HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/17/2010 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission
CrrY01- COH F.G1. -STI VI ION MINUTES
Norm <af lexn~ Ac'-111 Cnivo> iry' PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Workshop Meeting
June 17, 2010, 6:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Mike Ashfield, Doug Slack, Paul Greer,
and Hugh Stearns
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: John Nichols, Tom Woodfin, and Scott Shafer
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: David Ruesink
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Staff Planners Lauren Hovde, Matt Robinson, and Matthew
Hilgemeier, Greenways Program Manager Venessa Garza, Transportation Planning Coordinator
Joe Guerra, Senior Assistant City Engineer, Assistant Director Lance Simms, Director Bob
Cowell, First Assistant City Attorney Carla Robinson, Action Center Representative Kerry
Mullins, and Administrative Support Specialist Brittany Caldwell
1. Call the meeting to order.
Acting Chairman Mike Ashfield called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. Discussion of consent and regular agenda items.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding Consent Agenda Item
3.3 and Regular Agenda Items 7, 8, and 10.
Director Cowell stated that Regular Agenda Item 9 had been removed from the agenda
due to a notification error.
3. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update to the Commission on
the status of items within the 2010 P&Z Plan of Work (see attached). (JS)
Director Cowell gave an update regarding the 2010 P&Z Plan of Work.
4. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the P&Z Calendar of Upcoming
Meetings.
❖ June 24, 2010 - City Council Meeting - Council Chambers - Workshop 3:00 p.m.
and Regular 7:00 p.m.
❖ July 1, 2010 - P&Z Meeting - Council Chambers Workshop 6:00 p.m, and
Regular 7:00 p.m.
June 17, 2010 P&Z Workshop Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2
❖ July 7, 2010 - P&Z Mid-Year Retreat and Training - Green Room - 1:00 p.m. to
5:00 p.m.
Acting Chairman Ashfield reviewed the upcoming meeting dates for the Planning &
Zoning Commission.
5. Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Design Review
Board, Council Transportation Committee, Joint Parks/Planning and Zoning
Subcommittee, Wolf Pen Creek Oversight Committee, Platting Requirements and
Standards Subcommittee, Neighborhood Plan Stakeholder Resource Team, and Code
Coordination Subcommittee.
Acting Chairman Ashfield gave an update regarding the Neighborhood Plan Stakeholder
Resource Team.
6. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items - A Planning and Zoning 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.
Commissioner Stearns asked for a future agenda item regarding the 2009 codes for grey
water usage.
7. Adjourn.
Commissioner Greer motioned to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Stearns
seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0).
Meeting adjourned at 6:42 p.m.
Appr
J n ichols, Chairman /
Pl arming and Zoning Commission
Attest:
6~'Auw
Brittan Cal well, Admin. Support Specialist
Planning and Development Services
June 17, 2010 P&Z Workshop Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2
(*hr""
Cl-l Y O C OLL.I;(;F STUION MINUTES
HmrtP oj 7iwa~ ;&.11 lrfaiversicJl PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
June 17, 2010, 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman Mike Ashfield, Doug Slack, Paul Greer,
and Hugh Stearns
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: John Nichols, Tom Woodfin, and Scott Shafer
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: David Ruesink
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Staff Planners Lauren Hovde, Matt Robinson, and Matthew
Hilgemeier, Greenways Program Manager Venessa Garza, Transportation Planning Coordinator
Joe Guerra, Senior Assistant City Engineer Carol Cotter, Assistant Director Lance Simms,
Director Bob Cowell, First Assistant City Attorney Carla Robinson, Action Center
Representative Kerry Mullins, and Administrative Support Specialist Brittany Caldwell
1. Call meeting to order.
Chairman Nichols called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. Hear Citizens.
None.
3. Consent Agenda
3.1 Consideration, discussion, and possible action on Absence Requests from
meetings.
• John Nichols -June 17, 2010
3.2 Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting Minutes.
• June 3, 2010 - Workshop
• June 3, 2010 - Regular
3.3 Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a Final Plat for Graham
Road Industrial Park Phase 1, consisting of one lot on 2.58 acres located at 727
Graham Road. Case #10-00500085 (MR)
June 17, 2010 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 5
Commissioner Greer motioned to approve Consent Agenda Items 3.1 - 3.3.
Commissioner Slack seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0).
Regular Agenda
4. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent
Agenda by Commission action.
No items were removed from the Consent Agenda.
5. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a Final Plat of
Creek Meadows Subdivision Section I B Phase 4 Block 13 Lots I R, 2R, 10R, and
Common Area W" and Section 1 B Phase 1 Common Area "V" being a replat of Section
1B Phase 4 Block 13 Lots 1-2 and 10-12 and Section I B Phase 1 Common Area W",
located on 2.32 acres at 4002, 4004, 4006 Silver Brook Court and 4001 and 4003 Sunny
Meadow Brook Court near Creek Meadow Boulevard. Case #10-00500089 (LH)
Staff Planner Lauren Hovde presented the replat and recommended approval.
Acting Chairman Ashfield opened the public hearing.
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Acting Chairman Ashfield closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Greer motioned to approve the replat. Commissioner Stearns
seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0).
6. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat of the
Aggieland Business Park, Phase 1, Block 1, Lots IA-1, IA-2, 1B-1, and 1B-2, being a
replat of Aggieland Business Park Phase 1, Block 1, Lot IA and 1B consisting of 4 lots
on 6.84 acres, generally located near the intersection of Jones Butler Road and Raymond
Stotzer, in the City's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction. Case #10-00500080 (MKH)
Staff Planner Matthew Hilgemeier presented the replat and recommended approval.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the replat.
Acting Chairman Ashfield opened the public hearing.
Joe Schultz, representing the applicant, stated that he was available for questions.
Acting Chairman Ashfield closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Greer motioned to approve the replat. Commissioner Stearns
seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0).
June 17, 2010 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 5
7. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a discretionary
item to UDO Section 8.2.A.I I "Lots", and a public hearing, presentation, possible action,
and discussion regarding a Replat for Horse Haven Phase 4, consisting of two lots on
0.38 acres located at 6809 & 6901 Appomattox Drive, generally located south of Switch
Station Road in the Horse Haven Subdivision. Case #10-00500084 (MR)
Staff Planner Matt Robinson presented the discretionary item regarding right-angle lots
and recommended approval of the replat if the discretionary item was approved.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the discretionary item.
Acting Chairman Ashfield opened the public hearing
No one spoke during the public hearing.
Acting Chairman Ashfield closed the public hearing.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the fencing along the
rear of Lot 44.
Commissioner Stearns motioned to approve the discretionary item with the
condition that open fencing with at least 75% visibility be built on the rear of Lot 44
where it abuts Lot 45 and that the fence complies with the 15-foot side street setback
requirement. Commissioner Slack seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0).
Commissioner Stearns motioned to approve the replat. Commissioner Slack
seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0).
8. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a Rezoning for
Spring Creek Retail and Office Center from A-O, Agricultural Open to PDD, Planned
Development District for 5 acres located at 1850 William D. Fitch Parkway. Case #10-
00500060 (MR)
Staff Planner Matt Robinson presented the Rezoning and recommended approval with the
condition to remove the note regarding the triple buffer area on the concept plan.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the Rezoning.
Acting Chairman Ashfield opened the public hearing.
Jane Kee, IPS Group, stated that the applicant is implementing the Comprehensive Plan
appropriately and the development would fit with the adjacent neighborhood.
