Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous06/04/96 16:45 'C3`409 764 3496 DEVELOPMENT SVCS I~ 0 O 1 ~~~ ACTIVITY REPORT ~~~ ~~~~~e~xe~~~~xe~~e:~~s~~~~~~~~~xe~ TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX N0. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE.TIME. PAGES RESULT 6216 14043207027pp161 06/04 16:38 06'27 12 OK '~^;'?'J'J'J',',','J'J'J~J~J~J,,,~ UEitELf}F~hfEiv`6 ~EF2Ui~.ES /•? / I J•J•J / t J~J J J J-J~J •!•f /'/•J•J •! .;.,.,.,.,.J.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.J.J.J.J.J.J.J.J•J-J...J.J•J•J.J \.,.,•t•t•1•t.t.t.,•t.t.1.t•1.t•t.t. t•t•t•t •l•t•,•t•t •t•\•t• .?.,.,.,.r.J.J•J•,•J.,.J.J•J•!•J•J •!•J•S •J•J•!•J•J •/•J•I •I•J-J .,,,.,•t•~.t•••t•t•:•t•t•,•t•t•t•t•,•t•t•t•t•,nn•t•t•t•t•t•t•:•. GOLLE~E ~TATlQN, TEXAS X7$40 - J~rtiJ~~;'J~J~J~J~%J~Jd~J~r~J~J•!~; •J ~,,\.,.\.,.,.1.\-\.,.\.1. t.t.\.\.,.,.,.,.,.,. r.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,,.,•,.,,,.,.,., • ... ~ v ~ .... , t•t~t ...... . Facsimile Cover Sheet To: Company: Phone• Fax: From: Company: Phone: ' Fax: Date: Pages including this cover page: Comments• /~. a /~. L (40~} 764-570 t409) 764-3496 FAX J^ ii iJ TITLE SLIDE This request includes .property that was discussed twice in 1994 before the Commission and the Council. HISTORY MAP First request (June: and July, 1994) involved 15 acres at the southeast corner of Sebesta and SH 6. Was for C-1 General. Commercial. P&Z recommended approval. Staff recommended :approval to Council conditioned upon: the applicant submitting a larger rezoning request addressing buffering and step-down zoning issues. Council denied the request because of a large amount of opposition from nearby .neighborhoods and because there was no larger zoning.plan. Denial was made without prejudice and applicant came back with: another request in September, 1994. That request included 69 acres and was for a combination of commercial, townhome and multi-family zones. The Commission recommended denial. Again there was opposition. and concern about additional traffic. impacts. on surrounding neighborhoods. CC Development Policies subcommittee met three times to discuss the case (once with the developer .and once with representatives. of the affected subdivisions and once with staff). Council denied the request on 9'-22-94. At .the tmerezoning was being processed, CC was entering into. contract with HOK: for a new Comprehensive. Land Use Plan and Water and Wastewatrer Master Plan.:. Contract signed August '94 with anticipated completion fall '9S. HOK SLIDE OF % COMPLETE Project divided into phases:. Data gathering phase included public involvement through focus groups and one on one interviews withpublic officials and community leaders. It also included a review of existing studies and completing an inventory of physical and man-made features in the study .area. Large study .are includes the City and an area 4 miles beyond:. During .this. phase CC approved two additional amendments. to HOK's contract (one for facilities needs tudy and one. for a housing count. and. condition survey):. To date HOK has completed. all data collection for .the 20,000 acres within the City .and the 4 mile area outside with the exception of the .housing study which is 7S% complete. Have counted 20,000 dwelling units. thus far. Analysis. of Water/Wastewater systems is well underway. Enterring data into the water model and .have. developed an outline for the water section of the final report. Identifying service area connections for entry into the wastewater mndel and $0 % complete with digitizing the existing land use data for use. in the model. Over the next few weeks will be completing housing. condition survey, landscape values evaluation (looking at natural areas that may need to have special attention) and continuing. modelling of the infrastructure systems. Anticipating first-.Community meeting to review work to date and get feedback in early May... .Update orn HOK progress so P&Z and CC will realize that the City will not have a new Comprehensive Plan until sometime after. September. HOK will be looking specifically at the East By-Pass because they understand the sensitivities here. A review of specific zoning cases is beyond their scope of-services but :the project .manager was in antendance at one of the previous .hearing. on this case and I have discussed it in general terms with. him. We have discussed bufferring and even the idea of a parkway running along .behind the retail uses. The problem is as you move toward Woodcreek the subdivision is so close to the By-Pass that it makes a parallel roadway not workable. Are buffering solutions. Not any magdal solutions to this situation. There will always be areas like this where these conflicts must be negotiated and solutions found that are fair to the `landowners who want to develop while protecting the neighborhoods. 'That will always be a difficult thing to accomplish. HISTORY MAP SLIDE Staff supported 2nd proposed commercial zonings. That was. because the proposal included step down zonings to buffer the low density residential areas. This. request does not ncludethis. step down approach and places the R-1 adjacent to the C-l. The request is for 5.643 acres of A-P Administrative Professional and 34.020 acres of C=1 General Commercial adjacent to existing Woodcreek .and 22 acres of proposed R- 1. Staff is able to recommend approval of this only with the establishment of buffer areas or landscape reserves. The establishment of these buffers would constitute a change of conditions in the .area that would be a basis for a zoning change. Staff recommends approval of this request because .City's. current Development Policies support commercial land uses. at locations such as this. Policies state that commercial activities should be located at points of .high vehicular access. Defined as grade separations. along controlled access freeways and at intersections of aerterial and cohector streets. Changes. in the. Land Use Plan since the 2818 Study adoption.:constitute changes that.. justify thee. support for .commercial land uses here rather than just office uses as shown.. VACANT COMMERCIAL. PROPERTY MAP - ON WALL Currently there is vacant commercial property located along Texas Ave. , Wellborn Road, University and SH 6, Most of the .available property along, Texas and Wellborn is relatively small and would not support large users.. Larger commercial. lots are located along University and SH 6, but the commercial. lots on University are more restrictive as they are zoned C-B. SH 6 properties are. the only ones with enough. area to allow for larger scale developments. These properties are located on either side of this property under consideration and farther to the south in relatively undeveloped areas. This intersection has by previous zonings been. established as a commercial corner. FISCAL IlVIPACT ANALYSIS-FOR COUNCIL MEETING (+ $366,441) Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: RECS SLIDE 1. To insure that. the existing and proposed single family neighborhoods are protected, the C-1 zoningshould be conditioned upon final platting of the single family area. The C-1 zoning will not be effective until the R-1 development has final plats. approved and filed for record.: 2. 'There should. be 25 feet of additional landscape reserve adjacent to the proposed R-1 to increase the 1O foot buffer strip shown on the. proposed R-1. The landscape reserve. should be developed prior to any :development on the C-1 or A-P tracts and should include berms, trees and other plantings as well as a brick wall along the common boundary. 3. Along the remainder of the .common boundary between the C-1 and R-1, the landscape reserve .area should be extended to include the creek. If leaving the creek in its natural condition. is preferable., staff would :recommend that be done and be contained within the landscape reserve area. If the natural condition is not preferable, staff would recommend that it be improved and a minimum 25 foot landscape reserve be platted and :developed as in item 2 above.: This reserve should be in place prior to any commercial or A P development. 4. A 20 foot landscape reserve should be provided adjacent to the existing Woodcreek development along the common boundary of the proposed A-P. This. should consist of screen fencing. (which is required by ordinance) but should also consist of additional vegetation along the common ;property lines. This should be installed prior to any development on the commercial or A-P tracts. 5. The entrance drive for the R-1 should be a boulevard section as shown to lessen the impact of a single access subdivision.. However, as the remainder of the properi:y to the east develops, particularly if it is residentially zoned, there should be two access points on Sebesta to avoid a single access subdivision. Secondary access. is most important for efficient public .and emergency service, as well as for convenient traffic circulation... 6. The Project Review Committee,. in reviewing site plans. for the commercial and A- P tracts should use its discretion within the Germs allowed by the Zoning Ordinance to lessen 'as much as possible any negative impact of these developments on surrounding residential land uses. One of HOK's comments in our .discussions was that this case has really more to do with building and site design issues than zoning issues: Our PRC is a public meeting where site plans are reviewed. PRC does not. have full unbridled discretion but there are areas where it does have discretion and would use this in this rase. The'conditons of this rezoning however, strengthen their ability to use this discretion. 7. Access should be denied to Sebesta for the. commercial tracts. In the event that; the corner is platted and developed as a neighborhood convenience facility (i.e.; gas station, convenience store, cleaners, etc.) access should be considered to .Sebesta. This will allow the convenience,goods to be accessible to the surrounding neighborhoods. TRAFFIC ISSUES Traffic: Using: standard ITE (Instate of Traffic Engineers) trip generation numbers and reasonable assumptions of what could develop locally on this site, staff can estimate the traffic that would be generated at full build-out under various scenarios. If the entire 69 acres were to develop .residentially .(this excludes the Ledbetter tract which is not under consideration) it would generate approximately 2800 vehicles .per day. This traffic .would be dispersed across both Sebesta .and the Frontage Rd: Residential development would likely increase the cut-through traffic that has been a problem in the Emerald Forest Subdivision as a result of the conversion of the frontage roads to one-way. By comparison if the entire 69 acres develops as proposed, it would generate approximately 20,400 vehicles per .day. The net effect on surrounding residential areas would be about the same if access to Sebesta is denied from the commercial tracts. If the Ledbetter tract develops residentially (staff would not support (nor does the existing Land Use Plan) any uses other than residential. on his property) it will add an estimated 1880 vehicles per day to Sebesta Road. Sebesta,Road and the Frontage Road are both designed to handle these. increases and still maintain an acceptable level of service. Parkland.: There is an area shown as parkland which is not included in the rezoning as it is currently zoned. A-O. The Parks. Board will discuss this property and make their recommendation at the time of platting. NOTIFICATION; Legal Notice Publication(s): Advertised Commission. Hearing Date(s): 4-6-95 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: 4-20-95 Number of Notices Mailed to Property Owners Within 2.00' : 58 Response Received: Several Inquiries/Opposition LJ O cD C N cD n N oe S O N ••e ^ ^ ^ _ ~ ^_. a v c~ c~ 0 ca ~.n 1 ~- ~. _. ~~ ^e w r ® ^ s ^ q a 3 N O m c~ 0 3 3 m z v a 0 z 1 1 ^ ^ =; C sn i ...v 1 a~ ~~n. as ~~ ~~ ~,~°~`-~Dr 1 ~" ~Deveiopmeot Services - i~3ooi~a~ iui~ioc NE~~HB®~~~® G~ i t[7~71.7: June ~.