HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/02/2025 - Regular Agenda Packet - Zoning Board of Adjustments
College Station, TX
Meeting Agenda
Zoning Board of Adjustment
1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, TX 77840
Internet: www.microsoft.com/microsoft-teams/join-a-meeting
Meeting ID: 227 131 303 800 8 | Passcode: W9gv7VC2
Phone: 833-240-7855 | Phone Conference ID: 295 370 522#
The City Council may or may not attend this meeting.
September 2, 2025 6:00 PM Council Chambers
College Station, TX Page 1
Notice is hereby given that a quorum of the meeting body will be present in the physical location
stated above where citizens may also attend in order to view a member(s) participating by
videoconference call as allowed by 551.127, Texas Government Code. The City uses a thirdparty
vendor to host the virtual portion of the meeting; if virtual access is unavailable, meeting access
and participation will be in-person only.
1. Call meeting to order and consider absence requests.
2. Agenda Items
2.1. Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes:
Attachments: 1. August 5 2025
2.2. Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a front setback variance
to the Unified Development Ordinance Section 5.2.A. ‘Dimensional Standards for Non-Clustered
and Clustered Developments’, for the property located at Southwood Valley Phase 8A, Block 29,
Lot 32 generally located at 3011 Bluestem Drive. The subject property is zoned GS General
Suburban. Case #AWV2025-000027
Sponsors: Jeff Howell
Attachments: 1. Staff Report
2. Aerial and Small Area Map
3. Applicant's Supporting Information
4. Applicant's Exhibit
2.3. Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a height variance to the
Airport Zoning Ordinance for the property located at Tauber, Block 1, Lot 4 Thru 9 & Associated
BPP being 1.28 Acres generally located at 550 Cross Street. The property is zoned NG-1 Core
Northgate. Case #AWV2025-000094
Sponsors: Gabriel Schrum
Attachments: 1. Staff Report
2. Aerial and SAM
3. Easterwood Airport Management Documentation
4. TAMU System Documentation
5. Federal Aviation Administration Documentation for Helper Crane
6. Exhibit for Cranes
2.4. Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a height variance to the
Airport Zoning Ordinance for the property located at 100 Church Ave Subdivision Block 1, Lot 1
Page 1 of 54
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Page 2 September 2, 2025
generally located at 100 Church Avenue. The property is zoned NG-1 Core Northgate. Case
#AWV2025-000092
Sponsors: Robin Macias
Attachments: 1. Staff Report
2. Small Area Map and Aerial
3. Federal Aviation Administration Documentation
4. Federal Aviation Administration Documentation
5. Easterwood Airport Management Documentation
6. TAMU System Documentation
7. Building Elevations Exhibit
3. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items.
A member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific
factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to
a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting.
4. Adjourn.
Adjournment into Executive Session may occur in order to consider any item listed on the agenda if a
matter is raised that is appropriate for Executive Session discussion.
I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the website and at College Station City Hall,
1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas, on August 26, 2025 at 5:00 p.m.
City Secretary
This building is wheelchair accessible. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting
and who may need accommodations, auxiliary aids, or services such as interpreters,
readers, or large print are asked to contact the City Secretary’s Office at (979) 764-3541, TDD
at 1-800-735-2989, or email adaassistance@cstx.gov at least two business days prior to the
meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. If the City does not receive notification
at least two business days prior to the meeting, the City will make a reasonable attempt to
provide the necessary accommodations.
Penal Code § 30.07. Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun.
"Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (Trespass by License Holder with an Openly
Carried Handgun) A Person Licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411,
Government Code (Handgun Licensing Law), may not enter this Property with a
Handgun that is Carried Openly."
Codigo Penal § 30.07. Traspasar Portando Armas de Mano al Aire Libre con Licencia.
“Conforme a la Seccion 30.07 del codigo penal (traspasar portando armas de mano al aire
libre con licencia), personas con licencia bajo del Sub-Capitulo H, Capitulo 411,
Codigo de Gobierno (Ley de licencias de arma de mano), no deben entrar a esta propiedad
portando arma de mano al aire libre.”
Page 2 of 54
August 5, 2025 Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 1 of 3
Minutes Zoning Board of Adjustments
Regular Meeting August 5, 2025
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Bill Lartigue, Board Members Justin Collins, Michael Martinez, and Valen Cepak MEMBERS ABSENT: Board Members Jaymeson Hacker and James Hutchins
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Director of Planning & Development Services Molly Hitchcock, Senior Planner Jeff Howell, Assistant City Attorney David Purnell, Lead Technology Service Specialist Lillian Wells, and Administrative Support Specialist Kristen Hejny 1. Call meeting to order.
Chairperson Lartigue called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Agenda Items
2.1. Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes:
• July 1, 2025 Board Member Collins moved to approve the meeting minutes from July 1, 2025, Board Member Cepak seconded the motion, the motion passed 4-0.
2.2. Public Hearing, presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a front setback
variance to the Unified Development Ordinance Section 5.2.A. ‘Dimensional Standards
for Non-Clustered and Clustered Developments’, for the property located at Sweet Briar
Subdivision, Block 1, Lot 21 generally located at 1004 Rose Circle. The subject property
is zoned GS General Suburban. Case #AWV2025-000040
Staff Planner Segraves presented the item to the Board and stated that the applicant is
requesting a 6.5-foot reduction to the 7.5-foot side setback.
Staff recommended denial of the request due to the fact that it does not meet the specified criteria. Specifically:
1. There are not extraordinary conditions affecting the land, depriving the owner of its use. 2. The granting of a variance is not necessary for the enjoyment of a substantial property right. 3. The hardship is a result of the applicant’s own actions.
4. The application of the UDO would not effectively prohibit or
Page 3 of 54
August 5, 2025 Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 2 of 3
unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property.
Board Member Collins asked if the property was built today to current Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO) standards, would a variance be needed.
Staff Planner Seagraves clarified that the current UDO standards allow driveways and parking areas in the setbacks, so a variance is not needed for that.
Board Member Cepak asked for clarification that the distance between the structure and property line would be one foot.
Staff Planner Seagraves confirmed that the distance between the property line and the
structure would be one foot.
Board Member Cepak asked if the neighbor to the right expressed any concerns about the carport.
Staff Planner Seagraves stated that the property owner to the right has not expressed any
concerns.
Terry Creasy and Luisa Deckard, property owners, 1004 Rose Circle, College Station, were available via Teams and requested the variance to protect their vehicles from future hailstorms.
Chairperson Lartigue opened the public hearing.
James Worley, Sweet Briar Subdivision, College Station, spoke in favor of the variance
request.
Mark Troy, Sweet Briar Subdivision, College Station, spoke in favor of the variance request.
Mark Troy, Sweet Briar Subdivision, College Station, spoke in favor of the variance
request.
Chairperson Lartigue closed the public hearing.
Board Member Martinez stated that the Board must uphold UDO standards.
Board Member Cepak stated that the variance does not meet the necessary nine criteria.
Board Member Collins motioned to deny the variance as it will not be contrary
to the public interest, and that the approval was within the Zoning Board of Adjustment’s jurisdiction, Board Member Martinez seconded the motion, the motion to deny did not take action by a vote of 3-1 with Board Member Cepak voting in the negative.
Assistant City Attorney David Purnell addressed the Board stating that since a negative
motion has been made by the Board, the vote requires a vote of 4-0 to take action. The
Page 4 of 54
August 5, 2025 Zoning Board of Adjustments Minutes Page 3 of 3
Board could also take a unanimous vote on a positive motion to grant the variance.
