HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 02/21/1979 - SpecialPRESENT:
Mayor Pro Tem Bob Gulley
Council Members:
David Diaz
** Ruth Gill
*** Joe Holt
* Edward L. Sample
MINUTES
CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
SOLOMON-COLES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
February 21, 1979
7:00 p. m.
Assistant City Manager Archie N. Walker
Assistant City Attorney Jim Holtz
City Secretary Bill G. Read
Mayor Pro Tem Bob Gulley called the meeting to order at the Solomon -
Coles Elementary School in the absence of Mayor Gabe Lozano, Sr. and stated that
the purpose of the meeting was to conduct a public hearing on the preliminary
assessments on the street improvements in the Washington -Coles Area - Phase 1.
Administrative Assistant Dorothy Zahn called the roll of required Charter
Officers in the temporary absence of City Secretary Bill G. Read and stated that
the necessary quorum was present to conduct a legally constituted meeting.
Assistant City Manager Archie N. Walker asked Mr. James K. Lontos, Director
of Engineering and Physical Development, to briefly describe the street improvement
project.
Mr. Lontos explained that the Washington -Cole School Area Street Improve-
ments include the following streets:
1. Sam Rankin Street, from Martin Luther King Drive to West Broadway Blvd.;
2. Winnebago Street, from Sam Rankin Street to Brownlee Blvd. and from
North Staples Street to I.H. 37 Frontage Road;
3. Lake Street, from Sam Rankin Street to T. C. Ayers Park;
4. Ramirez Street, from North Alameda Street to Waco Street; and
5. Waco Street, from Winnebago Street to Martin Luther King Drive.
He informed the Council that funds for this street reconstruction had been
included in the 1972 Bond Election; the project was initiated as a result of some
voluntary paving petitions from residents of some of the streets; bids were received
on the project, and the bid was awarded to APCCO, the low bidder, on February 14,
1979, for a contract price of $504,235.15, but the work has not started yet.
Assistant City Manager Walker stated that Assistant City Attorney Jim Holtz
will conduct the hearing and that testimony will be offered by Mr. James K. Lontos;
Mr. Gerald Smith, Chief Engineer for the City; and by Mr. William J. Holly, the
City's independent appraiser.
MICROFILMED
SEP 0 41990
ti
..nutes
Special Council Meeting
February 21, 1979
Page 2
Assistant City Attorney Holtz stated that the purpose of this hearing is to
determine whether or not the assessments that have been proposed are appropriate
and proper and if the property involved will be enhanced at least in the amount of
the assessment to be levied. Mr. Holtz explained that the procedure to be followed
would be to provide testimony on which the Council can base their decision as to the
validity of the assessments. He then called as his first witness Chief Engineer
Gerald Smith, P.E.
Through questioning of Chief Engineer Smith, Mr. Holtz ascertained that
he is a qualified professional engineer, registered in the State of Texas, that he
has been employed by the City of Corpus Christi for 19 years, and that he is tho-
roughly familiar with the project under discussion. Mr. Holtz then requested that
Mr. Smith explain the Washington -Coles Area - Phase 1 street improvement project.
Mr. Smith displayed a map of the area and located the streets to be
improved in the area, some of which are scheduled to be improved and others are
to be completely reconstructed. He also stated that water lines in some of the
streets will be replaced as a part of this contract which has been awarded to
APCCO, the construction company that submitted the lowest bid. Chief Engineer Smith
explained that the assessments were computed according to the contract price of
$504,235.15, and the assessment roll consists of 102 items for a total of $102,777.86.
Mr. Smith described the planned method of construction; stated that no assessments
will be levied on Sam Rankin Street for pavement since it will only be resurfaced;
and explained that credits will be given for existing improvements if they are in
good condition.
Assistant City Attorney Holtz inquired about the completion date of the
project, and Chief Engineer Smith replied that the contract was awarded on February
14, 1979; the project should begin in approximately two weeks; and the contract
allows for 120 working days, which is approximately six months.
Council Member Sample arrived at the meeting at 7:25 p.m.
Mr. David Coover, Attorney representing one of the property owners,
inquired about the possible credit for existing improvements.
Chief Engineer Smith replied that most of the credits will be for property
owners who own property on Sam Rankin Street. He stated that there are some sidewalks
.nutes
Special Council Meeting
February 21, 1979
Page 3
on other streets for which credit will be given, but basically most of the credits
referred to are on Sam Rankin and Winnebago Streets. Mr. Smith also stated that no
credits will be given for property on Ramirez Street.
