HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCE 05/15/03 THU 16:03 FAX 979 775 5107 Kevin M. Jimmerson 63' /6 I2002
N 91 B1g 413' ■
May 13, 2003 i x
.'I.!vrij i.H(ti.ti � J
College Station City Council
College Station Planning and Zoning Commission
1101 Texas Ave. S.
College Station, Texas 7784
RE: Conditional Use Permit Request for 201 College Main
Dear Council and Commissioners,
The Northgate District Association is aware that the property owner at 201 College Main has
requested a Conditional Use Permit for a nightclub at this location. Our organization, which is
comprised of 77 of the property and business owners in the area, discussed the request at our
meeting on May 13 We believe that it is in the best long -term interest of the Northgate area for
the City to approve the permit that has been requested for this property.
As the members of our organization have a vested interest in safeguarding and improving the
vitality and character of the area, we are uniquely situated to evaluate the compatibility of any
change of use that is proposed for the area. It is our desire that Northgate be a vibrant multi-use
area comprised of a balance of retail, commercial, office, entertainment, institutional, including
municipal and religious facilities, and residential uses.
Over the past several years the City has invested quite a lot of time and money into infrastructure
improvements in this area to spur the revitalization of the district. It is imperative to the
revitalization process that the City takes steps at this time to foster the retention of existing
businesses and encourage development of new business enterprises.
Again, we respectfully request that the City approve the Conditional Use Permit that has been
requested for the property located at 201 College Main.
Sincerely,
0C/
Suanne Pledger
Northgate District Association
www.northgatetx.com
"Relating people to the Living God through Jesus Christ"
,..„,,‘ 417 University Drive
�� ' College Station, Texas 77840 -1375
Office: 979 - 846 -8731
/A &M Fax: 979 - 846 -3387
United Methodist Church Email: office @am - umc.org
June 10, 2003
Anne Hazen, City Council Place 6
PO Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Subject: Public Hearing for Conditional Use Permit for 201 College Main
Thursday, June 12, 2003
A &M United Methodist Church is opposed to the granting of this request for a nightclub in the Northgate area. This
proposed nightclub would be well within the 200 ft. distance from our doors on College Main and create an
environment that would be unacceptable for the ministries that will occur within that facility.
In the next few months we will be coming to the City Council with a proposal for a $4,000,000 building project which
will replace our present building on College Main. That facility will house our College ministries, Children's
ministries, Youth ministries, and a weekly worship service. It will greatly enhance the continued upgrading of the
Northgate area and support the work of the City Council which has led to the recent upgrades in streets, parking, and
utilities. We are committed to being in the Northgate area for years to come and to being good neighbors and good
stewards of our properties.
We are not trying to be unreasonable to our neighbors in the Northgate area. We have not opposed restaurants that
serve alcoholic beverages. But the type of activities incumbent with a nightclub and the patrons of such
establishments make it necessary to have some type of buffer for our children and youth. The granting of this
Conditional Use Permit on 201 College Main would, in our opinion, violate that buffer zone.
I appreciate your time and consideration of our concerns. I apologize that my schedule would not permit me to be
there to voice these concerns in person. If you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them. Thanks again.
i , ce and Peace,
•r. Je 1 Neff, S 0 • Pastor
COLLEGE STATION
P. 0. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas Avenue • College Station, TX 77842
Tel: 409 764 3500
June 30, 2000
A &M United Methodist Church
417 University Dr.
College Station, Texas 77840
Dear Church Representatives,
Thank you for returning the information previously requested in regards to the usage of your
Family Life Center. As you are aware we have been trying to determine which doors of your
facility must be measured to when processing an alcoholic beverage permit. After reviewing our
ordinances and the information you provided, we have determined that the Family Life Center
building does not itself constitute a church according to our Code of Ordinances.
Our Code of Ordinances, Section 13.D.1. defines a church as, "a building used principally for
religious worship and in which persons assemble and congregate to worship at least once each
week and which is owned by such congregation or persons or leased by such congregation for a
period of more than one year."
•. .„ ',e eti` 3! i :. Ti •` • • •• "�:$�E ., Y�`' mss"
of building it could not be determined that the principal use of the biding was for weeklya
worship services that have occurred continuously for more than a yeari ads that the
principal use of the building is for a private day school, with the second most frequent use as thae
of a fellowship hall. One of the response letters that we received from you even stated that this
building is a "multi-use facility!'
Therefore, we have determined that the appropriate doors to measure to, when we evaluate any
alcoholic beverage permit, are the public doors of the building physically connected to your
sanctuary! Thank you again for the information you provided. If you have any questions, please
call 764 -3570.
