Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous }' LAW OFFICES DILLON & GIESENSCHLAG, P. C. Metro Centre 3833\Jexas. Avenue -".:, ,,,"Ii )- DON DILLON TOM GIESENSCHLAG SAM SHARP STEVE SM ITH LARRY HOLT KEITH SWIM LES PALMER RUTH GARNER BRYAN, TEXAS 77801 August 31, 1982 Post Office Box 4067 Bryan, Texas 77805 713/846-1773 Ms. Diane Jones City Secretary for College Station P. O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77840 RE: Rezoning of 8.5 acres located north of the Inter- section of Texas Avenue and State Highway 6 Bypass from District C-l General Commercial and District A-PAdministrative. Professional to District A-P Administrative Professional Dear Ms. Jones: Please find enclosed our Written Protest to Proposed Rezoning in the above-referenced matter. This Protest is filed pursuant to Ordinance No. 850 and in compliance with your recommendations disc'ussed in our telephoneco'nversation of August 26, 1982. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, D I ~LO~........~.......:. GF]CHLAG, P. C . Xs. -Y;C/~ Les Palmer . ... .... 'M LP/dj Enclosure cc: John W. Haney ~~ City of College Station POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 September 3, 1982 M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DIAN JONES, CITY SECRETARY RE: PROTEST ON PROPOSED REZONING The proposed agenda for the council'meeting of September 9th includes consideration of a rezoning request relating to 4 tracts totaling approximately 8.5 acres in the Morgan Rector League. As of this date, I have received a formal document filed by John W. Haney, who is protesting the proposed rezoning of said property. His action is taken in accordance with (Zoning) Ordinance No. 850, I3-A.7., EFFECT OR PROTEST TO PROPOSED AMENDMENT, which states the following: "In case a protest against any proposed amendment to this ordinance be prese'nted in wri.ting to the City Secretary prior to the public hearing thereon duly signed by the owners of twenty per cent (20%) or more, either of the area of lots included in such proposed change, or of the lots orland immedi- ately adjoining the same and ,extending two hundred (200) feet therefrom, such amendments shall not become effec- tive except by the favorable vote of three-fourths (3/4) of all members of the Council. II . To satisfy the above requirement of Ordinance No. 850, approval of the rezoning will require at least five affirmative votes. Your agenda packets will con- tain additional information on this item from Jim Callaway. ~ J PLEASE RETURN TO ITV SECRETARY OFF1C! Petition . l; REC~~"~~ ])r;t 2 B 198tJ We, the undersigned, are opposed to the rezoning of 3.869JO acres south of Bernadine Estates fromAP (Administrative Professional) to Cl (General Commercial). Attached please find current considerations of December, 1984; Petition of May, 1984; Background Information of May, 1984; and additional considerations of May, 1 984 . Respectfully submitted: .lIt: ~.dfAd~. ~ S -t/Of ,#J~ ~/ {!~ SI /()~ JfJ;~ ~I} / r.- s ~ / /' (. \-/7; l , f-t. ,/ ) < ~ :1 ,f(., LA" ~ (/ ~ l . ~ \. .--,. , ' . /'/;.c.- /()&? /lli/{. /1.' I, I. -;> , , . ...' ~ 1 I '_- '7. 1 / 1/ ( I lie- Ii) 7 / ~/ [c.(i. .(^it \.. ~~ ,-,/ 11_ i 0~lv ~,~, e J ~ Ll t 11 I 1/"3 '>>J ' 7 ~ fJ-,/, (' '. J. J IS' n1~ GJ~! ('~RPcf Jtdtf'~ /; / I .s .7;lu~ ~, &111 ~~ ;?~ . II ff-. 7!U~ lC2 /1 ~ ft (.S I ',' n ,/ /I' c-ea II?- 7/l< -j! 'YLi -1' . L / 1/7 7# k2".: (' j- }" I /\ ,. II 7 )7/1 (/V_, IV'~. (t, S, ))\.';:, I ,.:' ( 'I ;../,.' 'i' _ I I j.. ~ -, 'f-~' .. J' ,~_' ....! """"'" \....:.) '\/ \ it; w\ \\~ / r-0~'i /lfr I~ ,52/-( c,g, ;~~ ~A ~a- 1 c\ r.- J.'I\(\" n C\ 1 .L j ~t , " ~ X-'\l j :i':-- <,\ ,I /) ~j " >:i--(1e tC/~ . , ~ J L7 <./'1 L / tJ z /1 / e~ I~A J C 1-/ , /0:2 ~ {JJL (2.-2, l'~ . ( l . ..'", .. ..,...,..... December, 1984 j Current Considerations 1. Traffic considerations continue to be of great concern to neighbors and the ~City of College Station as a whole. Accidents in this area were 17 in number for 1983 and are 16 at this present time. We understand that improvements are in the offing, however with such a congested area._ Therefore a commercial zoning (high traffic) would greatly increase the dangers at this area. 2. In rezoning this area we must be acceptable to "~" commercial establishment fitting in the commercial category. We do not know what is proposed and have found by prior experience that proposed plans do not always develop and land sales change situations. Considering that Ilany" commercial establishment might be built, we feel that this would not be an acceptable zoning for this area with regard to location and proximity to our homes and their value considered. 