Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCivil Engineering Master Requirement needs for College Park and other areaMike Luther 614 Welsh Ave. College Station, TX 77841 May 3, 2000 City of College Station Mark Smith, Director of Public Works Box 9960 College Station, TX 77840 Dear Mark, In re: Civil Engineering master requirement needs for College Park and other older areas Thank you so much for taking the hour to quietly walk the area around the 614 Welsh Luther homestead house after looking carefully at some of my research. I hope I was able to show you the real reasons behind our drainage and other engineering problems this whole sub -area of College Park has been faced with for years. Hopefully, the information also explains how it got this way, why it really cannot cost - effectively be changed now. Perhaps too, why this area, Welsh, Guernsey, indeed any of these blocks near us, cannot realistically support any major upward improvement to handle added infill pressure is clear now. Attached you will find, as requested, copies of the documents. When Dennis Maloney asked you, "Can these streets be curbed and guttered ? ", ' you of course had to answer, "Yes." But as we both noted, that's only part of the answer. It begs a further question, "But at what cost ?" There are two phases to the answer to that question! There is the physical cost to the massive work that will have to be done to do it, in many cases. Another huge ' cost is going to be what will happen to all the major trees, lot size shrinkage! As you now fully realize, standing on it in front of us here, Welsh Street is now nearly a foot over the grade in front of this home, as well as over lot -grade for nearly all the other homes in this block on Welsh. You, yourself, noted that same problem exists all along Guernsey (This lower end of it from Fairview down to Brison Park) and in many other places. As you said, "Sure, I can cut down Welsh a foot. But to do the job I have to go down two - and -a -half feet, not a foot." We both understand that will kill the trees all along these streets were that to be done. Then you said, "Doing that will change the entire character of these neighborhoods. That's not a practical or good solution for College Station." That is right on the mark with what a large number of folks have been working so hard to get City of College Station folks to understand! You phrased it as best I have heard anyone of official stature say it. In telling me, "The engineering for these neighborhoods was only designed to handle so much of a load and it is even now beyond that." That's precisely what we have been trying to make sure is totally understood. Thank you! What has happened to Welsh, in particular, illustrates all this so well. College Station could have turned toward a higher density neighborhood, a major traffic scenario, at one time, through the underlying civil engineering to do that! But it is now impossible, from a practical standpoint, once the current street pattern was frozen into place forty years ago. As you had a chance to see, here is the foundation for what went wrong, when, and what the real consequences of attempting that, now will be. You can find it all down at the County Courthouse, if you wish to look. I think a fairly well- informed person can see College Park was reasonably well engineered for drainage efforts, for a single - family residential neighborhood when Harry Hoag and crew laid it all out for the Southside Development Company ' efforts in November of 1921 That's when F. B. Clark, Lancaster, Burchard and that crew took over the Hardlicha efforts. Attached are copies of Volume 38, Page 574 and Volume 38, Page 602 and 603. If you look at pages 602 and 603, you miss an important point! Yes, they show the contour map elevation lines. Yes, they also show something very important, in that the only way to properly handle drainage at the time, was to run it all from the then Fairview Street down slope, to what was the lake area in College Park, now Brison Park! Look very carefully! Anyone can see that in order to handle the drainage problems, the entire block orientation for house facings in the area of Hereford Street, Church Street, Guernsey Street, were all roughly oriented what we characterize now as East -West and not North- South! But there is one more piece of this water flow puzzle you have to look very carefully on these pages to see! It's very faintly evident in Volume 38, Page 574. Look closely at the empty square area in the middle of Blocks 9, 10, 13 and 14, in Fairview Street! You can see a little faint square outline as a common area plot in that open area! That happens to be the well site for the Black community that really was the foundation for College Park and College Station, when they settled in here before and after the early 1900's Yellow Fever plague that killed well over half of all the cities of Anderson, Navasota and Millican. For accuracy, I have attached a color copy showing names of these Black families who were a part of that tiny settlement. I have all the deed records researched for the area from which these names were taken. The John Wallace family, Jack Williams family, Wash Williams family, Adine Henry, Eddie Chew family, Curtis Cheek family, W. J. Davis family, Martha Moore and another brother of John Williams, all lived around that wide place in the center of Fairview just before it dead -ended into what was then a Black family home, given for service as the community church and school house. They all drew water from the community well! It even became part of the original A &M Consolidated School System. That's named for a number of these little small school houses