Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneousSTAFF NOTES Lacour Phase One Case #96-209 Discretionary Items: I~Tone. Ordinance Requirements: Clearly distinguish the plat boundary. sure ose 2 acre road right-of-way will line up wi le. 2.791 ere tr 's not included in Use the same wording that was used in the South Creek Phase One final plat for the University Commons Apartments for the Wolf Pen Creek dedication area totaling 5.100 acres. rrect eage for 1 ubtr e nunimum de i ar ® ed with t .plat. Clarify th to or remove th ote on lot 1 that re he pr ed Wolf Pen Creek ® dedic are 'ncluded i of 1 t be dedicated b separate instrument. fit is , t 's plat, d istinguish wean t 20' strip and the 5.100 acre tract to be dad' tad.) vicini ocati n on-s~ert~-" ~. _ L~'~G2~2~ ~~r-~ Comments/Concerns: ~ ~ ~..,,,_~ 4 L~ Coordinate electrical .service detail with Electrical Operations Coordinator Tony Michalsky at (409) 764-3660. ~~~~~ c.u--e-`-- a.-J The 20' underground electrical easement shown on t e final plat should be changed to a ® 20' public utility easement. Coordinate telephone service details with G.T.E. Representative Laverne Akin at (409) 821-4723. .r~I~INIC~P~4~ .t?ET~.,~ ~P1VI~N~ GI~QUP '03 Flollernan Drive East • College Station, Tezas 7?80.409-693-5359 • F.9~L• 409-693-443 Engineering, Surveying, Planning and Environmental Cansuttant~ F_~Y # NO. PAGES TO FOLLOW ~ DATE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ To .~ o~v~e.__ 1~ e.e.. G~ dam-, (~~R h n -~,~ FROi~'i Gs'~alrJ 1~ If there is a problem with this transmissior~ ~Iease caI SOS CONFIDE~VT'IALITFIYOTICE: Thisfacsimile message and accomp P documents are intended~or the etclusive and conftdenrial use of the indivrc the message is addressed CO~IEIVTS ~~ 3 [e ~e.r ~yt,.d 5~.~ ~ ~~~ rrcmunicarion d/o ii or enriry to which fir, VV_ ~ ~~ 1.._i' ~ 1 1 S G K 5 S ~ v~} i~ 1 "~ ~ z V1 L~ Z °~ e~- l~~ ro'Y[ r CcL ~ (~ 2~ ~: tn1 ~. ~ ~ I ( ~ ra,~~ -~crr rtes o ~-F f~~ i~!'~ , ~,/ `Tka,~ (c -,,, G~ .~r u~i ct s ft's ~m c -L ~ !~T ~~~ '`'.ti ~~ ~' ~, 1~IUNICIP~~ D~~~LOPMENT GROUP 203 Ilolleman Drive East • G'ollcgc Starion, Texas T?s40 • d09-693-5359 • F.4X.' 409-G93-4243 Engineering. Surveying. Planning and Environments[ Consultanu ~,%~F July 26, 1996 Jane Kee, City Planner Development Services Department City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue South College Station, texas 77840 Re: LaCour Subdivision Variance request Dear Jane: As we had discussed previously, we have encountered several difficulties during our preliminary design for this project and are seeking to have them resolved in the fastest manner possible. As you recall, SCC is Iegally obligated to have the Office Max. store ready for, business by 31 December 1996, so'time is of the essence to us in these matters. We arc requesting a variance to two items: Item 1 Variance to 7.1~ .2.a, Page 7-37 We would like the :approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission to fill our site all the way to the dedication line as we discussed out our pre-development meeting of 15 July. Obviously if we do this, it will be necessary to place fill in the dedication area as well, in order to cazry the slope back to natural ground. I spoke with Kent Lana about this yesterday and he told me that the ordinance would not. allow us to do this without a variance- We feel this is a reasonable approach to developing the site- if we cannot do this we are. deprived of about 20 feet of buildable area on what is proving to be very tight site. Our only other altenzative to this that would allow us full use of the site would be the erection of a retaining wall the entire length o f the Tot along the dedication line. There are several drawbacks to this approach, the first being that the dedicated area would be below a 5 foot high wall and access would be difficult. Aesthetically, a simple