HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 09/08/1987MINUTES
CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 1987
9:00 a.m.
PRESENT
Mayor Betty Turner
Mayor Pro Tem Clif Moss
Council Members:
David Berlanga, Sr. City Manager Craig McDowell
Leo Guerrero * City Attorney Hal George
Frank Mendez * City Secretary Armando Chapa
Bill Pruet
Mary Rhodes
Mary Pat Slavik
Linda Strong
Mayor Betty Turner called the meeting to order in the Council Chamber of
City Hall.
The invocation and Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States
were led by Mayor Pro Tem Clif Moss.
Mayor Turner administered the oaths of office to the following people:
Jake Sanchez, and Donald Taft - Planning Commission; Dorothy Garrett - Sister
City Committee; David Gray - Ambulance Advisory Council; Celina Cavazos - Human
Relations Commission; Mark Scott, Govind B. Nadkarni, Paula Gaut and Lawrence
Balderas - Landmark Commission.
Mayor Turner recessed the Council Meeting at 9:10 a.m. to convene the JTPA
Executive Committee Meeting.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Turner reconvened the Council Meeting at 9:45 a.m.
* Council Member Mendez arrived at 9:25 a.m.
* Council Member Guerrero arrived at 9:45 p.m.
Council Member Slavik requested that the Council grant five minutes of time
to a group from Flour Bluff concerning an excavation project in Flour Bluff and
the Council agreed.
MICROFILMED
:mutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 2
Messrs. Joe Hansler and Vic Menard, residents of a Flour Bluff
neighborhood, appealed to the Council in regard to a plan by Heldenfels
Brothers, Inc. to excavate a 57 -acre tract near the corner of Caribbean Drive
and Flour Bluff Drive which is approximately 2,000,000 cubic feet of soil, zoned
residential and is surrounded by residential properties. The concerns of the
neighborhood are that 1. It will detract from the appearance of a highly -visible
area; 2. Lower property values in a high -valuation area; 3. Blowing sand will be
a nuisance; 4. Blowing sand will be a safety hazard to student pilots operating
at Waldron Field; and 5. Low area will become a breeding place for mosquitoes.
They requested the City Council's support in protecting their property from this
commercial excavation and requested that an emergency ordinance be passed
requiring that the contractor apply for an excavation permit.
Discussion followed and it was the consensus of the Council that the
residents set up a meeting between the residents, Mr. Nino Gutierrez of the
State Highway Department, and the contractor to make him aware of the problem;
City Attorney Hal George will look at the existing ordinances to determine
whether they are in conflict with other ordinances on the books; and that the
Engineering Department will inspect them under the code to ensure that they do
not go over the allowable one foot of excavation.
Mayor Turner stated that doing something retroactively, after the fact,
when there has been no ordinance in place will subject the City to serious
liability. She encouraged the residents to meet with the State Highway
Department and that the City will look into the possibility of developing an
ordinance that responds to their concerns for the future.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Turner referred to the Board and Committee
following appointments were made by the Council:
Park and Recreation Board
Claude Axel
Cathy Harrison
Dave Porterfield
Guadalupe Valdez
Xavier Perez
Gwen Bryant
Jim McCown
Landmark Commission
Appointments. The
Claire J. McCauley
Janet Allen
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
A motion was made by Council Member Slavik that the Minutes of the Regular
Council Meeting of September 1, 1987 be approved as presented; seconded by
Council Member Pruet and passed unanimously.
Mayor Turner called for consideration of Consent Motions 1 thru 3.
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 3
1. M87-0312
Approving plans and specifications and authorizing receipt of bids on
October 13, 1987, for modifications to the Oso Water Reclamation Plant to
improve operational efficiency.
2. M87-0313
Approval of the Tax Roll levy for the City of Corpus Christi for the Tax
Year 1987 in accordance with Section 26.09(e) of the Texas Property Tax
Code, which states that the Assessor will submit the appraisal roll, with
amount of tax entered, to the governing body for approval as the City's tax
roll.
3. M87-0314
Approving specifications and authorizing Staff to solicit proposals for
street sweeping services.
In reference to Item No. 1 concerning the Oso Water Reclamation Plant
Improvements, Council Member Slavik inquired if these improvements will help the
odor problem, and City Manager McDowell replied that this should address the
odor problem.
In answer to a question from Council Member Strong, Engineering Services
Director Victor Medina stated that the equipment is just being replaced and
making it more efficient in its operation.
Council Member Mendez stated that the minority business enterprise
participation has been set at five percent and inquired if it was difficult to
increase it to ten percent, and Mr. Medina stated that it was very difficult in
this case; Staff wants the work to go as quickly as possible; the less sub
contractors that there are, the better it will be; and Staff would like to have
the plant shut down the least amount of time possible.
Mr. Mendez suggested that wherever possible, the City set the minority
participation at ten percent.
In reference to Item No. 2 concerning approval
Council Member Slavik noted that she is going to
she is still against the 1}C and would like to
provide funds for the aquarium.
vo
ha
of the 1987 Tax Roll Levy,
to no on this item because
ve the }C only which would
Mayor Pro Tem Moss noted that with the low tax base that the City has, the
tax levy will only raise 18 percent of the gross budget of the City, and of the
operating budget, it is less than half at only 45 percent. He stated that we
should take that into account in finding every opportunity that we can to raise
the tax base for our City.
ftnutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 4
In reference to Item No. 3 concerning the contract for street cleaning,
Mayor Turner noted that performance standards or the Staff's analysis comparing
the City's operation were not included in the support material the Council
received, and she would like to see those items. She inquired what kind of an
investment the City had in street cleaners, and if any were recently purchased.
She also noted that as a strong advocate of privatization she feels very
strongly that the public sector should be competing against the private sector,
and that our Street Department should have an opportunity to bid against the
private sector relative to the specifications.
City Manager McDowell stated that there are three categories of streets for
what is presently being done; 1. the central business district which will be
swept every other day; 2. arterial streets which are swept once a week; and 3.
residential streets which are swept twice a year. He stated that Staff knows
what our costs of operation are because it is in the budget; we are asking the
private sector for a bid on the same basis that we do sweeping at the present
time; and we have not purchased any equipment lately.
Council Member Mendez stated that we need to see if it would be
economically feasible for the City to do it.
In answer to a question from Council Member Mendez, Mr. McDowell stated
that the specifications call for the same schedule that is being done now and
does not call for an increase in services, but that we could bid an alternate
for increased sweeping.
Council Member Guerrero stated that the ultimate goal in privatization is
that it will save on down time, employees being ill, insurance, etc. He stated
that if the private sector could do it for the same amount as the City, the
savings will be far greater because it will eliminate a lot of expenses that the
City has that they will not.
In answer to a question from Council Member Pruet, Mr. McDowell stated that
Staff looked at what it costs the City to sweep that same area; made some
estimates on what it would cost from the private sector; and determined that it
would be cheaper to do that. He explained that he does not have the figures,
but it was a very rough calculation and just an estimate.
Mayor Turner requested information on the downtime of the machines and the
maintenance costs.
In answer to a question from the Mayor, Mr. McDowell replied this calls for
a five-year bid, the base price being established in the first year and
escalating in the subsequent four years based on the consumer price index.