~~5 January ~. I3evelogament Services - ~i~~a~ir€~; i~ivisic~r~ ~®r T ~~'i: N~ ac~es5 t~ abaSta ®ther 1' ~' 4 'Development Services - i;'iennin a~ivisio~~ T~~~ ~E~N~~G~: ^ ~aG~C tg A IVetAI "'~ e~& ~" ~~n~ L?eveiopenent Services - 3~iann€n H~avisisrs~ ®®®®®® ~ CRE~~ UFF~~o ~lat~rai state #ar it#e of the ®eed FBestrictle~ns 2 11/1/95 09:25 $~09 76~ 352 COLL STA PUB tiTL f~j 001 Post-lt°° brand fax transmittal memo 7671 #oipages 1b ~ From ~ ~ ~ , Co. L Co, ~ T V Depl.~ phone ~ „} ~~C - Y ~l b Fok ff ~! _7 ~u(~ J Fax N '['ho College Station Fire DepartmCnt upposes~the Proposed closing of Bent Yee Drive and Sebesta Rd , intersection due to the following concerns. Closing the intersection of SentTree and Sebesta rd. eib nor ~x~~lytwo minutes. th('h~s increase is • . Rosebud Court, Gree4wood, Driftwood, and Bent Tr Y PP wa of Fmeralcl due to fire ~yparatus sad other emergency vehicles required to enter Emerald Forest by y parkway, or Sebesta at Gre~enieaf rather than the Sebesta at Bent Tree route.) • Any increase ui respo:se time to an existing emergency greatly increase& the poficntial for the. emergency to be~ catastL ophic_ We have spent. a great deal of time insuring that we can respond to as much of our community as efficiently as possible. Our continued success literally is measured ~ thshou d enhance our to get to an emergency incident Changes in existing infrascNCture of this community .response time not diminish from it. Chapter 3 (Building Regulations} Section 3 D. (i) attd again in Chapter 4 (Subdivisions) Section S-G (5 - 6} of the College Station City Ord es a, p~~ ~~ ~ ~a~a for all cul-des ac sw'lthin the city limits of f a cul-dasao on the other hand req u Collage Station. 'Ihe value of these standards plays. a major tale for the fire departmm t~tbis e6sen a~to effic ent operatp~ons.t we operate. '174e ability. to maintain high mobility with large equip aratus m their movement and turn . :Closing Bent Tree will create a condit"son that limits emergency app amtus will place an . atoned capabilities. Placing this type of restriction on the operation of emergency app . .undo hardship on skis neighborhood concerning tiTe.protection, and emcsgeacy medical services. In conclusion it is our position that the intersectionT nfBenot'~main open lets us better serve tl7isle asset to the neighborhood that it serves. We feel that alto g comflt~untty- ff David Giordano Asst Chief Operations C S. Fire Deaprtatent ~" l~ JAN. 29. 1996 4:13PM P 1 FROM : MUNSCH PHONE N0. 12148557584 .. ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS MUNSCH ~AI~T 4000 FOUxI'AIIV PtacE 1445 ROSS AVENUE KOPF ~ I?,4I.I.AS, TExas ~saoz-279o 'I~tEPxoNS: (214) 555-7500 HARR & ~ Fax: (214) 855-7584 DINAN A PROFESSIONAL r -- ~ -- - CaRnoRa'noN To: Ms. Jane Kee Firm: City of College Station Fix #: {409} 764.3496 PLunr #: (409) 784-3370 From: Rob Baldwin Phone #: (214} 855-7582 Subject: Draft deed restrictions -Revised per Bill's comments Pages: 6 (including this cover sheet} Hard Copy of Document to Follow: No C/M#: 3021.1 Spacla! Measagea: Attached pleas@ fled the revised draft deed restriction for the 34-acre tract that Bob Bower is requesting to `iRezone. PI@ase 17ote that section A was changed to require mechanical equipment to be screened and section F was revised to ref@r@nC@ the City's. 9xistinp nuisance ~eAufati~ns. Pleases call mo with s~ny questions, comments or changes. Thanks. Confidentiality Expectation THE INFORMATION CONTA,MED M THIS FACSIMILE MESSAGE IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR TIC EMPLOYEE OR A(Dl?NT RE5PONSIBLE TO DELIVER IT TO TI3E INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OP 'PHIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY FROHIBITED. IF ' YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION 1N ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE, AND RETURN THE ORIGMAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADt?RESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. Should. you encounter any difficuities with the r®ception andlo~ quality of this transmission, please cant~oct our Telecommunications Department at {214f 880.7607. cis cs z W W ~' ;:.:.~w D O O Z O m a c~ W Z as ei r1 ~.. co as • ~~ 1 ®rase '' :~3= ~:~` 1 iii z ac W V Z O V D O O 2 O m 2 C3 W Z omoom v W a ~+ N O ~F+ N N V V 0 Z Z • F~ Z O N W d' W d' N LL O N o ~ . o Q o~ V • • W L~ LL m Y W W a' V ~ ~ f O ,.~ 3 ,_ 1 ^ ._ Q~ ^ e ^ ^ ~ e ^ ~ O ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS . .. , MUNSCH HARDT ~ °wa,~~ ? s~°~~~,, KOP F HARRN DI NA A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 1/23/96 Jane Kee City Planner College Station, `TX 77845. 4000 FOUNTAIN PLACE 1445 ROSS AVENUE DALLAS, TEXAS 75202-2790 TELEPHONE. (214)855-7500 FACSIMILE (214) 855-7584 WORLDWIDE WEB HOME PAGE HTTP://RA M PAG ES.O N RA M P. N ET /~ M U N SCH/ WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL 855-7582 RE Proposed deed restrictions. fora 34.1 acres in the area of Sebesta Road and the East Bypass Dear Jane Kee: Thank you .very much for attending January 16, 1996 meeting at Texas Digital Systems, Inc. where we discussed Bob Bower's proposal to construct a new headquarters on the above referenced properly. As promised, .attached please fmd a copy of the proposed deed restrictions for this property. As you can see,.. these. proposed restrictions limit the permitted uses as well as prescribe construction and development. standards for. this property. These restrictions are intended to be filed with the .County Deed Records and are. currently written. in such a way that the City of College Station is responsible for enforcement. Please note that the. City is reviewing these restrictions and will probably suggest more modifications. We welcome you comments on these proposed restrictions.. Also please find a summary of the January 16, 1996 meeting .for your ...information.. Please'let me l~no`v if you haze ar~y questions or co~r~rne us abut the Content of this summary. Again, thank you very much for taking .the time to attend the meeting last week.. Please call me at (214) 855-7582 if you. have any questions or comments. Ver truly yours, r illiam S. ahlstrom WSD:rbb cc: Council Member Crouch Jane Key P:\REAL\3021\1\[-IOMOW NR3.MER 1 rbb 1/22/96 January 26, 1996 ,~~ ~~/`~ ~i TO: Sebesta Road Area Representatives Bill Dahlstrom, Attorney Bob Bowers,. Texas Digital Systems From:. Skip Noe, .City Manager Re: Pending Application for Rezoning The purpose of this memo is to articulate the agreement that has been reached among the parties relative to the development of this tract by Mr. Bowers for the expansion of TDS and similar businesses in the future. 1. The case of M-1 zoning will continue as an interim zone. 2. Mr. Bowers willfile deed restrictions as interim protection to limit the potential land- uses on the site. A copy of the draft has been prepared and should be provided to the parties. The City under that agreement agrees to provide enforcement. 3. The staff has been directed by City Council to prepare a new.. zoning district which would be a variation of M-1 designed for high tech businesses similar to TDS and consistant with the land uses that are allowed under. the proposed covenants. All parties will be allowed to review the proposed zone prior to presentation to the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council to ensure that it meets the understanding herein. 4: Once the new zoning district has been approved, the parties agree that the subject property will be rezoned from M-1 to the new district. The deed restrictions would be eliminated at that time. This is my understanding of what has been discussed. All of this would be subject to approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. If this reflects the understanding of all of us, I will have it drafted in the appropriate legal format. I look forward to hearing from you on this matter. Skip Noe City Manager cc: Jane Kee Nancy Crouch Lynn McIlHaney FROM MUNSCH JAN. 25. 1996 10:15AM P11 PHONE N0. ~ 1214E5575E4 NAME ADDRESS P)ETONE NO. Bill Dahlstrom 4000 Fountain Place 214/855-7582 .1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, TX 75202-2790 Wayne Steelman 9273 Brookwater Circle 409193-5865 College Station,, TX 77845 Curtis C. Stauffer, M.D. 9206 Sunlake Ct. 409!693-3588 College Station, TX 77845 Col. and Mrs. R, E. Wilson 9245 Brookwater Circle 4091693-5055 College Station, TX 77845 Sherry Ellison 2705_ Brookway' Dr. 409!696-6793 College Station, TX 77845 Bab Long 2612 Sandlewood Ct. 409!764-4553 Co1l~ge Station, TX 77845 Larry Teverbaugh 9225 Brookwater Circle 409!696-1616 College Station, TX 77845 Judi Bigda 2205 Bent Oak 409!696-5308 Cotiege Station, TX 77845 Jane Kee City l?lanner 409!764-3570 City ofCoIlege Station Wayne T, Rufe 9255 Brookwater Circle 409/764-8382 College Station, TX 77845 Keith Kutler 111 i BriarcreSt Dr. 409!776-1111 Bryan, TX 77802 Bob Albanese 9407 Scarborough Dr. 409!764-1721 College Station, TX 77845. Rob Baldwin 1445 Ross Ave., #4000 2141885-7503 .Dallas, TX 75202-2790 Craig Hall 1702 Amber Ridge College Station, TX 77845 Stacy Gunnels 1007 Howe College Station, TX 17845 Ray Marlyn 7803 Appomattox 409!693-9106 College Station, TX 77845 Susan Clegg 9002 Sandstone 409/696-7691 College Station, TX 77845 P:IREALI3 0211 I IA T"CEN D 16. L ST 1 kjg 1!1')/96 ~(r ~ ~ (~ 9'` 1 r~ ~ ~ -~--- i ~- --(Do ®•> CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I . Post Office Box 9960 1101 'texas Avenue College Station, Texas ?7842-9960 (409) X643500 G ~~ ~ ~~9~ March 8, 1996... 1VIr. William S. Dahlstrom Munsch Hardt, Kopf, Harr & Divan i 4000 Fountain lace ~ 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202-2790 Re: TDS Rezoning in College Station Dear 1VIr. Dahlstrom: Pursuant o our telephone discussion, I have drafted the release provision to be added to the restrictive covenants that are to be filed on the tract of land owned by Mr. Bowers. Please review it, and if it meets with your.. approval, incorporate it into the restrictive covenants. I have completed the rezoning ordinance and sent it to Jane Kee four inclusion on the Council agenda. Jane and I agree hat it would be -best for you to submit the final:- restrictive covenants to the tall with the platting of the property. At the same time you can discuss with staff during the .platting process the amount of property to be dedicated to the City to give it a property interest sufficient to enforce these restrictive covenants. I am sure you are aware that the property can either be dedicated by plat or deed and you can discuss this with the Planning Department as well. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free'to contactme. The release language follows hereinbelow: ` '', RELEASE The City by .this Agreement does not consent to litigation, and the City hereby expressly revokes any consent o litigation that it may have granted by the terms of this Agreement, charter or applicable state law. The rrwlc:/mr-ap96/tdsreldoc FI®ene of Texas ASM tlniverslty ;~ Letter to Mr. Dahlstrom March 8,1996 Page 2 property owner, -his successors, .heirs :and assigns who take any interest in the property that is subject to these deed :restrictions, hereby .agree to release, relinquish. and discharge the City, its officers, agents, and :employees from all claims, demands, and: causes of action, including the ', cost of defense thereof, that is caused by or alleged to be caused by, arising out of, or in connection with, the City of .College Station's enforcement of these restrictive covenants. This release hall .apply :regardless of whether said claims, demands, and causes of .action area covered in whole or in part by insurance and regardless of.whether such damage was caused in who-le or in part by the negligence of the City: Yours sincerely, ~~~r~~~ ~>rn-~ Roxanne Nemcik Senior Assistant. City Attorney ~ RN`.rrw I I rrw/c:/mr-ap96/tdsreLdoc FEE-15-1996 1Ea12 FROM FILL LETEETTER IA i~ifY~a IDe I~bett~t TO 14097643496 Pa01 fax (~ FAX TO: CITY QF COLLEGE STATION PLANNING 8~c ZONING COMMISSION ATTN: Jane Kee / City of Cogege Station Planning Dept. @ {409} 7b4349b Total No. Pages {indudingthis Cover Page: t pie PP ~~ e fir, FROM: WiI[iam D. Letbetter, Ph.D. W .~~. DATE: February i 5, 1996 RE: Rezoning Request {City of US Case No. 96-) 00) Only upon receipt of a "Notice of Public Hearing" {dated 1 / 19I9b} on January 22, 199b from the City of College Station did 1 become aware of the above•referenced .matter. I, at least initially,.. am representing the interest of my family (Letbetter} who owns the 4 j + acres of {A -O}-zoned property east o€, immediately ad}acertt to, and between tFte parrs[ proposed for rezoning and Foxfire, and this matter is of particular personal and fnancial interest to us. Fortunately, since that time, all paRles who appear to have interest In the outcome of this hewing have been most cooperative in bringing me up to speed on the relevant details. For that I _am rnost gratefu) to the following peoples Sabine Kuenzel and Jane Kee of the City of College Station Planning Division; Skip Noe. of the. City of CoI[ege Station; Ray Martin, Chairman of the East6ypass Homeowrtes3 Cooperative; and, finally, Dr. Robert Bower, CEO of Texas Dlgltal Systems and his Counsel, William S. llatrlstram. From them, I have teamed that, at this point, most {if not ail} parties who have expressed an interest in this. rezoning matter have reached a consensus that the proposed change in zoning of the 34.1 subJect acres to M-1 Planned lndunrlal 'with voluntary deed restrictions, which will subsequently become a new zoning category ratted, perhaps,. "R Bt Q'° upon appropriate action at a later. date by the City of College Station, is acceptable. In ~ener 1, we also can accept this general conceal Qf a new "Mixed-Use" zoning dassiflcation. However, I do express a genera[ cancem ,about the dangers in pre-approving an °'as-yet-not-clearly-deflned° zoning entity. I'm concerned also about the fact that there apparently is still neither a completed Comprehensive Plan from HC+K nor an approved one by the C;Ity. It would seem, on the basis of what Information l have received, Cha[ if our property likewise could eventually be rezoned: to, at least, the same mixed-use category as propncpd for the _ad)acent property under.. consideration here, our future personal and financial interests would be safeguarded and preserved as well as those of the other .parties implicated here tonight. Thanks for your consderation of our concerns. 02!15/96 10:19 '~ OCEAN DRILLING f~j001 2907 Adrienne Drive College Station, TX 77845 February 15, 1998 City of College Station Planning and Zoning Commission City Hall 1101 Texas Avenue S. College Station, TX 77840 Via Fa ~ 64-3498 Re: Request to Rezone 34 acres at Hwy 6 Bypass 8~ 5ebesta Road Comments for2115/96 Public Hearing Dear Commissioners: This is to express my opposition to the. request to rezone 34 acres of la«d at the Hwy 6 Bypass. and Sebesta Road in College Station to "Planned Industrial." Many residents .have invested in homesites in the adjacent area based on the zoning specifications in effect, and a change to the zoning. criteria would alter the nature of their residential environment. !t would also affect neighboring facilities, including a recreational. site and an existing church. The issue is whether the City of College Station intends to honor their original zoning commitment and the good faith investment of those who would be potential neighbors. The request for rezoning keeps resurtacing, in spite of continued objections from concerned citizens. Please vote NO to this request and resolve this conflict once and for a1l_ Respectfully yours, ~~'~.~~ Linda K_ Norton l ~~ j, f t °~rv ~~_ ,, ~•~ CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI~I ~'~ LEGAL DEPARTMENT / POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77842-9960 (409)764-3507 MEMORANDUM TO: Jane Kee, City Planner Skip Noe, City Manager FROM: Roxanne Nemcik, Senior Assistant City Attorney RE: TDS Rezoning -Covenants and Restrictions DATE: February 15, 1996 ~~ QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether the City can enforce private deed restrictions if the property owner designates and authorizes the City to do so. FACTS: Texan ®igital Systems is a .company .that currently operates a business in College Station. It's owner, Mr. Bob Bowers, owns a parcel of property along the bypass of approximately 34 acres and wishes to relocate and consolidate his business at this site. This parcel is currently zoned R-1 and A-0. Bowers has filed an application to rezone this property from.-the current classifications to M-1. The adjacent property owners are concerned about the compatibility of adjacent uses in having M-1 abut up to R-1. The applicant is willing to file deed restrictions on his property addressing public concern and to leave the creek area as a natural reserve, thus creating a buffer zone .between':. the residential property and the M-1 zone. Additionally, the applicant has indicated a willingness to down zone his property from M-1 to a new district zoning classification Ghat. is currently being drafted by the Planning Department that would be the substantial equivalent of the M-1 zoning wi h deed restrictions and would be more compatible zoning district abutting up to residential property. js/c/feb96/tds.doc Jane Kee Skip Noe February 15, 1996 Page 2 DISCUSSION: 1. Who can enforce restrictive covenants? Generally, restrictive covenants can. only be enforced by parties to the restrictive covenant or agreement, or by those who can prove that .the. covenant was imposed on land for the benefit of iand .owned by them. Baker v. Alford, 482 S.W.2d 9~8, 909 (Tex. Civ. App. -- Houston [1st .Dist.] 1972); Davis v. Skipper, 83 S.W.2d 318 (Tex. 1935); see generally, 51 A,L.R. 3D 556, SECTIOnI 4(a)~. The right of a person not a party to a restrictive covenant or agreement to enforce it depends upon the. intention of the parties `- that is, where the restriction. is created by deed, the intention of the grantor and the .grantee -- in imposing it. Interstate Circuit, Inc.. v. Pine Forest Country Club, 409 S.W.2d 922, error ref. n.r.e. (Tex. Civ. App.. -- Houston [1st Dist] 1966, r.n.r.e.). In order to confer a right of enforcement upon one other than a party to the agreement, it .must appear that it was.. intended to create a servitude or right which would inure to the benefif of the Land acquired by,them_ Interstate Circuit, Inc. V. Pine Forest Country Club , 409 S.W.2d 922, 926-27 citing Davis v. Skipper, 83 S.W.2d 3.18 .(Tex. 1935). In the absence of proof either that the plaintiff is a party to the covenant or that: he is an intended beneficiary because the restriction benefits his land, the. covenant is considered a personal. rather than a' real covenant. ld. at 926, Baker v. Alford, 482 S: W.2d at 909. 11. The distinction between "real" and "personal" covenants -The primary. distinction between real and personal covenants is that real covenants run with the land, binding. the heirs-.and assigns of the covenanting parties, and personal covenants do not. In order to "run with the land", a covenant must be made by parties in privity of estate 2 at the time the. conveyance of property is made.. Tarrant App. D. v. Colonial Country Club, 767. S.W.2d 230, 235 (Tex. App. -- Fort Worth 1989, no writ); Clear Lake Apts: v. Clear Lake Utilities, 537. S.W.2d 48, 51 .(Tex. Civ. App. -- Houston [14th Dist.]), modified on other grounds, 549 S.W.2d 385 (Tex. 1.977). In Texas, to establish a covenant that runs with the land the requirements are: Annotation, Comment Note -- Who may .enforce Restrictive Covenant or Agreement as to Use Of Real Property. 2"Privity of Estate" means that there must be a mutual or successive relationship to the same rights of property. Westland Oil Development Corp. v. Gulf Oil, 637 S.W.2d 903,.910-11 (Tex. 1982). js/c/feb96/tds:doc Jane Kee ..Skip Noe February 15, 1996 . Page 3 1. .there must be "privity of estate" between the parties to the agreement; 2. the covenant must relate to something in existence, or specifically bind the parties and their assigns; 3. the covenant must touch or concern the land;3 4. it is intended by the original covenanting parties that the restrictive covenant run with the land;4 5. the successor to the burden has notice. Unless all of these `requirements are met, the covenant cannot run. with the land and cannot bind subsequent purchasers.s On the other hand, personal covenants bind. only the actual parties to the covenant and those who purchase the land with notice of the restrictive covenants, if the restrictions concern land or its use. Frey v. DeCordova Bend Estates Owners Assn, 632 S.W.2d 877, 879 (Tex. App. -- Fort..Worth 1982), affd, 647 S.W.2d 246 (Tex. 1983). However, -the #act that restrictions are based upon personal. covenants does not affect their validity. Tarrant App. D. v. 'Colonial Country Club, 767 S.W.2d at 235. Rather, it determines vvho is bound by the restrictive covenant,; not whether the covenant is valid, Id. Thus, in cases where covenants are personal rather. than real, to ensure subsequent purchasers are bound by the restrictive covenants,. ..they must take the property with. notice of the covenant or servitude.6 Id.; Col um v. Neuhoff, 507 a.V1/.2d 920 (Tex Civ. App. -- Dallas 1974, no writ}. 3The term touch and concern has been .interpreted as (1) affecting the nature, quality or value of the thing independently of collateral circumstances or (2) if it affects the mode of enjoying it or (3) if the. promisee's legal relations in respect to that land are increased -- his legal interesf as owner rendered more value by the promise. Id. at 911.. 4lntent of the parties is determined from the language of the deed itself. Jim Walter Homes v. Youngtown, Inc_, 786 S.W.2d 10, 12 (Tex. App. -- Beaumont 1990, no writ). 5lnwood Homeowners' Association v. Harris, 736 S.W.2d 632, 635 (Tex.. 1987); Billington v. Riffe, 492 S.W.2d 343, 345-46 (Tex. App. -- Amarillo 1973, no writ); .Jim Walter Homes v. Youngtown, Inc., 786 S.W.2d 10 (Tex. App. -- Beaumont 1990, no writ}. 