There was general discussion amongst the Board.
Board Member Cepak motioned to deny the variance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, and that the approval was within the Zoning Board of Adjustment’s jurisdiction, Board Member Collins seconded the motion, the motion to deny passed 4-0, the variance was denied.
3. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items - A member may inquire about a
subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or
the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. There was no discussion on future agenda items.
4. Adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 6:22 p.m.
Approved: Attest:
______________________________ ________________________________ Bill Lartigue, Chairperson Kristen Hejny, Acting Board Secretary
Page 5 of 54
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 1 of 5
September 2, 2025
VARIANCE REQUEST
FOR
3011 Bluestem Drive
AWV2025-000027
REQUEST: A 25-foot reduction to the minimum 25-foot front setback as set forth in Section
5.2.A. ‘Dimensional Standards for Non-Clustered and Clustered Developments’
LOCATION: 3011 Bluestem Drive
Southwood Valley Phase 8A, Block 29, Lot 32
ZONING: GS General Suburban
PROPERTY OWNER: Cynthia Ripplinger
APPLICANT: Reach Design and Construction LLC
PROJECT MANAGER: Jeff Howell, Senior Planner
jhowell@cstx.gov
BACKGROUND: The existing 294 sq. ft. carport encroaches into the front setback by 25-feet, as
the entire accessory structure is located in the front yard and past the front
property line. The applicant is seeking to allow for the carport, which has
already been constructed to remain. The improvements require a variance to
Section 5.2.A. ‘Dimensional Standards for Non-Clustered and Clustered
Developments’ and would be a reduction of 25-feet into the required 25-foot
front setback.
Should the variance to encroach into the entire front setback be granted, the
structure will still require a License to Encroach into a public right-of-way as the
existing carport was constructed past the private property line, or the portion
that extends off of private property will have to be removed. The License to
Encroach has not been vetted, but it appears staff would not be in support of
this request as there is an existing gas line in the area.
It is worth noting that with the proposed improvements, it appears the
development would be within the maximum 55% of Impervious Cover allowed
by the Unified Development Ordinance, but additional information would be
required to confirm this during the building permit process. If the Impervious
Page 6 of 54
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 2 of 5
September 2, 2025
Cover requirement is not met, site modifications or an additional variance
would be required at that time.
APPLICABLE
ORDINANCE SECTION: UDO Section 5.2.A. ‘Dimensional Standards for Non-Clustered and Clustered
Developments’
ORDINANCE INTENT: UDO Section 5.2.A. ‘Dimensional Standards for Non-Clustered and Clustered
Developments’ sets minimum setback standards that allow for some degree of
control over population density, access to light and air, and fire protection.
These standards are typically justified on the basis of the protection of property
values.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the variance request.
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Board Hearing Date: September 2, 2025
The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s Neighborhood
Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing:
N/A
Property owner notices mailed: 35
Contacts in support: None at the time of this report
Contacts in opposition: None at the time of this report
Inquiry contacts: None at the time of this report
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USES
Direction Zoning Land Use
Subject Property GS General Suburban Single-Family Dwelling
North GS General Suburban Single-Family Dwelling
South GS General Suburban Single-Family Dwelling
East GS General Suburban Single-Family Dwelling
West GS General Suburban Single-Family Dwelling and Bluestem Drive
ROW
Page 7 of 54
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 3 of 5
September 2, 2025
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
1. Frontage: The subject property has approximately 60 feet of frontage on Bluestem Drive.
2. Access: The subject property takes access from Bluestem Drive.
3. Topography and vegetation: The subject property is relatively flat with several existing trees.
4. Floodplain: The subject property is not located within FEMA regulated floodplain.
REVIEW CRITERIA
According to Unified Development Ordinance Section 3.16.E. ‘Criteria for Approval of Variance’, no variance
shall be granted unless the Board makes affirmative findings in regard to all nine of the following criteria:
1. Extraordinary conditions: That there are extraordinary or special conditions affecting the land involved such
that strict application of the provisions of the UDO will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his
land.
Staff has found that no extraordinary or special condition exists that would deprive the applicant a
reasonable use of the land. The applicant has stated that “the homes were built in such a way no permanent
structure could meet the setback requirements and provide shelter for vehicles.”
The lots within this subdivision were platted in 1976 and all appear to be meeting the required setbacks.
While there is no existing garage, it appears there are other existing homes along Bluestem that also do not
have garages and are able to accomodate parking in the driveway.
Based on the proposal, some of the property still remains developable and it may be possible for a carport
to be accommodated according to standards elsewhere on the property in order to meet the setback and
size requirements of the UDO while remaining outside of the right of way. Due to the configuration of the
property limited space is available outside of the front setback, however there is room in the rear of the
property to accommodate an accessory structure.
2. Other property: That these conditions do not generally apply to other property in the vicinity.
There are no special conditions identified that would deprive the applicant of a reasonable use of the land.
With the size of this lot, there is limited buildable area outside of the front setback in which the carport can
be built without a variance. However, the rear of the property may be developed and access may be
available along the side of the property. Other homes in the subdivision are built meeting the setback
requirements, include driveway parking, and no other detached carports exist in the front setback along
Bluestem Drive.
3. Enjoyment of a substantial property right: That the variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.
The variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property right of the
applicant. While the existing dwelling (1,378 sq. ft.) was built in 1978, if the proposed variance is not
granted, the applicant can still build an accessory structure or addition outside setbacks and be in
compliance with Section 5.2.A ‘Dimensional Standards for Non-Clustered and Clustered Developments’ of
the UDO. If the variance is not granted, the applicant will still enjoy the property right of using the property
as a single family home with parking.
Page 8 of 54
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 4 of 5
September 2, 2025
4. Hardships: That the hardship is not the result of the applicant’s own actions.
The Zoning Board of Adjustment may consider the following as grounds to determine whether compliance
with this ordinance as applied to a structure that is the subject of the variance would result in unnecessary
hardship:
1) The financial cost of compliance is greater than fifty (50) percent of the appraised value of the structure
as shown on the most recent appraisal roll certified to the assessor for the city under Chapter 26 of the Texas
Tax Code;
2) Compliance would result in a loss to the lot on which the structure is located of at least twenty-five (25)
percent of the area on which development may physically occur;
3) Compliance would result in the structure not being in compliance with a requirement of a City of College
Station ordinance, building code, or other requirement;
4) Compliance would result in the unreasonable encroachment on an adjacent property or easement; or
5) The City considers the structure to be a nonconforming structure.
A hardship has occurred based upon the applicant’s own actions and does not occur due to an extraordinary
condition of the land. The applicant is seeking a variance to the front setback required for a carport which
was constructed without an approved building permit. If the applicant had submitted plans for the structure
prior to construction, the applicant would have been notified that the proposal did not meet the necessary
requirements and would have had the opportunity to modify it to be in compliance. The applicant has stated
that the “structure is currently built” and “the client needed to make capital improvements to the property
at the time of purchase. To remove the structure would alter the appraisal and not meet the needed
threshold as was fulfilled at title.” Also the applicant indicated “the structure in question was constructed
under the belief that the adjacent roadway qualified as a side street, given that it does not accommodate
through traffic” and they “placed the structure 11 feet from the road”.
