HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondenceMarch 29, 2012
To: David Neely/College Station City Manager
Charles Gilman/College Station Public Works Director
Matt Robinson/College Station Senior Planner
Re: Cain Rd. Drainage Problems
Gentlemen
The tract of land that is (mown as 'The Barracks" go before the Planning & Zoning Board on April 5, 2012. The drainage of this tract presents many
problems to the to
downstream property owners. This has always been the case, but as construction continues, the problems will increase.
Since the recent rains of 2012, Cain Rd & Old Wellborn Rd, south of Cain, have overflowed with drainage water four times, making the road impassible
and once
closed by tile city.
This is an intolerable situation and can only increase with many more concrete roads and roof tops. The city has neglected our concerns for years. As a
group. we came
to the City Council and requested the ditches to be cleaned. Nothing has ever been done.
Now you are planning to allow upstream development to increase with absolutely no plan or even a concern about the properties downstream. We
request a delay
in further development until a proper plan of action with get this drainage to properly flow under the railroad tract at FM 2154.
Since ly,
�, j ;:—
Ken Tripp (�
04/24/2012 18:09 2103411777 PAGE 01/01
Mabel M. Bagger Trust
John. Barger, Trustee
8023 Vantage Drive — Suite 840 - San. Antonio, TX 78230
Phone: 888-522-7437 - Fax: 210.341-1777
April 24, 2012
BY HAND DELIVERY
Ms. Sherry Mashburn
City Secretary
City of College Station
1101 South Texas Avenue
College Station, TX 77840
Re: Heath Phillips Investments, LLC Rezoning Scheduled for April 26, 2012, as
Agenda Item #2 in the Regular Meeting
Dear Ms. Mashburn:
The Mabel M. Barger Trust owns the land immediately adjacent and to the North of the tract
proposed by Heath Phillips Investments, LLC, for rezoning. Pursuant to section 211.006 (d) of
the Texas Local Government Code, please accept this letter as the Trust's protest to the
proposed change to the zoning ordinance and request that the affirmative vote of at least three -
fourths (3/4ths) of all members of the City Council be required to approve it.
Sincerely,
MABEL M. BARGER TRUST
By:
John W. Barger, Trustee
cc: College Station Planning and Development Services Department
College Station Legal Department
04/24/201218:09 2103 '777 PAGE 01/01
L i 1
Mabel M. Barger Trust
John Barger, Trustee
8023 Vantage Drive — Suite 840 - San Antonio, TX 78230
phone: s8s-522-7437 - Fax: 210�341-1777
April 24, 2012
BY HAND DELIVERY
Ms. Sherry Mashburn
City Secretary
City of College Station
1101 South Texas Avenue
College Station, TX 77840
Re: Heath Phillips Investments, LLC Rezoning Scheduled for April 26, 201Z as
Agenda Item #2 in the Regular Meeting
Dear Ms. Mashburn:
The Mabel M. Barger Trust owns the land immediately adjacent and to the North of the tract
proposed by Heath Phillips Investments, LLC, for rezoning. Pursuant to section 211.006 (d) of
the Texas Local Government Code, please accept this letter as the Trust's protest to the
proposed change to the zoning ordinance and request that the affirmative vote of at least three -
fourths (3/4ths) of all members of the City Council be required to approve it.
Sincerely,
MABEL M. BARGER TRUST
J
By:
John W, Barger, Trustee
cc: College Station Planning and Development Services Department
College Station Legal Department
04/2i/2012 1b:2b 21b.i411 /! / rHl1 ulr n<
Mabel M. Barger Trust
John Barger, 'trustee
$023 'Vantage Drive — Suite $40 - San Antonio, TX 78230
Phone: $$$-522.7437 — Fax: 210-341-1777
April 26, 2012
Members of the City of College Station City Council:
Please accept this letter in lieu of my presence at the rezoning hearing. 1 have worked with the
Phillips for over two (2) months in an effort to reach an agreement regarding our differences and
learned on Tuesday morning that my offer was rejected. Rather than be part of the cause of a
contentious and difficult zoning hearing like last June and put the members of the Council as
well as the staff through such a difficult process, I have°chosen to submit my objections and
comments in writing and trust the Council to make a decision that is in the best interest of all of
the parties involved.
I support the rezoning with the exception of the commercial amusement/water recreation uses
and support the staff recommendation to approve the rezoning, but with the condition that the
PJ 1111 ttww 115CJ.
Please recall at the June 9, 2011 rezoning hearing I presented some video clips of activities that
can and do occur at wake board parks. Though the Phillips have verbally indicated that they do
not intend to host such activities, the ordinance they have requested would not prohibit such an
activity. In fact, the ordinance they have submitted would allow, by right, even more impactful
uses such as carnivals, fairs, rodeos, which I will address below.
In the same June session, my counsel, Chuck Ellison, expressed to the Council that I did not
object to the Phillips project or even the water park. My issue was that I did not have enough
information to assess whether we had concerns or not. That is the same position we are in
again today. We don't have enough information to tell you what our concerns are. if there is
going to be a rodeo, I object. If there is going to be a wakeboard event like I showed you in
June, I object. If the amenity is only going to be daytime paddle boats and canoes, l do not
object. My problem in articulating the kinds of mitigation needed for the adverse impacts
created by the wake board/water recreation portion of the project is that we don't know the
extent of what the wake board/water recreation will be.
