Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 12/10/1969MINUTES CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING December 10, 1969 2:00 P. M. PRESENT: Mayor Pro Tem Gabe Lozano, Sr. Commissioners: Dick Bradley, Jr. Eduardo E. de Ases Ken McDaniel Ronnie Sizemore Church. City Manager R. Marvin Townsend City Attorney I. M. Singer Assistant City Attorney Amador Garcia City Secretary T. Ray Kring Mayor Pro Tem Lozano called the meeting to order. The Invocation was given by The Reverend Edwin T. Brown, Pastor of Sts John Lutheran City Secretary T. Ray Kring called, the roll of those in attendance. Motion by Sizemore, seconded by Bradley and passed, that the absence of Mayor Blackmon and Commissioner Roberts be excused for cause. Mayor Pro Tem Lozano recognized members of the Student Council of West Oso High School, and presented Certificates of Attendance to : Richard Alaniz, Danny Noyola, Honeybee Smith, Mary Sustaita, Oscar Sifuentes and Isabel Escamilla. The students were accompanied by their sponsor, Mr. Jerry Muttera. Mayor Pro Tem Lozano called for the City Manager's Reports. Motion by Sizemore, seconded by Bradley and passed, that the City Manager's Reports, Items "A" through "C" be accepted, and that the requests and recommendations be granted and approved as follows: a. That an agreement with the Lower Nueces River Water Supply District to authorize a total payment in the amount of $381,000 to the District for District debt service, and agreement that the District will not levy a tax for the 1969 tax year, be authorized; b. That an appropriation in the amount of $1,300 for appraisals by Roy. L. Temple con- cerning Parcels Nos. 46 and 48, in connection with acquisition of land for the Oso Sewage Treat- ment Plant, be approved; c. That the oral notice relative to the oil, gas and mineral lease dated December 4, 1968, with Kelly Bell as Lessee, covering 130.268 acres of land in 78 tracts, be accepted in lieu of written notice that the well was completed on February 24, 1969, as a dry hole. • Minutes Regular Council Meeting December 10, 1969 Page 2 ORDINANCE NO. 9572 AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER, FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE LOWER NUECES RIVER WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT WHEREBY THE CITY WILL MAKE PAYMENT TOWARD PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST OF WATER DISTRICT IN ORDER TO AVOID LEVY OF PROPERTY TAX BY THE SAID WATER DISTRICT, ALL AS MORE FULLY SET FORTH IN THE AGREEMENT, A COPY OF WHICH IS ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The Charter Rule was suspended and the foregoing ordinance was passed by the following vote: Lozano, Bradley, de Ases, McDaniel and Sizemore, present and voting "Aye"; Blackmon and Roberts were absent. ORDINANCE NO. 9573 APPROPRIATING OUT OF NO. 250 SANITARY SEWER BOND FUND THE SUM OF $1300 FOR APPRAISALS BY ROY L. TEMPLE CONCERNING PARCELS 46 AND 48, IN CONNECTION WITH ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR OSO SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT, PROJECT NO. 250-61-25.5; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The Charter Rule was suspended and the foregoing ordinance was passed by the following vote: Lozano, Bradley, de Ases, McDaniel and Sizemore, present and voting "Aye"; Blackmon and Roberts were absent. City Manager Townsend read and presented a formal statement in response to questions raised by Mrs. James C. Scott, President of the Organization for the Preservation of an Unblemished Shoreline, in a letter dated November 29, 1969, pertaining to the alleged illegal construction of the Canta Mar Apartment Project at 4222 Ocean Drive, which letter, Mrs. Scottstated she had received no reply. In presenting the statement, Mr. Townsend reviewed the history of the case in question, pointing out that a building permit had been denied on June 3, 1968; was appealed to the Board of Adjustment on June 25, 1968, and that the applicant, Mr. R. W. Depuy, was apparently able to convince the Board that the City had reduced the depth of the lot by acquisition of right of way for Ocean Drive, and that drainageway and erosion along the edge of the Bay constituted unusual lot conditions and hardship of the land, and that the Board unanimously approved the request; stated that as to whether or not the Board exceeded its authority is debatable, but that the Board had shown commendable diligence in its review of information presented by the Staff,and that the Staff had no reason to conclude that the Board did exceed its authority; that their decision that there was a hardship of the land was a matter of judgment which a court would probably be slow to overrule. • • Minutes Regular Council Meeting December 10, 1969 Page 3 He explained that this project had been inspected more frequently than similar projects because of the interest which had been expressed, but stated that it had been called to the attention of the Staff and Council through a member of the Council and not through the news media as alleged. Mr. Townsend further explained the Staff's role in supporting the zoning ordinance before the Board of Adjustment and the procedures and policies for following up on such cases. He stated that he finds that the facts in this situation are clearly in favor of the owner; that the project is being built in accordance with the City Building Code and the site plan approved by the Board of Adjustment; that the matter is closed, and no further action is indicated. (Council Exhibit #12-69) Mrs. James C. Scott was furnished a copy of Mr. Townsend's written statement. Mrs. Scott stated she is not satisfied with the report and questioned the Board of Adjust- ment's authority in this case; questioned as to whether or not the site plan had been revised since it was originally approved by the Board of Adjustment; cited a case in Abilene in which a property owner was forced to set back a building, and its intended use as a garment factory