Setbacks are measured from the property line, not at the curb. Based on the survey, the property line is
located over 10’ from behind the curb. Due to the configuration of the property limited space is available
outside of the front setback for a carport to be located in the front of the property. However, there is room
in the rear of the property to accommodate an accessory structure. Based on the proposal, it appears that
could be redesigned in the rear of the property in order to meet the setback requirements of the UDO.
5. Subdivision: That the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of
land in the area in accordance with the provisions of this UDO.
The granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of land in the area
in accordance with the provisions of the UDO. The surrounding properties are platted lots within the
Southwood Valley Phase 8A subdivision.
6. Flood hazard protection: That the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing flood
hazard protection in accordance with Article 8, Subdivision Design and Improvements.
The granting of this variance will not have the effect of preventing flood hazard protection in accordance
with Article 8, Subdivision Design and Improvements as the site is already developed and due to no portion
of this property being located within floodplain.
Page 9 of 54
Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 5 of 5
September 2, 2025
7. Comprehensive Plan: That the granting of the variance would not substantially conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of this UDO.
The granting of this variance does not substantially conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and with the
purposes of the UDO.
8. Utilization: That because of these conditions, the application of the UDO to the particular piece of property
would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property.
The application of the UDO standards to this particular property does not restrict the applicant in the
utilization of their property. The applicant is still able to utilize their property as a residential lot.
9. Substantial detriment: That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare, or injurious to other property in the area, or to the City in administering this UDO.
Granting the variance may be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or injurious to other
property in the area, or to the City in administering the UDO. Based on the survey provided, a portion of
the existing structure is located in the right-of-way and even if granted a variance, would require approval
of a License to Encroach into the public right-of-way in order to remain in the current location.
ALTERNATIVES
The applicant is proposing to maintain the existing construction. The applicant could demolish the structure or
relocate it with approved plans that meet setback (and other) adopted standards. This would help alleviate the
encroachment completely or help with the severity of it in this case. The applicant has stated that, “The carport
has been installed for 5 months. It did help the owners daughter not receive hail damage to her car earlier this
month. It has not altered any trash service, city access from any utility provider, has not altered the lives of any
neighbors in any way other than positively.”
As the structure exists today, there is a substantial encroachment into the front setback. Should a variance be
granted, there is also a portion of the structure that will need to be modified or receive a license to encroach
due to the existing encroachment into the public right-of-way of Bluestem Drive.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Due to the lack of meeting all of the required criteria, including having a special condition that has resulted in a
hardship on the property, Staff recommends denial of the variance request.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Aerial and Small Area Map
2. Applicant’s Supporting Information
3. Applicant’s Exhibit
Page 10 of 54
Page 11 of 54
Page 12 of 54
Name of Project: CAR PORT EXCEEDING SET BACK (AWV2025-000027)
Address: 3011 BLUESTEM DR
Legal Description: SOUTHWOOD VALLEY PH 8A, BLOCK 29, LOT 32
Applicant: REACH DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION LLC
Property Owner: FRUIT COUNTY INVESTMENTS LLC
Applicable ordinance section being appealed/seeking waiver from:
N/A
The following specific variation to the ordinance is requested:
N/A
The unnecessary hardship(s) involved by meeting the provisions of the ordinance other than financial
hardship is/are:
The structure is currently built. Plans for the structure have been submitted. The client was wanting a place for
her daughter to park I read the code as a side street which I thought it was as it is not a main road through the
neighbourhood. Additionally, the client needed to make capital improvements to the property at the time of
purchase. To remove the structure would alter the appraisal and not meet the needed threshold as was fulfilled
at title.
The following alternatives to the requested variance are possible:
N/A
APPEAL/WAIVER APPLICATION
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
The variance will not be contrary to public interest due to:
The carport has been installed for 5 months. It did help the owners daughter not receive hail damage to her car
earlier this month. It has not altered any trash service, city access from any utility provider, has not altered the
lives of any neighbours in any way other than positively. It has given legitimate reason for property value
increase unlike everyone else getting tax raises without any property value additions.
The following special condition exists:
The homes were built in such a way no permanent structure could meet the set back requirements and provide
shelter for vehicles.
Page 1 of 2
Page 13 of 54
Page 2 of 2
Page 14 of 54
To Whom It May Concern,
We are requesting a variance from the 25-foot setback ordinance. The structure in question was
constructed under the belief that the adjacent roadway qualified as a side street, given that it does
not accommodate through traffic. Based on this understanding, we adhered to the 10-foot setback
requirement typically applied to side streets and placed the structure 11 feet from the road.
The structure is a carport with no electrical or plumbing installations, intended to provide
covered parking for the homeowner’s daughter, who is currently attending graduate school.
Additionally, the client needed to make capital improvements to the property to comply with the
requirements of a 1031 exchange at closing.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if any further clarification is needed.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Caleb
Page 15 of 54
Page 16 of 54
AIRPORT ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AIRPORT HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUEST
FOR
550 Cross St (Previously 311 Stasney St)
AWV2025-00094
REQUEST: Height variance to the Easterwood Airport Zoning Ordinance for a helper
crane.
LOCATION: 550 Cross St (Previously 311 Stasney st)
Tauber, Block 1, Lot 4 Thru 9, & Associated BPP, 1.28 Acres
ZONING: NG-1 Core Northgate
PROPERTY OWNER: 2013 STASNEY STREET LP
APPLICANT: Quiddity Engineering
PROJECT MANAGER: Gabriel Schrum, Staff Planner
gschrum@cstx.gov
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
BACKGROUND: The applicant has been coordinating a new mixed use high-rise development on
this lot located at the corner of Stasney Street, Cross Street, and Tauber Street.
The building is anticipated to have approximately 24 stories, with a parking
garage and residential units similar to the character of other developments in the
area. There was a previous height variance that was approved at this site for
the tower crane and structure. It was stated at that time, that an additional
application, being this helper crane would be coming foward.
This height variance for the Helper Crane will allow for the erection of the
building and the tower crane needed for construction. The helper crane's
height is anticipated to be 298' Above Ground Level (AGL), or 648' Above Mean
Sea Level (AMSL) an approximately 177.4' allowance beyond the maximum
permitted height threshold of 470.6' Above Mean Sea Level(AMSL).
Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment
September 2, 2025 Page 1 of 3
Page 17 of 54
Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment September 2, 2025 Page 2 of 3
ORDINANCE INTENT: The purpose of the Airport Zoning Ordinance is to establish clear and
unambiguous regulations for the protection of the lives and property of users,
owners, and occupants of and in the vicinity of Easterwood Field Airport and for
the protection of airport operations.
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Board Hearing Date: September 2, 2025
Property owner notices mailed:
Contacts in support:
Contacts in opposition:
Inquiry contacts:
13
None at time of staff report
None at time of staff report
None at time of staff report
ZONING AND LAND USES
Direction Zoning Land Use
North NG-3 Residential Northgate Multi-Family
East NG-3 Residential Northgate Stasney Street (Right-of-Way)
South NG-1 Core Northgate Cross Street (Right-of-Way)
West NG-1 Core Northgate Tauber Street (Right-of-Way)
REVIEW CRITERIA
According to the Texas Local Government Code Section 241.034 Variances, the Board shall allow a variance
from an airport zoning regulation if all of the following criteria are met:
1.A literal application or enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or
unnecessary hardship.
2.The granting of the relief would result in substantial justice being done.