No one spoke in regard to the Consent Motions.
A motion was made by Council Member Guerrero to approve Consent Motions 1
thru 3; seconded by Council Member Berlanga and passed; Slavik voting "No" on
Item No. 2.
linutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 5
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Turner called for consideration of Consent Resolutions, Ordinances
and Ordinances from previous meetings, noting that Items, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8a, 15,
and 16 are withdrawn for discussion.
No one spoke in regard to the above items.
City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes and the following
were passed:
8. RESOLUTION NO. 19964
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH OCEANSIDE ASPHALT, INC. FOR
STREET RECONSTRUCTION INCLUDING CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, AND
STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS ON BONNER DRIVE FROM SOUTH STAPLES STREET TO
EVERHART ROAD AND BURTON LANE, BETTY JEAN DRIVE AND NELSON LANE FROM
WILLIAMS DRIVE TO HOLLY ROAD, ALL IN THE GARDENDALE AREA OF THE CITY,
APPROPRIATING $1,079,335.42.
The foregoing Resolution passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss,
Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye"; Pruet
absent at the time the vote was taken.
9. ORDINANCE NO. 19966
CLOSING THE HEARING ON STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON THE FOLLOWING STREETS:
Gardendale Area, Phase I - 1. Bonner Drive, from Everhart Road to South
Staples Street, and 2. Betty Jean Drive, Nelson Lane and Burton Lane, from
Holly Road to Williams Drive; FIXING A LIEN AND CHARGE, THE MANNER AND TIME
OF PAYMENT AND COLLECTION: AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
The Charter Rule was suspended and the foregoing Ordinance passed by the
following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik
and Strong voting, "Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken.
10. SECOND READING
ANNEXING A 26,593 SQUARE FOOT TRACT OF LAND OUT OF LOT 8, SECTION 11, FLOUR
BLUFF AND ENCINAL FARM AND GARDEN TRACTS, OWNED BY ENCINO--CIMARRON AND
ENCINO-CIMARRON 62, LTD.
The foregoing Ordinance passed on second reading by the following vote:
Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting,
"Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken.
11. SECOND READING
The foregoing Ordinance passed on second reading by the following vote:
linutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 6
Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero,
Pruet absent at the time the vote
The foregoing Ordinance passed on
Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero,
Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye";
was taken.
second reading by the following vote:
Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting,
"Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken.
12. SECOND READING
AMENDING CHAPTER 6 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ESTABLISH REQUIREMENTS AND
PROCEDURES FOR THE REGULATION AND GRANTING OF PERMITS TO CONDUCT THE
BUSINESS OF GROOMING, BREEDING, SHOWING, EXHIBITING, OR BOARDING OF
ANIMALS; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY.
The foregoing Ordinance passed on second reading by the following vote:
Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting,
"Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken.
13. SECOND READING
ADOPTING THE LONDON AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AN ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN.
The foregoing Ordinance passed on second reading by the following vote:
Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting,
"Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken.
14. ORDINANCE 19967
AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 39, PERSONNEL, BY ADDING A
SECTION 39-18, RESIDENCY OF OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES: PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE.
The foregoing;ng Ordinance passed on third reading by the following vote:
Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting,
"Aye"; Pruet absent at the time the vote was taken.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
In reference to Item No. 4 regarding the City Hall Land Expansion Project,
Mayor Pro Tem Moss inquired about the reason this property needs to be acquired,
and City Manager McDowell stated that the need is for additional parking for the
new City Hall, and that the City is in the process of acquiring extra parcels to
provide parking. He further stated that it is not an overrun on the City Hall
project.
In reference to Item No. 6 concerning the San Carlos Sanitary Sewer
Improvements, Council Member Slavik referred to the low bidder and inquired if
the City had done much business with A.M.H. Construction Company, and Victor
linutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 7
Medina, Director of Engineering Services, stated that the City has worked with
their crews but not the company. He stated that since the bid was so low, Staff
investigated the company; they were able to get a bond; but that they could not
get insurance coverage for that type of work.
In answer to a question from Council Member Slavik in reference to Item No.
7 regarding the Tax Collection Contracts with Corpus Christi Independent School
District and Corpus Christi Junior College District, Mr. McDowell stated that
this is the prorated share of what it costs the City to collect; the City is not
taxing boats; the school district is; and the total cost of operation is
approximately the same whether boats are included or not.
In answer to a question from Mrs. Slavik, Director of Finance, Debra
Andrews, stated that the cost to collect on the boats is nominal; it is a
minimal cost; those are already in the costs; the contracts have been
negotiated; and this is really an extension of the last three-year extension.
Mayor Turner inquired if there has been any dialogue with the county to see
if they would like to give up their tax assessment collection, and Ms. Andrews
replied there have not been any discussions with them, but that Staff will
pursue that.
Mr. McDowell pointed out that Staff does it much more efficiently, quicker
and at less cost.
In answer to a question from Mayor Pro Tem Moss regarding increasing tax
collections, Mr. McDowell stated that we will pursue it aggressively; we are
making all reasonable attempts; and that the list is published by the media.
Mrs. Andrews stated that the City uses media contact on this as much as
possible; and if the taxpayer does not pay his taxes after February 1st to July
1st, there is another 15 percent penalty.
Council Member Berlanga inquired what kind of obligation the collective
agencies have with the City, and Mrs. Andrews replied goals and objectives are
set up with them each year; there are monthly monitoring meetings; and the
contract is up June 1st of next year.
In reference to Item No. 8a regarding the consultant proposal to plan,
design, and implement a new City Radio Communications System, Council Member
Slavik mentioned the cost of $98,000 for this item. She stated that we need to
justify this expense and inquired why the group range of $40,000 was not
acceptable.
Mr. McDowell stated that the prices ran from $40,000 to $226,000; it was
the recommendation of the Fire Chief, Police Chief, Head of Radio Maintenance
and Dan Hobbs, Director of Management and Budget, that the firm they are
recommending was the best qualified to do the work with the best proposal.
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 8
In answer to a question from Council Member Slavik, Mr. McDowell stated
that Staff did not want to go to one of the potential suppliers; they wanted an
independent evaluation.
Mrs. Slavik inquired about the first phase, and Mr. McDowell stated that
the first phase is to look at what our existing coverage is; where the problem
areas are; identify those problems; and the corrective action that needs to be
taken. He further stated that the study is part of the bond issue.
Mrs. Slavik inquired about the funding for the future study, and Mr.
McDowell explained that $98,000 is for phase 1 thru 5; funds for the actual
purchase of a system would be from a future bond sale; and that money for the
communications system is in the bond program.
Mayor Turner expressed concern about the Police Department needing radios
and inquired when the report will be completed, and Mr. McDowell stated that we
will know in about three to four months what the problem is; the solution to the
problem will have to wait for a future bond sale; it will be two months for the
first phase; about two and one-half months for the second phase; and twenty
months for all five phases.
In answer to a question from Council Member Slavik, Mr. McDowell explained
there are no sources of funds for the radios until we sell the next bonds which
deal with the construction of the facility; we think there are some things that
will come out of this that we will be able to address from an operational
standpoint, short of having to purchase a brand new system.