Mr. & Mrs. James Butcher, 4420 Spring Meadows Drive, College Station, Texas; Linda
Wilson, 404 Rockspring Court, College Station, Texas; Will Welch, 4426 Spring
Meadows, College Station, Texas; Troy Davidson, 404 Cold Spring, College Station,
Texas; Robert Rose, Walnut Creek Court, Bryan, Texas; Chaodong Wu, 4432 Spring
June 17, 2010 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 5
Meadows, College Station, Texas; Bill Barkley, 912 Winged Foot Drive, College Station,
Texas; Joann Grandjean, 417 Rock Spring Court, College Station, Texas; Rose Gessner,
408 Rock Spring Court, College Station, Texas. The citizens expressed concern about
property values, buffer, and the safety of a u-turn.
Acting Chairman Ashfield closed the public hearing.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the Rezoning.
Commissioner Stearns stated that the development does not fit with the neighborhood.
Commissioners Slack and Greer expressed concern about the u-turn that would have to
be made for vehicles to get to the development that are going east on William D. Fitch
Parkway.
Commissioner Slack motioned to recommend denial of the Rezoning request.
Commissioner Stearns seconded the motion, motion passed (3-1). Acting Chairman
Ashfield was in opposition.
9. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a Rezoning for a
portion of Lot 1, Block 3 and a portion of Lots 34-36, Block 2 of the Spring Creek
Garden Subdivision from A-P Administrative Professional and R-1 Single Family
Residential to PDD Planned Development District for 0.8625 acres located east of the
intersection of Candace Court and Decatur Drive. Case #10-00500070 (MKH)
This item was removed from the agenda due to a notification error.
10. Public hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion on the Annual Review of the
Unified Development Ordinance and the Annual Review of the Comprehensive Plan.
Case #10-00500002 (BC)
Director Cowell gave a presentation regarding the Annual Review of the Unified
Development Ordinance.
Acting Chairman Ashfield opened the public hearing.
James Hanna, 1306 Trail, stated that there are neighborhood integrity issues with taxi
companies operating out of their home.
Robert Rose, 3201 Walnut Creek Court, Bryan, Texas, stated that High Density needed to
be defined.
Acting Chairman Ashfield closed the public hearing.
The Commission agreed that the Home Occupations amendment to the Unified
Development Ordinance regarding taxi operations should be prioritized.
June 17, 2010 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 5
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the review.
Director Cowell gave a presentation regarding the Annual Review of the Comprehensive
Plan.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the review.
Acting Chairman Ashfield opened the public hearing.
Robert Rose, 3201 Walnut Creek Court, Bryan, Texas, stated that there needs to be age-
restricted multi-family communities to allow for people, other than students, to live in
apartments or condos.
Acting Chairman Ashfield closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Greer recommended to City Council that staff pursue the prioritized
amendments, but asked that the amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance
regarding Home Occupations also be prioritized. Commissioner Stearns seconded
the motion, motion passed (4-0).
11. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items - A Planning and Zoning 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.
12. Adjourn.
Commissioner Greer motioned to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Stearns
seconded the motion, motion passed (4-0).
The meeting was adjourned at 9:48 p.m.
Approve
Jo Ni ols, Chairman
Pla g and Zoning Commission
Attest:
I
Brittan Cal well, Admin. Support Specialist
Planning and Development Services
June 17, 2010 P&Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 5
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
GUEST REGISTER
2Q 10
MEETING DATE,;
NAME ADDRESS
1. ~rAMr~ 3vr~~r ¢4zv S`P~i~GM1~~4~D~~ D?P~
4. -lbkw~ ' k
5. R ~ i~ o
6. 2~ 1 -.t 2a 13o~ 76) T~
1
8. li
a. IJ
10. S ,~~c 1 1 L.~ l.k C vc"r' 4' ~ v c 7 7 ~ ~->s
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
Registration Form
(For persons who wish to address the Commission)
t 0 7/Z a j U
Date of meeting:
Agenda Item No.: 8
Name: ;:S-A rAg S C--
Address: ¢~LZG 5t~1~/ c~G 1'✓I~ ~ W S IJ' .
If speaking for an organization, name of organization:
j EL-p 94:x-, D 4,0
Speaker's official capacity:
Subject on which person wishes to speak:
Please remember to step up to the podium as soon as you are
recognized by the chairperson, hand your completed
registration form to the presiding officer. State your name and
your residence before beginning your presentation. If you have
written notes you wish to present to the Commission,
PLEASE FURNISH AN EXTRA COPY FOR PLANNING
FILES.
Registration Form
(For persons who wish to address the Commission)
Date of meeting:
Agenda Item No.:
Name:
Address:
If speaking for an organization, name of organization:
Speaker's official capacity:
Subjec on which person wishes to speak:
` Q s
I.A
Please remember to step up to the podium as soon as you are
recognized by the chairperson, hand your completed
registration form to the presiding officer. State your name and
your residence before beginning your presentation. If you have
written notes you wish to FURNISH AN EXTRA COPY FOR P NNSING
PLEASE FU FUR
FILES.
Registration Form
(For persons who wish to address the Commission)
Date of meeting: 1 1 10
Agenda Item No.:
~~0,~ K
Name:
Address: ! h nS
c~ 5, -7--'S 4~
If speaking for an organization, name of organization:
Speaker's official capacity:
Subject on which person wishes to speak:
Please remember to step up to the podium as soon as you are
recognized by the chairperson, hand your completed
registration form to the presiding officer. State your name and
your residence before beginning your presentation. If you have
written notes you wish to present to the Commission,
PLEASE FURNISH AN EXTRA COPY FOR PLANNING
FILES.
Registration Form
(For persons who wish to address the Commission)
Date of meeting:
Agenda Item No.:
Name:
Address: If speaking for an organization, name of organization:
Speaker's officiat,capacity:
Subject on hich person wishes to speak
Please remember to step up to the podium as soon as you are
recognized by the chairperson, hand your completed
registration form to the presiding officer. State your name and
your residence before beginning your presentation. If you have
written notes you wish to present to the Commission,
PLEASE FURNISH AN EXTRA COPY FOR PLANNING
FILES.
Dear Fellow Commissioners,
We will be considering several plats and plans at the southern edge of town in tonight's meeting. This
packet addresses some ongoing concerns that Lhave about this development. At the last P&Z meeting,
after I spoke out about the over abundance of commercial zoning at the southern edge of town, calling
it a worst practice, a fellow commissioner asked who would determine this a worst practice. That is a
fair question that I will seek to answer it.
While it may be true that the specifics of College Station's zoning have not been addressed by
authorities such as the American Planning Association (APA) and the United Sates Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), they have rather specifically addressed some of our general practices.
The APA's "Policy Guide on Smart Growth" says:
While many Americans may have benefited from the effects of rapid suburbanization: large yards,
proximity to open space, new schools, increased mobility, and the financial appreciation of home
values, these benefits have not been universally shared. Professional planners acknowledge that the
social, economic, and environmental costs of urban dispersion can be more effectively managed, if
not avoided entirely. The nation is now experiencing a heightened concern over the social,
environmental, and fiscal quality of our communities arising from development practices that
aggravate the decline of many urban communities and older suburbs, congest streets and highways,
accelerate the loss of natural resources and the deterioration of the natural environment, and limit
opportunities for the retention and creation of affordable housing. Often these problems are simply
and collectively labeled, "sprawl." In response, the Smart Growth movement emerged.