All we have to go on is what the applicant has asked this Council to give them as entitlement
rights. I am left to my own imagination as to what might occur based on the rights it will have if
the applicant's request is approved. Based on what they have requested and the types of
activities that it will allow, I strenuously object. There are few differences between the first
application, which Heath admitted was "page 3 of 6 pages", and the current application. Among
them are (i) limit hours of operation of the wake board park to 14 hours a day (11) require a
vegetation buffer of 6 feet when ma#ure (Emphasis added) and (if!) limit the number of towers
to two (2). But, he expanded the request to include, among other things, that they be able to
conduct "commercial amusement" activities in the Recreational facility. Commercial
amusement is defined in the UDO as:
04/26/2012 15.26 2103411777 rfAUL G�in<
"An enterprise whose main purpose is to provide the general public with an amusing or
entertaining activity, where tickets are sold or fees are collected at the gates of the
activity. Commercial amusements includes zoos, carnivals, expositions, miniature golf
courses, arcades, fairs, exhibitions, athletic contests, rodeos, tent shows, ferns wheels,
children's rides, roller coasters, skating rinks, lee rinks, traveling shows, bowling alleys,
indoor shooting ranges, and similar enterprises." (Emphasis added)
Based on the applicant's application, a wake board contest like the ones I showed you in June
would still be an allowed activity if you approve this ordinance, I say that it is inappropriate and
the Phillips have not refined their plan enough for this Council, to make a reasonable ordinance
that addresses the adverse impacts of their use.
The request to allow by right "commercial amusements" on the 11 acre facility opens the door to
many activities that I object to. I would not want a rodeo, roller Coaster, zoo, traveling show or
other intense entertainment activities. According to the existing zoning ordinance, commercial
amusements are allowed in C1 and C2 provided they are 300 feet from a residence. Clearly,
there will be residences much closer than 300 feet from the proposed commercial amusement,
In fact, commercial amusements according to the City of College Station zoning ordinance are
not allowed in C3 zone without a conditional use permit. A conditional use permit would require
far more information than has been submitted to the Council to determine if the actual activities
to be conducted are compatible with the neighboring properties and with the overall land use
which was established by an extensive, collaborative and comprehensive planning effort.
The Council denied the wake board use at the initial rezoning hearing because you did not have
enough information to make a determination about the appropriateness of such an intense land
use. I submit that you still do not. Would you want, on the second floor of the building in the
recreation area, a 3500 square foot restaurant with an additional 2000 square feet of deck
space, with 75% of its sales from alcohol and a rock band playing at 1:00 in the morning? I
believe that if you pass this ordinance, the applicant could build that. i would object to that.
Nothing in the current application has alleviated my concerns or fears that the intense use of the
recreational facility will be limited to "an amenity for the college student development." Instead,
It seems more like the applicant is seeking the right to create a very intense commercial
amusement area that could host camivais, zoos, Ferris wheels, roller coasters, along with wake
board competitions and other uses, The application contains nothing that addresses potential
noise pollution, odor intrusion, and traffic congestion that would result from the uses requested
by the applicant. Instead, the Council is being asked to take It on faith that none of that will
happen. I suggest that in dire economic circumstances people do dire things and this property
should not be entitled to conduct those kinds of activities without the Council having a chance to
know in great detail exactly what is contemplated.
I urge you to approve the rezoning with the condition that the commercial amusement/water
recreation uses be removed from the concept plan and the list of permitted uses until all parties
concerned can have a better understanding of what activities are planned there.
Sincerely
MABE L M. BARGER TRUST
By: John Barger, Trustee
March 29, 2012
To: David Neely/College Station City Manager
Charles Gilman/C01109e Station Public Works Director
Mail Robinson/College Station Senior Planner
Flo: Cain Rd. Drainage Problems
Genliemen:
the tract of land that is known as 'The Barracks" go before the Planning & Zoning Board on April 5, 2012, The drainage of this tract presents many
problems to the to
downsiream property owners. This has always been the case., but as construction continues, the problems will increase.
Since the recent rains of 20'12, Cain Rd & Old Wellborn Rd, souih of Call, have overflowed with drainage water four limos, malting the road impassible
and once
closed by the city.
This is an intolerable silualion and can only increase with many more concrete roads and roof tops. The. city has neglected our concerns for years. As a
group. we came
to the City Council and requested the ditches to be cleaned. Nothing has ever been done..
Now yen are planning to allow upstroam development to increase with absolutely no plan or even a concern about the properties downstream. We
request a delay
in furthor development until a propor plan of action with gat this drainage to properly flow under the railroad tract al FM 2'led,
K
IY,
pp
Page 1 of 1
Matt Robinson - Rezoning for The Barracks II Subdivision
From: "Kent Laza"<klaza@phillipsengineeringbcs.com>
To: "'Matt Robinson"' <Mrobinson@cstx.gov>
Date: 2/10/2012 1:37 PM
Subject: Rezoning for The Barracks II Subdivision
CC: "'Heath Phillips"' <heath_ superiorstructures@yahoo.com>
Matt,
As I indicated earlier on the phone, Heath Phillips has asked me to contact you and have the rezoning of The
Barracks II Subdivision pulled from the P&Z Agenda that was scheduled for February 16. He is attempting to
work out a compromise with the adjoining property owner regarding concerns on the proposed land use. We
would like to tentatively reschedule the time for the next available meeting. Thank you.
Kent M. Laza, P.E., Manager
Phillips Engineering
PROVIDING CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES TO COLLEGE STATION, BRYANAND SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES
4490 Castlegate Drive
College Station, Texas 77845
(979) 690-3141 office
(979) 220-1957 cell
(979) 690-1041 fax ,.
klazannhi ll insen eineerinebcs. com
file://C:\Documents and Settings\mrobinson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F351D9BC... 2/10/2012