HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes City Council - 02/17/1961 - SpecialPRESENT:
Mayor Ellroy King
Commissioners:
Dr. James L. Barnard
Mrs. say Airheart.
Joseph B. Dunn
Patrick J. Dunne
K. A. Humble
Gabe Lozano, Sr.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
February 17, 1961
7:00 P.M.
City Manager Herbert W. Whitney
City Attorney I. M. Singer
City Secretary T. Ray Kring
•
Mayor Ellroy King called the special meeting to order, read the published
notice of the public hearing on the new proposed zoning ordinance, and announced that
the Council would hear from all persons who desired to comment and be heard.
W. K. Price requested that Article 21, Section 9 of'the present zoning
ordinance, which has been deleted from the new proposed ordinance, be put back in
the new ordinance.
Mayor King read the article which refers to an existing use at the time
of passage of the ordinance being considered thereafter as a conforming use under
certain conditions.
Mayor King asked John I. Cofer, of Harland Bartholomew & Associates, and
William Anderson, Director of Zoning & Planning, if they wished to comment.
Mr. Anderson explained that the effectt of including the foregoing would
be to permit these nonconforming uses to be expanded without need for appearance
before the Board of Adjustment, that Article 26 of the proposed ordinance deals with
nonconforming uses which can be expanded by making application to the Board of Ad-
justment which was felt wise to have expansions reviewed.
Paul Vogler requested that the area between Omaha Drive and Villa Drive,
which is presently zoned "B-4" and which includes his property on Omaha Drive, be
included in the "I-2" District which is adjacent to this "B-4" area, and stated
that his adjoining neighbor felt the same way, but that they would agree to'a buffer
zone if necessary. He further requested "I-3" zoning instead of "1-2"zoning for
his property at 3109 Agnes on which he operates a service boiler works because he
can't operate this business in light industry zoning and would therefore be a non-
conforming use.
Walter Chastain, attorney, representing property owners on Corpus Christi
Beach, presented and read a petition of 161 signatures, objecting to the proposed
Special Council Meeting
February 17, 1961
Page #2
20' front yard setback provision instead of the present 4' requirement on the basis
that the majority of existing buildings would become nonconforming use buildings re-
quiring special permission to improve them or rebuild in case of fire; that it would
prevent use of 23% of a single lot and 53% of a corner lot due to the fact that
almost all the lots are 50' x 90° instead of the standard 50' x 150°, and cited
examples; that it would lower the sale value of an individual lot since it would have
to be sold simultaneously with an adjoining lot in order for the purchaser to re-
develop and expect a reasdnable return on his investment; and that it would thereby
result in an unjust limitation of the use, maintenance and development of their Pro-
perty.
Mr. Cofer answered that the provision would not be applicable in most cases
since it applies only to new construction and in blocks, not lots, that are presently
less than 257, developed.
Ed Williams, attorney representing 3 clients, objected to the basic rea-
soning in the approach to control property in Corpus Christi as being unreal; the
need for increase in size of lot area as being outdated; that there are too many
categories; that all requirements should be spelled out in words and not left to the
discretion of a department or board; and that the zoning districts on the map should
be indicated in India ink and not in colored crayon which can be altered. Mr.
Williams went through the proposed ordinance calling attention to several articles
and sections to which he objected and gave his reasons for objecting to them, and
stated that he found much that was good in the ordinance and an improvement on the
present ordinance, which was long overdue, and that he would present his objections
in writing within the next few days.
Mayor King stated that the Council had discussed informally some of the
points mentioned by Mr. Williams, and that he felt there should be a time Limits
tion for action by the Council and advisory boards on an application, and etated
that the Council also hoped to adopt a final zoning ordinance before its term of
office is over.
Robert Plato requested "AT" zoning for a tract approximately 1,000'
along Ocean Drive and 500' deep, extending the proposed "AT" zoning to Airline
•
Special Council Meeting
February 17, 1961
Page #3
Road, for use with the existing "AT" zoning in the immediate area to build a luxury
type, multi -storied apartment hotel. He presented some comments signed by the
president of the Ocean Drive Home Owners' Association favoring what Mr. Flato felt
very clearly described what he and his associates wanted to build, and a letter
from Sessions Mortgage Company, representing the owners of a 19 -acre tract opposite
his tract, stating they had no objections to the proposed apartment development;
and stated that in view of the boundary zoning of the area and the present land use,
he felt his request would help the economy of the City, be in the public good, and
could not conceivable do damage to any homes on Ocean Drive.
F. R. Kaufield, objected to anything in the nature of a business;being
permitted in a residential home area.
Eldon Dyer was in favor of Mr. Flato's request and proposed development on
Ocean Drive.
R. E. Williams, operator of a radio and TV repair service, spoke in favor
of more stringent control over home occupations in residential districts and stated
he was in favor of not permitting any business or occupation in a residential dis-
trict.
Mayor King answered that the proposed provisions are more liberal than in
the present ordinance, but that he feels this should be given more consideration with
regard to more definite definitions,
Joe Roscoe suggested that a person operating a business out of his home,
the same as if he were in a commercial building, be taxed on the basis of business
property for assessments for paving and that this might be a good method of control.
Mayor King replied that he did not feel that was the answer, since you
can destroy with taxes,
Leslie Mabrey, representing the local chapter of the American Institute
of Architects, presented and read a letter signed by the president favoring the" ..
adoption of the proposed ordinance as having considerable merit, and recommending
a mandatory yearly re-evaluation to insure adaptability to the effects of local con-
ditions on a contemporary basis. - ..