On their web page dealing with Smart Growth, the EPA says:
Communities across the country are using creative strategies to develop in ways that preserve
natural lands and critical environmental areas, protect water and air quality, and reuse already-
developed land. They conserve resources by reinvesting in existing infrastructure and reclaiming
historic buildings. By designing neighborhoods that have shops, offices, schools, churches, parks,
and other amenities near homes, communities are giving their residents and visitors the option of
walking, bicycling, taking public transportation, or driving as they go about their business. A range of
different types of homes makes it possible for senior citizens to stay in their homes as they age,
young people to afford their first home, and families at all stages in between to find a safe,
attractive home they can afford. Through smart growth approaches that enhance neighborhoods
and involve local residents in development decisions, these communities are creating vibrant places
to live, work, and play. The high quality of life in these communities makes them economically
competitive, creates business opportunities, and improves the local tax base.
The Smart Growth Network, a collaborative effort that includes universities, the APA, The American
Institute of Architects, the US Forest service and many others outlines ten basic principles of smart
growth as:
1. Mix land uses
2. Take advantage of compact building design
3. Create a range of housing opportunities and choices
4. Create walkable neighborhoods
5. Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place
6. Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas
7. Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities
8. Provide a variety of transportation choices
9. Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost effective
10. Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions
Placing a huge inventory of land zoned for commercial development at the edge of town violates some
aspect of most of these principles.
The bigger issue is, why is this overwhelming body of information on modern development practices so
absent from our local dialog. Recently someone told me that I should not even mention the words
Smart Growth because they are a red flag. Why? This is the main thrust of modern urban design. What
should make us afraid to us these words and why are we getting so little information on these practices?
As an example, despite the request, there was almost zero information on these practices provided to
the Comp Plan committee. And this body seems to get almost no information about these practices. It
may be assumed that a little information can be a dangerous thing. I assure you that less information is
far more dangerous. There is a huge body of great information out there that I believe would be helpful
to this commission. I have provided a small sampling of information that I hope will give insight into
what is available and to help address the issue of why we do not want to encourage sprawl
development.
Respectfully,
The Commissioner - Spring 2010
Commissioner's Voice
The True Market for Smart Growth
By R. Hunter Gee
Metropolitan Nashville-Davidson County Planning Commission
Communities around the country are talking about smart growth. While many have developed
community-driven visions for their future, implementation remains the challenge.
Small towns are seeing their historic centers and rural character continue to deteriorate. Large
cities - economic engines of their regions - lack adequate affordable housing and have aging
infrastructure. Mid-tier cities, after years of growth, realize that they have limited land for
economic development or open space preservation.
We agree that the market drives economic development and growth. But is there an adequate
market for high-density employment centers, urban living, or walkable mixed use retail centers?
Cost to the consumer matters. Therefore, "the market" for urban infill is shallow given the cost of
land, infrastructure, parking, and building codes plus developers' challenges with land-use policy
and zoning, land assemblage, and NIMBYism. Urban infill is difficult, expensive and time-
consuming, ultimately costing the consumer more than traditional development.
Ironically, the cost of urban infill to the community is much less. As Chris Leinberger points out
in his book, The Option of Urbanism, Albuquerque, New Mexico, determined that the public
infrastructure costs for suburban households are 22 times more than those in urban areas.
Conceivably, we taxpayers are paying 22 times more to provide a cheaper alternative for the
consumer. Isn't this the definition of public subsidy?
So the playing field is not level. Until we offset additional developers' costs for urban infill and
the community's costs for suburban sprawl, we don't truly understand what the market wants.
The City of Nashville has begun tackling the issue. Under Director Rick Bernhardt's leadership,
the Metro Planning Commission has implemented new policy and zoning tools that incentivize
redevelopment. The Community Character Manual, our new land-use policy application for the
entire city, lays the groundwork for intensification coupled with high-quality urban design.
Recent rezonings of our entire downtown and a number of our commercial corridors and centers
offer developers greater heights, and thus more development potential.
Land-use policy and zoning changes are a first step. Infrastructure-related fees, utility rates, and
stormwater requirements in most communities are inequitable, given the cost to the community.
Land costs and land assemblage will remain two of the biggest hurdles to overcome.
Regional government and restructuring the tax system and fees are unappealing to most
politicians. Schools, police cars, and sewer lines do not vote. People do.
First, people must embrace a common vision that we support in the election booth. Next we must
understand the true cost to the community for infrastructure, maintenance, and services. Finally,
we must provide our elected officials with a clear roadmap to offsetting those costs, one at a
time. Only then will we level the playing field, create choice for the consumer, and understand
the true market for smart growth.
~l
Amelricm Pb ming Assodai t
Making Great Communities Happen
Policy wide on Smart Growth
Adopted by Chapter Delegate Assembly, April 14, 2002
Ratified by Board of Directors, April 15, 2002
Chicago, IL
Organization of the Policy Guide
This policy guide is divided into four sections.
1. A motion to adopt a definition of Smart Growth, including a statement of Smart Growth principles.
II. A description of the Smart Growth issue, including an historical overview.
III. Specific policy motions in five categories:
A. Planning Structure, Process and Regulation
B. Transportation and Land Use
C. Regional Management and Fiscal Efficiency
D. Social Equity and Community Building
E. Environmental Protection and Land Conservation
IV. A list of outcomes to help readers understand what will be achieved by implementing these
policies.
. Motion to Adopt a Definition of Smart Growth
Smart growth means using comprehensive planning to guide, design, develop, revitalize and build
communities for all that:
• have a unique sense of community and place;
• preserve and enhance valuable natural and cultural resources;
• equitably distribute the costs and benefits of development;
• expand the range of transportation, employment and housing choices in a fiscally
responsible manner;
• value long-range, regional considerations of sustainability over short term incremental
geographically isolated actions; and
• promotes public health and healthy communities.
• Compact, transit accessible, pedestrian-oriented, mixed use development patterns and
land reuse epitomize the application of the principles of smart growth.
In contrast to prevalent development practices, Smart Growth refocuses a larger share of regional
growth within central cities, urbanized areas, inner suburbs, and areas that are already served by
infrastructure. Smart Growth reduces the share of growth that occurs on newly urbanizing land,
existing farmlands, and in environmentally sensitive areas. In areas with intense growth pressure,
development in newly urbanizing areas should be planned and developed according to Smart
Growth principles.
Core principles of Smart Growth include:
A. RECOGNITION THAT ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE NON-PROFIT AND
PRIVATE SECTORS, PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN CREATING AND IMPLEMENTING
POLICIES THAT SUPPORT SMART GROWTH. Every level of government - federal, state,
regional, county, and local - should identify policies and practices that are inconsistent with Smart
Growth and develop new policies and practices that support Smart Growth. Local governments have
long been the principal stewards of land and infrastructure resources through irplementation of
land use policies. Smart Growth respects that tradition, yet recognizes the important roles that
federal and state governments play as leaders and partners in advancing Smart Growth principles at
the local level.
B. STATE AND FEDERAL POLICIES AND PROGRAMS THAT SUPPORT URBAN INVESTMENT,
COMPACT DEVELOPMENT, AND LAND CONSERVATION. State and federal policies and
programs have contributed to urban sprawl and need to be re-examined and replaced with policies
and programs that support Smart Growth, including cost effective, incentive-based investment
programs that target growth-related expenditures to locally-designated areas.
C. PLANNING PROCESSES AND REGULATIONS AT MULTIPLE LEVELS THAT PROMOTE
DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND SMART GROWTH PRINCIPLES. All planning processes, as well as the
distribution of resources, must be equitable. A diversity of voices must be included in community
planning and implementation.