3.The granting of the relief would not be contrary to the public interest.
4.The granting of the relief would be in accordancewith the spirit of the regulation.
The boardmay impose any reasonable conditions on the variance that it considers necessary to accomplish the
purpose of airport zoning.
The variance request is to allow for the helper crane to go up to 648' AMSL or 298' AGL, a
variance request of 177.4 feet.
Page 18 of 54
Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment September 2, 2025 Page 3 of 3
The FAA has made the determination that No Hazard to Air Navigation is present for the helper crane. In
consultation with the EAM team, the TAMU System has no objections to the granting of a variance for
the use of the helper crane.
Allowing the height encroachment for the helper crane would result in substantial justice being done. The relief
wouldnot be contrary to the public interest as it has been deemed acceptable by the FAA, Easterwood
Airport and the TAMU System with additional safety precautions and communication processes between the
applicant and airport required. The relief would be in accordance with the spirit of the regulation to allow
development while protecting lives, property, and airport operations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
After reviewing the request and the related criteria, the information provided by the FAA, EAM and TAMUS,
staff recommends approval of the request. The granting of the variance would result in substantial justice
being done without being contrary to the public interest, and the spirit of the regulation remains.
ATTACHMENTS
1.Aerial and Small Area Map
2.Easterwood Airport Management Documentation
3.TAMU System Documentation
4.Federal Aviation Administration Documentation for Mobile Crane
5.Exhibit
Page 19 of 54
Page 20 of 54
Page 21 of 54
Easterwood Airport Management
1 McKenzie Terminal Blvd,
College Station, TX 77845
August 17, 2025
Anthony Armstrong, P.E., CFM,
Land Development Review Administrator
City Of College Station
1101 Texas Ave.
College Station, TX 77840
Re: Helper Crane at 311 Stasney
Dear Mr. Armstrong:
Easterwood Airport Management has reviewed the application requesting a height variance
for a 298-foot-tall temporary helper crane at 311 Stasney. We have also reviewed the FAA’s
"Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation" for the temporary structure.
Easterwood Airport Management has no objection to the approval of these height variances,
provided that all conditions specified in the FAA determinations are fully met by the
builder.
Respectfully,
Kevin Davis
Easterwood Airport Management
Page 22 of 54
From:Robin Macias
To:Gabriel Schrum
Subject:FW: 311 Stasney St Helper Crane - Hight Variance with Recommendation Letter
Date:Wednesday, August 20, 2025 2:00:01 PM
Attachments:Height Variance Letter for 311 Stasney Student Housing Helper Crane.pdf
letter_654147665.pdf
From: O'Neill, John <joneill@tamus.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 1:57 PM
To: Anthony Armstrong <aarmstrong@cstx.gov>; Robin Macias <rmacias@cstx.gov>
Cc: Duron, Joseph <Duron@tamus.edu>
Subject: 311 Stasney St Helper Crane - Hight Variance with Recommendation Letter
***** This is an email from an EXTERNAL source. DO NOT click links or open attachments
without positive sender verification of purpose. Never enter USERNAME, PASSWORD orsensitive information on linked pages from this email. *****
Anthony, The Texas A&M University System (TAMUS) relies on the expertise of the Easterwood Airport Management (EAM) team and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to determine the impacts of height variance requests which would or could affect the airport’s operations.
CGBANNERINDICATOR
Anthony,
The Texas A&M University System (TAMUS) relies on the expertise of the Easterwood Airport
Management (EAM) team and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to determine the
impacts of height variance requests which would or could affect the airport’s operations.
At this time, the Easterwood Airport Management team has no objections to granting a 298-
foot-tall temporary helper crane proposed for the student housing project at 311 Stasney St, so
long as the builder complies with the conditions as outlined in the FAA Letter (see attached).
In consultation with the EAM team, the TAMU System has no objections based on the
determinations made by our subject matter experts in the field, as long as all conditions, as
outlined, have been met.
Thanks and should you need anything else, please feel free to contact me,
John
John J. O’Neill, MBA | Executive Director
Business Affairs
joneill@tamus.edu
1262 TAMU | College Station, TX 77840-7896
Tel. 979.458.6234 | Fax 979.458.6247 | www.tamus.edu
Moore/Connally Building
301 Tarrow St., 5th Floor
College Station, TX 77840-7896
THE TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY SYSTEM
Page 23 of 54
Mail Processing Center
Federal Aviation Administration
Southwest Regional Office
Obstruction Evaluation Group
10101 Hillwood Parkway
Fort Worth, TX 76177
Aeronautical Study No.
2025-ASW-2590-OE
Page 1 of 6
Issued Date: 04/17/2025
Dylan Lambur
Subtext Living
3000 Locust Street
St. Louis, MO 63103
**DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION FOR TEMPORARY STRUCTURE**
The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C.,
Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning:
Structure:Mobile Crane The Verve Mobile Helper Crane
Location:College Station, TX
Latitude:30-37-15.36N NAD 83
Longitude:96-20-44.64W
Heights:350 feet site elevation (SE)
298 feet above ground level (AGL)
648 feet above mean sea level (AMSL)
This aeronautical study revealed that the temporary structure does exceed obstruction standards but would not
be a hazard to air navigation provided the condition(s), if any, in this letter is (are) met:
**SEE ATTACHMENT FOR ADDITIONAL CONDITION(S) OR INFORMATION**
This determination is based, in part, on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates, heights,
frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates, heights and frequencies or use of greater power, except
those frequencies specified in the Colo Void Clause Coalition; Antenna System Co-Location; Voluntary Best
Practices, will void this determination. Any future construction or alteration, including increase to heights,
power or the addition of other transmitters, requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination includes all
previously filed frequencies and power for this structure.
This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be
used during actual construction of a structure. However, this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as
indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the
FAA.
This determination concerns the effect of this temporary structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable
airspace by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law,
ordinance, or regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body.
Page 24 of 54
Page 2 of 6
A copy of this determination will be forwarded to the Federal Aviation Administration Flight Procedures Office
if the structure is subject to the issuance of a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM).
If you have any questions, please contact our office at (817) 222-5933, or andrew.hollie@faa.gov. On any
future correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2025-ASW-2590-OE
Signature Control No: 648936366-654147665 ( TMP )
Andrew Hollie
Specialist
Page 25 of 54
Page 3 of 6
Additional Condition(s) or Information for ASN 2025-ASW-2590-OE
Proposal: To construct and/or operate a(n) Mobile Crane to a height of 298 feet above ground level, 648 feet
above mean sea level.
Location: The structure will be located 2.15 nautical miles northeast of CLL Airport reference point.
Case Description for ASN 2025-ASW-2590-OE
Crane needed to assist in the construction of a proposed building in College Station, TX.
Part 77 Obstruction Standard(s) Exceeded and Aeronautical Impacts, if any:
Section 77.17 (a) (2) by 98 feet - a height that exceeds 550 feet above mean sea level within 2.15 nautical miles
of CLL.
Section 77.17 (a) (3) by 68 feet - a height that increases a minimum instrument flight altitude within a terminal
area (TERPS Criteria). The proposal would necessitate At 648 AMSL,1A, Easterwood FLD (CLL), College
Station, TX. RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, AMDT 1C, ILS OR LOC RWY 35, AMDT 14B, RNAV (GPS) RWY 11,
AMDT 1D, RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, AMDT 1B, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, AMDT 1C, VOR RWY 29, AMDT
14A, VOR OR TACAN RWY 11, AMDT 19F, increase Circling CAT B MDA from 880 to 960, NEH 580
AMSL. /// LOC BC RWY 17, AMDT 8A, increase Circling CAT B MDA from 940 to 960, NEH 640 AMSL.