Mr. Coover, stating that the property he was concerned about was on Ramirez
Street, asked for a definition of serviceable pavement and sidewalks that are in
good condition.
' Mr. Smith reiterated that the staff did not find anything in the 6900 Block
of Ramirez Street on which credit could be given.
Mr. Lontos then introduced Mr. William J. Holly, who was present to present
testimony in regard to the value of the assessments.
Assistant City Attorney Holtz questioned Mr. Holly and determined that he
is a licensed real estate broker in the State of Texas, that he has been in the
real estate business for 25 years, and that he is experienced as a real estate
appraiser.
Mr. Holly verified that he has examined each and every parcel of land
included in this project. He testified that with the exception of three parcels
of land, in his opinion, each and every parcel assessed as a part of this project
will be enhanced in value at least in the amount of the assessment.
Mr. Holly continued his presentation by explaining that.this project
includes three odd -shaped, or pie -shaped, pieces of property on which he has recom-
mended a reduction. He explained that because of the odd shapes of the lots listed
below, he has recommended reductions as listed:
Item No. 39 - Sadi Orshanski Estate
Item No. 62 - SA.U. & G. R.R.
Item No. 67 - A. Walford, et ux
Recommended Reduction
$153.79
$257.35
$459.42
Mr. Lontos stated that the staff has reviewed the recommendations of Mr.
Holly; they agree with the suggested reductions on these parcels; and he recommends
that these reductions be incorporated in the assessment roll.
Mr. Coover indicated that he would like to question Mr. Holly in regard to
Item 91 which is listed as Lot 9, Block 69, Bluff Portion, stating that he was
speaking on behalf of the owner. He inquired of Mr. Holly if he was familiar with
Minutes
Special Council Meeting
February 21, 1979
Page 4
this particular piece of property.
Mr. Holly stated that he is familiar with it and noted that it is a vacant
lot.
Mr. Coover further questioned Mr. Holly in regard to the condition of the
street in front of this property, and Mr. Holly stated that the entire portion of
this street needs to be improved.
Assistant City Attorney Holtz objected to this line of questioning of the
real estate appraiser, pointing out that he is not qualified to testify as to the
condition of the streets and that he was not retained by the City for this purpose.
Mayor Pro Tem Gulley informed Mr. Coover that he would allow him to ques-
tion Mr. Holly in regard to his appraisals of the property as it pertains to the
assessments, but the Engineering staff would be the proper ones to speak to the
condition of the street.
Mr. Coover then stated that he would like to know the value of this parti-
cular piece of property and questioned Mr. Holly In regard to this.
Mr. Holly stated that he would have to run some comparables of similar
property before he could reply to that question, indicating that he would be glad
to do so if Mr. Coover would like to engage him for this service.
Mr. Coover then questioned Mr. Holly's ability•to testify as an expert
witness in regard to the enhancement of this property if he does not even know
the value of the property.
Mr. Holly informed Mr. Coover that he could testify as to the value of the
improvements planned for this property and pointed out that he was not employed by
the City for any other purpose.
Assistant City Attorney Holtz again objected to Mr. Coover's questions and
pointed out to the Council that the purpose of this hearing is not to determine the
value of all of the property involved. Mr. Holtz noted that the appraiser, Mr.
Holly, has testified that each and every piece of property will be enhanced at
least the value of the assessments with three exceptions of odd -shaped lots, and
pointed out that Mr. Holly has already done this.
Mayor Pro Tem Gulley again explained to Mr. Coover that the appraiser was
not required to testify as to the value of all of the property involved in the
project.
Minutes
Special Council Meeting
February 21, 1979
Page 5
Mr. Coover then objected to the assessments levied against this property
and stated that the gentleman who owns the property cannot afford to pay for the
assessments and that an attempt has been made to sell the property without success.
Mr. Lontos mentioned the fact that most of the property included in this
assessment roll is zoned other than residential, and noted that the property under
discussion is zoned "A-1" but is vacant. He informed Mr. Coover that traditionally
the City has taken the position that if the property owners involved in a street
improvement project desire to have their property rezoned to "R -1B", the City will
initiate the proceedings, and if the property is down zoned, then the assessments
may be reduced accordingly. He suggested to Mr. Coover that he request the change
of zoning for his client on this particular item since it is a vacant lot.