6Notice, in law, is of two kinds, actual and-constructive. Constructive notice is implied by law from duly recorded instruments or from the possession of land. Sickles v. White, 66 Tex. 178 (1886}; Westland Oil Development Corp. v. Gulf Oil, 637 S.W.2d at 911. Actual notice. can be of two kinds, express and implied'. Id Express actual notice, is express knowledge of a_facta Woodward v. prfiz, 237 S.W.2d 286 (1951)... Implied actual .notice or inquiry notice is an inference of fact. When a person. has knowledge of such facts as would cause a prudent man to make further inquiry, he is chargeable with notice of the facts, which by use of ordinary intelligence, he would have ascertained. Flack v. First National Bank of Dalhart, 226 S.W.2d 628 (Tex. 1950). js/c/feb96/tds.doc Jane Kee .Skip Noe February 15, 1996... Page 4 lll. Exceptions to the. General Rule Concerning Enforcement of Restrictive Covenants a. Governmental. entities There are two Texas statutes in which the legislature has recognized public interests in. enforcing restrictive covenants without having a property interest or owning a property that is an intended beneficiary: The TExAS t_OCAL GovERNMENT Co~E7 and THE GREENBELT AcT8. Through these statutes .the legislature authorizes .the designated governmental entity the authority. to enforce restrictive covenants on private land even .though. they do not have a concomitant property .interest. Consequently, the legislature has carved out an exception to the. common law and allowed municipalities without zoning ordinances with a population of 1.5 million or more to enforce restrictive covenants as if they owned benefited property. Similarly, THE GREENBELT ACT affords landowners the right to have their property taxassessedaccording to the act if they restrict the use of their Land ao scenic, park and recreational use and incorporate the language. of article 7150n and subchapter F .into the deed restrictions., Texas courts. have held such a reference to the statute as sufficient to manifest the parties' intent o create, and the terms necessary. to create, a valid and enforceable legal covenant. See, Tarrant App. D. v. Colonial Country Club, 767 S.W.Zd 230 (Tex. App. -- Fort Worth 1989,.. no writ). It should be noted that the court, withouf expressly articulating, infers that the state has acquired a right in the property by virtue of affording ahe owner a reduced tax assessment. This case is distinguishable from our rezoning case for two reasons:' First, the legislature has' not specifically authorized a city of our size the ability to enforce deed restrictions, and second, the GREENBELT AcT does not apply to municipalities. My research ..has not. uncovered a Texas case that addresses the. issue in this memorandum -- Does a municipality have legal standing to enforce deed restrictions if they are named as the enforcing party in deed restrictions by parties to the restrictions but do not own benefited. property? It is unclear. If ahe courts decided the issue in the affirmative, it would be on the theory of giving effect to the intention of the parties. On the other hand, it would be just as likely that the court could .determine the City does not .have standing to enforce -these restrictions absent a property interest to the property subject to the restriction or benefited by them. TEX. LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION230.001 ET SEQ.-- ENFORCEMENT OF LAND USE RESTRICTIONS CONTAINED IN PLATS AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS (VERNON SUPP. 1995), 8TEX. TAX CODE ANN. SEC. 23.82(C) (VERNON 1992) js/c/feb96/tds.doc Jane Kee Skip Noe .February 15, 1996 Page 5 b. The Texas Property Code SECTION 202.004(8) of the TEX. PROP. CODE (VERNON 1995) allows "a property owners' association or other representative designated by an owner of real property may initiate, defend, or intervene in .litigation. or an administrative proceeding affecting the enforcement of a restrictive covenant or the protection, preservation, or operation of the ~~ property. covered by the. dedicatory instrument . Under this section the property owner could designate the City as its representative to enforce the deed. restrictions by expressly stating so and referencing the above-mentioned. section of the Property Code. CONCLUSION: The City can enforce deed restrictions in this case by being named in the restrictive covenants in one of two ways: 1. Name the City as the designated representative under the PROPERTY' CODE SECTION 202.004(b) in the restrictive covenants. Under this method, the City does not have to have a property interest. However, the problem with this option is .that until the owner sells or conveys any of the property, the deed restrictions could be considered ex paste and unenforceable because as sole owner of the restricted property he can modify or remove the use restrictions at will. See e.g., Burns v. Wood, 492 S.W.2d 940, 943-44 (Tex. 1973). 2. Name the City as the enforcing entity in the restrictive covenants and either (a) convey a small parcel of land to the City so that it becomes a party to the restrictive covenants.. by virtue of the conveyance of a piece of the property or (b) specifically state that the restrictive covenants are to benefit the adjacent property that the City awns as park land. The most conservative method to ensure that the City would obtain legitimate enforcement authority of the restrictions would be to use method No. 2 above and have the owner convey a small parcel of the property to the City. In this way the owner has made a conveyance of the property, thus ensuring that the restrictive covenants are binding upon him and the City has a property interest and can enforce the restrictions. Finally, the enforcement. of deed restrictions by a municipality is a proprietary and not a governmental function. Cf. City of Houston v. Muse, 788 S.W.2d 419, 422 (Tex. App. -- Houston [1st Disf ] ~ 990, no writ). As a result, it would behoove the City. to ask the js/c/feb96/tds.doc Jane Kee Skip Noe February 15, 1996 Page 6 property owner to release and indemnify us for the enforcement of the deed restrictions. F2N:jls js/c/feb96/tds.doc a 'Meeting with Bob. Bowen and East. Bypass. Area Property :Owners and Homeowner's Associations Tuesday, January 16,1996 7:30 - 10:00 PM Texas. Digital Systems' .Offices The. purpose of this meeting ; vvas to alley Bob. dower tQ present .his proposal for a new headquarters for Texas Digital Systems, Inc., on a 34-acre parcel east of -the East Bypass and south of Sebesta Road, to the surrounding property owners and Homeowner's Associations. The meeting was facilitated by City Councilmember Nancy Crouch, representatives from the Woodcreek, Emerald Forest, Foxfire Stonebridge, Shadowcrest and Amberlake neighborhoods and. representatives of the owners of the subject property participated in the meeting. Jane Kee, the City Planner for College Station and twa staff planners also attended this meeting. A complete list. of the..participants can be found attached to this document. The meeting began with. Councilmember Crouch setting the agenda and. ground rules for .the current meeting and. by Ms. `Crouch reviewing the outcomes of the. first meeting with the neighborhood representatives, .which was held in June of 1995.. In the previous meeting, the neighborhood representatives determined that the following uses were acceptable on the subject parcel: l . The land uses should reflect the uses listed in the HOK Plan. 2. Planned .Unit Development (PUD) with patio homes or single-family townhomes 3. . M-1 Light Manufacturing 4. Government Dses 5. Churches 6. Service uses a. .daycare b. dry cleaner c. video stare. d. pharmacy e. quality restaurant 7. Light Retail 8. Retirement housing 9. Professional offices The group also reached consensus that the following uses were unacceptable at this location: ®RAFT January 22, 7996 i ~ . 1. Automotive body shop 2. Apartments 3. Large. retail .(such as a Wal-Mart or Office Depot) 4. Auto dealers 5. Oil field supplq/pipe laydown yard 6. Night Club 7. Service Station CRAFT January 22, 1996 The meeting was then turned over to Bill Dahlstrom who discussed that a rezoning request has been filed. for the property and that time is bf the essence for getting this project under. way.. Mr. Bob Bower then. explained to he group what: Texas Digital Systems ("TDS") did and provided a brief description of the history of the company and a summary of the products the Company designs. and assembles. The,participants were thengiven a tour ofthe existing facilities. Once the tour was .completed, Mr. Bower's architect, Bill Scamardo, showed the participants a model of the proposed technology park and renderings of what TDS' new buildings would look like. The participants were invited to ask questions about the proposed project. Mr. Bower then .initiated a discussion with the property owners' regarding the deed restrictions he was. willing to place on the. property. The proposed deed restrictions would limit permitted uses and establish architectural and operational requirements. Mr. Bower also promised to keep a significant "no- build" area between his proposed. project and the homes that back up to this project.. Mr. Bower agreed to sell-a portion of the no-build area to the adjacent'property owners if there is interest in ..the proposal. and if the property owners agreed to erect a fence'between the two uses... Councilmember .Crouch then opened the discussion on the merits of ;the proposed project. Generally, everyone was supportive of the project itself, but there was agreement that the residential property owners did not trust the City's development system to guarantee that the project would be built as promised, if at all. Mr. Martyn expressed his opinion that no rezoning should be approved: before the.:. Comprehensive Plan, currently being prepared by HOK, was adopted and the new Mixed-Use zoning classification.. was developed. Other issues .that the surrounding property owners had concerns about included: 1. Who. was going to guarantee that the. offered deed. restrictions would be enforced? Would the City be responsible for the. enforcement, or would the property owner be responsible? i DRAFT January 22, 1996 2. The traffic circulation issues in the .area must be addressed. It was suggested that the Technology Park construct an additional access point. from the Bypass service road, which would be in addition to the access: point from Sebesta Road. There was also a discussion of techniques to "calm" the cut-through traffic that residents '~ of Emerald Forest are now, experiencing. 3. There was concern aboutthe development ofthe front half of the propertry. This .property is not part of the current rezoning'request or development plan. It was suggested that he development of the back part. of the property would set the I' "tone" for the development of the front part. 4. There: was also a concern "that: this rezoning. would set a precedent for the 1 remainder of the property along the Bypass. 1 5 . Questions.. as to the definition of "mixed-use" development were also raised. The definition of mixed-use that was presented by HOK was read to the audience.. 6. One member of the audience wanted to know ifthe use of the project would be environmentally friendly and if there would be toxic chemicals used on the site. Mr. Bowen told her that no' toxic chemicals would be used in this location. 