Sincerely, 1 -
`Y ,i 742 -t / I
\ter A n •
J Jim n rsq
-Staff Planner
Home of Texas A &M University
)
C CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
POST OFFICE BOX 9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77842-9980
(409) 764 -3507
MEMORANDUM yiart4,
TO: Connie Hooks, City Secretary f&-004/74'1-
FROM: Roxanne Nemcik, Acting City Attorney
SUBJECT: Issuance of a Beer and Wine Permit to Texadelphia
DATE: January 17, 1997
QUESTION PRESENTED:
Todd McDaniel has asked me to provide you with a legal opinion that answers the question:
Whether the method the staff has used to measure the distance from Texadelphia's business to any
church within the general vicinity comports with state law?
SHORT ANSWER
CHAPTER 1, SECTION 10D(2) OF TIE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION CODE OF ORDINANCES prohibits
the sale of alcoholic beverages within 300 feet of a church, public hospital or public school.
Mr. Madden, the owner of a Texadelphia franchise, has submitted an application for a wine and
beer permit to the TABC and the City of College Station. The proposed Texadelphia Restaurant
will be located at 317 to 319 Patricia Street in College Station -- Northgate Zoning District. The
staff has measured the distances between the proposed restaurant and any churches in the locale
to determine whether the City may issue a permit. Todd has forwarded a map depicting the on-
the-ground measunnents that the staff has taken. The issue here is whether this measurement
comports with state law?
DISCUSSION:
An incorporated city may enact regulations applicable in the city prohibiting the sale of alcoholic
beverages by a dealer whose place of business is within 300 feet of a church, public school, or
public hospital. In order to regulate, the city must first have enacted an ordinance.' Because the
City Council has enacted an ordinance prohibiting the sale of liquor within 300 feet of a church,
Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission
2 is defined in our crdinanoe as "a , each. _ � k ' , for dli _ a chip and in which Persons
assemble .. u F . -�`. � .:.. to '. ' e. at once 1R and w L his owned by . i » oongnegatton or
o,rricasetbrimaksona one
SECTION 109.33(A), TEXAS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CODE (VERNON SUPP. 1997)
See, Ezzell v. Texas Alcoholic Beverage Conunission et al., 528 S.W.2d 888, 890 (Tex. App. — Fort Worth 1975
no writ).
jt/djan97 /Ww.doc
Connie Hooks
January 17, 1996
Page 2
public school or public hospital, and the ordinance is not in conflict with state law, we may regu-
late these businesses.
Notwithstanding the enabling legislation authorizing a municipality to regulate, the legislature has
established a method by which cities must measure the distance This method of measuring
distance cannot be altered by a city. The prescribed method to measure the distance between the
place of business where alcoholic beverages are sold and the church shall be along the property
lines of the street fronts and from front door to front door, and in direct lines across intersec-
tions. The city's ordinance prescribes the same method of measurement. In addition to the
statutory method of measurement, Texas courts have further interpreted the statutory language to
provide the following guidance concerning distance measurement. Consequently, these rules
should be used in conjunction with the statutory method of measurment when computing
distance.
1. At street intersections the crossing should be diagonally instead of crossing
each street at right angles.
2. Where there is more than one front door, any door of the church or institution
can be considered the front door.
3. A city street does not have to be crossed at an intersection with another street
but rather at the point on the block where the front door of the church or insti-
tution is located. °
I have attached two diagrams to this memorandum that illustrate the correct method of measuring
the distance from a church to a business that sells alcohol. These diagrams are excerpts from two
cases that are cited in the footnotes hereinbelow -- Robinson and Ezzell.
The revised map that the staff has submitted to you measures the distance in this case in accor-
dance with the A1,coxouc BEVERAGE CODE and case law. Using the prescribed method of
measurement, the distance from Texadelphia to the closest church, A&M United Methodist,
exceeds the 300 feet restriction. Thus, you may approve the application that Texadelphia has
submitted for a beer and wine permit.0
RN jla
Attachments
cc: Skip Noe
Todd McDaniel
City Council
s See, SECTION 109.33(B), TEXAS ALc0HOUC BEVERAGE CODE (VERNON SUPP. 1997).
6 See, City of Wichita Falls v. Abell, 566 S.W.2d 336, 339 (Tex. App. — Fort Worth 1978 writ refd.).
t Id; See also` Ezzell v. Texas Alcoholic Beverage Comm., 528 S.W.2d at 891.
Hallum v. Liquor Board 166 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. Civ. App. — Dallas 1942, writ refd.)
9 Stubbs v. Texas Liquor Control Board 166 S.W.2d 178 (Tex. Civ. App. —Dallas 1942, writ refd.)
I° Robinson v. City of Dallas, 193 S.W.2d 821, 823 (Tex. Civ. App. — Austin 1946, writ refd.)
Jr/c/Jan97/texa.doc