that were all brought together back then. In fact, that little school was moved over to a site near the present Baptist Church near Lincoln Center where it survived for many years afterward, outhouse and all! 2 Engineering can do wonders! We can move mountains, tunnel through them, carve out whole huge lakes. The pavement cutter machine we take for granted today wasn't even anywhere around College Station forty years ago when the first mistakes needed to come out to solve the problem! Heck, I'm no civil ' engineer, but even I can read a topographic map and spot some things! I think a fairly well- informed person can see College Park was reasonably well engineered for drainage efforts, for a single - family residential neighborhood when Harry Hoag and crew laid it all out for the Southside Development Company ' efforts in November of 1921 That's when F. B. Clark, Lancaster, Burchard and that crew took over the Hardlicha efforts. Attached are copies of Volume 38, Page 574 and Volume 38, Page 602 and 603. If you look at pages 602 and 603, you miss an important point! Yes, they show the contour map elevation lines. Yes, they also show something very important, in that the only way to properly handle drainage at the time, was to run it all from the then Fairview Street down slope, to what was the lake area in College Park, now Brison Park! Look very carefully! Anyone can see that in order to handle the drainage problems, the entire block orientation for house facings in the area of Hereford Street, Church Street, Guernsey Street, were all roughly oriented what we characterize now as East -West and not North- South! But there is one more piece of this water flow puzzle you have to look very carefully on these pages to see! It's very faintly evident in Volume 38, Page 574. Look closely at the empty square area in the middle of Blocks 9, 10, 13 and 14, in Fairview Street! You can see a little faint square outline as a common area plot in that open area! That happens to be the well site for the Black community that really was the foundation for College Park and College Station, when they settled in here before and after the early 1900's Yellow Fever plague that killed well over half of all the cities of Anderson, Navasota and Millican. For accuracy, I have attached a color copy showing names of these Black families who were a part of that tiny settlement. I have all the deed records researched for the area from which these names were taken. The John Wallace family, Jack Williams family, Wash Williams family, Adine Henry, Eddie Chew family, Curtis Cheek family, W. J. Davis family, Martha Moore and another brother of John Williams, all lived around that wide place in the center of Fairview just before it dead -ended into what was then a Black family home, given for service as the community church and school house. They all drew water from the community well! It even became part of the original A &M Consolidated School System. That's named for a number of these little small school houses that were all brought together back then. In fact, that little school was moved over to a site near the present Baptist Church near Lincoln Center where it survived for many years afterward, outhouse and all! 2 I have taped interviews with Lee Groce, and Booker T. Robinson now over a hundred, who recall being at the well! This small Black community originally was financed by a Black woman who helped settle them there, all focused on the homesite for what is actually the number one (1) Historic House in College Station at 301 Highland! I can't obtain copies of the panoramic photograph hand -taken from the water tower at Texas A &M in 1917, which is available at the College Station Community Center. But if you look closely at it you can see this major homesite, now 301 Highland, out there, as well as a large tree cluster which obscures the little Black community highlighted in the above paragraph. This was the original foundation of the College Station Southside! That well site and those huge trees there, even back then, were there for a natural reason. Do the research to prove it up if you care, but I suspect you need not. The reason for the existence of the place was the water table there happens to be very close to the surface! It was a bucket well. The Jack Williams and W. J. Davis plots in the then Block 14, were garden plots! You may see it all in the attached copy of the aerial photograph in the page attached, taken in 1929 These homes, together with a few other White folks' homes, notably, for drainage assessment purposes, are there; the old Blakely Home on Highland and the Schlesschelman Home, too, on what was then West Hereford Street. It touched South Hereford and ran from Brison Park, all the way West to Montclair Ave. That water table elevation, I suspect, is still in there today. You have, I think now realized, there is no arguing the fact that this immediate area of College Park, is in fact, as we noted, a "catch basin." It is now really no longer alterable, from a practical cost - effective standpoint, to further load the Welsh area, Highland area, Guernsey area around here, for water flow. As you noted, you now understand why all the alleys are still so necessary and why the only remaining solution is a major CIP project to care for what must remain a neighborhood much like it has been for all these years. There is no other realistic solution. The 1929 aerial photo map does not show it, but there was one other house a little later built in what was Block 17. It properly faced what was then Church Street on the Southeast corner of Church and the "Reserved Strip ", which later became an 'extension' of Welsh. When Park Place was slightly