3. We feel also that if this portion of the land is rezoned commercial, the remaining A-P will soon be requested to be commercial. This would then bring commercial right to our back doors. A good deal of commercial land is currently already available in the city. 4. We respect the political pressures which the City of College Station is under concerning this area. We ask for your consideration in the preservation of our properties and the City of College Station. May, 1984 PET I T ION We, the undersigned, are opposed to the rezoning of a 6.9 acre tract of land located on the west side of State Highway 6 (East Bypass) south of and adjacent to the Bernadine Estates Subdividion, from Administrative- Professional District A-P to General Commercial District C-l. Background information and additional considerations are submitted for your review. ,.... ~~IV\U ~ ~4d:LJ a~j?tiJ 1 . . .#~ _/:a.01 ( L v<A. ... n ~--- ,/ 0' 't' .~' ~ ~~ 'l '-J " Cl~v~!//~vrLI _~(2f>~ {jJ ~ ~ .e1 ff- .!3iMd~ {U~~ ~~ ~ , .. I g/Mff ~ Address _ ,4 /" //j-74~ ~. 1:-. ().# J L S ~ ,(y /l-t./....e..- ItA HrLE Dk:\ 1/3 ;ryjt I. e .(;)-.,/, I'O-D ~~pO m~ LG 12. l /~I ~<~~tf?/ /16 ~ Ih::.. ''-7~ II . I / &:' ,,' ' It:ft/. //9'~~~ a. /02 /flb/Ju *l". ;r:;97U;1)J ~. lOt' )/J4( 0/1 /07 m1 f, j)i( /& y 911Ah~. I cfJ l( .111 -{ 'gQ 117 /YlA'l~; ffl1/. 1/7 J1iL.J.l/ fA- JOS' )~J~ ~'v. ( '" {"Jay, 1. ~b4 ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS The residents of Mile Drive realize that this land will develop. We are interested in a devleopment which would be compatible with our homes and the community as a whole. Please consider: 1. The traffic surrounding this site is, at best, dangerous at this time. Access to. this land (considering the by-pass access road to go to one-way and the division of Texas Avenue coming under the intersection-overpass) would not be easily obtained and would not be conducive to a high traffic area (C-l). 2. Due to the limited size of the area, no large facility for commercial use could be constructed (with parking area) without coming right up to our back door. 3. As brought out in the "history" rezoning of .this property to C-l would put us." and the city", right back where we were several years ago (proposed plan mayor may not develop, and land may be resold again). 4. We have contacted the City Planning Office and they were unable to give us information as to the type of commercial structure proposed for this site. 5. We have no information from the owner of this property as to what is being developed, and are, therefore, unable to address the effect on our homes with complete understanding. 6. We respect the owner's investment in this land. However, we ask consideration for our investment also. Our homes, on the conservative estimate, would well exceed $1,500,000. This is based on current square footage building costs and lot values. This is also an established neighborhood with most of us having lived there for 12 to 16 years. "7 . As has been brought out in previous city meetings, there is already a considerable amount of land zoned C-l and available in the city of College Station. 8. At present, we get a great deal of noise from trucks and other traffic on the bypass and Texas Avenue. This cannot be changed. We would like to avoid additional noise and/or all-night lights which would exist with a commercial establishment which is open evenings, nights, and weekends. This would detract from the value of our homes and the living conditions of our neighborhood. These considerations are submitted in hopes of reducing the amount of time required for presentation in the actual meeting. We, as residents will be present to answer additional questions and give help as we are abl~ at the meeting. If further information is desired, please feel free to contact us. We feel that A-P is a fair andEnuitable zoning for this l~nd (:lue to t ~f. '-' ..... r a l: lC, location, proximity to our homes, and enviroTh~ent. Please consider this request. Tha11k you for your time' and efforts. May, 1984 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. The majority of the residents on Mile Drive purchased or built their homes 8 to 16 years ago. Five homes have been built new. We purchased our homes with the consideration that the lands bordering our properties were R-I. 2. Se'veral times this land was proposed for rezoning. Basicially because the R-I property had been sold for commercial prices and the investors did not wish to lose money. 