7. Finally, the audience questioned. whether any .agreement reached would be enforceable in the future. When asked what they liked about the project, -the audience stressed that they liked the proposed plan and that this plan. was much better than any other development. proposal that has been presented for this property. There was a consensus that high~technology use was acceptable for his property, and that Mr. Bower ran a business that .was responsible and cared about the .community. Finally, the audience hoped that the. quality of the. proposed plan would set the tone for quality development for the front parcel and for other properties along the Bypass. '..The audience requested that the deed restrictions be available for review prior to the rezoning hearing. Mr. Bower assured everyone'that each participant will be sent a copy of the proposed deed restrictionsprior. to the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. ~i I The neighboring property owners suggested that .:they could:. support the proposed plan if the following conditions could be met: 1. That enforceable deed. restrictions were prepared and recorded- with the .County Deed Records.. 2. The existing traffic .problems should be addressed. i ®RAFT January 22,1996 3. The owner agrees. not to oppose a future City initiated rezoning of the property if '' - 'the proposed plan is not begun within a specified period of time. 4. The "no-build" area must be maintained by all future owners of lots within the technology Park. The final conclusion was that the .proposed plan was good, but the neighboring property owners distrust the rezoning and development process. P: \REAL\3021 \ 11RES ULTS2. DOC 1 rb 1/21/96 i II I ;a z Meeting with .The East ..Bypass Development Group and Adjacent Homeowner's Associations Tuesday, June 27, 1995 7:00 - 9:.00 PM College Station City Hall The purpose of this meeting was to initiate a dialogue between the owners of the property on the northeast corner of Sebesta Road and the East Bypass and the. representatives of the residential subdivisions located adjacent to the property. Another purpose. of the meeting was to get all parties to agree on the key issues that should be considered in the development of this property. l ~' The meeting was facilitated by Cit}= Council Mer~~be~ Nancy Croach, repr.~sertatives from the Emerald Forest, Foxfire, Stonebridge, Shadowcrest and Amberlake neighborhoods and representatives of the owners of the subject property participated in the meeting. A complete list of the participants can be, found attached to this document. .~ ..~ The group identified 15 issues that should be addressed when the property is developed. These .~ issues were narrowed by group consensus to the five (5) most important issues. The five. most important issues are: 1. The property should be developed according. to the planned balance of land uses that will be reflected in the Comprehensive Plan being prepared by HOK. 2. The interests of all citizens. of the City should be considered when this property is developed. 3 . The .property should. be developed to .reduce the effect of pollution on adjacent properties. This pollution includes light/glare, air pollution and noise pollution. 4. The ultimate use of the property should preserve the .property values of the ad,~acent .•es.w~nt.al areas. 5. The development of the property .should be sympathetic to the traffic impacts on surrounding. areas. These traffic impacts can include: a. The time the .traffic visits .the :site; b. The amount of traffic (density) attracted to the site; c. The type of traffic (criminal activity, teenagers);,. and d. The. frequency of the traffic. The participants also listed. the land uses that would be acceptable and unacceptable on the site. The acceptable uses included: 1. The land uses should reflect the. uses listed in the HOK Plan.. 2. Planned Unit Development (PUD) with patio. homes or single-family townhomes 3. M-1 Light Manufacturing 4. Government Uses 5. Churches 6. Service uses a. daycare b. dry cleaner c. ~~iden store d. pharmacy. e. quality restaurant 7. Light Retail 8. Retirement housing 9. Professional offices The following uses were suggested to be unacceptable at this location: 1. Automotive body .shop 2. Apartments 3. Large retail (such as a Wal-Mart or Office Depot) 4. Auto dealers 5. Oil. field supply/pipe laydown yard 6. Night Club 7. Service Station.. The group agreed that the meeting was constructive and worthwhile. The group agreed to meet again once the HOK Plan has been presented which is currently scheduled to occur in mid to late August. FROM ~ MUNSCH JAN. 19. 1996 2:52PM P 1 PHONE N0. e 1214E5575E4 Ar1~7reh~7r5dt Cve.:~5c~o[e5 MUNSCH HA12DT 4000 FOUNrAIN PLACE ] 445 Ross Avl;rrua ~OPF DALLAS, TExA3 75202-2790 TECEPHOxI:: (214) 555-7500 HARK & FAX: (214) 855-7584 DIVAN January 19,1996 A PROPE3510NAL CORPORATION ~^ To: Ms. Jane Kee Firm: City of College Station Fsx #: {409} 764-3496. Phone #: {409} 764-3570 From: Rob Baldwin Phone #: (2 i 4) 855.7582 Subject: Draft deed restrictions and meeting summary Pages: 10 (including this cover sheet) Hard Copy of Document to Follow: No C/M#: 3821.1 Special Messages: Attached piease find the draft deed restriction for the 34-acre tract that Bob Bower is r®quesfing to rezone. Please also find a draft summary of the meeting: we held at Bob's office Last Tuesday. Please coil me with any questions, comments or changes. Thanks. Confidentiality Expectation THE 1NFORMATiON CONTAINED IN THIS FACSIMILE MESSAGE IS PRNILEGBD AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATEON INTENDED ONLY FOR TF~ USE OF THE INDMDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF T1iiS MESSAGE I3 NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT. OR THE EMPIAYEE OA A('rENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELIVERIT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYINC'ir OP THiS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE, AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THEAI30VE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU, Should you encounter any difficulties with the reception and/or quality of this transmission, please contact our Tel®communicatinns Department at I214T 880-7607. ~~.. CRAFT Jaauary 22, 1996 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF BRAZOS This instrument was acknowledged. before me on , 1996 by Robert Bower, Jr. an individual." Name My Commission expires: P:\REAL\3021\1\DEEDRESI.DOC 2 RBB/kjg 1/19/96 I i i { j DEED RESTRICTIONS Page 5 i ZONING DLSTRICT INFORMATION SUMMARY Case #96-100 From R-1 and A-0 to M-1 EXISt111QA-O A.Qrculti~r~al Ope~i Zoning District: PURPOSE: This district includes lands within the. corporate limits of the City which are -not subdivided. and are relatively undeveloped. It may also include those .areas mentioned in Section 5 above.. This.- district is designed to promote orderly, timely, economical growth and to recognize current conditions. It is a reserved :area in which the future growth of the City can occur. PERMITTED USES: Single family dwellings. Barn, stable for keeping private animal stock. Country club (publicly or privately owned). Crop production..: Farm. Truck. :garden ...(including greenhouse for commercial purposes), Golf course. Home occupations. Pasturage. Poultry production (non-commercial). Riding. academy. (private). Proposed M-1 Planned Industrial Zoning Dist~•ict: PURPOSE:. Tlus district is provided: for high technological,' light manufacturing, non- pollutng industries, properly proportioned and designed .for aesthetic appeal, with controlled design` of plant e~.teriors and construction materials. Not only sits; design and .layout,. but facades, materials, llighting, and apparent architectural aspects of the project are subject to review and approval. All vehicle access shall be paved.. The M-1 District may be compatible with adjacent uses in ..any other district, depending upon the character of the operation and the conditions imposed. PERMITTED USES: Research and development. Laboratories. Instrument and component manufacturing. Apparel manufacturing. Rubberandplastics product manufacturing. Transportation component manufacturing. Printing and allied products. Electrical machine manufacturing. Fabricated. metal products manufacturing. Office equipment and supplies manufacturing. Offices. Existing R-1 Single Family Residential District: PURPOSE: This district includes lands subdivided for single' family ..residential purposes and associated uses. This district is designed to provide sufficient, suitable residential neighborhoods, protected from incompatible uses, provided with necessary facilities and services.. PERMITTED. USES: Warehousing. Large recycling collection facilities. Small recycling collection facilities. Other ` uses will be considered by the Conunission. Single family dwellings. Home occupations. ...~'~ a 95-06 , EAST BYPASS DEVELOPMENT GROUP: ATTN: ~iI~~ITT~ pcxx 3001. RUSTLING OAKS DR BRYAN, TX 77802 95-106 LUCILLE D LETBETTER c/o WILLIAM D LETBETTER 2348 ECHO CLIFFS CT ATLANTA, GA 30345 95-106 JABR, INC 8711 EAST BYPASS SOUTH COLLEGE.STATION, TX 77845 95-106 CSL -0F TEXAS., INC ATTN: HARTZELL ELKINS PO BOX 433 BRYAN, TX 77806 95-106 CARL ANDREW & CARIE SVAJDA P. O. BOX 2091 BRYAN, TX 778Q6 -C.~ ~ ~- 95-106 T D LETBETTER'. JR. 4058 MIRAMONTE PLACE RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 95-106 TAC REALTY, INC 1008 WOODCREEK COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 95-106 STYLECRAFT BUILDERS. 7610 EASTMARK STE 201 COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840 95-106 WAYNE & ANN RIFE 9255 BROOKWATER CIRCLE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 95-106 John & Pamela Hanson 2101 Fairfax College Station, TX 77845 95-106 THOMAS JAY & GLENDA STEIGER 9237 BROOKWATER CIRCLE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 95-.106 Maxine Jones 1005 Huntington College Station, TX 77845 95-1.06 CALVIN BOYKIN EMERALD FOREST HOA 8407 SHADOW OAKS COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 95-106. PATSY & DONALD DEERE 1500 FROST DR COLLEGD STATION, TX 77845 95-106 BILL & JANET DAVIS 9271 BROOKWATER CIRCLE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 95-106 MIKE CAUDEL 8406 WHITE ROSE CT COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840 95-106 BILL STINE 204 HEARTHSTONE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77840 95-106 WAYNE & BETTY STEELMAN 9273 BROOKWATER CIRCLE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 95-106 DARRELL BRUFFETT .1518 FOXFIRE DR COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 ~. .._ .r,, 95-106 95-106 ARTHUR HARRISON HOLY CROSS LUTHERAN CHURCH DBA HARRISON HOMES 1200 FOXFIRE 503 N TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 ~~~ J~'-~~ BRYAN, TX 77803 ~ 1 95-106 9 6 6 < 41 YCS~~~ .LARRY & KATHLEEN TEVERBAUGH PYI ~' 9225 BROOKWATER CR ~'"'~~~~• - i' m ~~ ` COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 IG - 'r~ rcres ., ~~H B 95-106 95-106 JAY. & MARY ANN McILVAIN Mary Ekenhorst 9239 BROOKWATER CIRCLE. Sandstone Homeowners Assn. COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 2000-0akwood Traily College Station, TX 77845 95-106. 95-106 Col. R.E. & Joy Wilson Gene Clark ~ 9245 Brookwater Stonebridge Homeowners Assn. College Station, Tx 77845 1302 Sussex College Station, TX 77845 95-106 95-106 ROBERT D LINN JR Linda Rundell ;~ 9247 BROOKWATER CIRCLE Shadowcrest Homeowners Assn. COLLEGE STATION, TX 77.845 9213 Riverstone Ct. i College Station, TX 77845 95-106 95-106 THOMAS & :CINDY MURRAY Stacy Gunnels 9249 BROOKWATER CIRCLE Foxfire Homeowners Assn. COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 1.007 Howe College Station, TX 77840 ' 95-106 95-106 DAVID & PATRICIA YOUNG John R. Ellison 9209 SHADOWCREST 2705 Brookway Dr. COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 College Station, TX 77840 95-I06 95-106 JOHN,& TAFFEE ALBERNAZ Marianne & John Ferriola 9231 BROOKWATER CIRCLE 9201 Riverstone COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 College Station, TX 77845 95-106 95-106 THOMAS PROPERTIES George Jackson PO BOX 10106 1403 Sussex COLLEGE STATION, TX 77842.. College Station, TX 77845 I 95-106 95-.106 JOSEPH & ANNE SCAMARDO David ~^.cWhirter ~ 9251 BROOKWATER CIRCLE 1708 Amber Ridge Dr. COLLEGE :STATION, TX 77845 College Station, TX 77845 ~ (1.