re- ' aligned and Church Street became what we now know as Park Place and extended Westward, that home now carries the address we now know it by, 503 Park Place. That particular home is valuable for thinking about drainage issues and ' foundation core data for the area, along with what was the rear part of Block 17, which then faced West Hereford Street. Both of these "lots" in the then Block 17, are the actual low point for the whole area, particularly what is now that rear part of Block 17 as now re- oriented to Welsh. And therein lies ' the first part of the major mistake that was committed in allowing the re -plat of a part of College Park by Hershel Burgess in 1941. If you look very carefully at the Volume 38, Page 602 and 603 maps, you will see the actual low -level flow -line happens to be what was once the back alley on an East -West run from Montclair, all the way down to what is now Brison 3 1 The critical point is that once a home is built and developed at- level, for whatever level that may be, the street facings, the drainage, the entire sewage system, are all frozen at -level for the entire life of the whole homesite. That holds for the neighborhood as well. No homesite is an island, a fortress, if you please. As we discussed, the Texas riparian rights laws still hold. As a neighbor I can neither inordinately withhold from nor inordinately dump water on my neighbors. If I depend on adjacent property for drainage and it is blocked, that's serious. Development efforts in these older neighborhoods have to consider that. You walked this property. You now realize that, as I think any reasonable and prudent person would. However, developer damage, by not addressing drainage properly, is often the case. Developers come in all sizes! It matters not, in creating drainage problems, if a large developer creates one in older neighborhoods with infill development by level elevation and /or with a privacy fence, or an individual homeowner further developing his property simply puts in a privacy fence. If water gets blocked under it, doesn't get to go where it needs to go in these older neighborhoods, the effect is the same. Probably one of the worst problems the City has in these old neighborhoods is fences of all kinds. I know it represents an increased work load for Development Services. But in these now officially recognized older Historic Area's, in fact, all really older neighborhoods, the City needs to pass on all fences specifically for the drainage problem. Blocking alleys and adjacent property with fencing, where no real solution exists for surface runoff except for joint property access, can put a huge unfair drainage load on even properties many parcels down the stream. Upstream, too! The attached pictures of our homesite's now only access for drainage through the common low point in the 503 Park Place property, are actually typical of what happens when all fencing in the area isn't reviewed for drainage considerations as years go by. The reverse of what we have here is succinctly illustrated by the Miller homesite problem now that the 600 Welsh site has been elevated to damn it up on her and further blocked by privacy fencing which didn't consider this. When our family put up fences at our homesite, for animal control we were required to use hog wire at the bottom of the fence to keep the required drainage! Absent of any such current control and thought, the neighbor tried it with a string of concrete blocks. However, as can be seen from the photographs, even after moving them and leaving requested spaces between the blocks, that isn't a practical solution for either party! If you go anywhere up the alley here all the way toward George Bush, you'll find everything from full structures, to non- access fencing, blocking water all up and down it. The older the homesite; the worse I suspect the effect. That's unfair. 4 Park. Properly oriented, for drainage and sewage purposes, that alley was originally intended to carry all the flow off the back of what is now the 503 Park Place home, and what was to be built facing West Hereford, from it's joint back face with the 503 Park Place home, down hill to the Brison Park area. As well, in it were to be all the sewer and other utility lines. For the most part, all houses in this area were built so that the area is intended to serve them all from the rear. They are not to be served from street faces. The critical point is that once a home is built and developed at- level, for whatever level that may be, the street facings, the drainage, the entire sewage system, are all frozen at -level for the entire life of the whole homesite. That holds for the neighborhood as well. No homesite is an island, a fortress, if you please. As we discussed, the Texas riparian rights laws still hold. As a neighbor I can neither inordinately withhold from nor inordinately dump water on my neighbors. If I depend on adjacent property for drainage and it is blocked, that's serious. Development efforts in these older neighborhoods have to consider that. You walked this property. You now realize that, as I think any reasonable and prudent person would. However, developer damage, by not addressing drainage properly, is often the case. Developers come in all sizes! It matters not, in creating drainage problems, if a large developer creates one in older neighborhoods with infill development by level elevation and /or with a privacy fence, or an individual homeowner further developing his property simply puts in a privacy fence. If water gets blocked under it, doesn't get to go where it needs to go in these older neighborhoods, the effect is the same. Probably one of the worst problems the City