Section 77.17 (a) (5) a height that affects an Airport Surface by penetrating:
Section 77.19 (b) Conical Surface by 168 feet as applied to CLL.
Preliminary FAA study indicates that the above mentioned structure would:
have no effect on any existing or proposed arrival, departure, or en route visual flight rules (VFR) operations.
not exceed traffic pattern airspace
have no physical or electromagnetic effect on the operation of air navigation and communications facilities.
have no effect on any airspace and routes used by the military.
Based on this aeronautical study, the structure would not constitute a substantial adverse effect on aeronautical
operations or procedures because it will be temporary. The temporary structure would not be considered a
hazard to air navigation provided all of the conditions specified in this determination are strictly met.
As a condition to this Determination, the structure is to be marked/lighted in accordance with FAA
Advisory circular 70/7460-1 M Change 1, Obstruction Marking and Lighting, flags/red lights-Chapters
3(Marked),4,5(Red),14(Temporary),&15.
Any failure or malfunction that lasts more than thirty (30) minutes and affects a top light or flashing obstruction
light, regardless of its position, should be reported immediately to (877) 487-6867 so a Notice to Airmen
(NOTAM) can be issued. As soon as the normal operation is restored, notify the same number.
It is required that the FAA be notified 3 business days prior to the temporary structure being erected and again
when the structure is removed from the site. Notification should be made to this office through your registered
e-filing account. Notification is necessary so that aeronautical procedures can be temporarily modified to
accommodate the structure.
Page 26 of 54
Page 4 of 6
NOTIFICATION IS REQUIRED AGAIN THROUGH YOUR REGISTERED E-FILING ACCOUNT
WHEN THE TEMPORARY STRUCTURE IS REMOVED FROM THE SITE FOR NOTICE TO
AIRMEN (NOTAM) CANCELLATION.
It is required that the manager of EASTERWOOD FLD, (979) 775-9901 be notified at least 3 business days
prior to the temporary structure being erected and again when the structure is removed from the site.
It is required that the manager of EASTERWOOD FIELD Air Traffic Control at 979-846-3998 be notified at
least 3 business days prior to the temporary structure being erected and again when the structure is removed
from the site. Additionally, please provide contact information for the onsite operator in the event that Air
Traffic Control requires the temporary structure to be lowered immediately.
This determination expires on 10/17/2026 unless extended, revised, or terminated by the issuing office.
NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST
BE E-FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE. AFTER RE-EVALUATION
OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO
SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE
ELIGIBLE FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD.
You must contact the FAA as specified above to request a Flight Data Center (FDC) Notice to Airmen
(NOTAM) in order to coordinate the following:
At 648 AMSL,1A, Easterwood FLD (CLL), College Station, TX. RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, AMDT 1C, ILS OR
LOC RWY 35, AMDT 14B, RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, AMDT 1D, RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, AMDT 1B, RNAV
(GPS) RWY 35, AMDT 1C, VOR RWY 29, AMDT 14A, VOR OR TACAN RWY 11, AMDT 19F, increase
Circling CAT B MDA from 880 to 960, NEH 580 AMSL. /// LOC BC RWY 17, AMDT 8A, increase Circling
CAT B MDA from 940 to 960, NEH 640 AMSL.
You must also contact the FAA as specified above when the temporary structure has been removed from the
site to cancel the NOTAM(s). If it specifies above that you must contact the FAA via e-filing, please visit the
instructions link at oeaaa.faa.gov and review the NOTAM Efile Desk Reference Guide for assistance.
Page 27 of 54
Page 5 of 6
TOPO Map for ASN 2025-ASW-2590-OE
Page 28 of 54
Page 6 of 6
Sectional Map for ASN 2025-ASW-2590-OE
Page 29 of 54
Created with 3D Lift Plan www.3dliftplan.com
Crane
Piener SK 415-20
Tower at 90°
112' Jib w/ Double Trolley (90° offset)
Base:
Counterweight:
33.1' Lift Radius (360°)
Crane Capacity at 33.1' = 44,090 lbs
There are no sling tensions to display.
Crane
Demag AC 500-2
139.4' Main Boom at 77°
145.7' Light Fixed Jib (0° offset)
Base: 100% Outriggers: 31.6' x 31.5'
Counterweight: 176.4 kip
66.3' Lift Radius (360°)
Crane Capacity at 66.3' = 48,900 lbs
Load
Total Load 28,000 lbs
57% of capacity
Sling Tension: 16,166 lbs
5/19/2025
Title Lift Plan
Project Verge - College Station
Customer Hoar Construction
Description SK 415 Lift Plan
Drawn By Paolo Salvatore
Not issued for construction. For pre-planning only.Grid: 10' x 10'
XXX
282'
298'
CRANE EXHIBIT
TOWER CRANE
HELPER CRANE
Page 30 of 54
Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 1 of 3
September 2, 2025
AIRPORT ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AIRPORT HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUEST
FOR
100 CHURCH AVE
AWV2025-000092
REQUEST: Height variance to the Easterwood Airport Zoning Ordinance
LOCATION: 100 Church Ave
100 Church Avenue Subdivision
Block 1 Lot 1
ZONING: NG-1 Core Northgate
PROPERTY OWNER: Aspire A&M II LLC
APPLICANT: Quiddity Engineering LLC
PROJECT MANAGER: Robin Macias, Land Development Review Administrator
rmacias@cstx.gov
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing a new mixed-use development in Northgate bounded
by University Drive, Wellborn Road, Church Avenue and First Street. The
building is anticipated to consist of a parking garage and retail space on the floor
level with a parking garage and residential units above. The height of the
building is proposed to be 566 feet Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL) or 225 feet
Above Ground Level (AGL). Per the Airport Zoning Ordinance for Easterwood
Airport, the maximum height of a structure at this location may be 470.6 feet
Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL).
A previous variance was granted in May 2023 for a building height of 550 feet
Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL) or 205 feet Above Ground Level (AGL). This
request to increase the building height to 225 feet Above Ground Level (AGL) is
due to the installation of new mechanical equipment and proper FAA lighting.
Page 31 of 54
Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 2 of 3
September 2, 2025
With the limitation of 470.6 feet above mean sea level, the applicant is
requesting a height variance of 96 feet for the building,
ORDINANCE INTENT: The purpose of the Airport Zoning Ordinance is to establish clear and
unambiguous regulations for the protection of the lives and property of users,
owners, and occupants of and in the vicinity of Easterwood Field Airport and for
the protection of airport operations.
NOTIFICATIONS
Advertised Board Hearing Date: September 2, 2025
Property owner notices mailed: 10
Contacts in support: None at time of staff report
Contacts in opposition: None at time of staff report
Inquiry contacts: None at time of staff report
ZONING AND LAND USES
Direction Zoning Land Use
North Local Street
(Church Ave)
Local Street
(Church Ave)
East
Local Street
(First St)
and NG-1 Core Northgate
Local Street
(First St)
and restaurant
South Major Arterial
(University Dr)
Major Arterial
(University Dr)
West Major Arterial
(Wellborn Rd)
Major Arterial
(Wellborn Rd)
REVIEW CRITERIA
According to the Texas Local Government Code Section 241.034 Variances, the Board shall allow a variance from
an airport zoning regulation if all of the following criteria are met:
1. A literal application or enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary
hardship.
2. The granting of the relief would result in substantial justice being done.
3. The granting of the relief would not be contrary to the public interest.
4. The granting of the relief would be in accordance with the spirit of the regulation.
The board may impose any reasonable conditions on the variance that it considers necessary to accomplish the
purpose of airport zoning.
The variance request is to allow for the construction of a mixed-use development.. The residential building will
be at 566 feet Above Mean Sea Level. The Easterwood Airport Management (EAM) team has no objections to
Page 32 of 54
Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment Page 3 of 3
September 2, 2025
granting a height variance for the building. The FAA has made the determination that No Hazard to Air
Navigation is present. In consultation with the EAM team, the TAMU System has no objections to the granting
of a variance for building height.
Allowing the height encroachment for the building height would result in substantial justice being done. The
relief would not be contrary to the public interest as it has been deemed acceptable by the FAA, airport and the
TAMU System with additional safety precautions and communication processes between the applicant and
airport required. The relief would be in accordance with the spirit of the regulation to allow development while
protecting lives, property, and airport operations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
After reviewing the request and the related criteria, the information provided by EAM and TAMUS, staff
recommends approval of the request. The granting of the variance would result in substantial justice being
done without being contrary to the public interest, and the spirit of the regulation remains.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Small Area Map
2. Federal Aviation Administration Documentation
3. Easterwood Airport Management Documentation
4. TAMU System Documentation
5. Exhibit
Page 33 of 54
Page 34 of 54
Page 35 of 54
Mail Processing Center
Federal Aviation Administration
Southwest Regional Office
Obstruction Evaluation Group
10101 Hillwood Parkway
Fort Worth, TX 76177
Aeronautical Study No.
2025-ASW-1614-OE
Prior Study No.
2022-ASW-24886-OE
Page 1 of 8
Issued Date: 05/19/2025
UP CAMPUS PROPERTIES, LLC
TYLER AMMERMANN
560 W. Washington BLVD.
Suite 200
Chicago, IL 60661
** DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION **
The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C.,
Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning:
Structure:Multi-purpose Building 101 University - Point 8A
County, State:Brazos, Texas
Collected Point(s):
Label Latitude Longitude SE DET AGL AMSL
101 University - Point
8A
30-36-58.80N 96-20-53.16W 340 Ft 225 Ft 565 Ft
This aeronautical study revealed that the structure would have no substantial adverse effect on the safe
and efficient utilization of the navigable airspace by aircraft or on the operation of air navigation facilities.
Therefore, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, it is hereby determined that the structure would not be a
hazard to air navigation provided the following condition(s) is(are) met:
As a condition to this Determination, the structure is to be marked/lighted in accordance with FAA Advisory
circular 70/7460-1 M Change 1, Obstruction Marking and Lighting, red lights-Chapters 4,5(Red),&15.
Any failure or malfunction that lasts more than thirty (30) minutes and affects a top light or flashing obstruction
light, regardless of its position, should be reported immediately to (877) 487-6867 so a Notice to Airmen
(NOTAM) can be issued. As soon as the normal operation is restored, notify the same number.
It is required that FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, be e-filed any time the
project is abandoned or:
_____ At least 10 days prior to start of construction (7460-2, Part 1)
__X__ Within 5 days after the construction reaches its greatest height (7460-2, Part 2)
See attachment for additional condition(s) or information.
This determination expires on 11/19/2026 unless:
Page 36 of 54
Page 2 of 8
(a)the construction is started (not necessarily completed) and FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual
Construction or Alteration, is received by this office.
(b)extended, revised, or terminated by the issuing office.
(c)the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) and an application for a construction permit has been filed, as required by the FCC, within
6 months of the date of this determination. In such case, the determination expires on the date
prescribed by the FCC for completion of construction, or the date the FCC denies the application.
NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST
BE E-FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE. AFTER RE-EVALUATION
OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO
SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE
ELIGIBLE FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD.
This determination is subject to review if an interested party files a petition that is received by the FAA on
or before June 18, 2025. In the event an interested party files a petition for review, it must contain a full
statement of the basis upon which the petition is made. Petitions can be submitted to the Manager, Rules and
Regulations Group via email at OEPetitions@faa.gov, or via mail to Federal Aviation Administration, Air
Traffic Organization, Rules and Regulations Group, 5th floor, 600 Independence Ave, SW., Washington, DC
20597. FAA encourages the use of email to ensure timely processing.
This determination becomes final on June 28, 2025 unless a petition is timely filed. In which case, this
determination will not become final pending disposition of the petition. Interested parties will be notified of the
grant of any review. Any questions regarding your petition, contact Rules and Regulations Group via telephone
(202) 267-8783.
This determination is based, in part, on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates, heights,
frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates, heights and frequencies or use of greater power, except
those frequencies specified in the Colo Void Clause Coalition; Antenna System Co-Location; Voluntary Best
Practices, will void this determination. Any future construction or alteration, including increase to heights,
power or the addition of other transmitters, requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination includes all
previously filed frequencies and power for this structure.
If construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed, you must submit notice to the FAA within 5 days after
the construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed.
This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be
used during actual construction of the structure. However, this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as
indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the
FAA.
This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace
by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or
regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body.
This aeronautical study considered and analyzed the impact on existing and proposed arrival, departure, and
en route procedures for aircraft operating under both visual flight rules and instrument flight rules; the impact
on all existing and planned public-use airports, military airports and aeronautical facilities; and the cumulative
impact resulting from the studied structure when combined with the impact of other existing or proposed
Page 37 of 54
Page 3 of 8
structures. The study disclosed that the described structure would have no substantial adverse effect on air
navigation.
An account of the study findings, aeronautical objections received by the FAA during the study (if any), and the
basis for the FAA's decision in this matter can be found on the following page(s).
If we can be of further assistance, please contact andrew.hollie@faa.gov, at 1-817-222-5933, or
andrew.hollie@faa.gov. On any future correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical
Study Number 2025-ASW-1614-OE.
Signature Control No: 646685606-659944782 ( DNH )
Julie A. Morgan
Manager, Obstruction Evaluation Group
Attachment(s)
Additional Information
Case Description
Map(s)
Page 38 of 54
Page 4 of 8
Additional information for ASN 2025-ASW-1614-OE
Abbreviations
AGL = Above Ground Level
MSL = Mean Sea Level
NM = Nautical Mile
RWY = Runway
NEH = No Effect Height
Part 77 = Title 14 CFR Part 77, Safe, Efficient Use and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace
Our study has disclosed that this proposed building project is composed of two studies that represent the two
closest corners of the building, located approximately 1.83 nm northeast of the airport reference point, is within
the protected surfaces at Easterwood Field (CLL), College Station, TX.
These two points were filed in 2022; however, these two points are increasing in height.
The two studies have an impact, and they are:
Aeronautical Study AGL / MSL Direct distance from runway end 17
2025-ASW-1613-OE 225 / 341 8495 feet / 1.39 nm
2025-ASW-1614-OE 225 / 340 8536 feet / 1.40 nm
Aeronautical study number 2025-ASW-1613-OE is being circulated for public comment and will represent h
project. A response to this study will be a response for the project.