~~~ f~~~~ 1 ~ 95-106 Robert & Vicky Newman. 2509 Fitzgerald- College Station, TX, 77845 95-106 Joe Bruegging 2104 Fairfax College Station, TX 77845 95-106 Dr. Julian Gaspar 9303 Amberwood Court College Station, TX 77845 95-106 Rick McCreary 1401 Sussex College Station, TX 77845 95-106 Jeff & Melody Braun 9217 Timber Knoll College Station, TX 77845. 95-106 James & Phyllis Stuckey 9227 Brookwater College Station, TX 77845 95-106 Jimmie L.~ Vernon 2103 Farley College Station,. TX 77845 95-106 Richard Crooks 2517 Fitzgerald College Station, TX 77845 95-106 Christian P. Borger 9204 Waterford. College Station, TX 77845. 95-106 Bobette McFarland 9206 Waterford College Station, TX 77845 95-106 Frank J. & Maria Rosa Bosquez 3130 E. Villa Maria#805 Bryan, TX 77802 95-106. Paul & Lorene Ellinger 9257 Brookwater College Station, TX 77845 95-106 David & Tamara Dodson 9210 Brookwater Cir. College Station, TX 77845 s-lo l yra al E tat 2 OS Te s S Ste 08 , Co 1 ge S ti n, T 778 0 106 J c Bo Hom 4 Sh do O s oll g S o , T 77 95-106 Philip & 1VlaranBeremand 9208 Brookwater Cir.. College Station, TX 77845 95-106 Daniel & Pamela Speck 9240 Brookwater Cir. College :Station, TX 77845 95-106. Douglas Bryan ~~ ~t_,,~f 2~Q~1 +~.~~C"t~ L>n 1101 Edgewood Bryan, TX 77802 9 ,106 ph or 1 g C' 7 95-106 James & Mary Beth Bond 9218 Brookwater Cir.. College Station,. TX 77845 ,z ~ 95-106 95-106 David Geidroc Peter & Tina Dacn 9229 Brookwater 9254 Brookwater College Station, TX 77845 College Station, TX .77845 95-106. 95-106. Cheryl Stauffer Gibson Residence ~~, 9206 5unlake Ct. 9266 Brookwater d College Station, TX 77845 College Station, TX 77845 (.y~c~~ C ~ , ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~( I,I ~ ~ ~ ~-~ ~~ ~~. ~~~ ~ ~ I~" - ~ ~~5 ill jl ,~ 96-100 ARTHUR HARRISON DBA HARRISON HOMES 503 N TEXAS AVENUE BRYAN, TX 77803 96-100 .HOLY CROSS LUTHERAN CHURCH 1200 FOXFIRE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 96-100 LARRY & KATHLEEN TEVERBAUGH 9225 BROOKWATER CR COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 96-100 JAY & MARY ANN McILVAIN 9239 BROOKWATER CIRCLE: COLLEGE .STATION, TX 77845 96-100 Col. R.E.. & Joy Wil~,pn 9245 Brookwater College Station, Tx 77845 96-100- Keith H. Kuttler Amberlake Homeowners Assn. 1111 Briarcrest Dr., Ste. 300 Bryan, TX 77802 96-100 Mary Eikenhorst Sandstone Homeowners Assn. 2000 Oakwood Trail College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Gene Clark Stonebridge Homeowners. Assn. 1.302 Sussex College Station,. TX 77845 96-100 ROBERT D LINN JR 9247 BROOKWATER CIRCirE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 96-100 THOMAS & CINDY MURRAY 9249.BROOKWATER CIRCLE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 96-100 DAVID & PATRICIA YOUNG 9209 SHADOWCREST COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 96-100 . JOHN & TAFFEE ALBERNAZ 923.1 BROOKWATER .CIRCLE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77845 96-100 THOMAS PROPERTIES PO BOX 10106 COLLEGE ,STATION, TX 77842 96-100 JOSEPH & ANNE SCAMARDO 9251 BROOKWATER CIRCLE COLLEGE .STATION, TX 77845 ~B 96-100 Linda Rundell Shadowcrest Homeowners Assn. 9213 Riverstone Ct. College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Stacy Gunnels Foxfire Homeowners Assn. 1007 Howe College Station, TX 77840 96-100 John R. Ellison 2705 Brookway Dr. College Station, TX 77840 96=100 Marianne & John Ferriola 9201 Riverstone College Station, TX 77845 96-100 George Jackson 1403 Sussex College Station, TX 77845 96-100 David McWhirter 1708,Amber Ridge Dr. College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Robert & Vicky Newman 2509 Fitzgerald College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Joe Bruegging 2104 Fairfax .College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Dr. Julian .Gaspar 9303 Amberwood Court .College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Rick McCreary 1401 Sussex College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Jeff & Melody Braun 9217 Timber Knoll College Station, TX 77845 96-100 James & Phyllis Stuckey 9227 Brookwater College Station, TX 77845 96-100 David, & Tamara Dodson 9210. Brookwater Cir. College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Ray Martyn 7803 Appomattox College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Barbara Wolf 2604: Calico: Ct. College Station, Texas. 77845 96-100 Philip & Marian Beremand 9208 Brookwater Cir. College Station, TX - 77845 96-100 Jimmie L. Vernon 2103 Farley College Station, TX 77845 96-100' Richard Crooks 2517 Fitzgerald. College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Christian P. Borger 9204 Waterford College Station,. TX 77845 96-100 Bobette McFarland 9206 Waterford College Station, TX 77845 96 100 Frank J. & Maria Rosa Bosquez -3130 E. Villa Maria #805 Bryan, TX 77802 96-100 Paul & .Lorene. Ellinger .9257 Brookwater College Station, TX 77845 96-100. Daniel & Pamela Speck 9240. Brookwater Cir. College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Doug Bryan Construction 1101 Edgewood Bryan, TX 77802 96-100 William S. Dahlstrom 400 Fountain Place 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202-2790 96-100. James & Mary Beth Bond 921$ Brookwater Cir. College Station, TX 77845 96-100 David Geidroc 9229 Brookwater College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Cheryl Stauffer 9206 Sunlake Ct. College Station, TX 77845 96-100 East Bypass Development Group Attn; Bill Atkinson 3001 Rustling Oaks Drive Bryan, Texas 77802 ~' 96-100 Lucille Letbetter c/o William D. Letbetter 2348 Echo Cliffs Ct. Atlanta, GA 30345 96-100 CSL of Texas, Inc. Attn: Hartzell Elkins P.O. Box 433 -< Bryan, Texas .77806 96-100 j Bob: Long 2612 Sandiewood Ct. :College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 TAC Realty, Inca 1008 Woodcreek .College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Wayne & Ann. Rife 9255 Brookwater Circle College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Thomas Jay & Glenda Steiger 9237 Brookwater Circle College Station, Texas 77845 96=100 Calvin Boykin Emerald Forest HOA 8407 Shadow Oaks College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Peter & Tina Dacin 9254 Brookwater College Station, TX 77845 96-100 Gibson Residence 9266 Brookwater College Station, TX 77845 96-:100 John & Pamela Hanson 2101 Fairfax College Station, Texas 77845 96-1:00 JABR, INC. 8711 East Bypass South College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Carl Andrew & Carie Svajda P.O. Box 2091 Bryan, Texas 77806 96-100 T D Letbetter Jr. 4058 Miramonte Place Riverside, CA 92501 96-100 Stylecraft Builders 7610 Eastmark Suite 201 College Station, Texas 77840 96-100 John & Pamela Hanson 2101 Fairfax :College Station; Texas 77845 96-100 Maxine Jones 1005 Huntington College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Patsy & Donald Deere 1500 Frost Dr. College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Bill &'Janet Davis 9271. Brookwater Circle College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Bill Stine 204 Hearthstone College Station, Texas .77840. 96=100 Darrell Bruffett 1518 Foxfire Drive College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Robert & LInda Batker 9243 Brookwater: Circle College Station; Texas 77845 96-100 Mike. Caudel 8406 White Rose Ct. College Stataion, Texas 77840 96-100 Wayne & Betty Steelman 9273 Brookwater Circle College Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Janice Epstein 9200 Sunlake Ct. College. Station, Texas 77845 96-100 Bi11y Bielamowcz 9235 Brookwater Circle College Station, Texas 77845 /~ 1 1 \ ~ ~ \ \ ~ \ ~ ~ ~ \ \ ~ ` ~ \ ) ,' ~ 4C GaaOO (~OC~~I o N~~OG~1L~~ G ~ , \ ~. ~ ~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' , v NAME ADDRESS. PHONE NO. Bill Dahlstrom 4000 Fountain Place 214/855-7582 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, TX 75202-2790 Wayne Steelman 9273 Brookwater Circle 409/93-5865 College Station, TX 77845 Curtis C. Stauffer, M.D. 9206 Sunlake Ct. 409/693-3888 College Station, TX 77845 Col. and Mrs. R. E. Wilson 9245 Brookwater'Circle 409/693-5055 College Station, TX 77845 Sherry Ellison 2705 Brookway Dr. 40/696-6793 College Station, TX 77845 Bob Long 2612 Sandlewood Ct. 409/764-4553 College Station, TX 77845 :Larry Teverbaugh 9225 Brookwater Circle 409/696-1616 College Station, TX 77845 Judi Bigda 2205 Bent Oak 409/696-5308 College Station, TX 77845 Jane Kee City Planner 409/764-3570 City of College Station Wayne T. Rufe 925:5.Brookwater Circle 409/764-8382 College Station, TX 77845 Keith Kutler 1111 Briarcrest Dr. 409/776-1111 Bryan, TX 77802 Bob Albanese 9407 Scarborough Dr. 409/764-1721 College Station, TX 77845 Rob Baldwin 1445 Ross Ave:, #4000 214/885-7503 Dallas,,`1'X 75202-2790 Craig Hall 1702 Amber Ridge College Station, TX 77845 Stacy Gunnels 1007 Howe: College~Statian, TX,.77845 Ray Martyn 7803- Appomattox 409/693-9106 College Station, TX 77845 Susan Clegg 9002 Sandstone 409/696-7691 College Station, TX 77845 P:\REAL\3021\1\ATTENDI6.LST . 1 kjg 1/17/96 ~~-~~ ~ ~ •trr.Trr• r• rrrrs~-r. ~S-''~- \•\•1•\•9~9•\•i'i•t't'\'\'1.5° •.l.!•I.r•!.l.l•i .l.l.i .!•!•!.l.I. ~i: .f./9!~l~I9i ~B~l~i bl~l~l~~.!~I~!`/~J.l.l.! .. .....a,t _t, t•t,t•t,t•.a.t•t•t,t•a~ .a •'a ~'. F•/JJv-'. t lJ•: i.: .l.l.! ....ply.! 1~Y~1~\ 1 t 1 •s~;:'~~t~t•t •t•t~t~t •t•t•t•t •°a •t•t•t•\•t~1 ;.l.l.l./.f.r. /. a.pi.l.l.l.l.l.l•1. . l,\•l~'v~tirt!a~'a!i''a•t•t~l~t•t•l •\•+'i'\'t't't't'l't •t't •i ~IT1` 4F CQLLE~E STF6T11}N DEUELQPhiENT ~ERUI~ES Ii01 TEXAS AVE COLLEGE ~TATiO(V, TE4A~ 77844 __ ..••••~-i........ •t•\•1•t•\•\•t•\.\.t•,•,•\•\•t• •!•!•l.l.l.l.l.l.l.l.J.l.l.l.l.1. y!J4l4!•!•!•!•!•!•l•! ! ! ~ : ! ! !•/ y~l,i.!~l.f •J4(~i ~l.l,/~(~1~l.e~l~!~!^I :i l~r.l. ~t~t•\•l•t•\•t•\•t•\•t•\•\•\•\•\•\•\•\•1•\•\•t•t•\•\ fi7.isl.l.l.ly•l•!•F•1.1.l.l.l.l.l.l.l.l.pl.l. ,.l.l.l. ....•,.t.t.t.•,.t.t.•,.;.t.t.t.•a.,. t.,.•a.•a,t.•,.t.t.•, J7 t tJ~fJJ...l.l.ppl.l.l.l.l.l.l,l,l •!,!,!,!,l,l,l.l. .•t•l•4t•\•t•l•\~t•t•t•\•t•t•t•t~l•t•t•t•l•t•t•t•t •t•t •t•t .~l.l.l.J.l.l.i.l.I.:.(.!.l.l.J.l.f.r.I.l.l./.I.l.ly.!•/.!.!. Facsimile Cover Sheet ~~ Company: 'YY1t~~~~ , ~"~~~~, L~f=, ~~~-~ ~i h~Rt~ Phone: Fax: From: ~.. ~_ Company: C° ^ ll _ ~.7ic~~ Phone: Fax: Date: ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ ~~) Pages including this cover page: ~' Comments: 1~1•\•\•l•i•l•\•t •\•\•••1.1•t•1•t•1•R• /~/•~l +'y !.!.(.!•l.!•l•!•!.l.l.l•l.l.l•l•!•!•/•!•! ~ 4 V'3 l ( ~ 4 - vJ ~ (1/ ~~..t.,.,.,•,.t•,•t.l.t.,.,,,.,.,. y. t.,.,.,.,.,.~ !.!.!•l.l•I.l.l.l.l.l.l. e.P.l.d./.!.!.l.l.l.l.f.! '..,.,.t.•.,.,.•.,.,.t.,.,.t.,.t.,.t.,.,.,.,.t.t.,~°` t4a9) 764-3496 FAQ{ tl.ltltl4:y.l...l.l.f./.; .l.l.l./.!•(•(y.•!,!•!,J \.t.t.t.t•\•l•\•9•\~\•\•t•4VVV4t•t•1•YY\•\•1: H. ti}J.r.l.l./.J•I•/•!•l•l.l.!•!•l •l.J y.e.f•l./•/•l•l •l•!.!Y . \~~\•\.t.,.,.1.t.l.,.t.\.t.t.t.t.t.t-R.\.i.t.\.\.t.~.~.~.a ...a~ P!•!•!d•!•!•!•!y• \•1•t•1•\•1.1.1•\•l ~ i p!.!,!