concrete wall will not be attzactive, and any improvement oC this solution will result in more delays and expense. Tn addition, this option would cost over $130000 for a simple concrete wall and such an expenditure would probably kill the entire project. What we propose to do will benefit the city- the dedication area will receive over X5000 dollars of free fill, compacted in place and sodded. This is something that will probably be required when the jogging. paths and walkways are developed, any way. Why not let us do it now? (See accompanying sketch) jape I<ee Page 2 July 26, 1996 Item 2 Variance to 7.F.l.a.(7}, Page 7-36 As we discussed atpre-development meeting, this may not actually require a variance, as it is my understanding that the building facade on the creek side will be as aesthetically acceptable as on the front. If this is the case, we appear to be allowed the use of compact car spaces, and. done require a variance. Nevertheless, we wish to have this interpretation approved by the staff and. P & Z. P,t this stage we simply must know, we can't. do all this site design based on a supposition. We seek to allow the southern tier of parking to be developed as "compact car "spaces. The reason for this is twofold. We can pzoyide more parking spaces on the site and lesson the problem of congestion. t~dditionally, since the compact space is only 7.5 feet by 16 feet we are able to accomplish what David Brochu suggested. at our meeting- we can provide 2 t~et of bumper overhang and still have. two',feet available for a hedge type planting .and the irrigation system, all without encroaching into the .Wolf Pen Creek Dedication. Area, or shifting the parking lot back, which. also creates design and space utilization problems. This is also a reasonable request. We sincerely believe that neither. of these .two variances will damagee the city in any way, or threaten the integrity of the Wolf Pen Creek corridor. These variances will allow for the most effi.cicnt use of the site, improve the aesthetics of the creek and the developed site and will allow for the enhancement of the WPC by actually having a high visibility commercial project succeed. We ask for your support is this matter. Please call if you have questions. Sincerely, Gregory K. Taggart Vice President ooossl-C.2a- is ~27s1) f\t TS ------s ~e~r`Ca7~`v-rt t_i /ler _ ~ Prm f~osc.4l F, ~I Q ~~ - Arty m f Q Vgri a n ct ~ ~ li deb kcs4- ~VCIo D /i'LL~. ~ S f TL f- o t ~ (.- o~ G a c,t 5~.~,bd~visi~ N afu ra I C~ ro ,.~ n ~ ~D ~ De d ~`~ ~,'a,.~ ~'+^c.o` ~Iaod,.~0.Y L~~e end ~bsaf~ft Limi} o ~ ~i l[ Yc~r'`avtC~ ~Cyr~t,zs~' U ~' c c.lc. GI~aKK~j VARIANCE REQUEST ~- The following specific variation from the ordinance is requested:. ~ ~ ~ L.y Gv e- w ~ ~i ~-it ~c~,,,,2S ~~ ~ mil/ v . ~ fem. ~~~G~ ~~ol / c~ f~'w~ ~/'.~ rr~~ /-~-7L~, ~~- ¢o c2a fit ~G l This variance is necessary due to the following special conditions: _ - L ~. ,. _ -- n . _ /. ' _ I _ , ~ n , ~- . ~ n -~-ltis~ ~ an 1.-iii' P ~'IA !~D (it 9 ~/1 The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible: ~"b~cv~ ~ ~ 3 ~-~- few ~~d~si l~r f This variance will not be contrary to the public interest by virtue of the following facts: ~ ~~ w e c ~' / ~ Cos ' d~ s s ~ f c~S~4t~ Y/~-E "~C`i/!l / c.at <S~ K v~ GtJGI / , - GJ \~c/ c+ ~~~- 1 S i c~ f10 ~I. `- e facts stated in this application are true and correct. / ~~ ~. 2 u`- Applicant Date ~~ ~ CC~-elyvl ~, l~ ~-~ t~°" ~G ~~ w / ,,~A smr~-//< y,.,[`/ ~C/!/~/l~f , _ 9 / a G The unnecessary hardship (s) involved by meeting the provisions of the ordinance other than financial hardship is/are: 1~7UNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP 203 Holleman Drive East • College Station, Texas 77840.409-693-5359 • FAX.