Council Member Rhodes stated this type of consulting work is justified, and
that when areas get into very technical procedures like this, it is money well
spent. She pointed out that it has not been approved which bonds are going to
be sold this year, and inquired if this system could be included.
Mr. McDowell stated that it would be possible; it would be a Council
decision; and that this was not included in the recommendation of the Task
Force.
Discussion followed and Council Member Mendez stated that this issue needs
to be addressed now to see how it could be corrected. He continued by stating
that alternative ways of funding the Police Station should be studied to see if
there are other options on how it could be done.
In answer to a question from the Mayor about purchasing the system and
moving it to the new facility, Mr. McDowell explained that part of the problem
would be to install it in the old building and move it which would be a
tremendous expense. Mr. McDowell noted that we need to study the facts; what
the actual problems are; and what it takes to correct them. He stated that this
should be dealt with from a factual standpoint.
tinutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 9
In answer to a question from the Mayor about the cost, Mr. Hobbs stated it
would be $1.5 million total for the radio communications system.
After more discussion, Council Member Mendez suggested that this matter be
put on the agenda so that the Police Chief can address the Council on the
problems concerning the radio.
No one from the audience spoke on the above items.
City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes and the following
were passed:
4. RESOLUTION NO. 19960
AUTHORIZING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS BY THE CITY TO CONDEMN FEE TITLE TO
PARCELS 2 AND 3 FOR THE CITY HALL PROJECT AND TO ACQUIRE SAID PARCELS FROM
THE OWNERS.
The foregoing Resolution passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss,
Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye."
5. RESOLUTION NO. 19961
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE DOCUMENTS
PARCEL 12 IN CONNECTION WITH THE MARY
APPROPRIATING $13,500.
The foregoing Resolution passed by the
Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes,
6. RESOLUTION NO. 19962
NECESSARY FOR THE
CARROLL CHANNEL
following vote:
Slavik and Strong
ACQUISITION OF
WIDENING; AND
Turner, Moss,
voting, "Aye."
REPEALING RESOLUTION 19879 AND ANNULLING THE CONTRACT AWARD TO A.M.H.
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE SAN CARLOS SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS;
RETAINING THE CONTRACTOR'S BID SECURITY CHECK IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,370.05 AS
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH J & B
CONTRACTORS; APPROPRIATING $106,282.63.
The foregoing Resolution passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss,
Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye."
7. RESOLUTION NO. 19963
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS WITH THE CORPUS CHRISTI INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CORPUS CHRISTI JUNIOR COLLEGE DISTRICT FOR THE CITY
TO ACT AS THEIR TAX ASSESSOR -COLLECTOR.
The foregoing Resolution passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss,
Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye."
linutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 10
8a. RESOLUTION NO. 19965
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH RAYMOND C. TROTT, CONSULTING
ENGINEERS, INC. TO SURVEY THE CITY'S EXISTING AND FUTURE RADIO
COMMUNICATION NEEDS; AND APPROPRIATING $98,000.
The foregoing Resolution passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss,
Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes, Slavik and Strong voting, "Aye."
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
In reference to Item No. 15 regarding use privilege agreements, Council
Member Rhodes reiterated that she is going to vote against this item again; and
she thinks it will be a big mistake if the Council turns over decisions on
encroachments of public rights-of-way to someone designated by the City Manager.
In answer to a question from Council Member Mendez, City Manager McDowell
stated there is a ninety -day provision where it could be revoked; the Council
will be provided a quarterly report; and that minor uses was taken out.
After some discussion, Council Member Guerrero asked the Council to concur
with Council Member Rhodes on this item because the Staff has enough pressure
and responsibility, and that it would be in the best interest of the Staff and
the City.
Mayor Pro Tem Moss pointed out that since there is a ninety -day quarterly
review it could be delegated to the Staff and be countered by the Council. Mr.
Moss stated that this is not being given away.
Council Member Slavik asked why the Staff is recommending this, and Mr.
McDowell replied that Staff is bringing the current code in conformance with the
new charter.
In answer to a question from Mrs. Slavik, Mr. Medina stated that it does
not come up that often; when it does the Staff does get criticized; and Staff is
trying to expedite the efficiency of the Engineering Department.
Council Member Strong mentioned the fact that she requested the amendment
in the wording to allow for the Council to get a quarterly update report; she
feels that the public's position is protected in this; the Council has the final
say; and it is appropriate that the Staff handle this.
Council Member Mendez referred to the $100 fee charged and stated canopies
and fences differ in scope, and $100 is a large fee for just putting up a
canopy.
Mr. McDowell explained it includes the cost of coming down and filling out
the paper work; the inspector checking and signing off on it; and then notifying
the appropriate parties.
linutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 11
Council Member Rhodes expressed concern about allowing an encroachment in
the public right-of-way. She stated that the appeal process does not hold any
water; and if they fence off public land, the public is not going to know the
difference. She continued by stating that it is wrong for the Council to give
away anything that is the public's property.
In answer to a question from the Mayor,
initiated by the Staff under a section of
Council may elect to delegate on these minor
Council's prerogative and it is OK with him
with this reponsibility.
Mr. McDowell stated that this was
the Charter which says that the
issues. He stated that it is the
if the Council wishes to continue
Council Member Slavik expressed concern about
right, and in answer to her question about Item "G",
stated that the reason for Item "G" is so that the
subordinate to any easements so that there could not
adverse possession.
protecting the public's
City Attorney Hal George
public's right is always
be any possibility of an
Mayor Pro Tem Moss noted that the Council should be very cognizant of their
responsibility to look after the public's needs. He stated that with Council
Member Strong's amendment all action will be reviewed by the Council; they are
not giving anything up; and it is a good way of managing and streamlining
procedures.
Council Member Pruet noted that these are normal routine matters that could
be handled by the Staff; the Council will have the review capability with the
amendment; it will expedite and reduce the processing time; and it will cut down
a lot of routine matters that come before the Council.
In reference to Item No. 16 regarding the third reading of proposed
amendments (regarding sign regulations) to Articles 12, 15, 16, 20 and 21 of the
Zoning Ordinance, Council Member Pruet pointed out that the majority of the
cities that were surveyed still allow some type of portable sign program; this
is not going to save businesses that are condemned to failure; but it will have
a significant impact on small businesses that are trying to keep their doors
open. He stated that he did not think the elimination of portable signs is going
to solve the beautification problems that the City has.
Mr. Pruet noted that Alternative "B" proposed by the Staff is a workable
solution which has a lot of benefits to the small business community and urged
the Council to consider Alternative "B."
Council Member Guerrero asked about the extent of the beautification
effort; and if there is any reasonable way to take any alternative and enforce
it. He stated that there is no way to enforce any type of portable signage in
Corpus Christi. He then urged the Council to accept no alternatives.
Council Member Strong pointed out that portable signage is disallowed in
certain zones and once it is allowable, there will be an increase in portable
signs. She stated that the most equitable situation would be that the sign
linutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 12
allowances are the same across the board; and that there are alternate ways to
handle this problem. She stated that she did not think we are adding to the
quality of life in Corpus Christi if we allow sign proliferation to continue.
Council Member Rhodes pointed out that for the ones who have legal signs,
there is a way to make them into permanent signs, and for the people who
manufacture the signs, there is a way to change their business over. She noted
that the ones who will be affected are the ones that have illegal signs in the
first place.