has in these old neighborhoods is fences of all kinds. I know it represents an increased work load for Development Services. But in these now officially recognized older Historic Area's, in fact, all really older neighborhoods, the City needs to pass on all fences specifically for the drainage problem. Blocking alleys and adjacent property with fencing, where no real solution exists for surface runoff except for joint property access, can put a huge unfair drainage load on even properties many parcels down the stream. Upstream, too! The attached pictures of our homesite's now only access for drainage through the common low point in the 503 Park Place property, are actually typical of what happens when all fencing in the area isn't reviewed for drainage considerations as years go by. The reverse of what we have here is succinctly illustrated by the Miller homesite problem now that the 600 Welsh site has been elevated to damn it up on her and further blocked by privacy fencing which didn't consider this. When our family put up fences at our homesite, for animal control we were required to use hog wire at the bottom of the fence to keep the required drainage! Absent of any such current control and thought, the neighbor tried it with a string of concrete blocks. However, as can be seen from the photographs, even after moving them and leaving requested spaces between the blocks, that isn't a practical solution for either party! If you go anywhere up the alley here all the way toward George Bush, you'll find everything from full structures, to non- access fencing, blocking water all up and down it. The older the homesite; the worse I suspect the effect. That's unfair. 4 The Burgess re -plat and subsequent development on what is now a completely re- oriented North -South block scheme, never addressed the real elevation problems for any of the homes then established there. It forever sealed the fate of doing anything later to offer any increased occupancy load, property coverage load and expanded street use development, once the originally promised curbs, gutters, and below -lot level needs for all these homes in the area, wasn't done. Never done properly then, it can't now be effectively corrected to protect older developed sites from much more intrusive pressure of modern use. Attached you will find a copy of Volume 107, Page 151, of the Deed Records of Brazos County. The correct drainage and actual sewage line then serving the area are displayed on this June 1941 filing. Reduced to, at this time, only a depicted ten foot sewer easement, it goes right through Lot 17 and Lot 2 of the then re- oriented Block "C" and Lot 17 and Lot 2 of the then re- oriented Block "A ", of College Park! The most interesting thing I can find in relation to things - political that seem to corrupt things -real about development is simple. That re- subdivision of all of this part of College Park was done, with the lot depictions shown, in the Deed Records of Brazos County, almost eight years before the outfit ever even owned a good part of the land! Of the John Wallace major lot ownership of what was then Block 14, right behind what is now the Miller home, then owned by Terrell's, who built it facing Guernsey, I believe you will be forced to conclude that politics and developers got in the way of reality! I have the exact documents needed from the Deed Records to prove it. Oakwood Realty never even owned the property until November 15, 1949, gotten from Wallace's widow, Volume 141, Page 83 and 84! As well, I think you will find that two other families were caught up in this Block 14 issue, of the filings, for Lots 10 and 11 and also Lot 8! I didn't write the documents, but I suspect that is why the peculiar language was used in the Wallace deed. Nearly nine years after the plat to lots they didn't- seem -to -own fact; Burgess and crew would have to honor all the previous commitments to the adjoining lands! Moreover, I suspect that is part of the exact reason that the spec house they built on Lot 17, and part of Lot 16, on then "Welsh ", sold to the Luther family as the original owners, cited only the subdivision documents of the 1941 filing! And, it more or less glossed over the 'abandoned' sewer line that actually is not only now under the Luther house, which never was abandoned, but still in service to this day! I can't prove it, but suspect one of the prime reasons the Pugh and 600 Welsh Cashion homes were built, may have been to add possible 'trespass to try title' to whatever claims might eventually have somehow surfaced from the earlier folk! Attached are pictures of the back yard of the alley of the Luther homestead, taken in late 1951 or early 1952. It is taken from the exact spot where the current sewer service port is in the alley that now, 'services' that line. My Father was told it was an abandoned line! That service facility for the line simply wasn't even there! It arrived as follows, all part of the water flow and drainage problems that were frozen at elevation levels when what is now 503 Park Place, 614 Welsh in 1948, 610 Welsh in 1952, and all the rest of the 5 fill houses for Lots 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and I think 7 of the block later arrived. The original connection to sewer operation for 503 Park Place, fed a septic tank in the back yard which we learned originally had a secondary drain operation to that 'abandoned' line, per my memory! In our case, we had a septic tank in the back of our property which did not connect originally to the sewer, as I think is correct. After two clean out and pumping operations on it, the City of College Station shunted it to a new support sewer line in the back