• 409-693-4243 Engineering, Surveying, Planning and Environmental Consultants ar~ 4:,„ July 26, 1996 Jane Kee, City Planner Development Services Department City of College Station l 101 Texas. Avenue South College Station, texas 77840 Re: LaCour Subdivision Variance request Dear Jane: As we had discussed previously, we have encountered several difficulties during our preliminary design for this project and are seeking to have them resolved in the fastest manner possible. As you recall, SCC is legally obligated to have the Office Max store ready for business by 31 December 1996, so time is of the essence to us in these matters. We are requesting a variance to two items: Item 1 Variance to 7.F.2.a, Page 7-37 We would like the approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission to fill our site all the way to the dedication line as we discussed out our pre-development meeting of 15 July. Obviously if we do this, it will be necessary to place fill in the dedication area as well, in order to carry the slope back to natural ground. I spoke with .Kent Laza about this yesterday and he told me that the ordinance. would not allow us to do this without a variance. We .feel this is a reasonable approach to developing the site- if we cannot do this we are deprived of about 20 feet of buildable area on what is proving to be very tight site. Our only other alternative to this that would allow us full use of the site. would be the erection of a retaining wall the entire length of the lot along the dedication line. There are several drawbacks to this approach, the first being that the dedicated area would be below a 5 foot high wall and access would be difficult. Aesthetically, a simple concrete wall will. not be attractive, and any improvement of this solution will result in more delays and expense. In addition, this optionwould cost over $130000 for a simple concrete wall and suck an expenditure would probably kill the entire project. What we propose to do will benefit the city- the dedication area will receive over $5000 dollars of free fill, compacted in place and sodded. This is something that will probably be required when the jogging paths and walkways are developed, any way. Why not let'us do it now? (See accompanying sketch) Jane Kee Page 2 July 26, 1996 Item 2 Variance to 7.F.l.a.(7), Page 7-36 As eve discussed at pre-development meeting, this may not actually require a variance, as it is my understanding that the building facade on the creek side will be as aesthetically acceptable as on the front. If this is the case,. we appear to be allowed the use of compact caz spaces, and dont require a variance. Nevertheless, we wish to have this interpretation approved by the staff and P & Z. At this stage we simply must know, we can't do all this site design based on a supposition. We seek to allow the southern tier of parking to be developed as "compact car "spaces. The reason for this is twofold. We can provide more parking spaces on the. site and lesson the problem of congestion. Additionally, since the compact space is only 7.5 feet by 16 feet we are able to accomplish what David B_ rochu suggested at our meeting- we can provide 2 feet of bumper overhang and still have two feet available for a hedge type planting and the imgation system, all without encroaching into the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication Area, or shifting the parking lot back, which also creates design and space utilization problems. This is also a reasonable request. We sincerely believe that neither of these two variances will damagee the city in any way, or threaten the. integrity of the Wolf Pen Creek comdor. These variances will allow for the most efficient use of the site, improve the aesthetics of the creek and the. developed site and will allow for the enhancement of the :WPC by actually having a high visibility commercial project succeed. We ask for your support in this matter. Please call if you have questions. Sincerely, Gregory K. Taggart Vice President 00081-C.20 - 16 (2751) 4 ~~ ~~~ l7ec~i Ga.