Council Member Slavik expressed concern over the small businesses and
suggested the regulation for portable signs, such as in Dallas and Abilene,
would be a fair compromise. She stated this would allow for portable signs;
they must be engineered, permitted and limited to one thirty -day period; if
violated, they would be impounded; with said policy to be reviewed in one year.
Council Member Berlanga noted that regardless of what is done, businesses
are going to be hurt; the consumer needs to be informed; he sympathizes with the
Staff with the problems regulating the portable signs; and we need signs. He
stated that he hopes a good alternative is found.
Council Member Guerrero stated that if we eliminate the signs, we are going
to force the issues on the alternatives; to impound the signs would be
ridiculous because the Staff is unable to enforce it now; and to review it in a
year is a political answer. He stated that we need to quit compromising and do
what is right.
Council Member Pruet pointed out that the Planning Commission had a great
deal of input from the public and have limited to specific zoning where it is
allowed. He stated that there are a lot of other things that need to be done to
clean up the City more than eliminating the portable signs. He again asked the
Council to look at the Planning Commission's recommendation and Staff's
Alternative "B."
Council Member Mendez pointed out that in looking at the other cities that
allow portable signs, they need a full-time inspector to make the inspections,
and approximately 80 percent of them are illegal. He stated that he thought the
enforcement of it would be totally impossible, and even if they were allowed, a
lot of them will be illegal.
The following citizens spoke in opposition to the prohibition of portable
signs: Jonna McCuffy, 1409 Devon, a small business -person; Sandra Robinson, 729
Claride, a representative of Nail Gallery, presented the Council with a
petition and results of an informal poll; Joe Bader, 4001 So. Port; John Rosse,
owner of a portable sign business; Al Kucera, 4936 Hakel; Lucy Vallario, 1218
Shields; George Polinard, 4701 Andover; J. B. Ward, 4600 Ocean Drive, who runs a
bicycle shop in So. Park Shopping Center; and Leo Estrada, 5302 Sugar Creek.
!Mutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 13
Mayor Turner stated that the sign polution in Corpus Christi is becoming a
very serious problem, and that the City has tightened up on sign restrictions in
every area of allowable signs. She also noted that the portable signs do not
add much to the beautification of this community.
Council Member Berlanga expressed his concern regarding losing businesses
over the portable sign problem. He then made a motion to postpone the third
reading for thirty days until more information is obtained and another
alternative can be reached. The motion was seconded by Council Member Slavik
and failed to pass by the following vote: Berlanga, Pruet and Slavik voting,
"Aye"; Turner, Moss, Guerrero, Mendez, Rhodes, and Strong voting, "No."
Council Member Strong pointed out that the
going to be stopped tomorrow, and that there will
City Secretary Chaps polled the Council for
ordinances failed and passed:
use of portable signs is not
be a one-year phase out.
their votes and the following
15. AMENDING THE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, BY ADDING A NEW
SUBSECTION TO ARTICLE I THEREOF, WHICH PROVIDES FOR AUTHORITY OF THE CITY
MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO ISSUE STANDARD FORM USE PRIVILEGE AGREEMENTS,
ADOPTING A STANDARD FORM DOCUMENT, AND ESTABLISHING A FEE THEREFOR;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE: AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
The foregoing Ordinance failed to pass by the following vote: Moss,
Mendez, Pruet and Strong voting, "Aye"; Turner, Berlanga, Guerrero, Rhodes
and Slavik voting, "No."
16. ORDINANCE NO. 19968
AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ADOPTING NEW ZONING REGULATIONS FOR SIGNS
IN "B-1" NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS, "B-3" BUSINESS, "B-4" GENERAL BUSINESS,
"I-2" LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND "I-3" HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS.
The Charter Rule
following vote:
"Aye"; Berlanga,
was suspended and the foregoing Ordinance passed by the
Turner, Guerrero, Mendez, Moss, Rhodes and Strong voting,
Pruet and Slavik voting, "No."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The meeting was recessed at 12:30 p.m.
Mayor Turner reconvened the Regular Council Meeting at 2:00 p.m.
Mayor Turner then read and presented a proclamation in honor of the Corpus
Christi Skier's Club to Mr. Butch Robinson, President of the Corpus Christi Ski
Club. Mr. Robinson introduced Mrs. Robin West, Vice President of the Corpus
Christi Skier's Club, and Mrs. Mary Ann Robinson, also a member.
Mayor Turner then read and presented a proclamation in recognition of Ice
Capades participants who will begin their United States tour here in Corpus
linutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 14
Christi. She presented the proclamation to Mr. Corey Chandler, Promotional
Manager, and Mr. Robert Gallagher, Road Manager.
Mr. Hymie Gonzalez, Coliseum Manager, then presented letters to the City
Council inviting them to attend a performance and an "after party." They were
accompanied by one of the stars of the show, Teddy Ruxpin.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
A status report on the Aquarium Project was presented by Mr. John Dorn,
President of the Board, who provided an update of the concept design of the
Aquarium which will be located on North Corpus Christi Beach. He informed the
Council that Phase I is about 909, funded, noting that it is one of four phases
planned. He described the exhibits to be located in the Gulf of Mexico
Building.
Mayor Turner asked Mr. Dorn about the fund raising project and the
anticipated date of the beginning of the structure, and Mr. Dorn replied that
there is a development committee that is working to obtain grants and gift
donations for the project; they expect to begin construction during the first
quarter of 1988; they have identified a contractor and are in the process of
negotiations; and if the schedule is followed, they feel that the Aquarium will
be open in the latter part of 1989.
Mayor Turner then recognized Council Member Leo Guerrero and Mr. Donald
Taft who are the liaison appointees for the City Council on the Aquarium
Project.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Turner called for acceptance of the Laventhol & Horwath study on the
Economic and Fiscal Impact analysis of the reopening of Packery Channel boat
pass. She provided information in regard to the commissioning of the study and
asked the representative to make the presentation.
Mr. John Rossi, Head of the Real Estate Division of Laventhol & Horwath,
explained that they were charged with preparing an impact study. He explained
that an impact study is an attempt to measure how things will be with or without
some event and noted that in the City, they know that tourism will grow;
however, an impact study tries to determine the difference between tourism with
the boat pass and without the boat pass.
Mr. Rossi emphasized the fact that this is not a feasibility study; it was
not an environmental impact study; nor was it a cost benefit study; and the
result was a study that would have an effect on the economy of the area.
Mr. Rossi continued by stating that they attempted to try to estimate the
number of jobs created, including temporary construction jobs and the long-term
employment, taking into consideration the number tourist days and apportioning
inutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 15
that between the island and the City of Corpus Christi. He noted that this is
a recreational boat channel, not a commercial channel, and they researched three
other cities for comparison purposes.
