The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03/04/1968 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission 6 ti- tJ • MINUTES OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION � �`v`' (14 �� '�`• March 4, 1968 o- C?4N..)C6'u'U p1 7 J\I R w Members Present: Burns, Chairman; Janne, Preston, Cooper, Parker and Goehring. The meeting was called to order at 5:15 p.m. before a standing room crowd of interested College Station residents, all of whom were concerned with action taken by the Commission at the December 4, 1967 meeting, which action resulted in the rezoning of Lots 3, 4,5 and 6 of Block 1, Oakwood Addition from residential to Apartment House. Mr. E. C. Klipple of 117 Pershing, College Station, presented and read a petition to the Commission. A copy of which is attached. Mrs. Mabel Barger also addressed the Commission, a copy of which is attached. • Mr. Badgett, Dr. Sorenson and Clyde Bloom also presented their views. Dr. Dan Russell also presented views pertaining to newspaper notice on the rezoning and pointed out the inadequate communication between the Commission and interested parties of the Oakwood Addition. Chairman Ed Burns assured Dr. Russell and group that proper steps would be taken in the future to insure correct communication with interested parties on future rezoning. Chairman Burns thanked the group for their interest and stated that no action would be taken concerning this matter until proper legal aspects could he ascertained from the City Attorney, Don Dillon. On a motion by Parker, seconded by Cooper, the minutes of the February 23, 1968 meeting were approved. Motion carried. / The Commission was advised of a request by Marshall Miller for rezoning of Lots 1,2 and 3, Block 2, College Park from residential to Apartment House. Their being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, . Dennis H. Goehring Secretary DG/lc r- ■ March V, 1968 To the City Planning and Zoning Commission Gentlemen: My name is E. C. Klipple and I live at 117 Pershing Street, where I have made my home since 1945. I have been selected by residents of Oakwood Addition to present a request that you use your influence to get City Ordinance No 555 repealed. Dr. J. R. Couch, who was our chief spokesman at the City Council last Monday night, is out of town this after- noon, but before leaving, he informed me that he had the support of nearly 100 percent of the Oakwood residents on seeking repeal of this ordinance. In particular, I have been asked to convey personal requests for repeal of Ordinance 555 from the following homeowners who live within 200 ft. of the Cofer property : Mr. and Mrs. Allan Madeley . Mr. and Mrs ; R, H. Mitchell Mrs . J. W. Barger Mr. and Mrs . H. L. Heaton Mr. and Mrs . Joe T. Sanders Mr. and Mrs'. E. C. Klipple I shall not list all the reasons advanced by the various residents in making this request. I mention in passing, however, that, so far as we know, only one resident of Oakwood (other than Mr. Cofer) recognized the newspaper fine print sufficiently to get a city map in time to know what property was involved in this ordinance. At this time, I would like for Mrs. Mabel Barger to read a nice statement she has prepared. I believe it expresses the feeling of the •Oakwood Community. Sincerely, E. c . la:4111--€12— E. C. Klipple • 4 . v 411 I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD AND GIVE MY REASONS FOR OPPOSING ANY CHANGES IN THE ZONING OF THE COFER PROPERTY IN AND ADJACENT TO BLOCK ONE IN THE OAKWOOD ADDITION OF COLLEGE STATION. IN 1948, MY LATE HUSBAND AND I PURCHASED THREE LOTS, NINE- TEN-AND-ELEVEN, IN BLOCK ONE OF THE OAKWOOD ADDITION. THIS PROPERTY IS NINETY FEET AWAY FROM THE COFER PROPERTY. LATE IN 1949 CONSTRUCTION WAS COMPLETED ON OUR HOME, WHICH IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE OF PERMANENT-TYPE CONSTRUCTION. WE SELECTED THIS LOCATION BECAUSE THE OAKWOOD ADDITION WAS A NICE, QUIET RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, INSURED BY RESTRECTIONS IN ALL OF THE DEEDS, LIMITING IT TO ONLY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES. IN 1963 , THE RESTRICTIONS LAPSED , BUT THE CITY CONTINUED TO ZONE • THE AREA FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES. I HAVE THREE PRINCIPAL REASONS FOR OPPOSING THE ZONING CHANGES REQUESTED BY THE COFER'S FOR THEIR PROPERTY. FIRST, I HAVE BEEN INFORMED BY QUALIFIED REALTORS THAT THE VALUE OF MY PROPERTY WILL DECREASE APPRECIABLY AS A RESULT OF APARTMENT CONSTRUCTION IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. SECOND, I THINK IT IS SAFE TO ASSUME THAT ANY APARTMENTS IN THE AREA WILL BE OCCUPIED PRIMARILY BY COLLEGE-AGE PERSONS, BOTH SINGLE r AND MARRIED. THE NOISE AND DISTURBANCES WHICH USUALLY ACCOMPANY THE RAUCUS ACTIVITIES AT A COLLEGE APARTMENT WILL RESULT IN AN ACTUAL LOSS OF MY PRIVACY. a . • • THIRD , MULTIPLE UNITS WILL MEAN AN APPRECIABLE INCREASE IN AUTO TRAFFIC AND PARKING WILL BECOME AN ACUTE PROBLEM,. THIS IS PARTICUTARLY DEPRESSING TO ME.SINCE I RECENTLY PAID THE CITY *EirattuNutt.6u DOLLAR PAVING ASSESSMENT TO PUT IN NEW PAVING AND NICE CURBS. I WOULD HATE TO SEE THESE SAME CURBS LINED WITH AUTOS. I DO NOT OPPOSE PROGRESS, BUT THERE ARE PLENTY .OF AVAILABLE SITES FOR APARTINT DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION SOUTH OF THE UNIVERSITY WHICH ARE ADJACENT OR NEAR PRESENT APARTMENT STRUCTURES. I AM IN HOPES THAT THIS BOARD, IN ITS WISDOM, WILL APPRECIATE THE PROBLEMS POSED FOR ME PERSONALLY BY THE REZONING OF THE • COFER PROPERTY. I' PERMITTED, THIS ACTION WILL RESULT EVENTUALLY IN TURNING ONE OF THE NICEST RESIDENTIAL SECTIONS OF OUR CITY INTO AN APARTMENT-HOUSE DISTRICT. I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE ZONING BOARD RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT . NECESSARY "ORDINANCES BE ENACTED TO MAKE ALL OF OUR AREA-ZONED FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES, EXCLUSIVELY. THANK YOU. •