~i~wt Li /~e~ ` ni'm~aosc~ ~'~~(I 4 ~~ ~ Ar~0.., o f ~G ~ vari qrt cc E ~n ~ ~eg~~s~ eve~o~,v-,LK ~ s i ~c !~ ! Lo-~ 2. 5wbd.,v; si~vt ~'xis~~vt ~ a't'u ra ( I Yp K K 0~. 20 ~ /~'r=.o~ GhaKvtc~ F. ~~ U ~laodw0.Y ~..,ne. a-~d ~bsofKfc Liwt i ~ o ~ ~i t[ (r~ Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the oversize participation .request in the amount of $7.874.40. City Attorney Recommendation: Chapter 9, Section 9-C of the City of College Station Code of Ordinances governs oversize participation for water lines. The City's participation is limited to 30% of the engineer's estimate unless the Council agrees otherwise and the project is placed out to public bid. Council Action Desired: Approval or denial of request. Supporting Materials: 1. Location Map 2. Oversize participation request 3. Engineer's estimate o:/group/dev-sere/v/96-209op From: Jane Kee To: City of College Station.City Hall(VMorgan), SVOLK Date: 9/2/96 9:19am Subject: Fred Heyne - Lacour tract -Reply becasue they don't have the $ to cover their cost of construction of Kyle, Jim and I disucssed it and offered that they could ask CC to amend their development agreement and perhaps have the row cost reduced by the amount of the construction cost, so when the city buys the row we get it minus the construction cost( and minus any improvement that is there -which was the original agreement). »> Shirley Volk 08/30/96 09:08am »> When Fred & I talked on Tuesday, he asked for "Mr. Callaway to have Mr. Shively" prepaze some kind of agreement regarding the completion of the construction of the rest of Kyle being ofd set by the purchase price of the R.O.W. Pm not exactly sure what he is talking about but I told him I would pass this on, and since you, V, are the "coordinator" on this project, I am passing it on to you, with a copy only going to Jane, who I believe is the co-coordinator, and to Jim who is THE BOSS! I suggested to Fred that it might be more expedient for him to have his attorney prepare something and then to submit it to our staff for review, but he wanted me to pass that request on, so Lam. He will probably bring it up again at the meeting with DRB! CC: City of College Station.City Hall(jcallaway), :. -_ '. '' '`~', 3,.'~"~~'71~;`.~`' Wyk -. ~' , 2 ~ ~~ _ ~ ~~' • • CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I 1 1101 Texas Avenue \ / Post Office Box 9960 ', College Station, Texas 77842-9960 (409).764-3500 , 'l 1996 An 8 P ~, Mr. Fred J. Heyne, III Mr. T. Robert LaCour f ~' SCC Development, Ltd. 3220 Williams Blvd. 212.1 Sage Road, Suite 380 Kenner, LA .70065 '' Houston,:Texas 77056 Mr, Greg Taggart Mr. Dicke LaCour Municipal Development Group 101 East Garden Street 203 Holleman Drive East Pensacola, Florida 32501. College Station, Texas 77840 Re: 4 339 & 7.891 acre tracts off Harvey Road in College Station '~ Dear Gentlemen: At long oast, please find enclosed an original or a copy of the fully executed Development Agreement. There are three originals. I have retained one for the City's records and am forwarding the other two originals to Mr. Heyne and Mr. Dick LaCour in ' Florida. Mr. T. Robert LaCour and Mr. Taggart are receiving copies of the signed document for their records as well. Last week a question was raised about the documentation necessary to effectuate the transfer to the City of the 5.1 acre, depicted as the "Wolf Pen Creek Dedication" on the plat. After conferring with Ms. Veronica Morgan in the City's Engineering office, it is my understanding that the City's standard form "dedication" language (which appears directly, on the plat) is being somewhat modified--pursuant to discussions between Mr. Taggart and the _City's planning and engineering staffs--in order to accomplish the dedication of this property and the other tracts by the filing of the plat. If this is