The aspect of this that won me over is the location. If the city's first plan, for three fields at Veteran's Park, was finalized, and IF that location drove commercial investment, half or more of the benefit would go to the City of Bryan. What hotel would be the first choice of teams? Perhaps the hotel just across University, which is in the Bryan City Limits? Did the COCS perform an area survey of available commercial development sites with realistic expectations of where new restaurants or sports related facilities might go? The Veteran's Park location was more expensive, for fewer fields, and what appears to be lesser economic development benefits for our city. In many ways, it was an attempt to cover the city's disaster at Texas Independence Ballpark.
I'm tired of hearing Council members say we're already doing too much for MidTown and using that as an excuse to make poor decisions. Do what's right for our city as a whole.
I hope the Bombers find a new home in Mid Town, but if for whatever reason they don't stay here, at least the field will continue to be used by others, and help our city prosper long term.

Do you know who will be managing youth tournaments?

Perfect Game has a strangle hold on Greater Houston and DFW.They have driven up the tournament fees and many teams have sought other alternatives. W/ the cost of overnight stays in BCS, I see this as an obstacle.

I know Shane Lechler was organizing tournaments outside the PG realm and teams from Cypress, Tomball, Spring Woodlands would participate. I believe they were mostly one day tournaments. PG holds a NIT a couple of times a year all throughout greater Houston. Over 750 teams participate from all over the nation and they occupy just about every field available.

PG has become the de facto go to for college recruiting. They own lots of data and track players starting as early as 9y/o...

Gator92 said:

---

Do you know who will be managing youth tournaments?

Perfect Game has a strangle hold on Greater Houston and DFW.They have driven up the tournament fees and many teams have sought other alternatives. W/ the cost of overnight stays in BCS, I see this as an obstacle.

I know Shane Lechler was organizing tournaments outside the PG realm and teams from Cypress, Tomball, Spring Woodlands would participate. I believe they were mostly one day tournaments. PG holds a NIT a couple of times a year all throughout greater Houston. Over 750 teams participate from all over the nation and they occupy just about every field available.

PG has become the de facto go to for college recruiting. They own lots of data and track players starting as early as 9y/o...

---

I know 12 Baseball will play a role. They're nationally renowned, headquartered here, but hold few events here due to a lack of facilities. All the pieces parts are here. Demand is here. Land is here. Little League, private clubs, public play- huge potential.

Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

lwd78 said:

---

The aspect of this that won me over is the location. If the city's first plan, for three fields at Veteran's Park, was finalized, and IF that location drove commercial investment, half or more of the benefit would go to the City of Bryan. What hotel would be the first choice of teams? Perhaps the hotel just across University, which is in the Bryan City Limits? Did the COCS perform an area survey of available commercial development sites with realistic expectations of where new restaurants or sports related facilities might go? The Veteran's Park location was more expensive, for fewer fields, and what appears to be lesser economic development benefits for our city. In many ways, it was an attempt to cover the city's disaster at Texas Independence Ballpark.
I'm tired of hearing Council members say we're already doing too much for MidTown and using that as an excuse to make poor decisions. Do what's right for our city as a whole.
I hope the Bombers find a new home in Mid Town, but if for whatever reason they don't stay here, at least the field will continue to be used by others, and help our city prosper long term.

---

The Bombers are welcome. Fun, affordable family entertainment.

Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

I saw the mention of parking volume being considered as not enough for The Station project. I looked at Diamonds at Daily and it has half the parking area for nearly the same fields as the CS facility. Diamond at Daily has 8 fields the new location has 9.

As someone who has umpired there, what was parking lot capacity like? For quick math i got 180,000 sq ft of parking lot area in Rosenburg. The parking lot area for the CS location is 410,000 sq ft.

I also noticed Diamond at Daily has (8) 250' fields, The Station is (5) 250' fields and (4) full size HS fields. so technically the math would need to account for the additional field usage to make an accurate comparison. But good enough in this scenario to draw an extrapolation.

As someone who has been there during busy weekends, how deficit was the parking? Or was it full and satisfactory?

I don't want to derail this conversation, but this is a phenomenal public private partnership (PPP) as it stands or at least as I've read it. This could be the partnership that sparks real momentum in pursuing future partnerships and deals.
I like Chapter 380 agreements because they include built in ways to protect taxpayer dollars (I never want to gamble with the community's money.)

Having clawbacks, along with my personal favorite feature of these agreements, the required audits, allows the city to truly incentivize developers to bring jobs and growth to College Station while keeping taxpayers nearly fully insulated from risk.

A valid point that's been raised repeatedly is housing. I believe the Housing Action Committee is very close to sending a recommendation to council on policies that would enable competitive workforce housing options. You simply can't sustain growth without reasonably priced homes.

Parking is ample.