denied; alleged that violations of the City's Building Code are taking place and that the City Staff and Council are derelict in the discharge of their responsibilities to correct the situation; that the Staff should assume a greater role in arguing cases before the Board of Adjustment; questioned as to whether or not the decision of the Board of Adjustment can still be reversed; stated the minutes are vague and lack sufficient documentation of evidence to show hardship; and stated that the Staffshould investi- gate the land fill behind the project, pointing out that it may have been created over state-owned submerged lands. City Manager Townsend stated that for the Staff to place themselves in a position of arbitrarily withholding the approval of permits or any other type of authorization simply because they have a personal dissatisfaction with the project being requested is so wrong as to "not be worthy of further discussion." He stated the Abilene case which was cited by Mrs. Scott is neither pertinent nor comparable to the case in question since the case cited was for the use of the land; that the only reason the courts might revoke the existing building permit would be finding that the Board of Adjustment acted arbitrarily in concluding that adequate grounds existed for taking the action to grant a variance. He stated there had been no delay in the investigation; explained that the Staff has for the past eight months been presenting a written opinion to the • • Minutes Regular Council Meeting December 10, 1969 Page 4 Board of Adjustment in all cases before it and that a procedure exists for Staff appeal to the Council when it is deemed desirable; conceded that the minutes were not perfect but that corrective steps have been taken in that regard; that there was, in fact, sufficient evidence and information before the Board for them to conclude that this was a hardship case. He assured Mrs. Scott that he has certification that there has been no substitution of the original site plan which the Board approved; pointed out that the use of the land is clearly not in question; stated that no laws are being violated, and that he takes exceptions to the remarks. Mrs. Robert Flato, 4240 Ocean Drive, stated she has been an eye witness to the land fill, and that she thinks it is intended to be used for parking. She suggested that the Staff investigate this aspect before construction is begun on another building, that if they cannot have the parking, they would not want the building. Comments from members of the Council indicated unanimous support of the actions of the Staff and the Board of Adjustment as presented in the statement of City Manager Townsend. Mayor Pro Tem Lozano declared a brief recess before the scheduled public hearing for Sidewalk Improvements, Mayor Pro Tem Lozano reconvened the meeting at 3:00 p.m., directed that it be noted that a quorum was present, and announced the Council would hold the public hearing scheduled on assessments for the proposed Sidewalk Improvements, Unit V, consisting of construction of concrete and shell sidewalks in portions of the following streets: (1) Alameda Street, from Hancock to Agnes; (2) Brownlee Boulevard, Buford to Agnes; (3) Chico, Howard to Commanche; (4) Howard, Chico to 19th; (5) Clark, Norton to 150' east; (6) Norton, Naples to Ramsey; (7) Naples, Shely to Norton; (8) McArdle Road, Rodd Field to Nile Drive; (9) Ruth, 22nd to 25th; (10) Santa Fe, Craig to Morgan; (11) Weil Place; (12) McArdle Road, Nesbitt to Johnston; (13) Shirley Drive; (14) Karen Drive; and (15) John Jones Park. He stated that Assistant City Attorney Amador Garcia would conduct the hearing. Mr. Garcia explained the purpose of the public 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 stated that the • 4 • Minutes Regular Council Meeting December 10, 1969 Page 5 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 and plans and specifications for the proposed sidewalk improvements and explained they are part of a proposed project designed to provide access to several schools in the City. He described the nature, extent, and specifications of the proposed sidewalks, and stated these plans and specifications were prepared in his office under his supervision. He explained that the sidewalks proposed are to be four feet in width with the exception of two streets where they will be five feet in width. He stated that the total contract price, based on the recent assessment policy adopted by the Council, is $47,533.20; total assessment to property owners is $22,557.78, and that the total cost to the City is $24,975.42; and explained the manner in which the pro rata share was computed. He stated a problem has arisen as to placement of the sidewalk on Norton Street where huge palm trees exist along the curb; that letters have been received from the property owners requesting that the sidewalk be four feet in width and placed against the curb, in which case the palm trees would have to be removed; that as an alternative it had been suggested that the necessary easement be obtained from the property owners and that the sidewalk be placed back of the trees and narrowed to three and one-half feet, and that the proper adjustments be made in the rates. - Mr. Harold Carr, real estate appraiser, testified as to his background and experience which he felt qualified him as a real estate appraiser for all types of property in the City; stated 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 stated that in his opinion, each of the properties so assessed would be enhanced in value at least to the extend of the proposed assessments, and that he does not recommend an adjustment on any single piece of property. Mayor Pro Tem Lozano gave property owners in the audience an opportunity to state his approval or objection to any of the proposed sidewalks or assessments to his property. The following persons appeared: • • Minutes Regular Council Meeting December 10, 1969 Page 6 Item #47 - John R. Thomas, Lots 4, 5, 