done, there is no need for any other "document" to transfer title: the dedication form, as modified, on the plat itself will be sufficient. For clarification, he use of the verb "donate" (as :opposed to "dedicate") in paragraph.. one of the Development Agreement was done, L' believe, at the request of the seller (presumably for tax purposes). No functional difference was intended as to the '~ ' Home of Texas A~Ni University Letter to Messrs. Heyne, LaCour, & Taggart Apri18, 1996 Page t manner of that dedication versus the dedications of property listed in paragraphs two and three (the "Kyle Street South. Dedication" and the 20 feet out of Lot One). I hope that the foregoing resolves any remaining concerns regarding the implementation of :this agreement. Once a closing is 'scheduled, please let my office or the City's Planning Department snow the date. Thank you for your cooperation and patience in this matter. Snc Pete Shively Assistant City ' ttorney Encl. cc: ' Jane Kee, City Planner Veronica Morgan, Asst. City Engineer 04/08/96. ps/c/feb96/lacour. doc 05/21/96 11:08 FAX 409 693 4243 M.D G /~r~ ^~~j (~'CJY' 1 ~VIUII~IC~P~.~ ~E~.LL4P1~~~T GRaUP 203 Holle-nan Drive East • College Station, Texas 17840.409-693-5359 • FAX.- 409-693-4243 Engineering, Surveying, Planning and Environmental Consultants Jl-" /2.11-~ FAX # ~S NO. PAGES TO FOLLOW DATE TO ~~~n~- ~~~ ~~ ~( ~S~ FROIK ~rd~'.~ 1 , If there is a problem with this transmission, please call us at 409-693-5359. C011~FIDEN?IALITYNO?ZCEr ThisfQCSimile message and accomparryingcomrnunicationand/or documents are intended for the exclresive and confidential use of the .individual or entity to which the message is addressed co.~rM~~vrs f~~ ~~~ (~tCou{ ~~ v ~~~ ~1 lGf ~iIP r~iool 05/21/96 11:08 FAX X09 693 1243 DID G n ~ ,~ lQ.] 0 0 2 1~~1 U11~ICIP.~4L DEVEL~PI~EN7' CrRO ~R 203 ffalleman Drirr East • College Station, resas 77840.409-693-5359 • F~3~Y: -f09-693-4243 F ~,~,rR,___~, S,nreying, P3zianing ~d Enravamtntel Consultants May 21, 1996 Kent Lana, P_ E_ City Engineer City +af College Station P.O. Box 9960 College Station, TX 77842-99b0 Re: LaCour Drainage Requirements Kent: Thank you for your response to our letter of May 3, 1996 concerning the requirements for drainage data on the above referenced project. There apparently was a misunderstanding as to the information the City ofEollege Station would require within the drainage report on this project_ We can certainly agree that the data mentioned in paragraph two of your letter of May 16, 1996 will and should be apart of any drainage report on this site_ Again, thanks for the clarifscation and infarmation. Sincerely, ~, North B. Wardell, P. E. C.E.O. /law ooosai<ts-ts(ZaBa? ~•, 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 FROM: Pete Shively, Assistant City Attorney ~5~ RE: Amendment to LaCour Development Agreement DATE: Thursday, November 21, 1996 Attached hereto is the 1~EI/I~E~, remised, revised, revl~c~1 revised draft of the Amendment to the Development Agreement form. I have incorporated the changes that you and SCC indicated on the marked up form that you sent back to me this morning. Please review Paragraph 12A now to see if it corresponds to what you want with respect to the signal conversion issue. One question that I had when Rox brought in the latest suggested language, is will the Office Max be able to safely use the drive to allow customers access to their new parking lot during the interim time between the .date they open and the date the City completes the signal conversion. If not, I suspect that Office Max will not want the City to wait that long, or they will want to delay opening the store until the signal light is ready. Of course, if they can use the drive safely, this is not an issue. Time to date = 12.25 X $45 = $551.25 10/3/96 ps/c/ t SCC-GP; Inc. ~®le General Partner November-22, 1996 Mrs. Shirley Volk :City of College Station P. O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas .77842-9960 Re: 4.339 and 7.891 acre tracts off Harvey Road in College Station Dear Shirley: Enclosed please find a check made out to the City ofCollege Station for expenses incurred and one signed copy of the Amendment to Development Agreement. I am sending. the :other three agreement copies to Dick LaCour for his signature and return to you by Federal Express. Very trulyyours, SCC COLLEGE STATION PAR RS, LTD. .