I'd say 4 full size fields is two to many. After 12U, number of teams drops off significantly. Could be a niche to fill however as number of FS fields is low. High Schools have been filling this void though. Especially ones w/ artificial field turf.

Youth ball is truly a real estate game. Baseball/Softball especially.

Trails? Swimming pool? Would love to read more about these. I enjoy running on the trail adjacent to this property, so naturally I'm wary of development disturbing my peaceful nature jaunts. But if it really means more trails/route options, I can be persuaded. What about publicly accessible bathrooms? Runners and cyclists love having that amenity on trails! Indoor or outdoor swimming pool? Are there preliminary plans that detail these offerings?

BTW, I have witnessed confusion over exactly where this will be built - a heavily populated group on FB has a post about this project using photos from Lick Creek Park and people unfamiliar with this development are convinced they're going to plunk this right in the middle of the nature/unpaved trails over on that side, just because it's near the greater "Lick Creek Greenway". The more info/transparency that can be shared easily, the better!

I'd also add, I would want to know who is managing travel tournaments. The private fields in Houston manage a mix. They host their own unsanctioned tournaments and Perfect Game/USSSA tournaments. Could make all the difference attracting out of area teams. Most teams want a mix of lower cost unsanctioned tournaments and higher cost sanctioned tournaments.

Sounds like a private entity will be managing this. W/ a private entity, I doubt they would want a sanctioned Little League. An independent Rec League would serve better. It's not only game/tournament demand, but local team practice demand as well. W/ a Rec League, you are cutting into practice hour dollars w/ games during the week.

Agree. I was getting at the fact that we only have 6 on the books, compared to our peers that have 65-70. We need to be more business/development friendly. The baseball complex is a good start.

Bob Yancy said:

---

happyinBCS said:

---

Almost sounds too good to be true except for the part if they bow out the city will finish it

---

We'll have a ripcord if we need to pull it. Walk, or finish it. Safety first. Not council's money. It's yours. Plan first. Spare regrets later.


Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

---

Will COCS require payment and performance bonds?

Sub4 said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

happyinBCS said:

---

Almost sounds too good to be true except for the part if they bow out the city will finish it

---

We'll have a ripcord if we need to pull it. Walk, or finish it. Safety first. Not council's money. It's yours. Plan first. Spare regrets later.


Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

---

Will COCS require payment and performance bonds?

---

Yes. And the partner will have to fund and hold a reserve fund in case of hard times. This one is different.

Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

You don't want to to do anything with the Bombers. Uri is a crook. Exhibit A - Bomber stadium in Bryan is dump and who knows how much the city is pouring into it to make it halfway decent. Better hope this a rental, not a lease agreement.

DonHenley said:

---

You don't want to to do anything with the Bombers. Uri is a crook. Exhibit A - Bomber stadium in Bryan is dump and who knows how much the city is pouring into it to make it halfway decent. Better hope this a rental, not a lease agreement.

---

I'm sorry Uri and my friends at CoB got sideways. He's my friend and I wish he (or anyone) would not be denigrated on this platform.

It'll be a square deal for the taxpayer. That's who I work for. And it'll be fun family entertainment that's affordable for all.

Yancy

Few questions about this…is this a park, where anyone can use the fields if they aren't reserved (Vets)? Is the City getting part of the usage fees, or just counting in/out tourism traffic in the $28M projection? How much/what is the City giving this business to develop their complex? Apologies if I missed that in the original post.

oldag7877 said:

---

Few questions about this…is this a park, where anyone can use the fields if they aren't reserved (Vets)? Is the City getting part of the usage fees, or just counting in/out tourism traffic in the $28M projection? How much/what is the City giving this business to develop their complex? Apologies if I missed that in the original post.

---

Here you go:

The developer will:
Lease 63 acres from the city for the baseball complex

Receive a 10-year property tax abatement for baseball complex improvements only

Provide all maintenance, operations and long-term capital replacements

Secure financing for the estimated $35 million to $50 million total project cost

Maintain a 12-month debt service reserve to ensure payments can continue to be made on the leased site

Maintain a capital reserve fund for any necessary maintenance or replacements, such as replacing turf on the fields

Build an adjacent resort development on 30 acres with a lake, a pool, casitas and an indoor training facility

The city will:

Sell 30 acres to the developer for lodging and amenities at $20,000 per acre (a steep discount, but still constitutes an approximate 90% gross ROI to the taxpayer based on original price paid for the tract)

Reimburse the developer up to $20 million for public improvements, such as fields, infrastructure and utilities, conditional upon construction milestones met

Extend utilities and road improvements to access the site, which is estimated to total about $15 million (an expense we would've likely incurred anyway, depending upon who the city would have sold/leased it to)

No city funds will be used to develop the hospitality portion of the project. (Lodging and amenities)

The public will have access to the complex Monday-Friday during evening hours at rates comparable to city facilities, and the city will have access to the complex on available weekends.

Tournament participants will be required to stay at a hotel within College Station city limits (not sure how we can ensure this.)

The Brazos Valley Bombers will be granted access to the larger, championship field to host home games at a rate comparable to such arrangements in a lease

The project is estimated to yield an annual economic impact of $28 million and about 60,000 hotel room bookings annually, based on the projected number of tournaments hosted at the complex.

The letter of intent states the developer will ramp up to hosting 30 tournaments annually at the complex within the first three years of operations.

That's the high points. Full disclosure, we've been directly involved on Council and I, as one member of that body, think this is a screaming deal.

Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

Have they indicated what the plan the seating capacity of the championship field to be?

Captn_Ag05 said:

---

Have they indicated what the plan the seating capacity of the championship field to be?

---

We've gone back and forth on that. Probably in the vicinity of 1500, though not confirmed. The topography out there allows for countersunk fields into the ground, and thusly will lend itself to a future expansion of outfield seating if needed, regardless of what we settle on initially. The champ field will be built with future seating expansion in mind.

Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

Thank you, sir. I was hoping it would be a little larger (in the 2,500 range), but like the expansion ability.

Bob Yancy said:

---

oldag7877 said:

---

Few questions about this…is this a park, where anyone can use the fields if they aren't reserved (Vets)? Is the City getting part of the usage fees, or just counting in/out tourism traffic in the $28M projection? How much/what is the City giving this business to develop their complex? Apologies if I missed that in the original post.

---

Here you go:

The developer will:
Lease 63 acres from the city for the baseball complex

Receive a 10-year property tax abatement for baseball complex improvements only

Provide all maintenance, operations and long-term capital replacements

Secure financing for the estimated $35 million to $50 million total project cost

Maintain a 12-month debt service reserve to ensure payments can continue to be made on the leased site

Maintain a capital reserve fund for any necessary maintenance or replacements, such as replacing turf on the fields

Build an adjacent resort development on 30 acres with a lake, a pool, casitas and an indoor training facility

The city will:

Sell 30 acres to the developer for lodging and amenities at $20,000 per acre (a steep discount, but still constitutes an approximate 90% gross ROI to the taxpayer based on original price paid for the tract)

Reimburse the developer up to $20 million for public improvements, such as fields, infrastructure and utilities, conditional upon construction milestones met

Extend utilities and road improvements to access the site, which is estimated to total about $15 million (an expense we would've likely incurred anyway, depending upon who the city would have sold/leased it to)

No city funds will be used to develop the hospitality portion of the project. (Lodging and amenities)

The public will have access to the complex Monday-Friday during evening hours at rates comparable to city facilities, and the city will have access to the complex on available weekends.

Tournament participants will be required to stay at a hotel within College Station city limits (not sure how we can ensure this.)

The Brazos Valley Bombers will be granted access to the larger, championship field to host home games at a rate comparable to such arrangements in a lease

The project is estimated to yield an annual economic impact of $28 million and about 60,000 hotel room bookings annually, based on the projected number of tournaments hosted at the complex.

The letter of intent states the developer will ramp up to hosting 30 tournaments annually at the complex within the first three years of operations.

That's the high points. Full disclosure, we've been directly involved on Council and I, as one member of that body, think this is a screaming deal.

Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

---

Thank you for all of this. It's very thorough. Just for clarity, as financial contributors to this business venture, will CoCS receive any portion of the usage fees?

oldag7877 said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

oldag7877 said:

---

Few questions about this…is this a park, where anyone can use the fields if they aren't reserved (Vets)? Is the City getting part of the usage fees, or just counting in/out tourism traffic in the $28M projection? How much/what is the City giving this business to develop their complex? Apologies if I missed that in the original post.

---

Here you go:

The developer will:
Lease 63 acres from the city for the baseball complex

Receive a 10-year property tax abatement for baseball complex improvements only

Provide all maintenance, operations and long-term capital replacements

Secure financing for the estimated $35 million to $50 million total project cost

Maintain a 12-month debt service reserve to ensure payments can continue to be made on the leased site

Maintain a capital reserve fund for any necessary maintenance or replacements, such as replacing turf on the fields

Build an adjacent resort development on 30 acres with a lake, a pool, casitas and an indoor training facility

The city will:

Sell 30 acres to the developer for lodging and amenities at $20,000 per acre (a steep discount, but still constitutes an approximate 90% gross ROI to the taxpayer based on original price paid for the tract)

Reimburse the developer up to $20 million for public improvements, such as fields, infrastructure and utilities, conditional upon construction milestones met

Extend utilities and road improvements to access the site, which is estimated to total about $15 million (an expense we would've likely incurred anyway, depending upon who the city would have sold/leased it to)

No city funds will be used to develop the hospitality portion of the project. (Lodging and amenities)

The public will have access to the complex Monday-Friday during evening hours at rates comparable to city facilities, and the city will have access to the complex on available weekends.