D. INCREASED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN ALL ASPECTS OF THE PLANNING PROCESS
AND AT EVERY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT. Appropriate citizen participation ensures that planning
outcomes are equitable and based on collective decision-making. Planning processes must involve
comprehensive strategies that engage meaningful citizen participation and find common ground for
decision-making.
E. A BALANCED, MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THAT PLANS FOR INCREASED
TRANSPORTATION CHOICE. Land use and transportation planning must be integrated to
accommodate the automobile and to provide increased transportation choices, such as mass transit,
bicycles, and walking. Development must be pedestrian-friendly. All forms of transportation must be
reliable, efficient and user-friendly, allowing full access by all segments of the population to
housing, employment, education, and human and community services.
F. A REGIONAL VIEW OF COMMUNITY. Smart Growth recognizes the interdependence of
neighborhoods and municipalities in a metropolitan region and promotes balanced, integrated
regional development achieved through regional planning processes.
G. ONE SIZE DOESN'T FIT ALL - A WIDE VARIETY OF APPROACHES TO ACCOMPLISH
SMART GROWTH. Customs, politics, laws, natural conditions, and other factors vary from state to
state and from region to region. Each region must develop its own approach to problem solving and
planning while involving the public, private and non-profit sectors. In some areas, this may require
a significant change in perspective and culture, but such changes are necessary and beneficial in
obtaining the results that Smart Growth aims to achieve.
H. EFFICIENT USE OF LAND AND INFRASTRUCTURE. High-density development, infill
development, redevelopment, and the adaptive re-use of existing buildings result in efficient
utilization of land resources and more compact urban areas. Efficient use of public and private
infrastructure starts with creating neighborhoods that maximize the use of existing infrastructure. In
areas of new growth, roads, sewers, water lines, schools and other infrastructure should be planned
as part of comprehensive growth and investment strategies. Regional cooperation is required for
large infrastructure investments to avoid inefficiency and redundancy.
1. CENTRAL CITY VITALITY. Every level of government should identify ways to reinvest in
existing urban centers, to re-use former industrial sites, to adapt older buildings for new
development, and to bring new development to older, low-income and disadvantaged
neighborhoods.
1. VITAL SMALL TOWNS AND RURAL AREAS. APA recognizes that inefficient land use and low.-
density development is not confined to urban and suburban areas, but also occurs around villages
and small towns. Many once thriving main streets are checkered with abandoned storefronts while a
strip of new commercial activity springs up on the edge of town together with housing and public
facilities. Programs and policies need to support investment to improve the economic health of small
town downtowns, and rural community centers. The high cost of providing basic infrastructure and
services in rural communities demands efficient use of existing facilities, and compact development.
Housing choices in rural areas need to take into account changing needs resulting from shifting
demographics, the cost of providing services and infrastructure, the cost of services and
infrastructure capacity, and must address upgrading of existing housing as an alternative or
complement to new development. Smart Growth is critically important in rural and small town
economic development initiatives because the limited availability of public funding means each
dollar must accomplish more.
K. A GREATER MIX OF USES AND HOUSING CHOICES IN NEIGHBORHOODS AND
COMMUNITIES FOCUSED AROUND HUMAN-SCALE, MIXED-USE CENTERS ACCESSIBLE BY
MULTIPLE TRANSPORTATION MODES. Mixed-use developments include quality housing, varied
by type and price, integrated with shopping, schools, community facilities and jobs. Human-scale
design, compatible with the existing urban context, and quality construction contribute to successful
compact, mixed-use development and also promote privacy, safety, visual coherency and
compatibility among uses and users.
L. CONSERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Biodiversity, green infrastructure, and green architecture are integral to Smart Growth. Smart
Growth protects the natural processes that sustain life; preserves agricultural land, wildlife habitat,
natural landmarks and cultural resources; integrates biodiversity, ecological systems and natural
open space (green infrastructure) into the fabric of development; encourages innovative storm
water management; is less consumptive and more protective of natural resources; maintains or
improves air quality, and enhances water quality and quantity for future generations. Energy
conservation is a major benefit and result of Smart Growth, helping to create more sustainable
development and allow people to meet current needs without compromising the needs of future
generations. Green architecture incorporates environmental protection and reduced natural resource
consumption into the design and construction of buildings, also enhancing the comfort and health of
the occupants.
M. CREATION OR PRESERVATION OF A "SENSE OF PLACE". A "sense of place" results when
design and development protect and incorporate the distinctive character of a community and the
particular place in which it is located. Geography, natural features, climate, culture, historical
resources, and ecology each contribute to the distinctive character of a region.
H. The Smart Growth Issue
Throughout the history of planning in the United States, there have been national movements that
influenced the direction of the planning profession. They include the city beautiful era; the advent of
Euclidean zoning; master planning for the automobile-dominated, post-WWII community; the 701
comprehensive plan; advocacy planning in the 1970s; along with environmental protection
described by the acronyms of NEPA, CEQA and others. Since the early 20th century, policy makers
have offered legislative solutions to communities to manage changes resulting from population
growth. In the 1920s, Secretary of Commerce, and later President, Herbert Hoover appointed an
advisory committee that drafted the Standard City Planning and Zoning Enabling Acts. Many states
subsequently adopted enabling laws based on theses Acts.
While many Americans may have benefited from the effects of rapid suburbanization: large yards,
proximity to open space, new schools, increased mobility, and the financial appreciation of home
values, these benefits have not been universally shared. Professional planners acknowledge that the
social, economic, and environmental costs of urban dispersion can be more effectively managed, if
riot avoided entirely. The nation is now experiencing a heightened concern over the social,
environmental, and fiscal quality of our communities arising from development practices that
aggravate the decline of many urban communities and older suburbs, congest streets and highways,
accelerate the loss of natural resources and the deterioration of the natural environment, and limit
opportunities for the retention and creation of affordable housing. Often these problems are simply
and collectively labeled, "sprawl." In response, the Smart Growth movement emerged.
Many organizations and individuals are now promoting Smart Growth. Over 60 public interest
groups across the U.S. have joined together to form Smart Growth America, a coalition advocating
better growth policies and practices. Groups ranging from the Urban Land Institute to the Sierra
Club to the National Association of Home Builders have released reports and sponsored forums on
the topic. Many communities embrace specific aspects of Smart Growth, such as urban service
boundaries, pedestrian- and transit-oriented development, controls on sprawl, compact mixed uses,
and the protection of agricultural and environmental resources. Concurrently, implementation in a
piecemeal fashion has sometimes resulted in unintended consequences that actually aggravated
other adverse aspects of rapid urbanization or dispersion. The APA recognizes that it is necessary to
balance the interests of diverse public, private and political groups and to serve the collective public
interest. Contained within Smart Growth are many interrelated, and potentially conflicting, elements
that need to be organized and prioritized, often on a regional basis. Additionally, many of the single
interest Smart Growth proposals omit areas of concern to the APA, especially as they deal with
social equity and disinvestments in inner city and first ring suburb infrastructure, community
facilities, and services. This situation is a major impetus for creating this policy guide.
APA's 2000 Policy Guide on Planning for Sustainability notes that "Sustainability is the capability to
equitably meet the vital human needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs by preserving and protecting the area's ecosystems and
natural resources. The concept of sustainability describes a condition in which human use of natural
resources, required for the continuation of life, is in balance with Nature's ability to replenish them."
