The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMiscellaneous City of College Station POSTOFFICEBOX9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 November 2, 1982 MEMORANDUM TO: (3) (4) -(5) (6) (7) (8) (9) ( 10) (11 ) ( 12) (13) (14) FROM: Plannlng&.ZoningCommission E. Earl Merrell, Jr.., 110 Villa Marla Rd.".Bryan Proj ect Rev iew Comm l ttee.. .. . .. .~ Jim Ca}laway, Asst. Director of Planni ng~ E 1 rey'Ash, DlrectorofCapi tal Improvements Jim Behling, Chairman P&Z Other Staff: Harry Davis, Fire Marshall JanepKee, 'Zoning. .Official Joe Guidry, ElectrlcalSuperintendent Mac Allen, Director of Public Services Jim Mctord, Elec. Power Engr. BillCupp,GTE . D i ckWy lle,GTE Shirl ey.' .Vo]k, Planni'ng Technician SUBJECT: Site Plan- Cherry Street~partments -.82-534 TheP .R.C. met on>November2,1982~.torevi ew the abovementioned site pl an, and recommends the following '>chan ges:";'~ ( 1 ) (2) Includegenerallocatlonmapon slteplan. There isap'roblemwlth the sewer'"~~pac ity in thlsareaandproJectwillhave to "be c lear'edwith 'the EngineerJhg-.Bepa'rtment" and the Consu ltl ng. Eng'ineerbefore goingtoP&Z for review. .' .',>: A fire hydrant must belocated.wi~,hi n 300 feet of all parts of the building as the hose lays. . . i<),i' . '... .,.. A screening fence wi 11be required~,e~weenthisproJeCtand any adjacent developeds lng lefamllyprojectand;>mus t be.shownon tne:rev'i sed. site pI an. Furnisha>morecompr:ehenslve landscaping plan. Pl'anshown 'Tsmarginal.. Provi deaminimum of 50< feet to maneuver garbage truck to'dumpste:rwi th no.. obst ructions... An 8ft. setback lsrequlred "fromCherry Street. Show drainage plan and. clear throu'gh Engineering Departrnent. (Suggest professional engineer do.thestudy.) A61 'standupcurbwlll,.berequl red a round . the ent i reparklng area. Flrelanes(marked&deslgnated}arerequireddown the northwest side of the property.. Traffic movement on site is extremely marginal; reference parellel parking and howto,getoutofthese<spaces and get turned around to leave project. Verifycirculatlonisle 'widths. All parking spaces must. be marked orstrlped. Show.whatpercentageofslteis covered by building. FURNISH 10 COPIES OF THE REVISED PLAN BY 5:00P.M. NOVEMBER 12th TO BE INCLUDED ON NOVEMBER18'th AGENDA. changes to: the approved sitepl an.mustbecleared through the PI anning Department. City ot'. College Station POSTOFFICE'.BOX9960 1101 TEXAS' AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 February 1, 1983 MEMO TO FILE TheP. R:C. met on this date to discuss the plan for the Cherry Street Apartments as presented by E. Earl Merrill, which was recently denied by the Plannlng& Zoning Comml:ssion. The Clty Eng ineer, Da-vldPu llen,advi sed,that there would not be anyp'roblem wlththe sewersorwateravaLlabilltyln this area caused by an addition this small,accord'i ng to the consultants. Mr. Mayo&'Mr. Behling both stated that the plan proposed represented extreme over-use of the small lot. Mr. Mayo explaIned the City's position on thJsarea is that a recommendation to rezone the area toMediumDensityResidentia'lis,being made, as. the current zoning ofR-6 creates too much density for th is parti.cular area, and in fact,theentl reNorthgatear'ea needs to be down-zoned. Mr. t4errillaskedwhatcouldbe.approved, and Mr. Behling advised he could..notanswerthat:wlthout.seeinga plan, but he personally could not glvehlsapproval taa plan which included paving from property line to property line, and suggested a re-design of the project consisting of fewer units. Mr. Mayo advised that 2 parking spaces provJdedwou Id be preferre'd for each unit rather than the minimum requIred by ordinance due to the already troubled parktnglnthe vicinity. Mr. Merrill asked if aplanshowlng 10 units could be approved, and hewasadvlsedthat the P.R.C. will be wIlling to review any new project he~roposed. Attendingthismeetlng were: JlmBehling(Chairman.P&Z}, AIMayo (Director.. of Planning), David 'Pullen(Gity'Englneer}, Harry