6, and 7, Block 9, Bayview Addition - Mr. Charles Hale, attorney representing Mrs. John R. Thomas and her three daughters, stated the notice appeared to be improper because the property had been described as being located on Clark Street, but stated he would stipulate that the described as correct. He stated his clients were vigorously opposed to the construction of the proposed sidewalks from Craig to Buford on the basis there are no school children, and no need for them since there is no pedestrian traffic; that Mrs. Thomas is a 90 -year old invalid widow confined to her bedroom, and that the proposed sidewalk construction would be within a few feet of her bedroom window which would be a nuisance and an injustice. He pointed out that the City had allowed business zoning in this area which does not necessitate construction of sidewalks; that his clients are willing to have the shrubs removed if they are objectionable, and that they are opposed on the basis the improve- ments would not benefit. Mrs. Otis Bowers, daughter of Mrs. Thomas, spoke on her behalf concurring in the statements made by Mr. Hale, and pointed out that sidewalks exist on the other side of the street all the way to Del Mar with the exception of an area in front of two buildings; that there is no bus stop, and that she feels the proposed sidewalks are useless. Mr. Carr stated that he had studied this particular property and that it was his opinion that sidewalks at this location would definitely benefit the area, pointing out that the property being used as a residence is not the highest and best use of the property. Items #143 and #144 - Alfred Mayorga, Lot 35, Block 1, and Lot 34, Block 1, Loma Alta Addition: Mr. Mayorga inquired as to whether or not driveways had been included in the con- struction. He was advised that they were not included and that if he desired driveways he should make arrangements with the contractor, and that credit would be allowed for driveway cuts. Item #147 - Felipe Villa, Lot 31, Block 1, Loma Alta Addition: Alfred Mayorga spoke as interpreter for Mr. Villa and inquired as to how the payments are to be made. Item #12 - First Free Methodist Church, Lot 12, Block 12, Southmoreland Subdivision: Reverend Smith appeared as representative of the church and stated the members are opposed to the sidewalks on the basis that they already have sidewalks in front of the church, and that another one would only clutter up their head -in parking and create a hazard by cars having to cross the sidewalk into their parking area. • Minutes Regular Council Meeting December 10, 1969 Page 7 Item #22,'L. H. Lester, Lot 20, Block 15, Arcadia Village: Mrs. Lester stated she was not opposed to the sidewalks but that she wos opposed to the 4 -foot easement proposed between the curb and the sidewalk, which would cut down the depth of her front yard and necessitate destruction of her palm trees. She suggested that the sidewalks be located between the palm trees and the curb. Item #15 - B. L. Miller, Lot 13, Block 15, Arcadia Village: Mrs. Edna Miller stated she was heartily in favor of the sidewalks, but that she could not understand why the City per- mitted that subdivision to be developed without sidewalks in the first place which is penalizing the residents at this time. She stated she would be willing to sacrifice the palm trees if the plans could be modified to construct the sidewalk next to the curb. City Manager Townsend reported that letters had been received from three other residents in this area requesting that the sidewalk on this street be placed next to the curb. The letters were signed by Thelma Doughty, Cora Atkins, and C. 0. Ward. Item #35 - Mrs. Lena Williams, Lot 1, Block 16, Arcadia Village: Mrs.Williams stated she was opposed to the sidewalk on the basis it would decrease the size of her yard; would destroy the only Retama tree in the entire neighborhood; would be too close to her bedroom window; and that she does not feel the school children would use the sidewalk. Mr. Lontos stated the assessment had been reduced fifty percent because this property sides onto the street; and that it will be investigated further and a recommendation submitted. Item #18 - Martin Flores, Lot 16, Block 15, Arcadia Village: Mr. Flores stated he was not opposed to the sidewalk nor the assessment, but objected to the eight -foot reduction in the size of his property, and stated the sidewalk would be too close to his house. Item #30 - F. A. Voelkei, Lot 21, Block 19, Arcadia Village: Mr. Hamricks stated that if the sidewalk is going to be imposed upon him, he would like to request that they be placed next to the curb. Items #52, 53, 54, 56 - Carroll Jones Company, Lots 12 and Lot 1, Black 4; Lot 1 and 24, Block 3; and Lot 10, Block 2, all in Heritage Park #1: Mr. Phil Jones appeared and stated he was opposed to being asked to pay for sidewalks located on the opposite side of the street; that he felt they should be constructed on both sides of the street; and inquired if the individual s _ • Minutes Regular Council Meeting December 10, 1969 Page 8 owners could contract for the construction if they desired and found it could be done more economically. City Manager Townsend stated this would not be feasible since the contract had been awarded for the total project, and would be too complex. He explained that the School System officials had been consulted as to which side of the streets was most desirable for location of the sidewalk, and also a factor which was taken into consideration was the side of the street which has the greater number of houses, and which has the most intersections to be served by the sidewalks. Mr. Townsend stated that the Staff would review each and every one of the requests. No one else appeared to be heard in connection with the proposed sidewalk construction. Motion by Bradley, seconded by McDaniel and passed, that the hearing be closed and tabled for further study. There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned.