HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence •
Jason Schubert
From: Jason Schubert
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 3:57 PM
To: 'Iouise .barker @suddenlinkmail.com'
Cc: Molly Hitchcock
Subject: RE: Woodcreek 3 Replat
Louise,
While I understand the circumstances you have described, I cannot confirm that the ordinance language or staff
interpretation back in 1998 would allow for that type of non -plat subdivision to occur. In this instance, we'll go ahead
and move forward with this plat and send it to staff for next week's review. I'll also mention in looking at the type of
plat, it may qualify as a minor plat /replat that does not need to go to P &Z but could be reviewed and approved by staff.
A couple years ago state law changed where if a residential replat is a minor replat, it does not need to go through the
public notices and public hearing at P &Z. We'll look into that during the full review. Have a good weekend!
Thanks,
Jason Schubert, AICP
Principal Planner
Planning & Development Services
City of College Station
office: (979) 764 -3570
fax: (979) 764 -3496
www.cstx.gov
City of College Station
Home of Texas A &M University
From: Louise Barker fmailto: Iouise .barker@suddenlinkmail.coml
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 4:02 PM
To: Jason Schubert
Subject: Woodcreek 3 Replat
Jason,
I received your comment about the adjoining 0.18 acre tract. This tract was cut out of the Carroll tract back in
1998 (before the UDO) for the then owner of Lot 13, Block 12, Woodcreek 3. If I remember correctly, at that time as
long as the property was being sold to an adjoining landowner there was no need for "replat" until such time the
property was going to be developed. Since that time the Carroll tract has been even further divided without a plat
requirement. Also, Lot 13 has been sold to the now current owner along with the 0.18 acre tract listed as Tract 2 in each
deed — it has never been left off of a deed with Lot 13 since 1998.
Please show me exactly where in the UDO that I will have to prepare a Master Preliminary of the entire parent
tract for something that happened 14 years ago. This will be next to impossible to complete since the original parent
tract is now under several separate owners, with improvements. How do I explain to them that I have to have their
permission to enter their property for survey, get them to sign an application, etc. Not only that, the extra cost to the
current owner of Lot 13 will be tremendous for the surveying services required to do this for only 0.18 of an acre.
I think at this time it should be taken under consideration to not require this preliminary in this situation. The
current owner did not have any idea (nor did I) that this would be required just for him to use this portion of his
property. Staff has the authority to take a common sense look at some of the requirements for these replats and can
decide whether to strictly hold to the letter of the UDO.
For some reason I can't get the UDO to pull up this afternoon on the City's website, so if you could send me the
section you are looking at for this comment I would appreciate it. Thanks!
Louise Barker
• 1
Kerr Surveying LLC
979 - 268 -3195
2