~~:-~ ,~ Corky Rebstock, Office of Fred J. Heyne, III cc: Mr: Scott Deskins enc/check and amendment 2121 Sage Road,. Suite 380 Telephone (713) 627-7460 Houston; Texas .7705E Telecopier (713) 965-9345 `•- CITY. ~F COLLEGE STATIO.I`I `~ please do not hesrtate to call me. Post Office Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77842-9960 (409) 7643500 April 29, 1996 Lawyer's Title Co. of $razos County 1673 Briarcrest Suite B Bryan, TX 77802 Attention: Colleen Goodrich Dear Ms. Goodrich: In response to a request the City received from Mr."Robert Latour, I am sending the original copy of the plat of the Latour Subdivision, and a Dopy of the Development Agreement the City has entered into with Latour Investments and SGC, Development, Ltd. covering the exceptions to the platting process for the.' Latour-Subdivision I would point. out that pursuant to paragraph 13 found on Page 5 of 10 of the Development Agreement, - the plat cannot be filed for record with Brazos County until a financial guarantee is posted with the City for fire costs of design and construction of a waterline from Harvey Road to the most southerly property line of Lot One and from Holleman to the most southerly property line of the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication. As an added reminder, I would point out that pursuant to paragraph 5 found on Page 3 of 10 of the Development Agreement, within seven days of the sale of Lot One, Latour shall provide the City with paid tax certificates from all applicable taxing authorities showing payment of all ad valorem taxes for the subjcet properly. I hope these documents will help expedite the closing and sale of the property. If you have any questions, Yours very truly, ~~ Shirley J.' Volk Development Coordinator ce: Mr. Robert Latour 3220. Williams Blvd.. Kenner, LA 70065 cil~ rte Home of Texas A&M University 1 .~ CI Mr. Dick LaCour 101 East Garden Street Pensacola, FL 32501 Mr. T. Robert LaCour 3220 Williams Blvd. Kenner, LA 70065 Ms. Colleen Goodrich Lawyer's Title Company of Brazos County 1673 Briarcrest Drive, Suite 104B Bryan, TX 77802 Mr. Fred J. Heyne, III SCC Development, Ltd. 2121 Sage Road, Suite 380 Houston, TX 77056 Mr. Gerald L. (Buddy) Winn Brazos County Tax Assessor-Collector 300 William Joel Bryan Parkway Bryan, TX 77803 Re: 1996 Taxes on 5.1 acres -the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication Dear Ms. Goodrich & Gentlemen: As you may recall, last April LaCour Investments platted and sold a certain 4.339 acre tract in College Station to SCC Development, Ltd.. This transaction was completed subject to a "Development Agreement" between the parties and the City of College Station. Among other things, the Development Agreement provided that LaCour Investments would dedicate by plat the adjacent 5.10 acre tract (referred to as the.. Wolf Pen Creek Dedication) and that LaCour Investments would pay the "pro-rata portion of taxes for the current year for ... the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication." See Paragraphs 1 & 5 of the Development Agreement. It is my understanding that the subject plat, .including the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication, was filed by the City's Development Services Staff sometime in May. Recently, the City has received a 1996. Tax Statement from the .Brazos County Tax Assessor-Collector