The important work done in creating the Policy Guide on Planning for Sustainability provides an
opportunity to extend those policies to the arena of Smart Growth. In response to this opportunity,
APA embarked upon a yearlong process to craft this policy guide. The effort formally started at the
2001 Delegate Assembly in New Orleans where a survey, Framing the Issue, was distributed to the
participants and was later supplemented by input from APA chapters. The survey and a literature
review showed that the concepts of "sprawl" and "sustainability" are intertwined throughout the
Smart Growth dialogue. Sprawl, in all of its characterizations, is the antithesis of Smart Growth.
Today, we must promote fairness in rebuilding inner city and inner suburban areas, in the
development of suburban communities, and in the conservation and revitalization of small towns
and rural areas.
Smart Growth should not be limited to combating the symptoms of sprawl. The protection of unique
and prime agricultural land to avoid premature conversion to urban and suburban uses, as well as
ecological and societal considerations, should be addressed. Planners have the tools at hand to
create better communities. It is our professional and ethical responsibility to use these tools to
produce results that are fair to all community members in the present and in the future. Fairness
requires that we reduce inequalities and that we narrow the gap of disparities in the distribution of
resources. We recognize that planning decisions influence the social and economic well being of
communities. Today, we must promote fairness in rebuilding inner city and inner suburban areas, in
the development of suburban communities, and in the growth of small towns and rural areas.
The Smart Growth Policy Guide helps direct APA efforts to influence public policy to meet those
concerns raised by the Smart Growth movement, along with the challenges of sustainability and
equity. This guidance can influence federal and state legislation that may provide financial
assistance and incentives for states to reassess their planning statutes, update them, and to
embark on meaningful implementation of community plans. Additionally, APA challenges the private
sector, especially the real estate and lending communities, to join us in working to reverse the
negative effects of the current predominant pattern of regional growth and to help us advocate for
new policies that will lead to well-designed regional communities of lasting value. APA asks them to
join with us in the important educational and informational efforts that will be necessary to build
support for Smart Growth with elected officials and policy makers, with their constituents, and with
the public-at-large.
Finally, planners, legislators, and others should consult this policy guide when reviewing the
GROWING SMART Legislative Guidebook, a compendium of statutes for planning and the
management of change, as they create proposals for regulatory reform pertaining to planning and
development.
III. Specific Policy Positions
This section includes policies organized in five categories:
A. Planning Structure, Process and Regulation
B. Transportation and Land Use
C. Regional Management and Fiscal Efficiency
D. Social Equity and Community Building
E. Environmental Protection and Land Conservation
Other adopted policy statements that bear on this topic are Planning for Sustainability (adopted in
2000), Agricultural Land Preservation (adopted on April 25, 1999), Endangered Species and Habitat
Protection (adopted on April 25, 1999), the Housing Policy Guide (adopted on April 25, 1999), the
Policy Guide on Historic and Cultural Resources (adopted April 10, 1997) and policy statements
currently under development or revision, including those for Water Resource Management,
Wetlands, and Waste Management.
A. Planning Structure, Process and Regulation
1. The American Planning Association and its Chapters affirm that reforming state legislation is
necessary to implement Smart Growth.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: States have a leadership role in fostering long-term, smart
growth decisions. While land use regulatory decisions are traditionally a responsibility of local
government, state programs, policies, and enabling legislation have a profound affect on local
planning and decision-making. States should enable local governments to foster more sensible,
planned growth through the revision of planning and police power enabling legislation and by
facilitating increased communication between state departments and local governments and among
local governments within a region.
2. The American Planning Association and its Chapters affirm that effective comprehensive planning,
based on Smart Growth principles, is the primary means of implementing Smart Growth.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Planning, especially comprehensive planning, is central to the
implementation of Smart Growth. Absent the collective decision-making processes inherent in
effective comprehensive planning, those who would implement smart growth measures are limited
to a series of short-term, geographically isolated, and disconnected decisions. The comprehensive
planning process achieves this through collective decisions about the intensity, the density, and the
character of development and the level of public services to be provided.
3. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support regulations that support land reuse
and require new urban growth to be coordinated with the provision of urban infrastructure capacity.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: The benefits of locating new urban growth in existing urban
and urban-adjacent areas include preserving farmland, increasing urban densities, utilizing existing
infrastructure capacity, and reducing public infrastructure costs. Tools, such as PDRs and TDRs and
Land banking, are available to mitigate the affects on landowners outside of existing urban and
urban-adjacent areas who seek to convert properties to urban uses.
4. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support the coordination, modernization,
restructuring, and consolidation (where necessary) of local governmental units and/or services.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Modernization and restructuring should be pursued where
governmental fragmentation impedes Smart Growth decisions. Smart Growth requires a higher
degree of coordination, especially in the areas of spending, eminent domain, taxation and
regulation, than is possible under the fragmented patterns of local government prevalent in many
states. At minimum, local decisions on the creation of new governmental units, urban growth,
capital infrastructure, services and maintenance should be subordinated to an intergovernmental
planning process in order to minimize competition for tax base and to reward local governments by
distributing returns from mutually beneficial decisions. Natural boundaries, such as watersheds and
valleys, should be respected in designing these comprehensive areas.
5. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support statewide comprehensive planning.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Statewide planning is needed to coordinate and integrate
actions on such vital areas as transportation, infrastructure, and environmental policy. The most
effective planning will integrate these areas with housing, economic development and other areas.
Statewide planning should also engage regional planning efforts to create a mutually supported plan
at multiple levels so all levels of government are working in concert to achieve Smart Growth goals.
6. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support federal and state incentives and
guidance to local governments on the elements to be addressed in comprehensive plans, based on
Smart Growth principles. The elements should include land use, transportation, infrastructure,
housing, economic development, natural resources, ecological systems, public educational facilities,
other community facilities and cultural preservation.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Local governments should be required to make land use
decisions within a statewide procedural and policy framework, consistent with a long-term vision
and early, on-going public involvement. State governments must help local governments by
establishing reasonable ground rules for planning requirements, assisting and funding local
governments and rural areas, and providing leadership on inter-jurisdictional issues.
7. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support legislation that provides incentives
for adoption of a clearly defined comprehensive plan and capital improvements plan prior to the
imposition of land use regulations and controls at the local level.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Land use decisions made without reference to a well-
articulated comprehensive plan have contributed to excessive regulation, requests for special
treatment and public disdain for the process. Land use regulation should enhance the predictability
for residents, investors and builders. Ad hoc decisions by communities, made outside of effective
comprehensive planning processes, undermine that predictability.
8. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support legislation that requires all actions of
local government be consistent with the community's comprehensive plan including, but not limited
to, zoning and other land use regulations, as well as the provision of infrastructure.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Consistency among comprehensive plans, land use
regulations, capital improvements plans and implementation are at the heart of Smart Growth.
Inconsistencies in these areas undermine public confidence in planning and in planners.
9. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support requiring federal agencies to include
the effect of federal actions on urban growth and sprawl in their analyses of environmental impacts
and to actively support state and local plans for growth management.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Federal policies and programs have a profound effect on local
development patterns, yet local communities have little power in identifying, reviewing, or
addressing federal actions and projects that may affect their growth. Changing the National
Environmental Policy Act to require federal and state agencies to analyze the effects of proposed
projects on growth and directing the Council on Environmental Quality to evaluate these reviews will
enhance a local community's ability to respond to federal actions.
