisch, appeared and spoke for the residents of his area, and stated that the increased load on water and sewer facilities could create a problem; that bonds would probably have to be voted to build more sewer facilities; questioned whether or not the enlargement of Ocean Drive would take increased density; stated that he concurred in the presentations of Jim Ryan and Binford Arney, and was opposing the development on the basis of feasibility and from the standpoint of traffic. Mr. Bruce B. Baxter, 4002 Ocean Drive, pointed out that none of those people associated with the proposed development live on Ocean Drive; that four mistakes had already been made when the existing apartment complexes were allowed to be built on Ocean Drive, but that that is no excuse to repeat the mistakes. Mr. Charles R. Manning, 4879 Ocean Drive, appeared in opposition and brought up the question of what effect the increased traffic would have on the ten thousand or more Naval Air Station Peronnel who have to travel Ocean Drive. Mr. Manning filed with the Council a letter Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 11 signed by Dr. F. W. Yeager which stated his objections: that traffic would be increased, destruction of the main tourist attraction would occur, it would be breaking precedent, and the destruction of downtown values would occur. Mayor Blackmon called for a show of hands of those present in the audience in opposition to the requested zoning change, and approximately 60 persons indicated their objection in this manner. He asked those in the audience who did not plan to speak, but would like to register their approval or disapproval, to come forward and sign their names to be filed of record with the City Secretary. Others appearing and speaking in opposition were Mrs. Harvie Branscomb, 4777 Ocean Drive; George Karabatsos, 4818 Adkins, concerning where the children from this proposed complex will attend school. Mrs. James C. Scott, president of the Organization for the Preservation of an Unblemished Bayfront, appeared and stated that the organization feels the granting of the subject requests would not be in keeping with their purpose, and that they advocate no change at this time. Others appearing in opposition were Mr. John Zerr, 7 Camden; Mrs. Lowell Kepp, 51 Camden; and Mr. W. H. Stahl, 4901 Kostoryz. Mr. Stahl began reading a statement reciting his prior efforts to obtain rezoning, and Mayor Blackmon declared him out of order. Mr. Stahl continued to read, and Mayor Blackmon called a brief break in the meeting. After reconvening the meeting, Mrs. Renfrow question the Mayor as to why Mr. Stahl's comments were not heard, and Mayor Blackmon explained that his comments were attacks on the Staff and Council and had nothing to do with the subject zoning applications. Mayor Blackmon stated that theit would be given a brief period for rebuttal testimony. Mr. Ford stated there had been a few misleading statements from the opposition, and in rebuttal to the statement that the strip referred to as an "unbroken strip" where only single-family residences exist, he stated that it is a two-mile strip, and named several non -conforming uses in the area. With reference to the plan prepared by Al len Marsden, he stated the plan was prepared at the request of John Zerr, and that Mr. Marsden has never owned the property in question. With reference to the citations of the law by Mr. Ryan, Mr. Ford stated that only portions of the citations Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 12 were read which left misleading impressions. Mr. Ford further stated he deemed it inappropriate to quote statements of boards and other organizations who were not present at this meeting. He stated he regards the Area Development Committee as a very vital body, but stated their decisions do not specifically deal with the problem in question. Mr. Ford stated and verified that the recommendation of the Zoning and Planning Commission was a split vote. Also, with reference to the statement that the proponents had asked for "B-4" zoning in the hope of settling for something less, he stated that he did not represent the applicants at the time the application was first submitted for "B-4" zoning. In connection with the traffic problem, Mr. Ford stated that we all say we want new residents in the City and stated that this naturally creates more automobiles and traffic. With reference to the alleged problem of school facilities, he stated that more improvements mean more taxation; con- sequently, there will be more school facilities. So far as the statement that personnel directors of Targe industries being asked to advise newcomers where to locate, he asked if it were necessary to direct them to places like Camden Place. Mr. Fred Morgan, one of the principals in the Sage Investment Corporation, introduced Mr. Homer Hoyt, Land Economist from Washington, D. C., brought here as expert counsel for the applicants. Mr. Hoyt stated the purpose of his testimony is to refute the claim that the property in the area in question would be devaluated; showed examples of similar types of developments in other cities, particularly in Houston, Ft. Lauderdale, and Montreal. Mr. Hoyt further stated that a check had been made of residences living in the shadow of complexes in these major cities and that no loss of value had been indicated. Mr. Hoyt specifically mentioned the complex in River Oaks of Houston, and stated that it was located in the center of a heavy residential area, and nearby property owners reported that not a single house had been offered for sale as a result of the apart- ment complex. He stated that in Ft. Lauderdale, the complex is completely surrounded with $50 and $60 Thousand Dol lar homes, and that there were no adverse effects reported; pointed out that high-rise apartments are no place for children, therefore there could be no problem of school facilities; stated that since 1961, there had been a tremendous swing toward multi -family dwellings in leading Texas cities, and further stated that if given a trial, in the long run, people usually adjust to the idea and like them. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 13 Mr. Arnold Morgan stated that the comments that he has plans to build a high-rise apartment structure on his property are only hearsay. He further stated that he built his house after the three high-rise apartments were bui It near his property, and that he did not consider they had been detrimental in any way. Mr. Ryan, in rebuttal testimony, stated he was in error to quote hearsay with regard to Mr. Morgan's plans to build a high-rise structure on property on Ocean Drive; stated that with the many things that had been injected into evidence in this hearing, there had not been one single valid reason given why the requested zoning should be extended to the southern boundary of Airline Road. In connection with the statement that the situation under which the Harland & Bartholomew Study was intended to be effective, he stated that it is not applicable to the area south of Airline Road;ond stated that the area in question has been consistently controversial. Mr. Ryan further stated that there has not been any information or arguments given the Council to show what is wrong with the AT zoning that exists between Airline Road and Ocean Drive; stated that from the public's stand- point, it behooves the Council to maintain the values in residential areas, and that this cannot be done in the manner proposed by the subject zoning requests. Mr. Ryan stated that he wanted to further stress the point made earlier in this meeting, that a study is under way to determine whether an offshore freeway paralleling Ocean Drive will be needed in the future, stating that if the expressway is built it would be necessary to condemn expensive properties on the Eshleman tract. Mr. Karabatsos stated that the residents who live next tq the existing high-rise structures on Ocean Drive are very dissatisfied. Mr. Fred Morgan, in answer to the question of why the applicants did not select some other place already zoned for this type development such as the Glasscock Fill or Corpus Christi Beach, stated that they have in their files an economic study of the Glasscock Fill as a possible location and found that the price was in excess of $4.00 a square foot; stated that he could show mathematical proof that this location would not be economically feasible. Concerning Corpus Christi Beach, he stated that they had also studied this proposal at one time, and found it to be unsuitable, and stated that the findings are available upon request. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 14 Mr. Ford stated that the development as proposed is in good faith and that if there is any deterioration in values of adjacent land, the person who will suffer most will be the one who invested and developed it. At this point, Mayor Blackmon declared the meeting in recess for a brief period and directed that it be returned to the Council Chamber where the meeting will continue in session. At 6:20 p.m., Mayor Blackmon reconvened the meeting in the Council Chambers and asked if members of the Council had questions to ask the representatives of the applicants or the opposition. A discussion followed between the Council, Mr. Ford, Mr. Ryan, Mr. Benjamin Eshleman, Mr. Arney, Mr. Fred Morgan, and Mr. Zerr as to flexibility of the plans of design of the proposed development; as to what portion of the applications would be acceptable to the opposition; financing; the length of time required for the development; location of the tower proposed to be on submerged land; the intent and seriousness of the applicants to complete the plans; and what constitutes a valid protester as applied to the 20 per cent rule. Mr. Fred Morgan brought up the question as to the possibility that the Council would approve one of the applications and deny the other, and explained that the project, as proposed, will be contingent upon obtaining financing that would be adequate to take care of the entire plan, and stated that they have not considered the possibility of accepting rezoning one tract without the other, Mr. Ryan stated the opposition views the applications as one project; stated that he feels that if the Council breaks a precedent, this is going to open the door to many other applications; that the groups and individuals which he represents are opposed to any change from single-family uses in this area, and that includes the townhouse portion of the project. Mr. Eshleman appeared and spoke in behalf of the application, expressed great faith in their Association, and assured the Council that they intend to do what they say they will do. He further stated that a great deal of money has already been spent on feasibility studies and asked the Council to approved the applications. There being no one else wishing to speak either in favor or in opposition to the foregoing zoning applications, Mayor Blackmon stated he would entertain a motion to close the hearing. Minutes Special Council Meeting November 27, 1967 Page 15 Motion by McDaniel, seconded by Bradley and passed that the hearing be closed. Moi -ion by McDaniel, seconded by Roberts and passed that the foregoing zoning matters be tabled for further consideration There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned,