Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParking Lot Lighting PetitionsSourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petitions 2009 40 Signed Pebble Creek Homeowner Petitions SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition. Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neightorhood. FO M Oo 9 SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent toffee neighborhood. IK- rrmr ivame print Address 70 2 � Print City, State, Zip SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed m the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. rNATURE / DATE i 'Print Address % _i'if_. SoureeNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. //s 2-C/ Print Name /V Ox y 'Print Address '�S—UUU Print City, State Zin 611e9e c�C-C 4Uld Tk 77 d //S SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot lighf poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. NATTTRF./DATE Print Name NZ.Aa. -B . k k Print City, State. Zip �a�I�c4 5 fd�\ �� n • �� �% s SoureeNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition I/we, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. SIGNATURE / DATE Print Name Print Address 1701 / i�gx'xt Print Citv. State. Zin �1� G I Ps[ (. \C —�i` IX % 7 8 NJ vtv►/e. WJ iLr Print City, State, Zip ._ SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light'poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non-busiaeess hours adjapent to the neighborhood. 5-/3 /a Print Name 21 a cr� ttib 7 Z7 K6,vd ,4J Q_(- Q__ <w 0 /I lec P sf; _.�t,b h . k/_ q 7 g7 S SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition I/we, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. SIGNATURE / DATE Print Name 'Print Address Print City, State, Zip SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition I/we, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light'poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. , I1 SIGNATURE / DATE Print Name Print Address Print City, State, Zip SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light'poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. , IN Print Address /x eX SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition I/we, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. M Print Name �ON�L��2Z�Z1 Print Address 7Zc7 (4 Cryfl' e- 4 D 6F e c4 6 0 K Print City, State. Zip ��� AGE sT/� % lO e � %jX 773 4c- SIGNATURE / DATE Print Name print Address Print City, State, Zip SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition I/we, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002: 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. SIGNATURE / DATE Print Name "Print Address Print City, State, Zip SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. rNATURE / DATE fLL n (cX. W . �CSO �✓ —/ �O / vial Ot Wyuo ch. nt Address o O R i s. _1 SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. fkD-2 A01)1 1/a11e61 Cf 4)41' \, f1Zj h Why Print Name .r 4l I�t f f N ! �y1 Tint Address w 'rintCity, State, Zip SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive ago objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light'poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non-bus ines ours adjacent to the neighborhood SIGNATURE / DATE " Print Name 0 Llfit� q �(� /Yl4,101 Print Address / �Y P / (- f n T SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition I/we, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non=business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hour's during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. -E�3 SIGNATURE / DATE Print Name Print City; State, Zip . � '. C_ _ _. SoureeNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light'poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the gurrent practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. SIGNATURE / DATE S S 1 i, `-46D S TDb3 J"ncJ4:J—irdz Print Address Print City, State, Zip C.Ouzc'e S' �D" T 4e_ 7—ZEYS j SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non=business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced; minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours � adjacent to the neighborhood. NATURE / DATE ✓ 1111 �, Chi`! Print Name �/Ad Print Name _ -. _ -J SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition J' I/we, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced_ with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. SIGNATURE / DATE Print Name Print Address Print City, State, Zip SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition Uwe, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. ' 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. NATURE / DATE v Print Name Print Address ` 74wI r� SourceNet Parking Lot Lighting Petition I/we, the undersigned residents and homeowners in the Pebble Creek subdivision adjacent to the Business Center at College Station support the following changes to the parking lot lighting to alleviate the intrusive and objectionable affect on the neighborhood and our property values: 1. The 25 foot light poles should be replaced with 15 foot light poles as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 2. The double fixtures should be replaced with single fixtures as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 3. All lighting should have shields to focus the light away from the neighborhood as agreed in the original construction in 2002. 4. Make permanent and require the current practice of turning off all driveway and parking lot lighting during weekend non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 5. Explore the possibility of requiring reduced, minimum lighting after hours during weekday, non -business hours adjacent to the neighborhood. 21 SIGNATURE / DATE Print Name 'Print Address Print City, State, Zip Ilebble Creek Z)wners Association City of College Station City Council Mayor Ben White John Crompton Dennis Maloney Lawrence Stewart Dave Ruesink James Massey Lynn Mcllhaney College Station Business Center -Board April 24, 2009 MAY - 12909 DELIVERED y;Is p►u Glenn Brown, College Station City Manager Kathy Merrill, Assistant City Manager David Neeley, Assistant City Manager Bob Cowell, Director of Planning and Development Services Department David Gwin, Director of Economic Development Department Cop . LlCe Simms College Station City Hall PO Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77840 To the members of the College Station City Council and the College Station Business Center Board: We are writing to express our sincere concern regarding the excessive lighting at the Source Net parking lot, located in the Business Park directly behind homes within the Pebble Creek community. The lighting within the newly constructed parking lot is unacceptable for the Pebble Creek homeowners in the adjacent area, as the light is so bright that it is easily seen from within Pebble Creek homes. During the original construction of the Reynolds & Reynolds facility and adjoining parking lot, both the City of College Station officials and representatives from Reynolds and Reynolds were willing to listen to Pebble Creek homeowners to work out a 4500 Pebble Creek Parkway - College Station, Texas 77845 - 979.690.0992 X109 Phone - 979.690.6826 Fax solution to the lighting in the parking lots at Source Net. This solution included compromises such as fifteen (15) foot light poles, single fixture lighting, and light shields to focus the light away from Pebble Creek homes. However, the newly constructed parking lot features twenty- five (25) foot light poles, double fixture lighting, and no light shields, which adversely impacts the quality of life for Pebble Creek residents. The new parking lot lighting is inconsistent with the original parking lot lighting, and it violates the original lighting agreement that Pebble Creek homeowners strived to attain. It should be noted that we have already pursued a solution with Britt Rice and Reynolds & Reynolds. They have been unwilling to correct the lighting and it is our understanding that they are seeking the Economic Development Board's approval to keep the lighting as is. It is our request that the lighting in the newly constructed parking lot feature the same standards as the original parking lot, and that the request made by Britt Rice Electric for variance be denied. Please give careful attention to our request, as the decision you make will directly affect the value of the Pebble Creek homes in the area. Sincerely, Pebble Creek Owners Association Board of Directors David Kipp, President Tim Rhome, Past President Jim Ross, President Elect Briefing Sheet on Meeting Conducted 9:00 PM, Wednesday, May 6, 2009, at the SourceNet Parking Lot Between Britt Rice of Britt Rice Electric, LP, approximately 15 to 20 Pebble Creek Homeowners, and Lance Simms from College Station Planning and Development Services 1. Mr. Rice submitted plans for 15 foot poles with single fixtures and then installed something completely different based on the light manufacturer's "engineering". Response: Mr. Rice is responsible for his mistake. 2. Mr. Rice stated his contract with Mr. Carlin Cooper of RentSys, the owner of the SourceNet property, is to install proper lighting for the lot. Any changes would have to be approved and paid by the owner. Response: Are we to believe that Mr. Rice quoted his contract on the submitted proposal to the City or the proposal "engineered" by the manufacturer of the lights? Did he not have the "engineered" proposal from which to quote his job to Mr. Cooper? If so, why wasn't this "engineered" proposal submitted to the City rather than the manufacturer's `cut sheet'? Mr. Rice is responsible for the proposal submitted to and approved by the City. 3. Mr. Rice stated to the homeowner's that the Certificate of Completion for the job had been issued when in fact it has not pending resolution of the lighting issue. He stated he was there out of a desire to address homeowner concerns. He was corrected by Mr. Simms on the status of the certificate. Response: Impressions were of a business owner out of touch with his own affairs or possibly an intentional deception. Either way, this created doubt as to Mr. Rice's real motivations. 4. Mr. Rice attempted to dissuade the homeowners from changing the 25 foot dual fixture poles to 15 foot single fixture poles stating that it would not provide enough lighting to the parking lot based on a "code" for lighting that he is `bound' to follow. Also any increase in light fixtures would be in conflict with a "green" code to reduce energy uses. Response: Are these "codes" professional organization's voluntary "codes"? If so, he is only bound by the city codes for adequate lighting for safety. Why was neither he nor any of his three staff members present aware of requirements when queried? Mr. Rice repeatedly stated the homeowners would not like a change to 15 foot single fixture poles as these would create increased backlight and reflection since the number of fixtures would be increased to adequately light the lot. Response: General consensus of the homeowners based on observations of existing 15 foot installations is this is a non -issue. Any small increase would be more desirous than the elevated light field presently installed. The 25 foot fixtures cannot be adequately shielded. 6. Mr. Rice stated repeatedly that he wanted to take light readings in the homeowner's yards to send to the light manufacturer for evaluation and response. Response: Any readings would be invalid as the vegetation is in full bloom and not thinned as it was two months ago when these lights were installed. Nor would it be valid for what will exist when the vegetation thins beginning in August or September. A nearly full moon also made any readings invalid. An engineer's evaluation based on tables and codes is not going to correct what is patently obvious to the naked eye from the homeowners' yards. And that is the light field is too high to be adequately shielded from homeowner's property. 7. Mr. Rice concluded the evening with a commitment to experiment with a light adjacent to a homeowner property by constructing a three sided metal, vertical shield. If this worked, he stated he would apply the same techniques to the other rear lights but could not with the interior lights as they would not adequately cover the lot. He stated he was willing "to do this on his own nickel to try and help solve the homeowner lighting problem". Response: This experimentation and "tinkering" holds absolutely no promise to remedy this problem, namely, the light field is too elevated to be adequately shielded from the neighborhood. Any further delay and procrastination is undesirable. We have a perfect example of the workable solution arrived at in 2002 by deliberations among all concerned parties, namely, the 2002 installation of 15 foot poles with single fixtures and shields to focus light away from the neighborhood. Conclusion: Mr. Rice needs to install the lighting proposed and approved by the City, 15 foot poles with single fixtures and shields to focus light away from the neighborhood. This includes all lights in the new parking lot as well as those on the drive entrance from the street. Source Net Lighting- May 8, 2009 David Gwin- Gave introduction of meeting, purpose, and function of the group. Jason Schubert -Talked about history of the project, this project's application was submitted last year, reviewed to meet general standards as well as those of the business center -plans met those but what was constructed did not match -meets technical standards of the City. Bob Cowell -Add that this board is also responsible for reviewing covenants and restrictions- another layer additional to technical standards. Britt Rice- We used the same design that was used for the last project 10-12 years ago -we were told to build same type of lighting that we did last time- there are 2 ways to do it higher with fewer lights or lower with more lights —anytime there is a new lighting in a space, there is going to be a change. Try to do things as green as possible and keep from lighting people's back yards. There's a rear parking lot with 15 foot poles and the big parking lot in front has 25 foot poles- same we used in the most recent project- there are only 4 poles in that lot but it doesn't meet the lighting standard- industry standard for cameras is at least 20 feet- original lot was designed years ago before a lot of security issues arose. Bob Cowell- Were you involved in the discussion of the design? Britt Rice- No, we were only involved in the installation. We have 25 foot poles out there, we can cut the poles shorter to 20 feet, but we'll have to add more lights and more poles. Cameras today need height and even lighting. Right now, those lights are at 95%, they will get down to 70% so it won't be as bright - if we go down to 20 feet, we'll still see those lights & there will be more of them. Fixture location is the same as the submittal but the cut sheet had 15 foot and that was never the intent. I'm willing to do a lot of different things like trying to shield the lights. I don't know how they were able to get 15 foot poles. Glenn Brown- Kim Foutz was more involved in those discussions, but I think it was a compromise. Britt Rice- We're willing to do whatever you agree to with Carlan Cooper, cameras need the proper lighting to get a clear image. Ron Gooch- Our objection isn't to the poles; it's to the lights and seeing the reflectors. We've known about the parking lot and Mr. Cooper was involved and wanted to make sure the neighborhoods were not adversely affected. It's the reflectors that are the main issue; cameras are nice, but there is not a lot of crime and security isn't much of an issue. On the cut sheet, 15 feet is written in. It's not double the fixtures, double the poles; even the 15 foot poles have shields and they do a good job. We did a lot of compromising in the design of this in 2002. David Kipp- Would never question the integrity of Britt Rice and his company. Britt Rice- Business issue for me, we can do whatever you agree with Carlan. David Kipp- This is about quality of life. Reasonable expectation of a homeowner to this board, that the impact is the same to residents adjacent to the entire property. Ask you to protect our quality of life. Appreciates Britt saying he would install shields, but still think you should lower the poles. Jim Ross- There is a halo effect, and the only way to see it is at night. He is glad there is an additional layer of review to protect residents and their quality of life. Brian Bochner- Staff was at the meeting on Wednesday and Lance said the City doesn't really have an illumination standard. Looks like this is a power standard, there are some standards across the country and you could go out there with a light meter and see if it matches that. The 2002 plan called for 15 foot poles near the neighborhood and this is a breach of that agreement. We accept that there are going to be lights back there. David Gwin- Asked if there were any additional materials from either side to help us get a resolution. Britt Rice- The pole is not an issue. We can lower it, but you'll still see these lights at 15 foot height. We only changed the fixture. If someone wants something lower and we're not liable if someone gets hurt, we'll do it. I think it will take some compromise to say we don't meet the standards, but maybe that's necessary since it's close to a residential neighborhood. You'll still see them. Ron Gooch- We know we'll still see them, but that hasn't been a problem, just need them lower so we can't see into the reflector. Britt Rice- It doesn't make any difference to us if we don't stamp the plans, but there could be a legal issue if somebody gets hurt. I need a letter telling me that there's an agreement that I don't have to meet the standard. Would probably have to put in 7 more poles to meet that requirement. Business Center Board Meeting 5/8/09 Name E mail Britt Rice BrittRice@brittrice.com (???) Larry D Patton Ipatton@briceco.net Mike Lane mike.lane@briceco.net Jim Ross iiim.ross.gvep@statefarm.com (sp?) David Kipp dkipp@tamu.edu Ron Gooch rsgooch@suddenlink.net Brian Bochner b-bochner@ttimail.tamu.edu 919rArt Rice E/ectr/c, P. O. Box 10477 • College Station, Texas 77842 • (979) 693-4076 • Fax (979) 693-9785 May 18, 2009 Business Center Advisory Board Attn: David Gwin City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Gentlemen, We would like to offer a possible solution for the parking lot lighting at Sourcenet. We have determined that there are 2 scenarios that may be acceptable and provide adequate lighting for security purposes. 1. Leave all poles at existing heights and construct shields for the 5 each fixtures installed on 25 foot poles nearest to the buffer zone. These shields are not a factory item and will have to be fabricated to shield the fixtures from direct view of the neighborhood. 