alley, which I believe now serves all the lots mentioned above! Our waste now finds its way into that major clean out port, along with another angled line from the Northwest to it, as well as a full support line flowing from the West itself and another full flowing support line from the South as well. The flow moves, as originally intended, Eastward down what is still the "alley" toward Brison Park. Yes, I think an iron -type sewer service line was added into Welsh Street when it was finally paved for the first time, long after we moved in 1948! Yes, it now does serve, I think I recall, the 503 Park Place homesite! But where and if it ever actually connects to the older line service was not obtainable from work the TV survey crew was able to do on -site when I had a chance to look too! Moreover, the photoplay reveals there still an active line flowing from the original line which went Northward up what was originally the front of ' Welsh, I suppose in parallel with the later added iron -type line! Both lines are now squarely in the major root support systems of all the prize oaks on all the lots of what is now lots 1, 2, 15, 16, and 17 of now Block "C ". The Mirza property senior live oak tree is now roughly 42 inches in major diameter at this time. The Luther property senior live oak tree is roughly 30 inches in diameter at this time. We alone have over 58 additional diameter inches of prize oak trees at risk for any sewer work incursions in any of a little more than the drip -cap canopy area of any of these trees planted on our property, alone. In general, projected major soil disturbance anywhere inside the canopy area plus about 10% or so for any of these trees has likely fatal consequences. Altering drainage flow even somewhat sub - surface to them can have grave consequences, especially as this last really dry year has shown. Other similar problems are already highly developed over the roughly 40 years in which the City never addressed the core foundation of street and drainage work in the area, which, once the development at cross purposes with the natural topography of the area has permitted. Mrs. Miller has at least 100 diameter inches highly at risk for any sort of curb, gutter or paving work in her front dimension on Guernsey alone. Even folks on Bell have a stake in the issue. You can find countless other examples of it. I believe you will find that any responsible aborist will tell you that the only safe way to work around any of these older prized trees is to stay outside the drip -cap rim of the canopy. Per professional advice our family has, the only safe way you can even add dirt around the surface under the canopy of one of them is to do so at no more than an inch or so in depth per year. A classic example of the loss of a really large number of them was perfectly evident when the Memorial Student Center was built. A &M actually lost almost all of them they tried to 'save' even with the best efforts they R could, whenever they had to work within the drip -cap area. The entire South wall trees were lost toward G. Rollie White Coliseum. In summary, tearing up all of this heritage part of College Park at huge costs, demolishing much that has been invested in for both still single - family home owners, as well as the rent property owners, is one way to effect a 'solution.' But doing that will also take substantial extra front setback footage from properties never developed with that in mind, including the come - lately new owners as well! That's not at all what a large number of people want, not a good message -send to anyone wanting to buy property in College Station, for whatever reason they want it, nor a vote winning campaign issue. Jim Callaway said it wonderfully today in the meeting addressing ordinance re- writes to help put us another 25 years or more as cleanly into the future as possible. He said, "Those who come later are making a conscious choice." What a priceless line for a city, "Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future." Mayor McIlhaney has been sensitive to our situation and has been a visitor to the area in times of distress. Councilman Ron Silvia has taken enough interest to walk the area and knows the elevation problems first hand. They also, like you, understand these problems are significant on the East Side too, and are working on it there, too, as I understand this. I believe that you are dead on when you opine we need a major CIP program to address this area. It will take that to even with very careful minimal site invasion planning to carry the load added by no more than a disposal for every house now in here! That, as well as carry all the water down alleys the City cannot abandon, but now needs to share for us. That, too, with target storm sewerage that does not kill trees and runs the water where it needs to go. For your use in City planning, attached are also a number of copies of major street photographs in this area showing drainage problems. They may help you. For my records, which are obviously more detailed than most, I would sincerely appreciate a record of the routing of this document. You get what you inspect, not what you expect, grin! A ly urs 2- Mike Luther HAL0246.wst CC: Dennis Maloney, Ron Silvia, Lynn McIlhaney, Jim Callaway 7 ABERDEEN PLACE i IN4 In q x � ts LLJ e 4 Z CCJ Irs qy� zt Na ct m �y v 6 � S � 1 �3 HJL�HJ � ➢�e os K a , �y v 6 � S � 1 �3 HJL�HJ � ➢�e os °s I Oi J1v t J o i � I J n 9 6 S o / ti/ Q v N •. , � a � t ;d I 06 c ~- / s , n \ • k � 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i1 X07 -151 �nb- t5 r RSSIIHDIVISION ' OF A PORTION OF t i COLLEGE PARK a COLLEGE STATION j TEXAS _ 4 s Juno 1941 J. .A ; , Orr 0 Control