•f •l•!.!. t•t•t•t•l•1•t• ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS 4000 FOUNTAIN PLACE F 1445 Ross AVENUE MU N S C H I DALLAS, TEXAS 75202-2790 ~ H ~l 1 1 • TELEPHONE (214) 855-7500 I ,~: KOP F ~ ~ FACSIMILE (214) 855-7584 H~D D ~ ~ ~-~~~ ~ ~ ,~~, ~ 4 0 WORLDWIDE WEB HOME PAGE _ DI NAN HTTP://RAMPAGES.ONRAMP.NET/'MUNSCH/ A PROFESSiorvaL CoRaoRnnoN WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL 855-7582 November 9, 1995 Ms. Jane Key Director of Planning City of College Station P.O. Box 9960 College Station, 'PX 77842-9960 RE: City of College. Station Comprehensive Plan Dear Jane: It was a pleasure meeting with you last week at the City's second community workshop on the ComprehensivePlan. The: City's planning program: seems to be progressing and I was impressed at the depth of the consultant's background data. However, I am disappointed at the initial land use recommendations of the consultants for he property on the East Bypass and Sebesta Road. As you may recall, this firm has been retained by the owners of the vacant property. located at .the intersection of Sebesta Road and the East Bypass. In this capacity, we have been working with the City and the neighboring property owners to come up with an appropriate land use plan for this property. Last June, Council Member Nancy Crouch hosted a meeting attended by representatives of the residential areas surrounding this...property, the owners of this property and myself. At this meeting, the participants generally reached a consensus that a maj ority of this property is not suitable for residential uses due to;.its location along the East Bypass, .and that the residents seemed not as concerned as to what went on the property, but rather how the proposed use was constructed on the site: ®ne point than the neighbors stressed is that high density residential and apartment developments were unacceptable on this property. Yet, two of the three concepts presented at the most recent community workshop identified this land'as high density residential. Attached please find a copy of the minutes of the neighborhood meeting:' Please note that the neighborhood,representativesstated that this property would be ideal for high-quality re earcl or light industrial development, light commercial or service uses. Apartments and automotive uses were deemed.. to be unacceptable on this property. Would you please forward a copy of the Ms. Jane Key November 9, 1995 Page 2 neighborhood meeting results to your land use consultant so the findings can be incorporated into the future land use plan for this .:area? Finally, pursuant to our conversation of last week, I would like to request that this area be included as one of the four special study areas you are requiring the planning consultant to produce as part of their contract. A lot of time and effort have been invested in making sure that this property is developed properly..:. As a special study area the City could build on the previous effort in this area and develop a plan that would benefit the owners of this property, the residents that live adjacent to this property and the City... Thank you in advance for your assistance with this matter. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions, or if I could be of any further assistance. I will be back in town to attend the next. community workshop on November 15,1995. Ve truly yours, William S. Dahlstrom Enclosure P:\REAL\3 021 \ 1 \KEY2. LTR 1 RBB 10/2/95 v Participants Rob Baldwin Munsch, Hardt, Kopf, Harr &Dinan 214/855-7503 Keith Kuttler Pres., Amberlake Homeowners Assn. (wk) 776-1111 Col. R.E. Wilson 9295 Brookwater Circle... 693-5055 Steve Rials (?) 9215 Shadowcrest Dr. (w) 690-0307/(h) 696-8607 Gene Clark, P.E. 1302 Sussex Dr. 693-6376 Mary Anne Murray 2702 Wind. Wood Dr. 693-8632 Stacy Gunnels 1007 Howe Dr. 693-6593 Bill Atkinson 300.1 Rustling Oaks 776-1.943 Bob .Bower 3409 Parkway Terrace 693-9378 Jim Simpson 8704 Chippendale 6993-8338 Wayne Rife 9255 Brookwater Circle (w) 776-2282/(h) 764-8382 Bill Dahlstrom Munsch, Hardt, Kopf, Harr &Dinan 214/855-7582 Ray Dietrich 1814 Rosebud 696-3552 Cal Boykin 8407. Shadow Oaks 693-0224 Patsy.Deere 1500 Frost 693-7363 p:\real\3021\1\resultsl .doc 2 rbb 062995 Homeowner's Associations Mr. Ray Martyn Mr. Bob Long ' Raintree 2612 Sandlewood Ct. ~, 7803 Appommattox Dr. College. Station, TX '77845 College Station, TX 77845 Ms. Stacy Gunnells Foxfire ` 1007 Howe College. Station, TX 77845 Mr. Ke1th Kuttler P:\REAL\3021\1\MEET2.LST Amberlake 1 rbb 1/8/96 1111 Briarcrest -.Suite 300 Bryan, TX 77802 Ms..Lnda Rundel Shadowcrest 9213 Riverstone Ct. .77845 n T lle a Statio Co g Mr. Cal Boykin I~ , rest. Emerald Fo ' 8407 Shadow Oaks College Station, TX 77845 ' Mr. Gene Clark Stonebridge 1302 Sussex Cciilege Statio.~, T~ 77845 Ms. Barbara Wolfe Raintree 2604 Calico Ct. College Station, TX 77845 Ms. Susan Cla Y I ; Sandstone ~ 9008 Sandstone College Station, TX 77845 I C ~-/0(Q ~~ ~~ ~'° e Development Policies address access by recommend. that drive entrance hould be minimized through the platting end/or site plan process.. Access could be denied to Sebesta for the commercial: tracts at the corner. However, as the remainder of the property to the east develops, ' particularly if it is resided±ially zoned, it would be best: to provide access to both the frontage road i and Sebesta o avoid a single. access subdivision. Secondary access is most important for efficient public and emergency service as well as for convenient traffic circulation. At the previous public hearing before Council there was much concern about the drive-through traffic affecting .the Emerald Forest Subdivision.:As mentioned in the. previous hearing these problems. are aresult- of residential cut-through traffic that. will continue until improvements are made in the City's thoroughfare plan to provide better. access on the east side of the Bypass. Development of the subject property will contribute to the traffic regardless of the land use. TRAFFIC GENERATION BOARD . Traffic. generation is .always something that we look at in any rezoning request. We do not typically go .over the numbers but rather present to you conclusions and recommendations resulting from our analysis. Bui for the benefit. of those in the audience and because concerns about traffic have been at the forefront of :this case I'd like to present some data re: to traffic generation. Based on research from the Institute of Traffic Engineers which is the .standard used to determine traffic impacts of various development we find: Trip per day -define Comm. - 17,000 (15 ac C-1:200,000 sf shopping center like P.O. Sq. and 7 ac C-3 - 75,000 sf - PO Village) A-P 6,000 -office bldg. like CS Professional or Bank R-4 2,300 R-3 1,200 TOTAL -= 22,000 If R-4 and-R-3 remain A-O or R-1 and develop as such then the total drops slightly to 19,700 Sebesta as a res. collector is designed to carry from 1,000 to 5,000 vehicles per day. Examples of other residential collectors are -Walton (3,000), Glade, Emerald Parkway and Woodcreek which each carry about 4,000. The traffic generation from the commercial is why staff suggested that access. to Sebesta could be denied in the original rezoning request. Staff still feels that. this is am important consideration. The traffic. generated from development of the rest of the property would be dispersed over Sebesta and the Frontage Rd. ` As the property `develops and plats it may be important to have a roadway that goes from: Sebesta to Woodcreek to disperse traffic even more. °~ t The bottom line is that the traffic generation to be expected from negatively impact surrounding land uses. There will be an increase, Roads available are designed to handle it, particularly. if access t commercial tracts. LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SLIDE these rezonings should not but that is to be expected. o Sebesta is denied. for the Development policies state that areas planned for low density residential uses will predominantly consist of single family dwellings. Other housing types maybe used but the overall density of the area should remain low. Appropriate .types include patio .homes, zero lot line housing and townhomes. Crross area densities should not exceed 6 dwelling`units per acre. The R-3 portion of this request. complies with these policies. The R-4 portion is a low density apartment district. The densities can go up to 16 dwelling units per acre which is higher than. is intended for low density areas. BUFFER SLIDE Explain slide COLOR SAM SLIDE The overall request provides for a good step-down approach. As per Development Policies the R- 3 is placed adjacent to the existing R-1 of Woodcreek. The R-4 is-used. as a buffer between the commercial and lower density residential areas to the east (Foxfire). The A-P and C-3 are placed adjacent to existing C-1. The A-P is also. acting, as .supported by the policies, as a buffer between residential and commercial land uses. It is placed in such a fashion as to separate existing Woodcreek lots from the proposed C-3 along the Bypass. Additional buffering of potential A-P uses from -the existing single family might be considered to lessen any possible impacts. This request went to the P&Z on 9-1. After a public hearing the Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial. Minutes are in you packets that summarize the concerns expressed and the people who spoke in opposition. After the P&Z meeting the applicant requested a meeting with the Council Development Policies Subcommittee. This subcommittee met on 9-7 with .the applicant and staff and again on 9-f~ with the staff. 'Members in attendance were Councilwoman McIlhaney, .Councilman Mariott and Councilman Hickson. COLOR SAM SLIDE Their recommendation to Council is that the corner Tract A be zoned C-1 General Comm., 11 acre Tract B be zoned C-B Business Comm., Tracts E and F be zoned C-3 Planned Comm. and A-P Administrative Professional respectively. They further recommend that access to Sebesta be denied for these commercial properties. The Subcommittee is also concerned about buffering future residential development that may occur to the east from the commercial properties'along the By Pass. If the commercial zonings can be conditioned upon this, the Subcommittee recommends doing so. ATTORNEYS 8 COUNSELORS ~ 4000 FOUNTAIN~LACE 1445 ROSS AVENUE M U N S C H oALLASr TEXAS 75202-2790 HARDT ~ KOP r TELEPHONE (214).855-7500 i, rp ,~Y FACSIMILE (214) 855-7584 H A ~l \ lX WORLDWIDE WEEI HOME PAGE j HTTP://RAMPAGES.ONRAMF'.NET/'MUNSC:H/ DINAN A PROfES51ONAL CORPORATION : WRITERS DIRECTDIAL 855-7582. 'i, January 8, 1996. 1VIr. Ray Martyn 78:03 Appomattox Dr. '~ College Station, TX 77845 RE: Rezoning of 34,1 acres in the area: of Se6esta Road and the East Bypass Dear Mr. Martyn: As the representative of the owner of the property referenced above, I would like xo invite you, as President of the Raintree Homeowner's Association, to a meeting on January 16, 1996 at 7:30 in the evening at Texas Digital Systems, Inc.'s offices located at 512 West Loop (2818) in College. Station. The purpose of this. meeting is to allow -the prospective owner of the above '~ ro osal for _constructin his new offices at this location. This. I'~~ referenced property to present lus p p g '; meeting .will be moderated by City of College Station City Council Member Nancy .Crouch. Representatives .from the other residential subdivisions who are :members of the East bypass Homeowner's Coalition and :the City of College Station's Planning Department have also .been '', invited to this meeting.. Please call meat (214) 855-7582 if yoga will bP abbe ty atte d tl~~:~ meetinng or if y:,u have any questions or comments.: I look forward to seeing you next week. Very truly yours, '~ William S. Dahlstrom WSD:rbb cc: Council Member Crouch I Jane Key ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS NtUNSCH HARDT KOP F HARR ~ DINAN A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION - ~ 4000 FOUNTAIN PLACE 1445 Ross AVENUE DALLAS, TExAS 75202-2790 d ~Q ~ ~ ~~~ TELEPHONE. (214) 855-7500 "_~„~~~ ~~eA`i FACSIMILE (214). 