Mrs. F. S. Duke, owner of a nonconforming use building at 2729 Gollihar,
•
Special Council Meeting
February 17, 1961
Page #4
felt that the small businessman should be considered in zoning, and requested that
her property be properly zoned to continue the auto repair garage operation and make
improvements which they have not been allowed to do, on the basis that they have
operated on this same spot for 10 years.
Mayor King replied that the Council would ask the City Staff what re-
commendations they have in the matter.
J. B. Trimble, attorney, representing J. R. Hatch property, 3101 Up River
Road, requested "I-2" zoning for the 8 -acre portion of the property on which the
Hatch Trailer Park has been operating since
first 650' of the property.
Mayor King asked Mr. Anderson if this split zoning had been done just to
justify the recent lawsuit in the matter.
Mr. Anderson replied that they had merely carried over the same zoning
in the proposed ordinance, but that trailer parks or mobile home courts are under
Special Council Permit regardless of the zoning and that what Mr. Trimble is ask-
ing for can be done without changing the zoning.
Mayor King stated that the Council would give this matter consideration
Dr. G. R. Van Aken, 1107 Third Street, objected to the inclusion of
funeral directors and funeral homes in the uses permitted in the proposed new
professional district because of the psychological effect of a funeral home in
the immediate vicinity of a doctor's office, and stated that he felt this would
devaluate his property in the event he wanted to sell to a general practitioner.
Mr. Cofer replied that he did not consider the psychological factor in
the same light as Dr. Van Aken, that funeral directors and funeral homey like
doctors, lawyers and other high type professional designations are dignified pro-
fessions with a minimum of advertising and not conducive to creating any great in-
crease in traffic in an area.
W. J. Manning, home owner, and representative of a national manufacturer
of building products, question the zoning of part of Lexington Boulevard as
residential if it is a factthat F. H. A. will not grant a loan for residential
building on Lexington Boulevard due to the predominance of business zoning.
1935, the same as has been given the
•
Special Council Meeting
February 17, 1961
Page #5
Mr. Cofer replied that Lexington Boulevard has had an unfortunate his-
tory with scattered commercial uses all along the street, and that the attempt had
been made to consolidate the commercial zoning where there are existing commercial
uses or where there is logical expansion, that it
to zone an entire main thoroughfare for business,
for F.H.A. not to approve residential loans along
was not considered good zoning
that it would be highly unusual
Lexington as most main thorough-
fares have very fine residences, that it is merely a matter of placement on the lot
or screening.
Mr. Manning requested that the matter of residential loans be investigated
and if the area banks and P.H.A. won't approve the loans, then the entire frontage
of Lexington be zoned for commerce so it can progress.
Curtis Bell, speaking for the Associated General Contractors, spoke for
making changes in the existing ordinance that would encourage private investment and
development, and felt that requiring detail plans before zoning discourages investors.
He favored holding joint sessions on zoning for quick action, and only a simple'
majority needed for the Council to override a recommendation of the Zoning & Plan-
ning Commission, if it is in the public interest, and that an owner should be per-
mitted to spend his money any way he chooses as long as the general welfare will not
be abused.
L. R Wood objected th the requirement for showing an economic need for-
a certain business before it could be zoned.
A. L. Stroller, owner on Ocean Drive, stated he had no objection to Mt.
Flato's request and hoped the Council would grant his request for "AT" zoning.
Ray Flood, resident all his life, requested that the zoning in connec-
tion with Home Occupation should have more teeth in it otherwise there was no
reason for having it in the first place.
Douglas Beck objected to the provision which states that in newly annexed
areas, construction not completed at the time of annexation must be suspended until
a permit is issued by the Public Works Department on the basis that it could prove
to be very expensive not only for the owner, but for the contractor.
Mayor King agreed with Mr. Beck and stated he was not at all in favor
of that provision.
Special Council Meeting
February 17, 1961
Page #6
Mr. Cofer stated that during preliminary discussions with the City it was stated
that the existing provisions of the zoning ordinance had operated satisfactorily
with a minimum of difficulty and therefore should be retained, and that for this
reason the new provisions are essentially the same as those in the existing
ordinance, but that some new revisions had been discussed today.
Every one present wishing to speak having been heard, Mayor King announced
the hearing was closed and the proposed ordinance would be taken under advisement for
further study and consideration with particular reference to the requests, objections
and comments which had been noted during this hearing.
There being no further business to come before the Council, the special
meeting was adjourned.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF NUECES
CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
TO !RE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, THE CITY MANAGER, THE CITY SECRETARY
AND THE Ci TY ATTORNEY TO THE CITY' OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS:
NOTICE is hereby given that a special meeting of the City Council of the
City of C•rpus Christi, Texas, will be held in the City of Corpus Christi, Texas,
in the Co
cii Chamber o'•the City Hall, at 7:00
o'clock P. M. on the
17
day of February , 19 61, for the purpose of a Public Hearing for the
purpose of hearing evidence, objections or recommendations in respect to the pro-
posed general amendment or amendments, corrections or additions to the Zoning Ord-
inance slid Map approved by the City Council on May 4, 1948, being Ordinance No. 2266
of record at Volume 16, Page 339, et seg of the Ordinance and Resolution Records of
the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, asp amended, and to the official Zoning Map of the
City of orpus Christi, as amended.
DATED this the / 7 day of
February
1961
ELLROY KING,
City -of Co
CONSENT TO MATING
yor
Christi I exas
We, the undersigned members of the City Council, the City Manager, the
City Secretary and the City Attorney of Corpus Christi, Texas, hereby accept
service of the foregoing notice, waiving any and all irregularities in such service
and consent and agree that said meeting shall be at the time and place therein
for the purpose therein stated.
T.RAYRTNG
City Se etary
I. M. SIN
City Attorn