for the 5.1 acres of the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication. A copy of this statement is enclosed herewith for your reference. This statement shows that there is a total of $4,132.99 in 1996 taxes due on this tract. Subsequent telephone conversations between representatives of the City's Accounting Department and the Tax Collector's Office have confirmed Ghat this amount is the pro-rata portion of taxes that accrued on the property from January 1, 1996 to May 31, 1996 and would thus be attributable to LaCour Investments and should have been paid out of the closing costs for the 4.339 acre tract. CITY OF' COLLEGE STATIOI`i -. - ~ ,; . Tuesday, January 07, 1997 ps/c/ 1 /7/97 ,, Letter to Ms. Goodrich & Messrs. LaCour, Heyne, & Winn January 7, 1997 Page 2 I have spoken to Ms. Goodrich at Lawyer's Title about this matter, and although she is not certain, it is her recollection that the monies credited to the Buyer for the unpaid 1996 taxes at closing included the taxes on the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication. The Settlement Statement, dated 4/19/96, indicates that a total of $7,196.91 was credited to SCC for 1996 taxes from "01/01/96 - 04/26/96." See lines 210, 211, & 213 of the Settlement Statement, a copy of which is also enclosed .herewith. Several possibilities occur to me as to why the Brazos County Tax Collector would send the City a tax. statement for $4132.99 in accrued 1996 taxes.. on the Wolf Pen Creed Dedication. However, at this .point T have little inclination to spend additional time attempting to resolve this matter. I would greatly appreciate it if you couldwork together to determine whether the taxes were paid but just not properly credited,. the taxes were not paid, the taxes for this parcel were not included on the settlement statement, the taxes were paid but did not include the period of time between the closing date and plat filing date, or something else. Please just let me know before January 31, 1997 what. resolution you arrive at and on what date these 1996 taxes were (or will be) paid; As always, thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Since ly, 'Pete Shively Assistant City Attorney Enc. cc: Ms. Jane Kee. City Planner aT%ls.' N~talic Tl~om~~,`Plat~in~~ TzchT~ican Mr. Phillip Guillen, Accounting Asst. ps/c/ 1/7/97 Front: Jane Kee I To: PSHIVELY If 'Date: 3/18/96 10:54am p Subject: lacour I just called Heyne and told him was approved and reiterated 4 things that still need to happen. 1. guarantee for waterline -bond from SCC and cash from Lacour. Agremnt, says plat won't be filed until this occurs. The $ will actually come from lacour out of the closing proceeds so we need to time the filing of the plat with the closing. Shirley and Nat, keep this in mind once the FP is approved by CC. I. 2. Access es. to WPC _ ~s may be on the FP but I don't recall at the moment. If it's not we can have it as a condition or get some separate instnunent. Pd t prefer it be on the plat. 3. back taxes -within 7 days of closing. ~0,~ /~IW OA1 f~ 7/,~~jG ~ i' 4. eng. grade study. This will be done of site plan but Heyne wants to get lacour's 25% at closing so it won't hold him up. That's fine with Ci as lon as our amount doesn't exceed 3,750 and SCC picks up any amount over the est. from Greg of 7,500. Heyne agrees to this and will work out the specifics with ~' Lacour. Heyne thinks we're all great. Obviously he's very intelligent. ~ `~'~' ""' ~ i'~~%~[ui ~/`-' ~~~'~~ 7 CC: JCALLAWAY, SVOLK, NTHOMAS ;i \ ~ ~I \ ~ \ i i i • I ^~ I ~ ~ ~ \ ~. ~ ~~ ~, 1 ~^~`\ • ` 1 V ~ `^` • 0 11' ~^ \- ~ V ~/ ~ ~ ~< ~~~ ~ CITY OI~ COLLEGE STATIOI`I .., Tuesday, January 07, 1997 Mr. Dick LaCour 101 East Garden Street Pensacola, FL 32501 Mr. Fred J. Heyne, III SCC Development, Ltd. 2121 Sage Road, Suite 380 Houston, TX 77056 Mr. T. Robert LaCour 3220 Williams