HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous
~
LAWRENCE. THORNTON, PAYNE Be WATSON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
308 EAST 25TH STREET
POST OFf:'ICE DRAWER E
BRYAN, TEXAS 77801
J JOHN M. LAWRENCE III
WILLIAM S. THORNTON
BILLY M. PAYNE
JAY DON WATSON
May 5, 1977
AREA CODE '13
TELEPHONE 823.004 ,.
BOBBY L. FREEMAN
Mr. Virgil Stover
Chairman
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of College Station
College Station, Texas 77840
RE: Rezoning request of KOA
Campgrounds
Dear rv1r. Stover:
I would like to submit to the Commission considering the
above referenced rezoning request, .the opposition statement
of Agency Records Control (ARC), who,! represent. I
apologize to t'heCommission for my inability to personally
attend and address the Commission personally,' however, I
hope that my thoughts can be read and considered by the
Commission in opposition to the .change .requestedby KOA.
ARC was, of course, one of the first, if not in fact the
first business to commit itself to development of property
along the east Bypass. The. committment made by ARC in
terms of dollars was substantial, and of course, the City
of College Station is in may ways the. benefactor of that
camrni ttment. Besides the present .taxes paid on the
exis ting plant, ARC owns a .tota.l of 37-1/2 acres. and
presently has under consideration, the additional develop-
ment of this acreage in a fashion s~milar to that of the
ARC facilities.. It. is our belief that the present plant
is tastefully done and that it in fact goes a long way
in welcoming people to the communi ty as t.hey approach the
City from the south. The plans being cons.idered for future
development of the other acreage would further inhance
what we feel to bea very favorable first impression of
this community, presented by this facility.
I think the Commissions' responsibility is to determine
whether or not the zoning change is in the best interest
of the communi ty. \Vhen considering that, Olle of the major
Mr. Virgil Stover
rvla y 5, 1 9 7 7
Page Two (2)
considerations should be the idea mentioned above and
that is what kind of first impressio~.this' type of
development would present to people coming into the
c6mmunity. Although I am certain that the. Commission
will be told that this development, if allowed, would
be tastefully done, I think everyone can agree that a
development of this sort might be less desirable than
others would be.
The next major consideration that I think that the
Commission should weigh would be the effect of this
project development upon future developments in the
area. ~Assuming that there will be arguments presented
to the Commission on both sides of this particular
issue, I think a fairsu~ary of all the arguments would
be that this development, if allo~ed, would detrimentally
affect the development of adjoining property. This is
of course, an assumption on my part, but speaking
specifically on the part of ARC, I assure you that a
development of this sort allowed in this area, can and
will cause ARe to seriously reconsider the additional
development of their acreage in a manner that they had
originally contemplated.
This problem presents a clash of an individual use of
property as opposed to the com~nity good. As I see it,
the responsibility of this Co~ission, is to guard the
community interest and it appears to me, any n~ber of
factors dictate that the zoning change, to allow the
construction of the KOA, campground is' not in the communi ty
interest. I respectfully urge and submit these argu-
ments to 'the Commission for consideration in opposition
to the requested changee
Rt:cA SUbm.i tted ~
Bill paynN
BP/ml