At the proposed height, this structure will penetrate these protected airport surfaces:
> 77.17 (a)(2) A height that is 200 feet AGL, or above the established airport elevation, whichever is higher,
within 3 nautical miles of the established reference point of an airport with its longest runway more than 3,200
feet in actual length, and that height increases in the proportion of 100 feet for each additional nautical mile
from the airport up to a maximum of 499 feet.
2025-ASW-1613-OE exceeds by 25 feet.
2025-ASW-1614-OE exceeds by 25 feet.
> 77.17 (a)(5) The surface of a takeoff and landing area of an airport or any imaginary surface established under
77.19, 77.21, or 77.23.
77.19 (a) Horizontal surface. A horizontal plane 150 feet above the established airport elevation.
2025-ASW-1613-OE exceeds by 96 feet.
2025-ASW-1614-OE exceeds by 95 feet.
**Part 77 obstruction standards are used to screen the many proposals submitted to identify those which warrant
further aeronautical study. This study is conducted to determine if the proposal would have a significant
adverse effect on protected aeronautical operations and airspace. While part 77 obstruction standards trigger
formal aeronautical study, including public circularization, these obstruction standards do not constitute
absolute or arbitrary criteria for identification of hazards to air navigation. Accordingly, the fact that a
Page 39 of 54
Page 5 of 8
proposed structure exceeds certain obstruction standards of part 77 is not sufficient grounds for issuance of a
determination of hazard to air navigation.
The proposal was circularized for public comment on 04/07/2025 to 5305 email respondents with zero
responses returned.
AERONAUTICAL STUDY FOR POSSIBLE INSTRUMENT FLIGHT RULES (IFR) EFFECT DISCLOSED
THE FOLLOWING:
> The proposed structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR arrival/departure routes,
operations, or procedures.
> The proposed structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR en route routes, operations, or
procedures.
> The proposed structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR minimum flight altitudes.
AERONAUTICAL STUDY FOR POSSIBLE VISUAL FLIGHT RULES (VFR) EFFECT DISCLOSED THE
FOLLOWING:
> The proposed structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed VFR arrival or departure routes,
operations or procedures.
> The proposed structure would not conflict with airspace required to conduct normal VFR traffic pattern
operations at any known public use or military airports.
> The proposed structure would not penetrate those altitudes normally considered available to airmen for VFR
en route flight.
The cumulative impact of the proposed structure, when combined with other existing structures is not
considered significant. The study did not disclose any adverse effect on existing or proposed public-use or
military airports or navigational facilities. Nor would the proposal affect the capacity of any known existing or
planned public-use or military airport.
Therefore, it is determined that the proposed construction would not have a substantial adverse effect on the
safe and efficient utilization of the navigable airspace by aircraft or on any air navigation facility and would not
be a hazard to air navigation.
Page 40 of 54
Page 6 of 8
Case Description for ASN 2025-ASW-1614-OE
Building development project located in College Station, TX.
Page 41 of 54
Page 7 of 8
TOPO Map for ASN 2025-ASW-1614-OE
Page 42 of 54
Page 8 of 8
Sectional Map for ASN 2025-ASW-1614-OE
Page 43 of 54
Mail Processing Center
Federal Aviation Administration
Southwest Regional Office
Obstruction Evaluation Group
10101 Hillwood Parkway
Fort Worth, TX 76177
Aeronautical Study No.
2025-ASW-1614-OE
Prior Study No.
2022-ASW-24886-OE
Page 1 of 8
Issued Date: 05/19/2025
UP CAMPUS PROPERTIES, LLC
TYLER AMMERMANN
560 W. Washington BLVD.
Suite 200
Chicago, IL 60661
** DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION **
The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C.,
Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning:
Structure:Multi-purpose Building 101 University - Point 8A
County, State:Brazos, Texas
Collected Point(s):
Label Latitude Longitude SE DET AGL AMSL
101 University - Point
8A
30-36-58.80N 96-20-53.16W 340 Ft 225 Ft 565 Ft
This aeronautical study revealed that the structure would have no substantial adverse effect on the safe
and efficient utilization of the navigable airspace by aircraft or on the operation of air navigation facilities.
Therefore, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, it is hereby determined that the structure would not be a
hazard to air navigation provided the following condition(s) is(are) met:
As a condition to this Determination, the structure is to be marked/lighted in accordance with FAA Advisory
circular 70/7460-1 M Change 1, Obstruction Marking and Lighting, red lights-Chapters 4,5(Red),&15.
Any failure or malfunction that lasts more than thirty (30) minutes and affects a top light or flashing obstruction
light, regardless of its position, should be reported immediately to (877) 487-6867 so a Notice to Airmen
(NOTAM) can be issued. As soon as the normal operation is restored, notify the same number.
It is required that FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, be e-filed any time the
project is abandoned or:
_____ At least 10 days prior to start of construction (7460-2, Part 1)
__X__ Within 5 days after the construction reaches its greatest height (7460-2, Part 2)
See attachment for additional condition(s) or information.
This determination expires on 11/19/2026 unless:
Page 44 of 54
Page 2 of 8
(a)the construction is started (not necessarily completed) and FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual
Construction or Alteration, is received by this office.
(b)extended, revised, or terminated by the issuing office.
(c)the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) and an application for a construction permit has been filed, as required by the FCC, within
6 months of the date of this determination. In such case, the determination expires on the date
prescribed by the FCC for completion of construction, or the date the FCC denies the application.
NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST
BE E-FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE. AFTER RE-EVALUATION
OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO
SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE
ELIGIBLE FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD.
This determination is subject to review if an interested party files a petition that is received by the FAA on
or before June 18, 2025. In the event an interested party files a petition for review, it must contain a full
statement of the basis upon which the petition is made. Petitions can be submitted to the Manager, Rules and
Regulations Group via email at OEPetitions@faa.gov, or via mail to Federal Aviation Administration, Air
Traffic Organization, Rules and Regulations Group, 5th floor, 600 Independence Ave, SW., Washington, DC
20597. FAA encourages the use of email to ensure timely processing.
This determination becomes final on June 28, 2025 unless a petition is timely filed. In which case, this
determination will not become final pending disposition of the petition. Interested parties will be notified of the
grant of any review. Any questions regarding your petition, contact Rules and Regulations Group via telephone
(202) 267-8783.
This determination is based, in part, on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates, heights,
frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates, heights and frequencies or use of greater power, except
those frequencies specified in the Colo Void Clause Coalition; Antenna System Co-Location; Voluntary Best
Practices, will void this determination. Any future construction or alteration, including increase to heights,
power or the addition of other transmitters, requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination includes all
previously filed frequencies and power for this structure.
If construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed, you must submit notice to the FAA within 5 days after
the construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed.
This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be
used during actual construction of the structure. However, this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as
indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the
FAA.
This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace
by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or
regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body.
This aeronautical study considered and analyzed the impact on existing and proposed arrival, departure, and
en route procedures for aircraft operating under both visual flight rules and instrument flight rules; the impact
on all existing and planned public-use airports, military airports and aeronautical facilities; and the cumulative
impact resulting from the studied structure when combined with the impact of other existing or proposed
Page 45 of 54
Page 3 of 8
structures. The study disclosed that the described structure would have no substantial adverse effect on air
navigation.
An account of the study findings, aeronautical objections received by the FAA during the study (if any), and the
basis for the FAA's decision in this matter can be found on the following page(s).