He stated that the analyses were undertaken for the 1989 to 2010 period;
fiscal impacts were estimated under three funding scenarios. The first scenario
assumed that funding for the channel and bridge are provided from non -local
governmental sources; the second scenario assumed that 50% of the channel
improvement costs are borne by the City with the remainder of the channel cost
and the bridge financing by non -local sources; and the third assumed 100%
funding of the channel and bridge by the City. He stated that the economic
impact analysis for all three funding scenarios is estimated to be $22.9
Million for the channel and bridge which would result in direct economic impacts
of $264.5 Million in total output, $97.9 Million in total earnings, and that 395
jobs are estimated to be created in 1989 if that is the construction year, and
afterwards, employment will be reduced to 63 jobs in 1990 with a steady
escalation each year to 523 jobs by the year 2000.
Mr. Rossi continued his analysis by stating that they continued the study
to the secondary development impact which would include an increased demand for
certain housing on the island for a total of approximately 375 additional units,
and there will be other incremental commercial development.
Mr. Rossi stated that the estimated maintenance will be about $300,000 per
year and projected those figures for increases in future years. Mr. Rossi
summarized by stating the results of their study show that the channel will have
a definite impact on this area and it is a strong project for the future
economy.
Council Member Strong inquired about the maintenance figures and inquired
if that figure was based on a situation with or without a sand by-pass plan, and
Mr. Rossi stated that they did use that figure with the sand by-pass.
Mayor Turner then stated that Council Member Strong and Mr. Homer Innis are
the Council's liaison appointees to the Packery Channel Board.
Council Member Slavik inquired about the difference between economic impact
study and economic feasibility study, and Mr. Rossi explained that a feasibility
study answers the question as to whether this project is economically feasible
or supportable and an economic impact study tries to measure the impact of this
project for the entire community.
Council Member Slavik continued by stating that the cover letter indicated
that some assumptions made by Laventhol & Horwath inevitably will not
materialize and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur; therefore,
actual results achieved during the period covered by the prospective financial
analyses will vary from those described in the report. She questioned the
meaning of this statement, and Mr. Rossi stated that the company stated that
this is a report based on available information and that is standard verbage.
linutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 16
Council Member Rhodes inquired as to what the Council is voting for
according to the Agenda and what will actually be approved, and City Manager
explained that acceptance of the report is needed so that the company can be
paid.
Council Member Rhodes stated that the figures provided were in accordance
with what the company was asked to do but expressed the opinion that three other
types of studies would have been more beneficial to the City Council. She
stated that had she been on the Council, she would have been opposed to paying
for this kind of study. She also noted that the study is based on significant
growth in the area, and Mr. Rossi stated that they base their finding on a
rather slow growth pace for one or two years, a larger growth factor for a few
years, followed by an additional slow growth period.
Council Member Berlanga concurred with Council Member Rhodes' concern about
the type of report that was prepared. He then asked for Mr. Rossi's
recommendation in regard to the City's involvement in the project. Mr. Rossi
stated that he did not have a recommendation to make but he could mention the
following facts. He stated that the opening of Packery Channel would have
significant economic impact on the community, but this is something that the
City has to consider in terms of priority.
Mayor Turner pointed out that the report had answered the question as to
whether this project will have a significant impact on this City, and the City
Council needs to determine whether the expenditure will support the economic
impact.
Council Member Strong pointed out that the City Council had previously
accepted the idea to consider the opening of the boat pass but they needed to
know if there is no economic impact, the boat pass would not be pursued and they
need to consider the economic impact in order to continue with plans for the
project. Mrs. Strong then announced that the Reopening of Packery Channel
Committee had been formed and they have assumed the responsibility of obtaining
a permit from the Corps of Engineers.
Mayor Turner recognized Mr. Homer Innis who is the Co -Chairman of the ROPC.
She stated that this is an exciting project; she is grateful for the ROPC; and
this group will pay for and obtain the permit from the Corps of Engineers.
Council Member Slavik referred to previous discussions on the opening of
the boat pass and stated that she has never been convinced that Packery Channel
is the appropriate location for the boat pass. She stated that she was aware
that State agencies had performed studies in regard to this and suggested
contacting the appropriate State agencies in regard to the appropriate location
for a boat pass. She stated that many people do not feel that Packery Channel
is the best place for this and she has major concerns about it because she is of
the opinion that it should be where deep water meets deep water. She reiterated
that State agencies should be contacted in regard to studies already made on the
subject.
'inutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 17
Mr. Paul Obersteller addressed the Council and stated that he is associated
with the Packery Channel Association which has 1,700 members. He stated that
they became concerned about the quality of the exchange of water from the Gulf
into the Laguna Madre and they are concerned with improving the quality of that
water. He expressed the opinion that the $600 Million estimated income from the
boat pass and the bridge are very impressive figures. He stated that their
organization is concerned about the maintenance costs and noted that an
estimated $8 Million will be required to open the boat channel without the
bridge. He suggested that $110,000 a year would be a reasonable maintenance
estimate for that project. He explained another boat pass that was unsuccessful
in that sand was continuously deposited there, but with a sand by-pass system,
sand will be redeposited near the jetties, and his organization recommends the
utilization of this system. He informed the Council that they have signed a
contract with a local engineering firm to prepare the application to be
presented to the Corps of Engineers, the cost of which will be paid for by his
organization. He agreed that the bridge will be very useful, but the channel
could be opened without building the bridge. He stated that he would like to
see the boat pass opened even at City expense and offered to work with the City
Council on identifying funding for the project.
Council Member Berlanga referred to the sand by-pass, and Mr. Obersteller
explained the sand by-pass system when there is a north current and a south
current.
Council Member Slavik referred to her suggestion about State studies that
had already been prepared and inquired if this organization has studied those
reports.
Mr. Obersteller stated that Texas Parks and Wildlife Department had
conducted a study in the 1950's which indicated that Packery Channel should have
been opened at that time as well as the Murdoch Channel. He explained that the
fish pass was funded by the State; it was not successful; it was a mistake; and
that study might provide some interesting information.
Mr. Wayne Johnson stated that he has owned property on Packery Channel and
urged that the boat pass be opened.
Council Member Strong pointed out that there was no reason to identify
funding until the Council learned whether or not it was economically feasible.
She expressed the opinion that that has been demonstrated and the next step is
to determine the funding source. She stated that she thought the question of
economic impact was properly determined by this study.
Council Member Mendez stated that the past City Council had requested this
study and agreed that environmental impact study still needs to be done. He
suggested that the Council allow Council Member Strong to work with the ROPC and
make it clear that the City Council strongly supports the acquisition of the
permit from the Corps of Engineers. He stated that the Council should proceed
with the project in the future under the direction of this Committee.
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 18
A motion was made by Council Member Mendez to accept the report, seconded
by Council Member Pruet.
Council Member Guerrero stated that he has a problem with paying $45,000
for the report which includes very little useful information. He stated that he
did not think that this should have been accepted by the staff and he has read
the report several times and did not think the information contained therein is
of very much benefit.
Council Member Slavik stated that she too was disappointed with the
information in the report because she was of the opinion that the Council needed
something on the feasibility of the project. She expressed the opinion that
everyone knows that spending $22 Million for a boat pass and a bridge would be
of benefit to the City. She stated that since the Council had employed this
firm, she feels that they should pay the fee.
Mayor Turner called for the vote on the motion to accept the study and it
passed by the following vote: Turner, Moss, Berlanga, Mendez, Pruet, Rhodes,
Slavik and Strong, voting "Aye"; Guerrero voting "No."