Blvd. Kenner, LA 70065 Ms. Colleen Goodrich Lawyer's Title Company ofBrazos County 1673 Briarcrest Drive, Suite 104B Bryan, TX 77802 Mr. Gerald L. (Buddy) Winn .Brazos County Tax Assessor-Collector 300 William Joel Bryan Parkway .Bryan, TX 77803 Re: 1996 Taxes on 5.1 acres -the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication Dear Ms. Goodrich & Gentlemen: As you may recall, last April LaCour Investments platted and sold a certain 4.339 acre tract in College Station to SCC Development, Ltd.. This transaction was completed subject to a "Development Agreement" between the parties and the City of College Station. Among other things, the Development. Agreement provided that LaCour Investments would dedicate by plat the adjacent 5.10 acre tract (referred to as the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication) and that LaCour Investments would pay the "pro-rata portion of taxes .for the current year for ... the Wolf Pen Creek. Dedication." See Paragraphs 1 & 5 of the Development Agreement. It is my understanding that the subject plat, including the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication, was filed by the City's Development Services Staff sometime in May. .Recently,. the City has received a 1996 Tax Statement from the Brazos County Tax Assessor-Collector for the 5.1 acres of the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication. A copy of this statement is enclosed herewith for your reference. This statement shows that there is a total of $4,132.99 in 1996 taxes due on this tract. Subsequent telephone conversations between representatives of the City's Accounting Department and the Tax Collector's Office have confirmed that this amount is the pro-rata portion of taxes that accrued on the property from January 1, 1996 to May 31, 1996 and would thus be attributable to LaCour Investments and should have. been paid out of the closing costs for the 4.339 acre tract. ps/c/ ~ ~, Letter to Ms. Goodrich & Messrs. LaCour, Heyne, & Winn January 7, 1997 Page 2 I have spoken to Ms. Goodrich at Lawyer's Title about this matter, and although she is not certain,. it is her recollection that the monies credited to the Buyer for the unpaid 1996 taxes at closing included the taxes on the Wolf Pen Creek Dedication.. The Settlement Statement, dated 4/19/96, indicates that a total of $7,196.91 was credited to SCC for 1996 taxes from "01/01/96 - 04/26/96." See lines 210, 211, & 213 of the Settlement Statement, a copy of which is also enclosed herewith. Several possibilities occur: to me as to why the Brazos County Tax Collector would send the City a tax statemerrt for $4132.99 in accrued 1996 taxes on the Wolf Pen Creed Dedication. However, at this point I have little inclination to spend additional time attempting to resolve this matter. I would greatly :appreciate it if you could work together to determine whether the taxes were paid but just not properly credited,. the taxes were not paid, the taxes for this parcel were not included on the settlement statement, the taxes were .paid. but did :not include. the period of time between the closing date and plat filing date, or something else. Please just let me know before January 31, 1997 what resolution you arrive at and on what date these 1996 taxes were (or will be) paid. As always, thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sin ly, Pete Shively Assistant City Attorney Enc. cc: I~~ls. Jane ltc~. {'itv Plaiulcr Ms. Natalie Thomas, Planning Technician Mr. Phillip Guillen, Accounting Asst. ps/c/ 1/7/97 12i©6196 11:11 A. G. EDIJARDS -~ 4~9 764 3496 N0.255 D01 Facsimile Cover Sheet To: ~~. Company: Phone: ~~~ ~ 3~~~P Fax:(,~0~~ , ~ ~'~`~`~ From: Company: J -G- ~~~~ ~° r Phone: 9a~) ~3~-~~ !1 ~ dab Fax: (gbh} ~~,~- ..Date: 1 ~, ~ ~ ~q ~ Pages including this e cod r page: Comments: G~--Etas-kz~ ~-~ ~`^.~ ~t,c- G~e~N ~, ~, ~.~n ~'c;e'