Tournament participants will be required to stay at a hotel within College Station city limits (not sure how we can ensure this.)

The Brazos Valley Bombers will be granted access to the larger, championship field to host home games at a rate comparable to such arrangements in a lease

The project is estimated to yield an annual economic impact of $28 million and about 60,000 hotel room bookings annually, based on the projected number of tournaments hosted at the complex.

The letter of intent states the developer will ramp up to hosting 30 tournaments annually at the complex within the first three years of operations.

That's the high points. Full disclosure, we've been directly involved on Council and I, as one member of that body, think this is a screaming deal.

Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

---

Thank you for all of this. It's very thorough. Just for clarity, as financial contributors to this business venture, will CoCS receive any portion of the usage fees?

---

TBD. It's an interesting conundrum. My analogy is the private sector is essentially building an airplane for us. They fly it on the weekends, the taxpayer flies it during the week and the weekends the private sector isn't using it. It's on our runway and stays our runway (except a small portion). At the end of the 50 year lease, the plane is yours. Do you assess them further still? As partners, it's in our interest for them to succeed, and they're already maintaining and staffing the entire airport, plus upgrading when necessary, plus posting up as the largest capital partner, which is exceedingly rare in these P3s. In fact, I can't find one this favorable in my research. The capital contributions are usually reversed, with the taxpayer bearing the largest burden, which is the opposite of this proposal.

These deal points need to be hammered out and that's happening now. It'll come before council for a final up or down vote soon. Until then, I'm gonna push back from the Texags table a bit until we have a contract.

I hope that's fair.

Respectfully,

Yancy '95 Place 5

https://communityimpact.com/houston/bryan-college-station/government/2026/02/27/college-station-approves-letter-of-intent-for-baseball-complex-in-midtown/

Will the terms of the agreement require a complete resurfacing every (x) number of years?

Councilman Yancy,

First of all, thanks for your insight into the inner workings of the City of College Station. By a wide margin, you have shared more information than any 20 previous councilmembers or mayors. I know I'm not the only one that feels this way.

Second, the details of the letter you shared leave me with more questions than answers. I have a hard time believing the potential field owner will agree to the items in the letter without question. Perhaps the letter is a good start but operating one of these facilities has typically not been a profit center. Given the total cost of baseball fields plus the hotel / resort, there is a large amount of debt and equity involved. That typically gives any good businessman some hesitation. I hope all parties keep their wits about them during the negotiations. I would like to see the final accepted agreement. My instinct is that the terms will change before then.


Again, thanks for your candor. It is deeply appreciated.

hereford said:

---

Councilman Yancy,

First of all, thanks for your insight into the inner workings of the City of College Station. By a wide margin, you have shared more information than any 20 previous councilmembers or mayors. I know I'm not the only one that feels this way.

Second, the details of the letter you shared leave me with more questions than answers. I have a hard time believing the potential field owner will agree to the items in the letter without question. Perhaps the letter is a good start but operating one of these facilities has typically not been a profit center. Given the total cost of baseball fields plus the hotel / resort, there is a large amount of debt and equity involved. That typically gives any good businessman some hesitation. I hope all parties keep their wits about them during the negotiations. I would like to see the final accepted agreement. My instinct is that the terms will change before then.


Again, thanks for your candor. It is deeply appreciated.

---

Of course, thanks for the kind words- albeit the info I shared is in that news story link, and the LOI is public information now- I just summarized it for my bosses.

But I must say it sounds like you think Council and staff have negotiated TOO well on the taxpayers behalf! That's quite a change, and I'll take it! ;-)

As one member of council, I believe it is a great deal for the taxpayer, and a good deal for our potential partner.

Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

spike427 said:

---

Trails? Swimming pool? Would love to read more about these. I enjoy running on the trail adjacent to this property, so naturally I'm wary of development disturbing my peaceful nature jaunts. But if it really means more trails/route options, I can be persuaded. What about publicly accessible bathrooms? Runners and cyclists love having that amenity on trails! Indoor or outdoor swimming pool? Are there preliminary plans that detail these offerings?

BTW, I have witnessed confusion over exactly where this will be built - a heavily populated group on FB has a post about this project using photos from Lick Creek Park and people unfamiliar with this development are convinced they're going to plunk this right in the middle of the nature/unpaved trails over on that side, just because it's near the greater "Lick Creek Greenway". The more info/transparency that can be shared easily, the better!

---

That's why I made this post- because of the confusion out there. Your trail experience will not be detrimentally affected. I'll ask about bathroom access. Good idea.

Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5