2. Replace the 3 existing 25 foot poles nearest the neighborhood with 15 foot poles and reinstall the existing fixtures. In addition 2 each 15 foot poles with a single fixture on each will be added on the side of the parking lot where the poles are lowered to provide adequate lighting. All other poles and fixtures to remain. A third possible option is to lower all of the poles and fixtures to 15 foot. Since this will not provide adequate security lighting we would require a letter from the City of College Station stating their requirements and acceptance of this design since we will not provide sealed drawings. We feel that the best solution for all concerned is option 1 or 2 and hope that the home owners will find one of these is acceptable. Yours trul4Dat LarP.E. Britt Rice Electric, LP 1patton@briceco.net s01( t4s- (eWarittRice' Electric, LP, P. O. Box 10477 • College Station, Texas 77842 • (979) 693-407E May 18, 2069 Business Center Advisory Board Attn: David Gwin City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77840 Gentlemen, Fax (979) 693-9785 We would like to offer a possible solution for the parking lot lighting at Sourcenet. We have determined that there are 2 scenarios that may be acceptable and provide adequate lighting for security purposes. 1. Leave all poles at existing heights and construct shields for the 5 each fixtures installed on 25 foot poles nearest to -the buffer -zone. These shields are not a factory item and will have to be fabricated to shield the fixtures from direct view of the neighborhood. 2. Replace the 3 existing 25 foot poles nearest the neighborhood with 15 foot poles and reinstall the existing fixtures. In addition 2 each 15 foot poles with a single fixture on each will be added on the side of the parking lot where the poles are lowered to provide adequate lighting. All other poles and fixtures to remain. A third possible option is to lower all of the poles and fixtures to 15 foot. Since this will not provide adequate security lighting we would require a letter from the City of College Station stating their requirements and acceptance of this design since we will not provide sealed drawings. We feel. that the best solution for all concerned is option 1 or 2-and hope that the home owners will find one of these is acceptable. Yo� Y� Larry D. atton, P.E. Britt Rice Electric, LP 1patton@briceco.net Thursday, February 7 at 7.00PM 4800 Apple Valley Ctm 690-7122 PLEASE COME TO A SHORT MEETING TO DISCUSS CONCERNS AND TO ORGANIZE A PLAN OF ACTION REGARDING COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION ADJOINING OUR YARDS! Also watch for a notice of an informational meeting to be held next week hosted by Kim Foutz of the Econmic Development Council of College Station. INFORMATIONAL MEETING REGARDING DEVELOPMENT ON QUALITY CIRCLE TUESDAY FEBRUARY 12, 2002 6:00 PM Utility Service Center Training Room 1601 Graham Road This is an informational meeting to discuss the development by SourceNet on Quality Circle in the Business Center Sponsored by: City of College Station For info. call: 764-3510 Citizen Concerns For SourceNet Solutions Development At College Station Business Center Presented by: Ronald W. Gooch Presented to: College Station City Council 5002 Cherry Hills Ct February 14, 2002 College Station, Tx 77845 979-690-5638 Background: • Swap of land between College Station and Pebble Creek Development. • Subsequent rezoning and Master Plan for Business Center. • Subsequent rezoning of adjacent Pebble Creek development land from agricultural to residential. • Utility constriction between adjacent tracks C-1 and R-1 leaves an approximate 30 foot swath bare of vegetation on Business Center side and 10 to 20 foot (variable) on residential side. • Subsequent developments by UCS and now proposed SourceNet. • Economic Development Department informational meeting conducted by Kim Foutz for Pebble Creek residents on February 12, 2002. Concerns: • Master Plan for Business Center was not reevaluated and updated after rezoning from agricultural to residential. • Code mandated bufferlbuilding line/setback of 25 feet does not afford adequate separation between C-1 and R-1 zones. • Inadequate vegetation for proper visual and aural buffer between C-1 and R 1 zones. • Proposed development places too much vehicular traffic too near residential property line — specifically, delivery service road and parking lots. • Light pollution associated with building security and parking lots. • Master Plan and Code requirements concerning Quality Circle street has forced the architect into less than desirable solutions — specifically, esthetic limitations and number of parking spaces required. Other • The architect has