3. In 1978, the land was finally proposed A-P adjacent to our pro- perties and then commercial at the edge. We worked with the developer and agreed upon a "plan" which would be compatible with our homes (similar to the office park behind Culpepper Plaza on Puryear Street). At that time we asked the City Council if the rezoning could be conti.ngent upon the "plan" being developed as presented, and if the "plan" did not dev~lop, could the land revert to R-l zoning. The Council said this could not be done. Mayor Bravenec did, however, make the rezoning contingent upon a 25-ft deed-restriction set--back and said he would not sign the rezoning until this setback had been filed at the courthouse. The "plan" did not develop. In March, 1982, after the land had been re-sold again, the deed-restriction set-back was filed and the rezoning concluded. 4. In 1982, Mr. Haney proposed a 24-hour convenience/gas stop be build on this site. We did not feel this would enhance our neighborhood and property values, and did not wish to live with this at our back gate. It was also considered to be all rezoned C-l so that a prospective lumber yard could be located there. Considering the traffic, existing homes, and history of the land, the City Planning a.nd Zoning Commission initiated action which resulted in the rezoning of the land to A-P. The residence of Mile Drive concurred and supported this action. . , ""!.' I .. Ll I I I I , I I I 8 \ , i FIRST TRACT: TIeing all'. that certain ~(}t~!i51~ acre tract or parcel of land lying arid being si tuated in the Morgan Rector League, Brazos County, ',Texas, and being part of the 11.55 acre tract described in Volume 218, page 637, Deed Records of Brazos County, Texas, and'being more particularly described as follows:' . BEGINNING at the iron rod in the northeast right-of-Hayline of State. Highway No.6 marking the west coTner of the beforementioned 11.55 acre , tract of land, said iron rod being the south corner of Block 2 of the Bernadine Estates. Subdivision as shown on the plat.recorded in Volume 263, page 75, Deed Records of BrazoS County, Texas; , THENCE S 470 58.4' E along the beforementioned west right-of-way line for a distance of '302.34 feet to an iron rod at a fence corner for corner; 'THENCE N 430 10.5' E along a fence for a distance of 388. 60" feet to an ~iron rod for. corner; . THENCE N 090 58.3' W for a distance of 384.60 feet to an iron rod for corner in the southeast line of the beforementioned Block2.of the Bernadir Estates Subdivision; . THENCE S 42040.4' W along the beforementioned southeast line of Block 2 for a distance of 625.5 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING, containing ?'j.:61;~ acres of land more or less, as surveyed by B.. J. Kling in Ap'ril 1969 . SEC,OND TRACT: Be.;i:~ all that certain"€) ,"OU" acre tract or parcel of land lying and b~ing s ., t.ed in the 'Morgan Rector League, Brazos County, Texas a:p.d being P'ftPf the il.55 acre tract of land described in Volume 218, page 637, oil ;,<,~ Deed Records of Brazos County, Texas, and being more particularly de~':t'.ibed as follows: " . BEGINNING at an iron rod in the southeast'line of Block 2 of the Bernadine Estates Subdivision as shm<ln on the plat recorded in Volume 268, page, 75, Deed-Records of Brazos County, Texas, located N 42040.4' E a ,distance of 625.35 feet from th,e iron rod in the northeast right-of-way line of State HighwaY No.6 marking the west corner of the beforementioned 11.55 acre tract of land, said iron rod being the south corner of thebeforemen:: tioned Block 2; , . THENCE. S 090 58..3' E for a distance of 384.60 feet to an iron rod faT corner in a fence; THENCE N 430 10..5' E for a distance of 388.60 feet to an iron rod for coiner in the west .rightof-way line of the State Highway 6 east by-pass ; THENCE N 110 06..1' E along" the beforementionedwest right-of-way line of Stat.e Hi,ghway'6 east by-pass fora distance of 296.29 feet to an iron rod--for angle point; THENCE NOlo 48.6' W continue along said west right-of-Hay line for a , distance of 219..,78 feet to ,an iron rod for corner at a Gammon corner of the beforementioned Block 2 of the Bernadine Estates Subdivision; THENCE S 420 40..4' W along the beforementioned southeast line of Block 2 of Bernadine,:Estates for a distance of 564. 47 feet to the PLACE OF ' BEG1NNING containing 6)Qf1>'f acres of land more or less, as surveyed by B. J. Kling in-April 1969. , I'l' 1 ( t(, I ,( t~_ J t L l.Lt 't ' ,~! it!..!,.