10, The American Planning Association and its Chapters support regulatory processes that facilitate,
encourage and support Smart Growth while eliminating regulatory barriers that increase the cost of
Smart Growth.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: It must be easier to develop and redevelop communities
based on Smart Growth principles, and harder to develop in the manner that has led to the
problems now evident throughout the country. Barriers to Smart Growth must be eliminated at the
federal, state, and local levels. Processes, laws and regulatory procedures should not be another
layer of review on top of other laws and regulations. A variety of federal agencies, state
governments, regional agencies and local governments are preparing programs, ordinances,
policies, procedures and laws to promote Smart Growth. As experience grows, successes should be
celebrated, publicized, and presented as models for others.
11. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support increased citizen participation in all
levels of planning as a means to accommodate diversity while promoting equity and community.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: In an increasingly diverse society, citizen participation is an
important means of developing plans that reflect the needs and aspirations of citizens. Planners
have an ethical responsibility to involve citizens in planning, especially those affected by the plans.
Participation can help to develop social capital, promote a sense of common goals, and develop
citizen involvement in implementation. Better plans are a result.
12. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support the provision of a clearinghouse of
advanced planning and geographic information for decisions makers and for the public by
coordinated regional, state, and federal Internet systems.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: The lack of availability and the fragmentation of basic data -
including GIS maps, technical studies, water resource information, permitting activity, demographic
data, and other information - requires repetitive studies and increases the time required for
decision-making. In addition, the information should be made available to the public through a well-
maintained web data system.
B. Transportation and Land Use
1. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support planning and funding policies that
link land use and transportation choices at the local and regional levels. The basis for transportation
funding should reflect the true costs and relative efficiencies of various transportation modes with
respect to a variety of users. The costs of federal subsidies for transportation should be reflected in
evaluations of transportation investment alternatives.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: A multi-modal transportation system n addressing
transportation problems in the United States. From a funding perspective, potential investments
should be judged on criteria that are unbiased and reflect the true costs of alternatives.
2. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support planning and funding policies that
acknowledge the continued importance of automotive transportation and support the automobile
within a policy context that provides for mitigating its environmental and resource impacts, while
increasing non-automotive transportation choices, car-pooling, van pooling and flexible work hours.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Automobiles are likely to remain an important form of
transportation for many people, but the negative impacts of automobile transportation can be
effectively managed. APA supports federal policies that will make automobiles more efficient, less
polluting, and less consumptive of fossil fuels. Automobile transportation also provides inter-modal
opportunities. APA supports federal and state efforts to combine automobile transportation with
other transportation choices (park-and-rides, kiss-and-rides, adequate parking provision at transit
stops) and encourage the pooling of automotive resources.
3. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support planning policies, legislation and
practices that target transportation investments to correct system deficiencies identified through
regular performance monitoring of all transportation modes within the system.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Efficient use of transportation funds requires using them to
maximize the operational efficiency of the transportation system. Transportation investments made
without regard to existing system deficiencies:
• result in sprawling, unplanned development, and allow existing transportation systems to
deteriorate
• waste money by allowing funds to be expended for facilities that do not address problems
lead to redundancies and inefficiencies as construction does not address real needs
A key component of Smart Growth involves the regular performance monitoring of all modes of
transportation. Such monitoring identifies system deficiencies and their causes so that
transportation investments may be targeted to appropriate infrastructure improvements.
4. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support the development and maintenance of
regional and statewide multi-modal transportation plans.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Regional and statewide transportation plans are needed to
guide the improvement and expansion of the transportation system in a consistent, logical, and
economically and functionally efficient manner. These plans should be multi-modal, covering all
significant modes of both people and goods movement, recognizing both public and private sector
needs. Transportation planning efforts should also be mutually supportive at all levels to ensure the
efficiency and continuity of the system. These plans should form the basis for transportation
investment decisions at the regional and state level.
5. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support federal and state incentives and local
initiatives that encourage locating new development, especially the development of public facilities,
in areas that are supported by a balanced transportation network that provides a variety of
transportation choices and supports more active, healthy lifestyles. .
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Public facilities should be located so they are accessible by
multiple modes, including transit, bicycles, and walking. Such facilities will be more widely used
than if accessible only by automobile, and the employers will have more access to people who
depend on transit, walking, and bicycling.
6. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support changes to roadway design
standards that promote and support the use of transit and non-motorized transportation modes,
including walking and biking.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Smart Growth recognizes the importance of the automobile
to transportation, but seeks to support automotive transportation in the context of greater
transportation choice, including the choice to walk or bicycle. The design of roadways and
intersections can either enhance or discourage transit and non-automotive transportation choices.
Roadway design should consider connectivity, accessibility, function, and speed as they affect safety
and security of people who choose not to drive. For instance, roadways designed solely from the
point-of-view of enhancing automobile transportation sometimes result in roads that poorly
accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists who share roads with cars. The current functional
classifications for roadways should be restructured to account for the constraints and opportunities
these public facilities pose for the full range of transportation choices.
7. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support policies and plans that place street
connection as a high priority in the development of transportation systems.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: The efficiency of a community's transportation system is an
objective of Smart Growth policy. Efficiency is enhanced when there are consistent and adequate
street connections that allow people and goods to move with as few impediments as possible. Gated
communities, private road systems, and the introduction of disconnected cul-de-sac systems
promote disconnections. Proper street connectivity, on the other hand, reduces miles traveled,
increases non-motorized trips, and supports transit use.
8. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support increased transportation choice and
mobility to and from work, home, and school, especially for the less advantaged.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Advocating for equity requires public investment in
infrastructure that reduces the need for long commutes and enhances transportation choices for
disadvantaged and disabled persons. By locating facilities near transit stops or in mixed-use
centers, trips might be consolidated. Planners should promote land use patterns that reduce the
need for motorized transportation, increase transportation options, and ensure that infrastructure
for non-automotive transportation modes are treated equitably in the planning process.
C. Regional Management and Fiscal Efficiency
1. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support strengthening and modernizing
state, metropolitan, and other regional institutions to facilitate multi-jurisdictional decision-making
and problem solving.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Most major growth-related problems are regional, not local,
in nature. Given the fragmented nature of local governance, individual community success in
implementing Smart Growth is likely to shift development to other parts of the region. States have
the opportunity to pass modern enabling legislation that promotes Smart Growth planning and
development at the regional level.
Regional plans are needed to coordinate local land use decisions and to integrate local decision-
making with planning that necessarily crosses municipal boundaries. Transportation corridors,
watersheds, air sheds, economic regions and neighborhoods are more appropriate and desirable
geographies for planning than the boundaries of political jurisdictions. Given prevalent patterns of
development, where jobs are often far from home, affordable housing and public transportation can
be addressed effectively only at the regional level. These efforts can simultaneously promote equity
by making affordable housing available throughout the metropolitan area and, by supporting
economic development, make a labor force available throughout the region.
2. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support federal and state incentives for
cooperative planning among local governments to address regional impacts and to pursue desired
land use patterns through an integrated system of regional plan-making, implementation and
monitoring.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Many states have laws that prohibit or inhibit joint planning
and/or decision-making by local governments, as well as other entities that make planning and
development decisions. Similarly, many local governments have laws, policies, or customs that
inhibit cooperation across municipal boundaries. In order to facilitate collaboration among local
entities when regional cooperation is needed, these barriers must be removed. Federal and state
authorities must encourage cooperation and collaboration by local entities. State and federal grants
should encourage cooperative planning and policymaking.
3. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support a wide variety of approaches to
accomplish Smart Growth, because its principles can be applied to communities of all sizes and
locations.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Customs, politics, laws, natural conditions, and other factors
vary from state to state and region to region. In addition, problems to be addressed vary from
region to region. Each region must develop its own approach to problem solving and planning while
involving the public, private and non-profit sectors. In some areas, this may require a significant
change in perspective and culture, but such changes are necessary and beneficial to obtain the
results that Smart growth aims to achieve
4. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support increasing the role of regional
planning organization in planning for land conservation, cultural preservation, fiscal efficiency and
ecological health.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Efficient use of land resources is a hallmark of Smart Growth.
Compact building forms and infill development help support more cost effective public and private
infrastructure than low-density development at the fringe of urban areas. Smart Growth means
creating neighborhoods where more people use existing services, such as water lines, sewers,
roads, emergency services, and schools. Inefficient land use places a financial strain on
communities providing for the construction and maintenance of infrastructure. Regional cooperation
promotes efficient use of infrastructure and helps avoid duplication of these very expensive
investments. At the same time, regional approaches maintain a healthy environment and preserve
valuable natural, as well as cultural, resources. Smart Growth is growth that protects identity of
places.
5. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support policies that favor the utilization of
existing infrastructure capacity over public construction of new infrastructure, including the
requirement that new development either pay for the services it requires or be consciously
subsidized.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Policies that increase the number of residents in the urban
core or that establish minimum densities for new urban development help ensure that existing
infrastructure is fully utilized and that the public is not burdened with the cost of paying for
inefficiency. Responsible stewardship over public funds requires that public subsidies be a matter of
policy adopted after a public debate of the issue. After debate, local governments may decide to
subsidize certain kinds of development and redevelopment in order to advance adopted policies,
including the revitalization of central cities.
D. Social Equity and Community Building
1. The American Planning Association and its chapters support a sustained and focused initiative in
federal, state and local public policy to reverse the general decline of urban neighborhoods and the
trend toward isolated, concentrated poverty through strategies that promote reinvestment within
urban communities.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Central city vitality remains at the core of Smart Growth
outcomes. Central cities are in a trajectory of long-term decline as a result of the migration of labor
and capital. According to the Fannie Mae's report, The Housing Policy Debate (1997), most central
cities and downtowns are becoming increasingly irrelevant to the future of metropolitan econornies,
despite signs that population losses have slowed and individual neighborhoods and cities have
turned around. Revisions to the federal tax code, renewed federal housing initiatives, local "fair
share housing" polices, regional tax base sharing, and the reduction of regulatory barriers that
unduly increase the cost of housing are items that need to be overcome.
2. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support increased social, economic, and
racial equity in our communities and call on the federal government to increase community
development funds to remedy these inequities and to include input from all segments of our
population in the planning process, and to ensure that planning and development decisions do not
unfairly burden economically disadvantaged groups.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Sprawl has aggravated the racial and economic segregation
of America's communities by limiting housing choices, transportation choices, educational
opportunities, and job access. The spatial distribution of jobs in a region, along with adequate
transportation options between work and home, and sufficient housing choice for workers at all
levels of compensation, is key to attaining the goals of social, economic, and racial equity. Federal
and state government policies should ensure that communities within a region have equitable
access to open, natural areas and to community facilities providing recreational opportunities and a
range of social services; and should also ensure that no single community is burdened with hosting
undesirable but necessary community uses.
3. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support federal and state policies and
programs that encourage mixed income neighborhoods as the foundation for healthy regions,
including requirements for the provision of affordable housing in all new-growth areas or through
the reinvestment in core communities.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: Affordable housing should be coordinated regionally to limit
concentrations of poverty. Growth strategies must specify provisions for production and
maintenance of affordable housing through affirmative measures such as inclusionary zoning
practices (zoning that includes a variety of housing types for a variety of income levels) that are
applied equally and regionally. Advancement of equity means developing a varied housing stock and
planning for stable, mixed income neighborhoods.
4. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support the enhancement of public education
systems which are an essential component of community building in urban, suburban and rural
areas, and which ensure that children have an opportunity for an excellent education in existing
communities. In furtherance of creating such opportunities, APA advocates for strategies that
increase neighborhoods that are economically and socially diverse.
Reason to Support the Specific Policy: If Smart Growth is to work, there must be a sustained effort
to improve urban public schools. Otherwise, families will continue to leave cities as soon as they
have children. Planners must identify public schools in their community that are at-risk and work
with administrators, parents, and neighborhood groups to improve the public school. Planners must
advocate for neighborhood diversity, mixed-income housing and educational excellence as the
hallmarks of healthy central cities. In the APA/AICP Millennium Survey (December 2000), the
highest concern of voters (76%) was having adequate schools and educational facilities. Moreover,
when voters in suburbs and small-to-medium cities were asked what might lead them to live in an
urban setting, better schools ranked first.
5. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support planning that identifies the
transportation, housing, employment, education and other needs of population change, both with
respect to the total number of people expected to reside and also with respect to population groups
with special needs such as the elderly, school children, or people of diverse cultures.
E. Environmental Protection and Land Conservation
Other policies listed in this Policy Guide will help to achieve environmental protection and land
conservation. For example, transportation and regional planning policies consistent with Smart
Growth principles also achieve these ends. See also the related APA Policy Guides on Wetlands,
Water Resources Management, Waste Management, Planning for Sustainability, Endangered Species
and Habitat Protection, and Agricultural Land Preservation.
1. The American Planning Association and its Chapters encourage public, private, and non-profit
cooperation to achieve a new level of partnership to preserve and enhance ecological integrity over
the short- and long-term.
Reasons to Support the Specific Policy: Environmental protection and land conservation have often
been seen as the role of the public sector. However, nonprofit organizations and private property
owners also have a role and responsibility in good stewardship of the environment. Cooperation and
collaboration among all interested parties are needed to improve and enhance ecological integrity.
The basis for all planning must be a sense of stewardship or "caring for the earth", along with an
expanded understanding of the long-term implications of daily decisions and the benefits of
conservation.
2. The American Planning Association and its Chapters supports land and water conservation,
including farmland preservation, soil and wetlands conservation, and brownfield remediation and
redevelopment. An important tool is full funding of the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund.
Reasons to Support the Specific Policy: Conservation of land and water resources is important to
maintain and enhance healthy ecosystems, and is also an ethical imperative, to protect these
resources for future generations. Soil conservation is an important concern and farmland
preservation, e.g., with compact development, can be an important result of Smart Growth. The
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), which was established by Congress in 1964, is an
extremely important tool to create and enhance parks and open spaces, protect wilderness and
wetlands, preserve wildlife habitat, and enhance recreational opportunities. The LWCF provides
funding to all levels of government as well as the nonprofit sector. See also the policy below
regarding water, and APR's other Policy Guides.
3. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support protection and enhancement of
biodiversity through the planning process. Planning for biodiversity should use the best available
science to assess natural resources and determine areas of environmental vitality as the first step in
incorporating "green infrastructure" into human settlements.