If we can be of further assistance, please contact andrew.hollie@faa.gov, at 1-817-222-5933, or
andrew.hollie@faa.gov. On any future correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical
Study Number 2025-ASW-1614-OE.
Signature Control No: 646685606-659944782 ( DNH )
Julie A. Morgan
Manager, Obstruction Evaluation Group
Attachment(s)
Additional Information
Case Description
Map(s)
Page 46 of 54
Page 4 of 8
Additional information for ASN 2025-ASW-1614-OE
Abbreviations
AGL = Above Ground Level
MSL = Mean Sea Level
NM = Nautical Mile
RWY = Runway
NEH = No Effect Height
Part 77 = Title 14 CFR Part 77, Safe, Efficient Use and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace
Our study has disclosed that this proposed building project is composed of two studies that represent the two
closest corners of the building, located approximately 1.83 nm northeast of the airport reference point, is within
the protected surfaces at Easterwood Field (CLL), College Station, TX.
These two points were filed in 2022; however, these two points are increasing in height.
The two studies have an impact, and they are:
Aeronautical Study AGL / MSL Direct distance from runway end 17
2025-ASW-1613-OE 225 / 341 8495 feet / 1.39 nm
2025-ASW-1614-OE 225 / 340 8536 feet / 1.40 nm
Aeronautical study number 2025-ASW-1613-OE is being circulated for public comment and will represent h
project. A response to this study will be a response for the project.
At the proposed height, this structure will penetrate these protected airport surfaces:
> 77.17 (a)(2) A height that is 200 feet AGL, or above the established airport elevation, whichever is higher,
within 3 nautical miles of the established reference point of an airport with its longest runway more than 3,200
feet in actual length, and that height increases in the proportion of 100 feet for each additional nautical mile
from the airport up to a maximum of 499 feet.
2025-ASW-1613-OE exceeds by 25 feet.
2025-ASW-1614-OE exceeds by 25 feet.
> 77.17 (a)(5) The surface of a takeoff and landing area of an airport or any imaginary surface established under
77.19, 77.21, or 77.23.
77.19 (a) Horizontal surface. A horizontal plane 150 feet above the established airport elevation.
2025-ASW-1613-OE exceeds by 96 feet.
2025-ASW-1614-OE exceeds by 95 feet.
**Part 77 obstruction standards are used to screen the many proposals submitted to identify those which warrant
further aeronautical study. This study is conducted to determine if the proposal would have a significant
adverse effect on protected aeronautical operations and airspace. While part 77 obstruction standards trigger
formal aeronautical study, including public circularization, these obstruction standards do not constitute
absolute or arbitrary criteria for identification of hazards to air navigation. Accordingly, the fact that a
Page 47 of 54
Page 5 of 8
proposed structure exceeds certain obstruction standards of part 77 is not sufficient grounds for issuance of a
determination of hazard to air navigation.
The proposal was circularized for public comment on 04/07/2025 to 5305 email respondents with zero
responses returned.
AERONAUTICAL STUDY FOR POSSIBLE INSTRUMENT FLIGHT RULES (IFR) EFFECT DISCLOSED
THE FOLLOWING:
> The proposed structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR arrival/departure routes,
operations, or procedures.
> The proposed structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR en route routes, operations, or
procedures.
> The proposed structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed IFR minimum flight altitudes.
AERONAUTICAL STUDY FOR POSSIBLE VISUAL FLIGHT RULES (VFR) EFFECT DISCLOSED THE
FOLLOWING:
> The proposed structure would have no effect on any existing or proposed VFR arrival or departure routes,
operations or procedures.
> The proposed structure would not conflict with airspace required to conduct normal VFR traffic pattern
operations at any known public use or military airports.
> The proposed structure would not penetrate those altitudes normally considered available to airmen for VFR
en route flight.
The cumulative impact of the proposed structure, when combined with other existing structures is not
considered significant. The study did not disclose any adverse effect on existing or proposed public-use or
military airports or navigational facilities. Nor would the proposal affect the capacity of any known existing or
planned public-use or military airport.
Therefore, it is determined that the proposed construction would not have a substantial adverse effect on the
safe and efficient utilization of the navigable airspace by aircraft or on any air navigation facility and would not
be a hazard to air navigation.
Page 48 of 54
Page 6 of 8
Case Description for ASN 2025-ASW-1614-OE
Building development project located in College Station, TX.
Page 49 of 54
Page 7 of 8
TOPO Map for ASN 2025-ASW-1614-OE
Page 50 of 54
Page 8 of 8
Sectional Map for ASN 2025-ASW-1614-OE
Page 51 of 54
Easterwood Airport Management
1 McKenzie Terminal Blvd,
College Station, TX 77845
July 17, 2025
Anthony Armstrong, P.E., CFM,
Land Development Review Administrator
City Of College Station
1101 Texas Ave.
College Station, TX 77840
Re: Multi-purpose Building and Cranes at 101 University
Dear Mr. Armstrong,
Easterwood Airport Management has reviewed the application for a revised height variance
for the construction of a 225-foot-tall building at 101 University, as well as the FAA’s
Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation for Temporary Structure.
Easterwood Airport Management has no objection to granting the requested height variance,
provided the builder fully complies with the conditions outlined in the FAA determination
letter.
Respectfully,
Kevin Davis
Easterwood Airport Management
Page 52 of 54
From:O"Neill, John
To:Anthony Armstrong; Robin Macias
Subject:[EXTERNAL] -101 University- Building Height Variance
Date:Thursday, July 17, 2025 11:53:51 AM
Attachments:CommDev_2025-Jul-11-143937.zip
Revised Height Variance Letter for Multi-purpose Building 101 University 7172025.pdf
***** This is an email from an EXTERNAL source. DO NOT click links or open attachmentswithout positive sender verification of purpose. Never enter USERNAME, PASSWORD or
sensitive information on linked pages from this email. *****
Anthony,
The Texas A&M University System (TAMUS) relies on the expertise of the Easterwood
Airport Management (EAM) team and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to
determine the impacts of height variance requests which would or could affect the
airport’s operations.
At this time, the Easterwood Airport Management team has no objections to granting the
revised height variance request for the proposed 225-foot-tall building at 101 University,
so long as the builder complies with the conditions as outlined in the FAA Letters (see
attached).
In consultation with the EAM team, the TAMU System has no objections based on the
determinations made by our subject matter experts in the field, as long as all conditions,
as outlined, have been met.
Thanks and should you need anything else, please feel free to contact me,
John
John J. O’Neill, MBA | Executive Director
Business Affairsjoneill@tamus.edu
1262 TAMU | College Station, TX 77840-7896
Tel. 979.458.6234 | Fax 979.458.6247 | www.tamus.edu
Moore/Connally Building
301 Tarrow St., 5th Floor
College Station, TX 77840-7896THE TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY SYSTEM
Page 53 of 54
Texas Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors Reg. No. 10046100150 Venture Drive, Suite 100 College Station, TX 77845 979.731.8000
HIGHEST BUILDINGELEVATION = 566'
MSL (225' AGL)HIGHEST BUILDINGELEVATION = 566'
MSL (225' AGL)
HIGHEST BUILDING
ELEVATION = 566'
MSL (225' AGL)
HIGHEST BUILDING
ELEVATION = 566'
MSL (225' AGL)
Page 54 of 54