Mayor Turner stated that this report will be submitted to the Committee and
the Council looks forward to their recommendations.
Mr. Irving Dietz addressed the Council and in response to Council Member
Slavik's reference to a study on passes in the Gulf of Mexico, informed the
Council that Mr. Innis is the one who performed the studies for the State.
Mr. Innis addressed the Council and stated that it was an error that
Yarborough Pass has been recommended as a suitable alternative for this site.
He stated that Packery Channel will be a much better site for the boat pass and
explained that the purpose of the Parks and Wildlife Department study was to
determine whether the artificial pass or a natural pass would be preferable. He
stated that the Yarborough Pass failed before the dredging was accomplished. He
explained the effects the currents from the Rio Grande River and the Gulf of
Mexico have on the material that is moved. He stated that Packery Channel's
location has been confirmed by the Parks and Wildlife Department as the best
location for a boat pass.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Turner called for consideration of Ordinances from the Regular Agenda
on Items 18 and 19.
There were no comments from the audience or the Council on these
Ordinances; City Secretary Chapa polled the Council for their votes; and the
following Ordinances were passed on first reading:
18. FIRST READING
4inutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 19
AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 35, OIL AND GAS WELLS,
SECTION 35-60, DRILLING BLOCKS, BY AMENDING THE CONFIGURATION OF DRILLING
BLOCK MAP EXHIBIT A, DRILLING BLOCK NUMBERS 183, 188, AND 189; PROVIDING
FOR SEVERANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
The foregoing Ordinance passed on first reading by the following vote:
Turner, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Moss, Pruet, Rhodes, voting "Aye";
Slavik and Strong were absent at the time the vote was taken.
19. FIRST READING
AMENDING SECTION 105.2 OF THE MECHANICAL CODE ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO.
19288 TO PROVIDE FOR THE FILING OF A CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE AND
SUSPENSION OF PERMITS WITHOUT INSURANCE COVERAGE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE;
AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
The foregoing Ordinance passed on first reading by the following vote:
Turner, Berlanga, Guerrero, Mendez, Moss, Pruet, Rhodes, voting "Aye";
Slavik and Strong were absent at the time the vote was taken.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Turner called for consideration of License Revocation Hearing of
David Soliz dba Soliz Electric Company. She stated that the Council had been
provided with supplemental information in regard to this and inquired if Mr.
Soliz was present. When it was determined that he was not in the audience, Mr.
Lorenzo Gonzalez, Building Superintendent, assured the Council that he had been
notified.
A motion was made Council Member Rhodes that the license revocation be
upheld, seconded by Council Member Guerrero and passed unanimously by those
present and voting.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Turner announced the public hearing on the following item:
Annexation of 3,630.06 acres of land and 32,966.32 acres of water, generally
located along the fringe of the present city limits, from far west extending
along the south city limits to the far east.
Mayor Turner explained that the Planning Commission had conducted the first
public hearing on this subject on September 2, at which time they tabled action
and recessed the public hearing. She questioned the effect their not taking any
action would have on this hearing.
Mr. Kelly Elizondo, Assistant City Manager, explained that only 40 days
could lapse between the first public hearing and the adoption of the ordinance
effecting the annexation. He explained that the first public hearing was
conducted by the Planning Commission on September 2, 1987; it was recessed until
9inutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 20
September 16 at which time it probably will be closed; and at least 20 days must
lapse before the first reading of the ordinance.
City Attorney Hal George stated that the initiation of annexation
procedures is triggered by the time of the first public hearing. He read from
the State Law which sets forth the regulations in regard to annexation, as well
as an opinion from Assistant City Attorney Bob Coffin.
Mayor Turner then suggested that the first reading of the ordinance be
scheduled for October 13, and staff indicated that they have no problem with
this date which would be an appropriate time frame regardless of whether the
first hearing is counted as being the one on September 2 or this one on
September 8.
Mr. Elizondo explained that the proposal recommends the annexation of
3,630.06 acres of land and 32,966.32 acres of water, generally located along the
fringe of the present city limits, from far west extending along the south city
limits to the far east. He stated that the following are the primary reasons
for the annexation: 1. They are logical areas for future growth; 2. They are
areas where services are available or can be obtained; 3. The land values in
these areas indicate that the land is considered urban land and these increased
values are because of their location; 4. The additional 1.45 miles into the
Gulf of Mexico may be placed under the drilling ordinance for the purpose of
controlling the activity in order to preserve and protect the gulf beaches; 5.
The areas can be integrated without difficulty into the Corpus Christi Urban
Pattern both physically and administratively; and 6. Based on 1986 tax roll
land valuations, it is estimated that it will increase and strengthen the City's
tax base by over $372,500 annually.
Mr. Elizondo continued by stating that there has been concern expressed
about the inclusion of the same area that was previously considered as part of
an annexation election in 1986 which the voters did not approve. He explained
that at that time 13,754 acres of land on the island were proposed for
annexation, and only 279.56 acres are being considered at this time for
annexation. He stated that out of 279 acres, 262.08 have all City services in
place and City building permits can and are being issued upon request of the
property owners. He explained that the remaining 17.4 acres are "pockets" that
are totally surrounded by the City and services are readily available to those
property owners.
Mr. Elizondo continued by stating the Charter Amendment authorized in April
of 1986 explains how annexation can occur and this proposal to annex by
ordinance meets all of the requirements of the City Charter and State law. He
noted that there was some concern expressed about the Land Office and informed
the Council that they have their jurisdiction and the City has its jurisdiction.
He assured the Council that what has been presented to them is a proposal, not a
plan, and it can be changed as the Council desires.
Mayor Turner interjected that the public has the right, according to the
City Charter, to petition for a referendum, and Mr. Elizondo stated that is
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 21
correct. He continued by stating that it requires 500 signatures to petition
for a referendum on private property considered for annexation.
Mayor Turner inquired if that included public property, and Mr. Elizondo
expressed the opinion that it does not. Mayor Turner continued by stating that
she served on the Charter Revision Commission and she thought the intent of the
Commission was that the petition could include whatever land was being
considered for annexation, whether it is private or public property. She then
asked for a legal opinion on that point at a later time.
Mr. Elizondo continued his presentation by displaying a map which showed a
comparison of the land included in the 1986 annexation election and the land
that is proposed for annexation at this time. He stated that the proposal in
the annexation election was about 60 square miles whereas this annexation
proposal is for approximately 280 acres only. He explained the roles of the Land
Office and the Railroad Commission in connection with the subject property. He
pointed out that the annexation will protect the beaches through the existing
City ordinances, particularly the Bay Drilling Ordinance and the Bay Drilling
Committee which supervises the operation of drilling operations in the bay.
Council Member Rhodes commented that the State laws are sufficient to
handle this, but if this is not annexed, the City would have to rely on the
State to enforce the law.
Mr. James Conn, Petroleum Superintendent, explained that there are no
drilling rigs in the area at this time but there are approximately six or seven
wells in that area, and if the water area is annexed, the area will
automatically be protected by the City ordinances on bay drilling. He explained
that each company has to provide insurance and bonds when drilling in the bay.
Council Member Slavik stated that it was her understanding that the State
and Federal agencies will provide protection of the bay. She then asked about
the one -mile exemption.
