Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970 Letters to the Editor various subjects)-inner George Eby Sa i Failed. To the I would like to correct on statement atement in the article (The Daily Eagle, March 3) about the College Station Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held on March 2. The motion made by Commissioner Gardner for the commission to recom- mend rezoning of block one of College Park subdivision (with the exception of lots 1, 2, half of 3, 10 and 11), in lieu of granting Mrs. Alani's apartment re- quest, to duplex zoning was denied. There seems to be a substantial ele- ment of confusion about this point. In actuality, after Commissioner Gardner's motion was seconded by Com- missioner Stone, Chairman Wells point- ed out that advertisements for public hearings would then be necessary for the new zoning. The zoning motion was then voted upon and the motion failed. On the question, Commissioner Tish- ler, Lindsay, Wells and Landiss voted no. Commissioner Stone, Gardner and Rhodes voted yes. From a planning standpoint, since the area is so close to the university,I_Q not sPP y his property, in time. sl not all become apartment area. _ George Eby III City Planner City of College Station 1. Questions Raised, Says Robert Cornish To the Editor: Joe Orr's concern over the estimated $200,000 per year in sales tax revenue which College Station residents pay in Bryan seems justified. However, it rais- ed several important questions which go well beyond the usual chamber of com- merce kind of activity of encouraging economic growth. Importance here is, do we really want new business and light industry and, if so where should such activity be located and to what standards of quality should it be built? Has College Station really decided what kind of city it wants to grow into in the next decade or two? For example: 1. Should College Station remain es- sentially a university city? 2. Should College Station offer higher quality commercial services to its residents? 3. Can the city be made generall more attractive and thereby en- courage higher quality investments, f both commercial and residential? I am unimpressed (to put it politely) by the general level of merchandising' in College Station, particularly when compared with the prices. So much so in fact, that often I shop in Bryan, by choice, simply because the stores are more attractive and have a greater depth of merchandise. Whether a separate chamber of com- merce could correct this situation or not is moot, at this time. However exist- ing merchants in College Station have a continuing opportunity to upgrade their appeal to the public. Why don't they? Robert Cornish 1700 Jersey College Station The Millers Say They Had a Dr a the Edito a enteen ye ago toda , viewing Co ege Station r the first time and knowing it was to be home, the dream was a city OF the people, BY the peo- ple, FOR the people. Now, our vision of the future for College Station: a city run by builders, contractors, a Planning and Zoning Com- mission that is the APPOINTED power —not the ELECTED power, poor man- agement at $14,400 per year —and the people —the poor little people who can't be heard unless they are personally in- volved within 200 feet of rezoning. The stand of the P &Z seems to be "To hell with the agenda. . . come on, mateys, now's the time to push this thing —not many here —no advance info —let's shove 'er through!" rhave If Mr. Orr has had so much exper- nce during his 25 years of public ser- ce, why are we in such a mess out re now? Why is HE encouraging oward Johnson's or an inn or some - ng ?" Heavenly days! With the advent TIS (Mr. George Boyett's baby), we had such an influx of hee -haw staurants there's scarcely room to put another service station. Commissioner Stone was entirely justified in asking for economical justi- fication for the need of more rezoning. Of what earthly benefit is it to the city? Quoting Mr. Seaback... "the city gains in tax dollars." Hmmmm —in 17 years our taxes have tripled and our benefits are status quo. And we live here by choice —not necessity. 4 We support Mayor Anderson an tain members of the City Council wholeheartedly. Few people realize how many hours are spent working for the good and future betterment of College Station. We cannot support and regret even having to tolerate Wells and his P &Z "yes men." We'll have to live with their mistakes for a long time to come. We URGE —even BEG —every inler- ested citizen to attend EACH meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission (first and third Mondays, 7 p.m., City Hall, CS), and the City Council meet- ing (fourth Monday, same time, same place). We can't afford NOT to attend, especially during the summer months. . . . the "skulduggery days." Without attendance, you have no say -so about what does go on. Think of this: we don't five within 200 feet of the moon, but our taxes are helping to pay for those trips! A large enough turnout will surely get through to these men that we ARE going to be heard. Mr. & Mrs. Edward H. Miller Owners, taxpayers, and bel- ligerents of 504 Guernsey, Col- Mr. X Says Issue Not Beautification To the Editor: I question the judgment involved in plastering ' A picture of a squalid hovel on the front page of The Daily Eagle (Nov. 24) in the name of city beautifica- tion. The issue here is not beautification. It is no less than the tragic degradation of human life. Yet to "pity the plumage and forget the dying bird" is the reaction of the College Station Beautification Com- mittee. Enclosed is $10 to alleviate the con- ditions of the human beings who exist there. It won't put turkey on the Thanks- giving table or toys in the Christmas stockings, but I hope that at least it won't be used for grass seed or flowers. How about each member of the Col- lege Station Beautification Committee matching this contribution? Incidentally, how about the Aggies donating a few cords from their bonfire wood for the winter this family must face? Anonymous : We suspend our rule against unsigned letters, Mr. X, since you have put your :money where your mouth is. We agree ;the picture says much about the quality - -or shortage of it— in the lives of the : occupants of the house. We will see that :your $10 is offered to them. —The Editor