expressed sympathy for residential concerns and has admittedly done a good job in his original proposal. However, he has repeatedly stated he is bound by the Code and SourceNet requirements. Assumedly, SourceNet desires good corporate neighborly relations. Citizen Concerns For SourceNet Solutions Development At College Station Business Center Proposed • A dedicated 50 foot greenbelt to be established by deed restriction on the Solutions: C-1 side of the C-1/R-1 property line. An aggressive replanting and landscaping above Code requirements to replace vegetation removed by utility construction. • Master Plan amendments/Code changes/Code variances to the property especially on the Quality Circle street to allow the expansion of parking on the street side of the property rather than against the residential area One proposal might be removal of the curb and construction of angled parking with sidewalk. An occasional indented relief similar to that already existing for a covered kiosk/gazebo would preserve the Master Plan intent. This would provide overflow parking to both businesses and nonemployee park visitors. • Relocation of the loading dock area to the south side of the proposed current construction where it is accessible only from Quality Circle. Design so as to allow future proposed expansion. Design approach and landscape so as to shield from view. • Designate the rear access road as fire lane/maintenance access road only with access gates to prevent other vehicular movement. • Explore innovative lighting options for both the building and parking. Indirect lighting focused away from the residential area and waist - high diffused lighting for parking can provide security and esthetics when combined with the security devices already planned, ie, cameras and controlled access. A visit to the Master Planned community, The Woodlands, in South Montgomery County provides an example of how businesses and residences can combine harmoniously. Summary: • SourceNet will be a welcome and valuable asset to the community. With a cooperative approach to the above concerns, SourceNet's image as a good corporate neighbor will be enhanced. College Station will benefit as the quality of its residential area will not be degraded nor the tax base of the neighborhood. I strenuously urge the City Council to undertake this matter immediately. FOLLOW-UP INFORMATIONAL MEETING REGARDING DEVELOPMENT ON QUALITY CIRCLE WEDNESDAY March 6, 2002 6:00 PM College Station City Hall City Council Chambers 1101 Texas Avenue This is a follow-up informational meeting to discuss the development by SourceNet on Quality Circle in the Business Center Sponsored by: City of College Station For info. call: 764-3509 COLLEGE STATION P. O. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842 Tel. 409 764 3500 February 27, 2002 Mr. & Mrs. Gooch 5002 Cherry Hills Ct. College Station, Texas 77845 Dear W. & Mrs. Gooch: The City of College Station Economic Development Department is sponsoring an informational meeting regarding an update of the SourceNet development on Quality Circle in the Business Center_ The purpose of the meeting will be to provide information on the revised site plan as submitted by UCS. The meeting will be held on March 6, 2002 at 6:00 P.M in the City Council Chambers in City Hall at 1101 Texas Avenue (see attached map). Please feel free to contact me at 764-3509 should you have any questions or need any further information. Sincerely, ,IV JA44 Kim Foutz Director of Economic Development Home of Texas A&M Universii''- INFORMATIONAL MEETING REGARDING DEVELOPMENT ON QUALITY CIRCLE Thursday May 30, 2002 6:00 PM College Station City Hall City Council Chambers 1101 Texas Avenue This is an informational meeting to discuss the development by SourceNet on Quality Circle in the Business Center Sponsored by: City of College Station For info. call: 764-3509 COLLEGE S}TATIOI P. O. Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842 Tel: 409 764 3500 May 24, 2002 Ronald & Sharron Gooch 5002 Cherry Hills Ct. College Station, Texas 77845 Dear Ronald & Sharron Gooch: The City of College Station Economic Development Department is sponsoring an informational meeting regarding the landscaping of the SourceNet development on Quality Circle in the Business Center. The purpose of the meeting will be to provide information on the final landscape plan as submitted by UCS and discuss fencing. The meeting will be held on May 30, 2002 at 6:00 P.M in the City Council Chambers in City Hall at 1101 Texas Avenue (see attached map). Please feel free to contact me at 764-3509 should you have any questions or need any further information. Sincerely, Kim Foutz Director of Economic Development -tome of Texas .A&M University