Mr. Conn explained that the State allows drilling within one mile of the
shore; City ordinance does not allow this and it is controlled through the Bay
Drilling Committee. He explained that the Committee does not make
recommendations on annexation.
In response to the Mayor's request, Mr. Conn stated that he is a Petroleum
Engineer and stated that he believed that the annexation would offer maximum
protection for the beaches.
Mayor Turner called for comments from the audience.
Mrs. Pat Suter, Vice President of the Coastal Bend Sierra Club, admitted
that this City's Bay Drilling ordinance is the ideal protection and is followed
by many other cities in the state. Mrs. Suter addressed another issue by
stating that on August 19, the City Council received a memo from staff which
presented
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 22
an annexation plan for a period of two years. She stated that plans should go
through the Planning Commission and expressed the opinion that the actions were
inappropriate. She quoted from the staff memorandum which referred to land and
water areas; she objected to the fact that a "plan" was presented to the City
Council whereas now there is a proposal rather than a plan and she is opposed to
the method of circumventing public's vote which the two—year plan evidently
does.
Mayor Turner explained that on the Charter Revision Commission, the issue
of annexation was not included in the charge to the Planning Commission on
development plans.
City Manager McDowell explained that the plan Mrs. Suter referred to was
presented to the City Council but it should not be considered an official plan
at all.
A motion was made by Council Member Guerrero that the annexation "plan"
originally presented to the City Council was submitted in error and the
"proposal" is what is being considered. The motion was seconded by Council
Member Rhodes and passed unanimously.
Mr. George Kimer, 11602 Possum Creek, owner of River Hills County Club
expressed opposition to the annexation of tract 2 which is 200 acres known as
River Hills Country Club. He stated that they do not receive any City services;
River Hills is chartered for a country club and golf course only; most of their
members are from Nueces County; and reiterated that they do not have any City
services.
Mayor Turner asked for an explanation of the reason for annexing the
River Hills Country Club, and Mr. Elizondo explained that services are
available; all other private country clubs are a part of Corpus Christi and are
paying taxes.
Mr. John Rider, 3341 Catfish Drive, also asked that the River Hills Country
Club be withdrawn from the annexation because he felt that the country club has
benefited Corpus Christi more than Corpus Christi has benefited the country
club.
Council Member Mendez stated that one of the questions brought up concerned
Wood River which was annexed by contract. He stated that he agrees that
River Hills Country Club should be excluded from the annexation. He pointed out
that adjacent to the Wood River Subdivision is the Haxel Bazemore Park and he
requested that the City require the developers of Wood River to dedicate park
land adjacent to the existing Hazel Bazemore Park which would then provide a
large regional park.
Council Member Rhodes returned to the issue of the River Hills Country Club
and pointed out that they are completely surrounded by the City; it is just a
small pocket in the middle of other annexed areas; they utilize City streets to
Minutes .
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 23
get to and from the country club; and she was of the opinion that it should be
annexed.
Council Member Strong inquired of Mr. Elizondo as to where the country club
obtains ambulance, fire, and police services, and Mr. Rider explained that they
receive those services from sources other than the City of Corpus Christi.
Mrs. Marie Spear, 9320 S. Padre Island Drive, stated that she is in favor
of annexing the parts of Padre Island that were omitted from previous
annexations but expressed concern about the lack of information provided in
regard to the cost of services and the amount of taxes to be derived from the
annexation. She pointed out that the Planning Commission did not have enough
information and they recessed their public hearing for that reason. She
objected to the annexation of the water area and stated that she too was shocked
that there existed a "plan" dated July, 1987 which included areas that were
voted down by the voters in 1986. She expressed the opinion that if that plan
exists, the public has the right to know about it and questioned why that plan
was prepared and then withdrawn.
Mayor Turner assured her that the plan has been withdrawn, and once the
Planning Commission makes their recommendation and the City Council makes their
recommendation, the annexation procedures will move forward.
Mrs. Gwen Bryant, Citizens for Progress, stated that she is speaking as a
private citizen and expressed approval of the annexation proposal and agreed
with the reasons as presented by the staff. She stated that she had studied the
minutes of the Planning Commission meeting and expressed the opinion that all of
the concerns expressed that evening were answered by the Planning Commission and
the Planning staff. Mrs. Bryant also pointed out that only 8.6% of the eligible
voters went to the polls to vote on the annexation election in 1986; however,
the proposed Charter Amendments, which included the annexation by ordinance
revision, were voted on by 53% of the voters who overwhelmingly approved the
amendments to the City Charter.
Mr. J.E. O'Brien, 4130 Pompano, complimented Mayor Turner for resolving the
time problem of the annexation by directing that the first reading of the
ordinance would be on October 13. He too objected to the fact that "plan" was
presented which has since been replaced by an annexation "proposal." He
referred to Proposition 12 of the Charter Amendment Election which clearly
indicated that the annexation by ordinance would be allowed subject to a
petition presented from 500 registered voters, and it did not distinguish
between private or public land. He suggested that D-1 be deleted from the
annexation because the Taxpayer's Association is in favor of calling for an
election on this portion of the proposed annexation.
Ms. Charlie Ward, President of Citizens for Progress, stated that they have
not met to discuss the annexation issue but she personally would like to ask
that the voters put this annexation in its proper prospective, noting that it
1inutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 24
will generate $325,000 annually in tax revenue. She also pointed out that many
objectionable uses could be placed in the areas outside the City limits.
Mr. Nick Nikoloric, Manager of the Padre Island Property Owners
Association, which consists of 500 property owners, are in favor of the proposed
annexation.
Mr. Lewis Lovelace, 1549 Casa Grande, expressed opposition to the
annexation because the voters were opposed to this in 1986. He stated that he
was of the opinion that pressure was being brought on the City staff by Mr.
Ralph Durden to annex those areas on Padre Island and stated that he is opposed
to this because he feels that a tax increment financing zone will be established
in that area. He also objected to the annexation of Hazel Bazemore Park because
the County spends more than they receive in upkeep on the park, and the City
would have to assume that responsibility.
Mayor Turner stated that she felt it was important that he have all of the
facts because some of the property mentioned is not included in the annexation
proposed. She stated that Hazel Bazemore Park is not in the projected proposal,
and virtually none of the area turned down by the voters in 1986 is included in
this proposed annexation, noting that only 279 acres are included. She then
asked the staff to meet with Mr. Lovelace to make him aware of exactly what is
included in this annexation.
Mr. John Palmer, property owner on Padre Island, expressed support of the
annexation and congratulated the Planning staff for preparing this proposal. He
agreed that the annexation is necessary for orderly development of Padre Island.
Mr. Claude D'Unger stated that he is a Certified Land Man associated with
the oil industry. He stated that there are some areas in the overall two-year
plan that he is opposed to. He stated that he has no association with Mr.
Durden and the idea of conducting an election at this time is foolish because
92% of the eligible voters did not even bother to vote in the 1986 election. He
also objected to the accusations made about the staff in connection Mr. burden
and stated that none of the people who have spoken really addressed the
annexation itself. He stated that he would like to suggest that Tracts E-1
through E-5, primarily in the Five -Points area, be deleted from the annexation
and suggested that area Tracts F-1 through F-3 be deleted, which include
Greenwood Wastewater Area and the Rodd Field Village, noting that he did not
think they would add any tax income to the City.