Monument f • s t FlDEUTY ST. ti 4 so h h JONES ST. do PARK PL A CL F 0 0 - --------- -------- b � V W b ` co y ro so so so s o T O O f re so so. so GUERNSEY ST. ro sv so .fv m o T O 9 y p Q Q t� o� Y Q F7 Approved July 2, 1941 Gibb Gilahrist Chrm. ! College Statlon,Texas } F.W.Hensel t i; ' I SDC - Southside Development Company. CSHC - College Station Housing Corporation OAK - Oakwood Realty DATE Sell To Vol Pge+ Description Res Corrupt 17- Feb -1922 SDC R R Lancaster 57 519 Lot 6 B21 None 17- Feb -1922 18- Feb -1922 SDC SDC M D M Duaghtery Scoates 57 57 590 591 Lot Lot 5 8 B21 None GG D B21 None 18- Feb -1922 04- May -1922 SDC SDC C D W Burchard Scoates 57 58 592 229 Lot Lot 2,3,4 12 B21 B12 None 1 No 13- May -1922 Sdc F B Clark 58 275 Lot 7 / B21 None 13- May -1922 SDC L Burnon 58 260 Lot 5, B9 ` 1,2 No�� 13- May -1922 SDC M D Davis 58 261 All Bk- Church B16 1,2 No<- 4 22- Jul -1922 SDC P Scopinto 58 527 In blank 1 No C 18- Dec -1922 SDC J A Peterson 59 561 Lot 2,3,4 B20 1 No 19- Sep -1922 SDC A. V. Smith 59 566 Lot 1 B20 1 No 01- Dec -1922 SDC C. Cheek 59 546 Lot 4 B15 `1,2 Nom- Yr� 04- Jan -1923 SDC F A Burt 60 230 Lot 12,1/211 B21 1 No 06 -Oct -1922 SDC 0 W Silvey 60 244 Lot 1 B21 1 No 08- Jan -1923 SDC G W Adriance 60 288 Lot 1,,j / B12 1, No 02- Feb -1923 SDC D Scoates 60 402 Lot 7,8 B13 ` 1,2 No e,?14 +y}t 02 -Feb -1923 SDC C Hinton 60 407 Lot 2 1 B15 -"1,2 No 02- Feb -1923 SDC E L Myers 60 426 Lot 4 B12 1 No [ f ° 03- May -1923 SDC F B Clark 61 329 Lot 10�, B21 No 04- Apr -1923 SDC A Finley 61 379 Lot 1,2 B13 1,2 No 0Af /WA? �44A 16- Jun -1923 SDC D F Irving 61 387 Lot 2 B22 1 No 08- Jun -1923 SDC D Scoates 61 415 Lot 9 B21 1 No 07 -Jul -1923 SDC F R Jones 61 449 Lot 1,2 B7 1. No 23 -Jul -1923 SDC J Camp 61 509 Lot 9 B1 ' 23 -Jul -1923 SDC J Camp 61 511 Lot 10 B11=� No 23- Jan -1923 SDC A A Lenert 61 590 Lot 4,5 B7 14- Sep -1922 SDC C A Medberry 61 601 Lot 13 +Add A 02 -Feb -1923 SDC W J Davis 62 435 Lot 10 , 1 1 - B14 1 , 2 No ,� 10 Dec -1923 SDC G L Dickey 62 619 Lot 11.12 B1 1,2 No 1 2- Feb -1924 SDC C W Burchard 63 95 Lot 6, B13 No 19- Feb -1924 SDC M L Hugh 63 214 Lot 1,/ B21 j No 02- May -1324 SCC CS Housing 64 77 Lot 1 Add B11L 1,2 No 15 -Jul -1924 SDC CS Housing 64 613 Lot 8 B12 1 No 15 -.;u1 -1924 SDC CS Housing 64 613 Lot 5 ✓ B11_ , 4,2 No 15 -Jul -1924 SDC CS Housing 64 613 Lot 1,3 B5 1,2 No 28- Aug -1924 SDC W H Mathews 65 96 Lot 'reserved' B21 1 No 24- Aug -1924 SDC H Tidwell 65 107 Lot 5 B8 1 No 02- Feb -1922 SDC Cheeks 65 439 Lot 3 B15 1,2 No 0.2l�� 05-Oct -1922 SDC avidson 66 152 Lot 3 B22 1 No 14 -Apr -1927 SDC I B Baccos 70 156 Lot 3 B7 1 No 24- Jun -1927 SDC J Camp 71 421 Lot 8 B1 1 No 24 -Jun -1927 SDC J 71 421 Lot 8 % B4 1 No 21 -Feb -1928 SDC J Williams 71 458 Lot 8' 8141 1,2 No DQfGi 08- May -1928 SDC 72 70 Lot 1,2 B4 1 No 6 20- Jun -1928 SDC J P McKee 72 172 Lot 1,2,3,4,5 B1 No 31- Aug -1928 SDC T Harry 73 344 Lot 8 B2 No 26- Apr -1929 SDC R Fletcher 74 327 Lot 1,Prt2 B8 1 No 01- Sep -1929 SDC C J Finney 75 406 Reserves ,- /� ,,I No 14- Oct -192 SCC J Wallace 75 604 Lot �B 1 ', Z, 3', 4, 5, 6 B14 1,2 No a. �L4 Lj��z 1 11- Jun -1929 SDC A A Blumberg 76 358 17- Mar -1930 SDC C W Burchard 77 50 23-Oct -1928 SDC F Brison 77 457 17 -May -1930 SDC J E Rabel 77 441 11 -Jul -1930 SDC C W Burchard 77 627 20- Sep -1930 SDC A B Ford 78 150 01-Oct -1930 SDC J D Mogford 78 229 26- Mar -1931 SDC I G Adams 79 408 03- May -1931 SDC J E Babel 79 516 04- May -1931 SDC J H Knox 75 561 25- May -1931 SDC J G Bensen 80 1 16- May -1931 SDC W E Young 80 83 16 -Jul -1931 SDC E 0 Sieoke 80 229 17- Aug -1931 SDC J E Reierson }Q 300 22-Oct -1931 SGC A Woolkit 31 20 2i,'- Aug -1929 SDC R M Fletcher 81 66 15 -Jul -1932 SDC L Patranella 82 182 18- Apr -1929 SDC J Bechlinger 81 583 07 -Jun -1932 SDC J 0 Peebles 82 103 24- Jun -1932 SDC E 0 Sieoke 82 352 02-Oct -1931 SDC J Camp 82 435 01 -Oct -1932 SDC C C Todd 82 505 03- Mar -1933 SDC C J Finney 84 124 06- Jun -1933 SDC J E Marsh 89 30 17- Jan -1936 SDC D Fleming 90 550 22- Apr -1936 SDC C Spriggs 91 109 13- May -1936 SDC J E Reirson 91 201 13- May -1936 SDC J E Reirson 91 203 16- May -1936 SDC M Morgan 91 216 28- May -1936 SDC R L Elkins 91 258 30- May -1936 SDC C W Wilkerson 91 267 31- Aug -1936 SDC C Hohn 91 560 11- .Nov -1936 SDC R W Steen 32 231 10- Dec -1936 SDC R R Lancaster 92 340 15- Mar -1937 SDC J S Kopper 93 216 23- Mar -1937 SDC E Lancaster 93 365 28 -Apr -1937 SCC K E Eimquist 93 386 04- Aug -1937 SDC J 0 Peebles 94 183 10- Aug -1937 SDC S S Morgan 94 204 21- Aug -1937 SDC J S McGuire 94 243 07- Sep -1937 SDC J Orr 94 308 09-Oct -1937 SDC J Sikes 94 551 14-Oct -1937 SDC C W Burchard 94 569 13- Dec -1937 SDC' J 0 Peebles 95 155 04- Jan -1938 SDC J L Hollow 95 245 09- Mar -1938 SDC R R Lyle 95 580 11- Mar -1938 SDC T Edde 95 588 12- Mar -1938 SDC J T L McNew 95 590 27- Mar -1938 SDC E C Klipple 96 169 03 -May -1938 SDC M L Gibson 96 227 09- Jun -1938 SDC M C Hughs 96 366 10- Jun -1938 SDC G B Adriance 96 378 18- Jun -1938 SDC M Campbell 96 106 01- Aug -1938 SDC E W Glenn 96 567 05- Aug -1938 SDC J Camp 96 587 Lotll +Add B2A 1 No Lot 2,3,4 B21 1 No Lot 5 B22 `'1,2 No Lot 6 B11 1 No Lot 1 ,`2 B11 , 1�, 2 No Lot 1,2 +Add B23 1 No Lot 5,6 +Add B8 1 No Lot 'unnumbered'B8A No 1 No Lot 6 +Add B1 Lot — No Lot 10 B2A mo No Lot 8 +Add B2A 1 No Lot 2,3 +Add B2 1 No Lot From Bounds B8 1 No Lot 5 B2 1 No Lot 9,1/2 -10 B10t 1,2 No Add Clarify B8A 1 No Lot 9 B2A 1 No Corrupt /indexed No Lot 6 2 � C ,,, /i� � I L j <<CCI -.ILA Lot 7 B2A 1 No Lot 7 B7A 1 No Add Part Lot 7 B1 � No Meets & Bounds 7 1 No Lot 7,8 B22 1 No Meets & Bounds B8A 1 No Resale Lot 1,2 B2A 1 No Lot 1,2,3,4 B4 1 No Lot 1,4 B2 1 No Lot 6 B2 1 No Lot 11,12 B23 1 No Lot 3,1/2 -4 B23 1 No Lot 7 +Add B22 1 No