855-7584 WORLDWIDE WEB HOME PAGE HTTP://RAMPAGES.ONRAMP.NET/"MUNSCH/ WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL 855-7503 January. 8, 1996. Ms. Jane Key Director of Planning City ofCollege Station P.O. Box 9960 College Station, TX 77842-9960 RE: Public meeting with residents of the Sebesta Road area Dear Jane: Attached please find a copy of a letter we sent to the homeowner's associations in the vicinity of Sebesta Road and the East Bypass inviting them to Bob Bower's office on January 16, 1996 to discuss his proposal for the property. I have also attached a list of everyone who was sent a letter. I hope that you and Sabine can be present. ~ If you have any questions, orneed any additional information, please do not hesitate to call me. Very truly yours, .~-- Robert B. Baldwin, AICP Land Planner ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS MUNSCH HARDT KOP F HARK ~ DI NAN A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION William C. Atkinson, President East Bypass Development Group 3001 Rustling Oaks Bryan,. Texas 77802 _, r ~- ~~,~- ~ ~~~ ~' . ~ =3 ~~ /tip,„,, -~ ~, : ~ea~ EJG /D~ /S~ ~~~ -/DD 4000 FOUNTAIN PLACE 1445 ROSS AVIENUE DALLAS, TEXAS 75202-2790 TELEPHONE (294)855-7500 FACSIMILE (214) 855-7584 WORLDWIDE WEB HOME PAGE HTTP://RAMPAGES.ON RAMP. N ET/'MUNSCH/ January 8, 1996 WRITER'SDIRE6:T DIAL (214) 855-7503 VIA OVERNIGHT MALI. RE: Rezoning Applicationfor the City of College Station Dear Bill: Attached please find the .Rezoning Application Form for the City of College Station. Please sign the second page and .prepare.. a check for $250.00, made payable to the City of College Station. Bi11 Scarmardo will come by on Tuesday to pick them up and submit the entire package to the City. The Planning and Zoning: Commission will hear this request on February 1, 1996. We have scheduled a meeting with the surrounding neighborhood associations for January 16, 1996. This meeting will be held at Bob's office and will take place at 7:30 PM. Council Member Nancy Crouch and Jane Key from the City's :Planning Department will attend this meeting . Please call me if you have any questions or comments. Ver truly yours, ~~ Robert B. Baldwin, AICP Land Planner cc: Bob Bower Bill Dahlstrom P: \REAL\3021 \ 1 \ATKINSN7. LTR ,:. ~~ M . ~, ~ . ; St 1Etj ~. E ~, Sll1EU ~1j ~ j E Ea] ,yJ ~ paziu ~uauu~ ~ ~~ ' SSa'J _i~ ~'r ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ' i~? ~ .~Eln~l ,t ~'` '~ a., uE uc _ f~ ~ ~~ ~ v~ ~ ~ iaplo ~, _ w .~,, ~ fi '., Plnoh~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,w; ~ ~.: -:~ t11I ~(~',1 ~~ ~ _--~. ,~ :, ., ,. t~_ ~., ~~~ 9: f. `t4om t ~ _ - - C .?" .. ._F ~.1'l:" ~. y ~ /._ t'f~ ~Y~ A ~-rf_. }: Si~%_i+d ATTORNEYS Bt COUNSELORS - 4000 FOUNTAIN PLACE .1,445 ROSS AVENUE A A >! i N CT~ u DALLAS. TEXAS 75202.2790 1 HA RD j 1 - ~ ~ TELEPHONE (214)-855-7500 KOP F FACSIMILE (214) 855-7584 I~ A 17 ~. ~Y - - ..WORLDWIDE WEB.HOME PAGE D I N A N ,. HTTP://RAMPAGES.ONRAMP.NET/"MUNSCH/ APROFESSIONAL CORPORATION. - WRITERS DIRECT DIAL 855-7582 I ' ~I~~~ .~A ~ ~ 199~P January 9, 1996. Ivlr. Skip No Ci Mana er Ci of liege Station 'P.U B 9960 CoT a Station, TX 77842-9960 ~!~ 1~: Public meetfng with. residents of the Sebesta. Road area Dear 1`v1r. Noe: This firm represents.Bob Bower and the East Bypass Development Group in their efforts to rezone the above referenced property. to accommodate the development of Texas Digital Systems' new headquarters on a 35 acre tract outh of Sebesta Road and east of Highway 6. Im this capacity, I would like to invite you, as City Manager for College Station, to a meeting on January 16, 1996 at 7:30 in the evening at Texas Digital Systems, Int.'s. offices located at 512 West Loop (2818) in College Ij Station., .:The purpose of this meeting is to allow Bob Bower to present the plans for his proposed development to representatives of the neighborhood associations in the area. Attached please ~md a list of all: of the neighborhood. representatives invited to this meeting. This meeting will be moderated by City of College Station City Council Member Nancy Crouch. Jane Key has -also been invited to this'meeting. Pleasecallme at (214) 855-7582 if you will be able to attendthis meeting or if you have any questions or comments. I look forward to meeting you next week. Ve truly yours, William S. Dahlstrom Enclosure cc: Council Membe Crouch Jane Key Bob Bower P:\REAL\3021\1 WOE 1.LTR 1 rbb 1/9/96 i 02/15>96 10:19 $ OCEAN DRILLING 2907 Adrienne Drive College- Station, TX 77845 February 15, 199fi City of College Station Planning and Zoning Commission City Hall 1101 Texas Avenue S_ College Station, TX 77840 Via Fay ° 64-3496 u~ i-'- Re: Request to Rezone 34 acres at Hwy 6 Bypass 8~ 5eb®sta Road Comments for2115/96 Public Heaping ®ear Commissioner: This is to express my opposition to the request to rezone 34 acres of land at the Hwy 6 Bypass and Sebesta Road in College Station to "Planned Industrial." Many residents have invested in homesites in the adjacent area based on the zoning specifications in effect, and a change to the zoning criteria would alter the nature of their residential environment. 1t would also affect neighboring facilities, including a recreational site and an existing church. l~ 0 01 The issue is whether the City of College Station intends to honor their original zoning commitment and the good faith investment of those who would be potential neighbors. The request for rezoning keeps resurfacing, in spite of continued objections from concerned citizens. Please vote NO to this request and resolve this conflict once and for a11. Respectfully yours, Linda K_ Norton } 0 0 o o ~. ~~ ~. ~ ~~ . _~ .~.,. ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ .~.o. ~' ~~ i .~®~. ~~-~~o ,~ ~. -~ ,• , ~ ~~ i 1 3' ' '~ --'~ ~ ~ ~\ `* ~ ~ ~\ ~ ,.- ``~ ~~ v ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~~ ~.•~ `, ~ ~. ~ ~~ .r - ------~- ~L . ~ ~ -> ,; ~` .~' A ~. ,` J, ~. .\ i' ~~ ~~ v' f,.~' _ ~~ ~' ~~ ~~ •` •~ .~ .\ .1 .` ~~ ~` •~ .` .` .` •~ .~ •` ~~ '~ •~ `' TECHNOLOGY BUSINESS PARK i ~ COLLEGE $1'A~10N~ TEXAa % s oo sso /~ o ao ao \~ a~svs~s,"~ J X a O O .,,mod ~"R ~ ' ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U U' U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U o w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w' w w w w w w w w ~ m F- Q I-. Q 1- Q H Q F- a I- Q H Q H a F- Q F- a F- Q F- Q I- Q F- Q 1- Q H Q H Q F- Q F- Q 1- Q 1- ¢ H Q H Q F- Q F- Q F- Q ' Q c n ~ s s ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ Q Y Y, Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y ~ Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y o W a- 0 0" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ m } 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Qi w m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m w m m m m m; m m m m m m m m m m m m m ~, m m m m m m m m ~ d' O ~' ~ M ~ 00 N M M CO N d' N ~ N N N i~ N 'O N to N b0 ~ M N d' .- ~ N N' ~ O r ~ ~ to ~- ~ m r ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ti d' ~ d' O d' O M fn ~ r- I~ o0 N rn N rn N ~ N rn N rn N ~ N rn N rn N ; N rn N rn N rn N ~ N rn N ; N rn N rn N rn W N a~ N rn N rn N rn N rn N rn, N rn N w (p O to `ct LC) d' to et O 'd' O mot' ~ d' ~ ~t to ~' -!') 'ct tn' ~' to 'ct M O N O N d' N O -n d' ~ 'd' u7' d' to ~t ~t') d' tC) ~' ~ d' a, O ti M O 00 N e0 A- 00 ti 00 ti 00 R O. I`- . O I~ O I~ O. ti O ti, O N O h O I~ O ~ O ti CO ~ O-- r O N W'... ti O ~ 00 I`- N I'~: M ~ ~ ti ~ ~ ti ti ~ ~ ti ~ ~ ti ~ r~ ti r- ti ~ ti ~ W '. H fQ- X Q X X X X X X X X X' X X X X` X X X X X X X X (n F- C9 H: F- F- H H F- F- H F- F- F- F- F- F- 1- F- ~ I- F- F- F- Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z~ Z Z Z Z Z 0 0 0. 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F- H F-' E- F- F- F- H {- H F- F- 1= 1- 1- h- F- F- Q a Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a Q Q cn cn m cn m m cn m cn cry cn m m m m m m m ¢ w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w z ~- ~ c~ c~ ~ c~ c~ ~ c~ c~ c~ Z Z c~ Z ~ t~ c~ c~ w ~ w c~ w ~ w ` Q Z w J w J w J w J w J w J w J w J w J w J Q Q w J Q w J w J w J J J J J rr ~- ~ g F- J 0 J 0 J 0. . J 0 J 0 J O J O J 0 J 0 J O ~- Q~ ~- ~ J` O' ~ ~ J 0 J 0 J 0 J 0 J 0 J 0 J 0 U m Q U U U° U U ' U U U U ' U m m U m U U U U U U U ~' U ~ U W Q Q U ~ 0 O M J V ~ Y W Y a 0 ~ Z J O QQ X = O Z W O ~ m W m (n Z W ~ ~ ~ O Cp M tp N O N p r O r p Q d N O O tC) ~- M Z O ~ U w _ ' Z ~ o ~_ ~ ~ , m ~ W ~ _~ ~_ _~ ~_ ~ ~_ ~ Y. W . H N - U U U ~ U ~ ~ U U U U U U U J w m ~ t0 W ~ U Y ~ W ~ W ~ W W ~ ~ W W J O 2 U Z Z O ~ W ~ W ~ W ~ W ~ W ~ W ~ W J W ~ (Q ~ U Y W w F- Q I- Q E- Q W ~ H Q m m z O U ~ N Q E- Q F- Q F- Q H Q H Q H Q N D ~ ~ ~ Q U ~ Y ~ Y ~ Y U ~ ~ Y fY ~ Z o Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y ~. Q Q, a O ~ m O O O O 1- ~ Q, >- ~ ~, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ Q J >- p Q p. m O O O O ~ , Z w 0 w ~ ~ o ~ ¢ . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 J m = Q O ~ ~ ~ ~ ' J ~ ~ = m X; J - ~ ~ ~ ~ R' ~ ~ ~ ~ . . W (n W S m m m , m Q O m m m m m m m m m 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 O O M N N I H O m O m ~ o 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'V' ~ ~ N 'ct ~ ~ O ~d' Q Q U ~ o0 N O) CO I~ O r N O N O N O ', ~ N O i ~ ~ ~ ~.. U N O N O N O N O) N O N O N O Z ', U } ~ J O Q 2 W = J ~ 2 W Z 2, z ~ ~ uJ ~ U Z u- p } m' ~ Q ¢ Z W ~ ~ W ~ ~ Q z J 2 oh p ~ Q O ~ °~ ~S U S ~ J o - O ~ U W J Q W 0 ~ ~ D. ~ ~ ~- Q. Q ~ ~ ~ ~ Q W ~ ~ ' = d Q cS °Z ~ Z J Z' ~tS W ~ a2S ~ m z = > g m w g ~ o = ~ ~ ° W ~ vi ~ m Q ~.... ~ ° Q' - ~ Q . = O cn w _ ~ Z Q _ ~ Q C9 ~ 0 ~ N ~ w O = Q ° ~ op O w z ~ u- o ~ ~ Q z - z ~ Q Z W m ~ z O" U cn >- ~ ' >- w O z W O W m ~ Z W J ~ ~ W ~ p Y U i i ~ W p u.l I- ~; Z Q Q ~ m 1- Q ~ S j ~ C9 Z ~ p U ~L U ~ Q J m H- m ~ O ~ U Q m J w ~ H > w Z O (n n ~ Q' >- ~ O 2 (n ¢ Q U u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ? J - W n Z U W J Q -> >- fn F-- Q+ (7: U , F m . W T m ~ Lll U - ~ ~ ~ -~ W J, ~; - (~ -~ d ~- N (O ~ (O tC) ~ tn CO N N ~ o0 r r 0 ti ~ O 0 to .- O 00 -n ~ O iW ~ ~ ~ op M ~ O a0 N ~ o0 0 ~ 00 ~- ~ O ~ R 0 ~ .- O ~- I~ N O N t0 N O M ~ `N ~' N 00 O I~ O) I~ N O O Cfl N M o0 d' o0 d' N D ~ 0 N 0 ~ 0 N 0 ~ 0 N 0 ~ 0 N 0 •- 0 N 0 ~ 0 N 0 ~ 0 N 0 ~ 0~ ~ O N O N O N O N M N M N 0 N 0 N 0' N O N '0 N 0 ~- 0 r 0 N 0 ~ ~ ~- d. 'd' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 W O O O O O r e- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O f6 d U X O O_ W ~~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U U U U! U U U U U w w w w w w w w w ` Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y , m m m m! m m m m m M ~ 'cfl M r d' ~J M1 O M N M ~ M O 'M= ~ M N N N N?, N N N N N' O ;~ O 0.; ~ O O O M ~ ti ~ r H H h- 1- H O O O O f- H H F- ~ ~ ~ ~ W W W W. J J J Q J O O O ~ O U U U m U Q' U W Q Y O O m M N O W J U ~_ ~ 0.' N U U U U O 4 Q Q g O O O N m O O O m m m 0 Y M O ti m ~ ~ ~ ~ Q. U Q Q Z Z W ~ Q Z J ~- o2f W Q Q Q o2S ~ U a2S Q ~ J m m ~ ~ ~ V ~ Z ~ U O Q Q W g Y ' W Q g U ~ W m ~ ~ m tt~ M I~ ~ O O N ~ c- d' O M ~ N N N N N O ~ O t- O ~- N N O ~' N N O ~ N N O ~ .- N M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r ~ 0 W' : 0 Q' 0- ~' 0 ~ 0 ~ 0. ~ 0 Q.' 0 ~ O O O ~ ~ 0 a N N O N d