Council Member Holt inquired about the amount of reduction that would be
effected if this particular piece of property is rezoned to "R -1B," and Mr. Lontos
replied that the rate would be reduced from $10.48 to $4.75 for curb, gutter and
pavement.
Council Member Holt then explained to Mr. Coover that the assessment on this
property could be greatly reduced if he would request that the City initiate change
of zoning proceedings.
After further discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Gulley stated that it is the con-
sensus of the Council that if the property owners request it, their property could
be rezoned "R -1B" which would result in a lower assessment.
Mr. Joe McManus, Realtor, 509 N. Water, stated that he was speaking on
behalf of Mrs. Hana Braslau on Items 82 and 83, which are 50 -foot lots bordering
on Ramirez Street. Mr. McManus pointed out that this property has gone down con-
siderably in value and he did not think that it would be enhanced in the amount
of the assessment and informed the Council that his client had already paid assess-
ments when North Alameda and other streets in the area were improved.
Council Member Gill inquired if it is determined that the property will
not be enhanced by the amount of the assessment, if it would be possible to change
the amount of the assessment.
Assistant City Manager Walker confirmed that if the property is not to be
enhanced at least in the amount of the assessment, according to State law, the
assessment must be reduced.
Minutes
Special Council Meeting
February 21, 1979
Page 6
Discussion followed in regard to this aspect of the assessments, and Assis-
tant City Attorney Holtz informed the Council that the property owner has 15 days
in which to appeal the decision of the Council in District Court if he does not
agree with the recommended assessment.
Mr. Perry C. Tucker, the owner of Mayflower Moving and Storage Company,
who owns property listed in Items 69, 70 and 102, contended that his business will
not be enhanced in the amount of the assessments.
**Council Member Gill departed the meeting at 7:55 p.m.
Mr. Tucker stated that he would like to have the sidewalks deleted from
his property which is adjacent to Winnebago and Sam Rankin. He also stated that
he did not object to the sidewalks being installed on Waco Street because the
children walking to school need these sidewalks, but he pointed out that they
will not enhance his property.
Mayor Pro Tem Gulley suggested that he discuss this matter with the staff
after the close.of the public hearing.
Mr. Pedro Garza, 2313 Riggan, spoke in regard to his property which is
listed as Item 64, which is zoned "A-1" and on which two residential units are
located, and inquired if this property could be rezoned to "R -1B" in order for
the assessment to be reduced.
Mayor Pro Tem Gulley assured him that if he requested lesser zoning on
this property, the staff would initiate the zoning procedure which would in turn
allow for the reduction in his assessment.
The Reverend Elliott Grant stated that the St. Matthews Missionary Baptist
Church does own property that is on Ramirez Street which has curbs, gutters and
sidewalks for which they are being assessed and inquired if credit would be allowed.
Chief Engineer Smith explained that consideration will be given to exist-
ing improvements and if they are in good condition, credit will be recommended.
Mr. Coover spoke again in regard to Block 69, Bluff Portion, stating that
he is thoroughly familiar with the area; the street is macadam paved; there are no
holes or ruts in the street; there is no need for curbs, gutters and sidewalks in
the area; there is no reason to improve this street; and that his client's property
will certainly not be enhanced by these improvements. He also contended that his
Butes
Special Council Meeting
February 21, 1979
Page 7
x
client cannot afford to pay his assessment and would like:to sell the property. Mr.
Coover summarized by emphasizing that Ramirez Street does not need to be reconstructed
because it is more than adequate at this time.
Mayor Pro Tem Gulley explained that the Council has to consider what is best
for a majority of the citizens In the area and they feel that these improvements will
benefit the entire neighborhood.
Reverend Grant stated that he, too, felt that the improvement program is
needed by the neighborhood. He also pointed out that improved lighting would be
very desirable in the neighborhood.
***Council Member Holt departed•the meeting at 8:12 p.m.
Mr. Lontos reminded the Council that this project is .a Community Development
project; there have been many public hearings conducted in connection with the pro-
ject; and an attempt is being made to change the character of the neighborhood
through this program, and the street improvement project is one of the items under-
taken for this purpose.
Mayor Pro Tem Gulley reiterated that if any of the property owners had any
seecific questions, members of the staff will remain after the meeting to assist
them.
There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion by
Sample, seconded by Diaz, and passed unanimously, the Special Council Meeting was
adjourned at 8:15 p.m., February 21, 1979.