Mrs. Elizabeth Walker of the Padre Island area stated that they are working
on a master plan of the area with the City staff and they feel that the
annexation is necessary for protection and control of development of the island.
Minutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 25
Mr. Irving Dietz explained the history of the Greenwood Sanitary Landfill
and pointed out that it will not derive any tax income. He inquired if the
water area is developed with oil wells if the oil companies would be taxed, and
Mayor Turner applied in the affirmative. Mr. Dietz stated he would be opposed
to a further tax on the oil producers.
Mr. John Rider spoke again in opposition to the annexation of River Hills
Country Club.
Mr. R. F. Hasker objected to the fact that the plan was prepared by the
staff without the approval of the Planning Commission and expressed the opinion
that there was too much confusion in regard to this annexation.
Mayor Turner requested that Mr. Elizondo display the map one more time for
the benefit of those in the audience, and Mr. Elizondo again described the 279
acres and in addition 16 or 17 acre pockets where services are available.
Mr. D'Unger spoke again and stated that a Navy representative will attend
the Planning Commission meeting. He informed the Council that oil and gas
explorations are coming back even in the Laguna Madre; Padre Island has no
protection for oil and gas exploration; and the first line of defense will be
the City's drilling ordinance.
Mr. Vern Shirley, 2126 Meadow Wood Drive, responded to the comments in
regard to the low voter turnout for the annexation election in 1986. He stated
that he felt that it is his right to vote and those who did not vote in that
election should not be addressing the issue.
There were no further comments from the audience.
A motion was made by Council Member Pruet that the hearing be closed,
seconded by Council Member Strong and passed unanimously.
Council Member Slavik asked the staff about the public concerns. She noted
that the public wants to be sure that they will still have access on the public
beaches even if the water area is annexed, and Mr. McDowell assured her that
access to the beaches is provided by State law; staff is only proposing to annex
water areas to protect the Gulf and beach areas.
Council Member Slavik then inquired as to what the staff plans generally to
annex and if that plan included the area removed from consideration the
preceding week.
City Manager McDowell explained that the concern about what is to be
annexed is a future issue but he felt that it will probably be the London area
which is under consideration now as a part of the development plan. He stated
that the book called Annexation Proposal includes everything planned for the
next two years.
inutes
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 26
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Turner called for City Council liaison reports.
Mayor Pro Tem Moss reported that he and Jim Barnette had attended the last
Regional Transit Authority Meeting; they did not have a quorum again; he
expressed the opinion that there are not enough members on that board who are
even interested; and again suggested that the City talk to the County
Commissioners and that a letter be sent to the one City appointee who does not
attend regularly.
A motion was made by Council Member Guerrero that a formal letter be sent
to the County Commissioners requesting that they replace their appointees who do
not attend the meetings. There was no second to the motion, but it was the
Council's consensus that letters should be written to the County Commissioners
and the City's appointee who has not attended the meetings regularly.
Mayor Turner then called for petitions or information from the audience on
matters not scheduled on the agenda.
Mr. Thurston Lambright, 202 Doddridge, stated that he had presented a
petition to the City Secretary's office in regard to building and zoning
violations at 3747 Denver Street and 3751 Denver Street.
Mayor Pro Tem Moss assured him that the information was provided the
Council Members in their packets that were delivered to their homes.
A motion was made by Council Member Guerrero that this item be placed on
the agenda for next week; the motion was seconded by Council Member Mendez.
Assistant City Manager Elizondo explained that from what the staff has been
able to discover, the uses at those two addresses are non -conforming uses which
were in place prior to adoption of the zoning map.
It was the consensus of the Council that this item would be placed on the
agenda the following week for discussion.
Mr. Joe A. Hansler, a resident of Flour Bluff, appeared before the Council
again and informed them that he had gone to the State Department of Highways and
Public Transportation and personnel there stated that they could do nothing
about the proposed excavation of property located ar Caribbean and Flour Bluff
Drives because it was up to the City Council. He stated that he had spoken to a
member of the Planning staff of the City who informed him that excavation could
not occur on RE zoned property. He again asked that the ordinance be amended
that day following a two-hour notice of a special meeting.
Minutes -
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 27
Mr. Larry Wenger, Director of Planning, explained that in order to
construct an excavation pit, a property owner would have to have a permit and it
does require industrial zoning, but in this particular instance, Heldenfels
Brothers is not proceding to perform excavation because they are only taking one
foot of soil from the property.
Mr. Hansler expressed concern that if one foot of soil is removed now,
there is nothing to prevent their going in and removing another foot of soil the
next week.
Council Member Strong stated that this matter was brought to her attention
by the residents of Flour Bluff during the past week. She stated that she had
checked with the Engineering Department; the staff investigated it; the trucks
do not meet the weight limits on Caribbean Drive; the construction company is
paying for the City water being used from the fire hydrants, which is a usual
procedure; and they have indicated that they will take care of any damage
inflicted on Caribbean Drive. She expressed the opinion that there is a
loophole in the City's Code of Ordinances that needs to be corrected, but she
expressed the opinion that there was nothing that the Council could do today.
She stated the the staff assured her that they will monitor this entire
operation to prevent their blading off more than twelve inches of soil.
Mayor Turner assured Mr. Hansler that this will be referred to the staff
for review and agreed that the staff should investigate the ordinance on this
subject.
Mr. Frank Stephens, 1737 Caribbean, also spoke in regard to this same
activity and expressed the opinion that it is a commercial industrial activity.
City Attorney Hal George stated that he sympathizes with the people
involved but the problem is that this is only a one-time use and the
construction company plans to take only eight inches of soil for removal to
another location. He stated that the City has a limited right to tell people
how they can use their property and the City cannot tell this property owner
what he can or cannot do.
Mr. Victor Medina, Director of Engineering, explained that Flour Bluff
Drive is a thru street with no weight limits for trucks; Caribbean is not a thru
street; Traffic Engineering controls that; and he is not sure that a wavier can
be granted. He pointed out that if Carribean is the only access to their
property, the City must grant them the right if they agree to repair any damage.
Discussion followed on this safety factor of the use of Caribbean Drive for this
operation. Others expressing concern about this were: Mrs. Gail Hoffman, Mrs.
Michelene Hansler, and Mr. Bruce Hoffman.
Further discussion followed, and it was the consensus of the Council that
an ordinance should be on the agenda the following week to prevent any future
occurrences such as this.
linutes •
Regular Council Meeting
September 8, 1987
Page 28
Mr. Richard Gonzalez presented to the Council flyers inviting them to the
Mexican Independence Celebration to be conducted at the Water Street Market on
Tuesday, September 15, from 7 to 11 p.m.
There being no further business to come before the Council, on motion by
Mayor Pro Tem Moss, seconded by Council Member Pruet and passed unanimously, the
meeting was adjourned at 6:18 p.m. September 8, 1987.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the
Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of the City of Corpus Christi of
September 8, 1987, which were approved by the City Council on September 15,
1987.
WITNESSETH MY HAND AND SEAL, this the
etty Turn r, MAYOR
I mie
day of Orctoimm, (1417_
Armando Chapa, City Secreary
City of Corpus Christi