Davls (Fi reMarshal), 'Mac All en (Dlrector of Publ i cServ lees), Jim McCord (Electric Power Engineers), GTE Representat ive.,Shirley Vol k (Planning Technician) and Mr.Merrillandar~presentatlve. sJv ..a1IIIII MT'.and Ml's.Frank E.Lamb, .Jr. 409 Cherl"yStreet College Station, Texas 77840 ~anuary 13, 1983 TO: Members of the College Stat.ion Planning and Zoning Commi 5s.i on SUB'-"ECT: The 14 unitapa-rtment pl'oJectunder consideration to be built on two sides tifourhomestead. We would like to protesttheproposedproJect,orin'actany plans wh ichintend tousethesmallstT' ip ofl'andimmed 1ate lV b ehi nd our yaT'dfor.any pUl'poseatallexcept natul"aldrainage. The reasons weaT'e forced to oppose suchuseaT'e as follows: 1. A goodly pOl'tionof ..theNoT'thGateAT'ea dl'ains >downTauber St. thl'u OUT' val'dand thea/dJscent properties to the cl'eek. 2. Soft gT'Dundhas alwtiysbeen somewhat of apT'oblemwith no obstructions to the natural wate-r flow, becoming severe in blet weather. 3. Th e.. natura 1 water flollJ,hasalready been disturbed in this immediate ares.twice, oncebl.j.the.addition.o' tbeTimbe,.Ridge Apt.ltheir buildings, grades, parking lots and slabs, and again by allowing the ()r~~getwo sto,.y p.,.oJectto be built di,.ectlybehindout' house Cimtnediately behind the proposedsitenoblundeT' consideration. The: net result o.f the two disturbance. which haveall'eadytaken place isfhat, instead o,the< water being all()wed to drai,n into the creek na~~ral'ly the back hal' 0' our yard is becoming (with each d i s t ur bian c e)1 nc l' ea s i ngl yso f teran ds ta'J i ng s of t Ion g" eT' an d 1 on.g eT' · We Cire very much a'raid<that i'any'u.,.ther construction is allowed be-tween, out' ya-rdand the c'ree k thatourbac k yard wi 11 become a tlucigmit';e useful only 'Por-. groblingducks and mosq.uitos. Ifei.th,&r the builder or the City of College Station is willing to enter into a cont,.a.ct with us, assuming. all liability 'or cC)rrecting any.. Ulorseningo.p t.heconditions outlined above we. would have no obJectiontdo thispT'oJE!cton the gT'ounds of drainage. However,the-re is still one otbel' point to which we <must obJect in the st,.ongest possible 'terms. This proJect proposes to place a tblostOT"\JP1'oJectUlrapped around tUlosides of our y.aT'd as close as possible to theproperttJ line, with only asix-Poot fence to saperate the two propeT'ties. We need not pointou.tto.you that a six foot .pence in these c 1 osequaT$tersislud icrous ly inadeCluate to provide "privacv It fOT'pe1"manent residence against the c10nstant turmoil and noise represented by packing that many transient people and vehicles in such a small 81"ea.Thisis especially true when \Iou consider that the "pT'ivacy fence", at a range of .underten feet will do nothing to pT'ovide screeningf-romthesecondsto-r\Jwindows, doo1"s,wslks, etc.. The net result ofallowingatwosto'rY building to be built in such c.on-Finedt1.ual'tel's, under thecu'rrent privacy provisionsbJould be the complete andpeT'manent distruction of OUT' right to privacy in our home and most severely in our back. yard. ~,.JI' 802-S.34 " Based on the information given above.wel'espec:tfullyreq.uestthat no multi.....,pamilg structuT'ehigheT' than one sto.....'A beallobJed on the pT'opeT'tvinC(uestionandadditionally<thatno construction, .levation orsuT'facing' of.. any kind .be allowed on.that.poT'tion.of....thepT'opertg immediately between the back of OUT' property and' the creek. ) Incloseing let us ask.one Cluestion of each member of tbe board. Gentlemen, UJould eachoftjou 1 ike and,feelsec ure in your homes if you had to live,fT~Omnotdontllithaconstantlg c:hangingstream ofstrsngsT's lookingintoljoUT'windolJlsand yard ....fromtheiT' windows, a vantage point provided by the proximity of their "home" about which you can do nothing? Thank you for \Jour kind attention in this mattef'. Sincerely, 4~f.hJ,.~. /l1~. ~",.~ -(;':~~4A Mr. 'and Mrs. Fl'ankE. .'~ Lamb, J'r-;W' ;) \1'1 ,,\,tl" e~-s-.i~ '