Lot 13,13 B1 N o Lot 161,11 B19 1,2 040 Lot 2 B21A 1 No Lot 4 B2 1 No Lot 6 B21 1 No Lot 8:/ B11 x ;1,2 No Lot 6 B2A 1 No Lot 1 +Add B2 1 No Lot 4 B2A 1 No Lot 1 +Add B8 1 No Lot 2 +Add B21 1 No Lot 5,6 B6 1 No Lot 5 +Add B2A 1 No Area B12 1 No Lot 6 B22 1 No Lot 7,8,Part6 B8 1 Yes Lot 9,10 B2 1 No Lot 5,6 B4 1 No Lot 2 ' 1311 '-- ' 1 2 No Corrupt /Index Lot 1,2 B12 1 No Lot 5,6 B23 1 No Lot 1,2,3 B2 1 No Lot 7 B4 1 No 2 10- Aug -1938 10- Aug -1938 08- Sep -1938 10 -Nov -1938 10- Jan -1939 23- Jun -1939 22- Dec -1939 30- Jan -1939 19- Feb -1939 22- Apr -1940 31- May -1940 28- Sep -1940 09-Oct -1940 13- Feb -1941 05- Apr -1941 13- May -1941 09- Jun -1941 02- Aug -1941 01-Oct -1941 14 -Oct -1941 14-Oct -1941 14-Oct -1941 01- Nov -1941 05- Nov -1941 10- Apr -1942 22-Oct -1942 22-Oct -1942 22- 10- Nov -1942 17- Nov -1942 09- Jan -1943 17- Apr -1943 10- Aug -1943 29- Dec -1943 19 -Jan -1944 16- May -1944 26 -Jul -1946 07- Jan -1946 V Jun -1946 10 -Jul -1946 03- Apr -1947 14 -Jul -1947 17 -Jul -1947 21- Jul -1947 25- Aug -1947 SDC M E Culberson SDC W F Gibson SDC P W Edge SDC S R Wright SDC R Fletcher SDC C Padgett SDC D W Fleming SDC W P St Clari SDC C W Burchard SDC L G Jones SDC W F Gibson SDC E W Steel SDC E C Klipple SDC I H Jones SDC Oakwood Realty SDC R R Lancaster SDC G Schlesselman SDC R K Fletcher SDC G E Potter SDC C W Burchard SDC C W Burchard SDC C W Burchard SDC F B Clark SDC E M Taubenhaus SDC G J Samuleson CSHC L G Varham CSHC J S Rogers CHSC M C Hughs CSHC C D Trall CSHC N R Rode SDC R 0 Berry CSHC M C Hughs SDC G B Wilcox SDC J Miller SDC E Langford SDC St Matt Bapt SDC E E Vezey SDC A A Holbrook SC47 G L Ou t law SDC R Rogers SDC S R Wright SDC R K Fletcher SDC City of CS SDC' F R Brison SDC F B Clark C W Burchard E. L Scoates R R Lancaster 96 603 Lot 2,3 B2A 1 No 96 607 Lot 4,5,6 B6 1 No 97 67 Lot 4 B21A No 97 399 .� Lot 6,i,8 B19 1,2 No 98 579 Metes & Bounds B8 1 No 100 319 Lot 4,Part B2 1 No 102 1 Lot 2 B2A 1 No 102 283 Lot 7 B2 1 No 102 378 Metes & Bounds 1 No 103 239 Lot 5,6 1 - , 2 No 103 425 Lot 4 i6 1 No 104 487 Lot 10,11 B21A 1 No 105 309 Lot 6,P rt7 B4 1 , No 105 554 Lot 8 B19 "L2 No 106 230 Various _ /� —L 106 485 Lot 1,Parrt3 A J No 106 547 Lot 2 r� B19 � - 1 ,2 No 107 181 Metes 1 No 107 530 Lot 3,4,5 B19 1,2 No 107 627 Metes & Bounds B21 1 No 107 629 Lot 4 B21 1 No 107 631 Metes & Bounds B21 1 No 108 98 Lot 7 B21 1 No 108 444 Lot 8,Part B23 1 No 109 631 Lot 7 B22 1 No 111 183 Lot 1,2 No 111 185 Lot 3 _ ,2 No 1 1 1 187 Lot 5 B1 1 vi , 2 No 111 271 Lot 8 B12 1 No 111 298 Correction 1 No 111 559 Lot 7,8 B21A 1 No ? 516 Lot 5 Correcte�ZNo �� 113 542 Lot 5 B21 1 No 114 601 Lot Unplatted B22 1 No 115 91 Lot 8,Part7 B22 1 No 116 85 Lot 1/2 Acre 1 �_ No 116 464 Lot-1-1-- B1 a6t: -- No 122 49 Lot 9 ? B21 A�L-1 No 124 125 306 66 Lot 10,11 1,2 Lot Unplatted - 823 1/ /B19 Nd p�Gr No 129 366 Lot 6,Part ; 1,2 No Chi 1 130 613 .0376 Acre 1 No 130 589 Brison Park No 130 630 Part +Add B22 1 No 131 272 Articles Dissolution & distribution to these four with undivided share of all lots, streets, alleys & park sites. Right to waive or remove any & all restrictions for as well as to enforce same which may have been heretofore imposed against any of the properties henceforth or now. 06- Jan -1948 SDC G H Johnson 133 340 .10 Acre 1 No 3 THE STATE OF TEXAS, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: COUNTY OF BRAZOS ) / 03 k -( That I, Lillie Wallace, a widow, of the County of Brazos, State of Texas, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN k N01100 DOLLARS and other valuable considerations, to me in hand paid by Oakwood Realty Company of College Station, as follows: all in cash, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,- have Granted, Sold and Conveyed, and by these presents do Grant, Sell and Convey, unto the ® said Oakwood Realty Company of College Station, of the County of Brazos State of Texas, all that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situated in Brazos County, Texas, and being Lots Noa. ONE (1), TWO (2), THREE ()), FOUR (4), FIVE (5) and SIX (6), all in 83 4- / outh THENCE S. 45 E. with said S. W. line,, 113.4 feet and corner, a stake, t •SS corner of this conveyance{ N THENCE N. 42 18' 101.8 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING, containing 11,550 sq. feet of -� land, more or lass. M TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described premises, together with all and singular A' the rights and appurtenances thereto In anywise belonging unto the said Jessie L. Jones, his heirs and assigns forever; and we do hereby bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, to warrant and Forever defend all and singular the said promisee unto the said Jessie L. Jones, his heirs and assigns, against every person whomsoever lawfully claiming, or to claim the aame, or any pert thereof. But it is expressly agreed and stipulated that the Vendor's Lien is retained against the above described property, premises and improvements, until the above described note end all interest thereon are fully paid according to its face and tenor, effect and read- ing, when this deed shall become absolute. Witness our hands at Bryan, Texas, this 18 day of November, A.D. 1949. Witness at Request of Grantor: Bill Morille her .i,y to mark of - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rosie X Morille t.:5 mark F. L. Henderson, l' 550 "avenue Stamp affixed and duly cancelled. THE STATE OF TEXAS( COUNTY OF BRAZOS ( BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public, in and for Brazos County, Texas, on this day personally appeared dill Morille and Rosis Morille, his wife, both known to me to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing in- strument, and acknowledged to me that they each executed the same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed, and the said Rosle Morille wife of the said Bill Morille having been examined by me privily and apart from her husband, and having the same fully explained to her, she, the said Rosle Morille acknowledged such instrument to be her act and deed, and she declared that she had willingly signed the same for the pruposes and consideration therein expressed, and that she did not wish to retract it. GIVEN under my hand and goal of office this the 18 day of November, A.D. 1949. • F. L. Henderson, Notary Public in and for (SEAL) Brazos County,Texas. i The foregoing is a true copy of the original instrument which was filed for record on the 22nd day of Nov. A.D. 1949 at 11 o'clock p.m. and duly recorded on the 22nd day of Nov. A.D. 1949 at 5 o'clock p.m. to which 1 certify A. B. Syptak, C C C.B.C._ i Deputy THE STATE OF TEXAS, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: COUNTY OF BRAZOS ) / 03 k -( That I, Lillie Wallace, a widow, of the County of Brazos, State of Texas, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN k N01100 DOLLARS and other valuable considerations, to me in hand paid by Oakwood Realty Company of College Station, as follows: all in cash, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,- have Granted, Sold and Conveyed, and by these presents do Grant, Sell and Convey, unto the ® said Oakwood Realty Company of College Station, of the County of Brazos State of Texas, all that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situated in Brazos County, Texas, and being Lots Noa. ONE (1), TWO (2), THREE ()), FOUR (4), FIVE (5) and SIX (6), all in I I DEED 141 i Block No. FOURTEEN (14), in the Plan of COLLEGE PARK, Southeast of the A. k M. College Campus as shown on the plat of said addition recorded in the Deed Records of Brazos County, Texas, and being the same land conveyed to John Wallace by The Southeide Development Company by deed dated August 2, 1923, and recorded in Volume 75, page 604 of the Deed Records of Brazos Count, Texas, to which deed reference is here made for all purposes, - The deed is made subject to the restrictions imposed against ,aid land by written instrument recorded in the Deed Records of Brazos County, Texas, - For said consideration, I do also hereby grant, sell and convey unto said Oakwood Realty Company of College Station all my right, title and interest in and to all of the property imme6iat0ly adjoining the above described tracts. ry The grantor herein, Lillie Wallace, is the surviving widow of John Wallace, desceased, S u p who died intestate and leaving no children nor descendants. Said above described property was a part of the property belonging to the community estate of John Wallace and Lillie Wallace; no administration was ever had upon the estate of John Wallace, deceased, and no necessity therefor exists. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described premises, together with all and singular the rights and appurtenances thereto in anywise belonging unto the said Oakwood Realty Company of College Station, its successors and assigns forever and I do hereby bind myself, my heirs, executors and administrators, to Warrant and Forever Defend, all and singular the said premises unto the said Oakwood Realty Company of College Station, its successors and assigns, against every person whomsoever lawfully claiming, or to claim the same, or any part thereof. WITNESS my hand at, Bryan, Texas, this 15th. day of November, 1949. $2.20 Revenue Stamps affixed Lillie Wallace and duly canceled. THE STATE OF TZXAS, COUNTY OF BRAZOS j BEFORE ME, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, on this day personally appeared Lillie Wallace, a widow, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that she executed the same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this the 15th. day of November, A. D. 1949. (SEAL) -ic - Amer Notary Public -in and for Brazos County, Texas. The foregoing is a true and correct copy of the original instrument which was filed for recor on the 23rd. day of November, A.D. 1949 at.8:40 o'clock a.m, and.duly.recorded on the 23rd. day of November, A.D. 1949 at 11:40 o'clock a.m. to which I certify. A. B. ypt , C. C. C B. C. v - — / ¢ v Deputy (d) THE STATE OF TEIAS, j 6'17UA ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: COUNTY OF BRAZOS That WE, CHARLES HOLLAND WAGAMON and wife, MARIAN ROSE HOLICB WAGAMON, of the County of State of Texas for and in consideration of the sum of NINE HUNDRED AND NO/100 ($9OO.00) DOERS to us in hand paid by W. 1. Hall as follows: CASH, in hand paid, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged: have Granted, Sold and Conveyed, and by these presents do Grant, Sell and Convey, unto the as W. Z. Hall of the County of Brazos State of Texas all that certain lot, tract or parcel of la lying and being situated in the Holick Addition to the City of Bryan, Brazos County, Texas, and being more particularly described as follows, - '1 i Tim o ; 1 i1 oG T/ IAAO� I I N o 3 ff �� 1 Vj, 91 VTM 10 r. j. lk- 0 •, 33a /NS 1 hV 17 5 121 v Co Z-455��Ilj( - t - zg S�tl/1� -07 t r w �a t w t [i h i PJ& i44)uot,4 JV IL41 � S NO �l 1 t F1 t ['I 1 b?of v Gb�,�-Izz I/p4</ 6Go chi 01/ / % vw 1 T fin/ /�✓�,�',c/� 7 71 9 /P �c,�IL ,&u�At-�S ��2 — z?VO go CID 'A t R � /2 or- xsll "9L1 C�viif C=am - � �� �bi��vi �•�� �iS�Y��� / 1y)1 &n1 177 `r��✓�F "GAL IAI M� 1 t J 1 1 t 1 t �l t A Jrl,7�F Ovll- O< 0-/ 111)1*LAI sv� lrj f P c � p 3 n v �3 W� 8 � Y " s, ° 3 a Nal 5� Ilk ON r� h �3a �Q2 auv 3 1. .� r ,� ��� � _ � � ��' ��30� �� �������� ���?���� �� �� €���� �2 ����� V .