Reasons to Support the Specific Policy: Natural systems and biodiversity are critical to the support
of human populations. Biodiversity planning should be included in the early stages of land use
planning. Planning should include an inventory of natural processes and ecosystems. To the extent
such information is available, plans should include identification of natural vegetation, wetlands, arid
lands, endangered and threatened plant and animal species, umbrella and indicator species, species
that are commercially important in the state, and species habitat (including food sources, denning
and nursery areas, and migratory routes). Based upon this inventory, all land use and development
plans should incorporate "green infrastructure" based on good science and best available
management practices to limit deleterious impacts on fragile ecosystems. Green infrastructure is an
interconnected network of greenways and natural lands that includes wild life habitat, waterways,
native species and preservation or protection of ecological processes. All development - including
redevelopment, infill development, and new construction in urbanizing areas - should plan for
biodiversity and incorporate green infrastructure. Green infrastructure helps to maintain natural
ecosystems, including clean air and water; reduces wildlife habitat fragmentation, pollution, and
other threats to biodiversity. It also improves the quality of life for people. Tools for preservation of
natural open spaces include acquisition of conservation easements by governments or non-profits,
transfer of development rights, and conservation design, in addition to land acquisition by public
agencies.
4. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support federal and state agencies providing
assistance to county and local governments to collect and analyze information on natural
communities and processes. County and local governments should supplement this information with
local knowledge. Using the combined information, all levels of government should work with non-
profit organizations, businesses, and citizens to designate green infrastructure policies and carry
them out.
Reasons to Support the Specific Policy: Many local governments, where land use planning takes
place, do not have the staff or technological resources to inventory and map biodiversity resources
for their communities. Federal and state agencies that have the resources and scientific/technical
knowledge needed on topics such as ecology and biodiversity should provide financial and technical
assistance to county and local agencies, which augment the information with local knowledge. A
county or local government benefits by obtaining technical information necessary to write a strong
plan, while the state and federal governments benefit by enhancing the protection of natural
resources through partnerships with local governments and nonprofits.
5. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support a balanced energy policy including
conservation and development of renewable energy resources.
Reasons to Support the Specific Policy: A comprehensive energy policy should include reduction of
energy consumption, development of new supplies, and use of existing natural resources, such as
coal, gas and oil, while protecting sensitive ecosystems. Energy conservation would include
transportation policy, development patterns that minimize vehicular miles traveled, and green
architecture. Development of new energy supplies should include renewable energy. Use of
renewable energy sources will contribute to reduce dependence upon fossil fuels, also helping to
reduce concentrations of carbon dioxide and other gases in the atmosphere. Increased use of
alternative energy sources will also contribute to healthier, more stable local economies through
reduced dependence on one or two energy sources that have an uncertain future. Solar power is
likely to become more important in future years and development patterns should balance the need
for solar access with the need for dense urban development. Development may be able to take
advantage of industrial cogeneration possibilities, utilizing waste heat from industry to heat
surrounding buildings. APA's Policy Guide on Planning for Sustainability can provide additional
insight on steps that can be taken to develop a balanced energy policy.
6. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support environmentally conscious design
and construction, including "green architecture" practices, adoption of LEED Green Building Rating
System and the adaptive reuse of buildings, and land recycling.
Reasons to Support the Specific Policy: The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), a national
nonprofit organization representing all parts of the building industry, has documented the
environmental impact of buildings. Impacts reported as of January 2002 include, for commercial and
residential construction:
• 65% of total U.S. electricity consumption
• 36% of total U.S. energy use
• 30% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions
136 million tons of construction and demolition waste in the U.S. (almost 3 pounds per
person per day)
40% of raw material use globally.
The USGBC has developed and administers the "LEED" green building rating system to promote
"green design" (see www.usgbc.org for details). LEED, or Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design, shows great promise to provide benefits such as reducing the impacts of natural resource
consumption, enhancing comfort and health, and minimizing strain on local infrastructure while
producing financial benefits for building owners and developers. LEED standards cover site design,
conservation of materials and resources including water and energy, and indoor environmental
quality. Green design practices include building reuse and preservation, which preserve a unique
sense of place in our communities, save building resources, and keep demolition refuse out of land
fills. Historic preservation also often saves energy and other natural resources. Green architecture is
a growing practice that should be recognized and adopted by all who construct buildings.
7. The American Planning Association and its Chapters support comprehensive water supply,
distribution, treatment, and storm water planning to protect water supplies, preserve water quality,
and prevent flooding.
Reasons to Support the Specific Policy: Clean and adequate water supplies are indispensable for life.
Comprehensive programs are needed to protect both water quality and quantity. Development
practices, including design and construction, must protect water resources. A variety of planning
strategies, design and development standards, and management practices are needed:
• Xeriscaping and natural, local landscaping that minimizes water usage
• Minimizing of paving and impervious surfaces that inhibit natural water drainage and
ground water recharge
• Innovative legislation and regulations - may include conservation and engineering
performance standards, buffers, maximum water run-off, agriculture zoning, etc.
• Minimizing of fertilizer and other chernical usage that produces polluted run-off and affects
water quality off-site
IV. Policy Outcomes
This section, not usually included in APA policy guides, is provided here to summarize APA's desired
results from the implementation of these policies.
A. In the area of planning process and regulation:
1. Reform of state planning enabling acts to promote proactive planning that encourages
regional cooperation, collaborative citizen participation in public life, diverse
neighborhoods, the equitable distribution of resources, and fiscal responsibility.
2. Well-designed, enduring communities that are sustainable in the near and the long term.
1 Improved communication and collaboration by the various levels of governments, citizens,
developers, and other interested parties to improve efficiency and build better
communities.
4. Slowing of low-density sprawl and a reversal in the dispersion of housing and jobs into
single-use, land consumptive development patterns in favor of densification and
centralization.
5. Growth in areas that can support growth, encouraged by intelligent land use planning. The
creation of new urban settlements within planned urban growth areas, or in planned new
urban areas, containing nodes of high-density development that include higher density
housing, the majority of community facilities and jobs, and connected by transit.
6. Federal and State support, in terms of policy and incentives, for local decision-making
processes, including comprehensive planning.
7. Development decisions that are predictable, fair and fiscally responsible.
B. In the area of transportation and land use.
1. A major shift from single-occupancy automotive transit to travel by bus, fixed-rail systems,
ferries, walking and bicycling in existing settlements and new urban-growth areas.
2. Automobile support that appropriately accommodates other modes of transportation,
especially non-motorized modes, including providing for appropriate vehicle storage that
does not result in further de-centralization and dispersion.
C. In the area of regional management and fiscal efficiency:
1. Improved long-term viability of regions and their constituent local governments.
2. Reordering of regional infrastructure planning and development from fragmented and
uncoordinated local governments to regional bodies strengthened by states to exercise this
function.
3. Local governments whose taxpayers are not burdened with the costs for financing ever-
increasing infrastructure backlogs.
0. In the areas of social equity and community building:
1. Vibrant central cities that have experienced a cycle of renewal and rebirth, whose
neighborhoods accommodate a diversity of people with a range of backgrounds, economic
capacity, and family structures.
2. Reversal in the centralization of poverty in urban cores and first-ring suburbs.
3. Elimination of regulatory barriers that impede construction of affordable housing.
4. Decreased racial and economic segregation through regulations requiring affordable
housing in all new-growth areas.
E. In the areas of environmental protection and land conservation:
1. Improvements in air and water quality and in the preservation of natural areas and wildlife
habitat.
2. Provision of green infrastructure (an interconnected network of natural lands, natural areas
and wild life habitat, and waterways) in existing settlements and new urban growth area.
3. Slowing in the conversion rate of agricultural and non-urbanized land to urban-type land
uses.
4. Protection and enhancement of ecosystems, incorporating biodiversity and green
infrastructure into developed areas.
FIRST ANNUAL REVIEW
OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
(Adopted May 28, 2009)
1. Significant actions and accomplishments during the past year, including the status of
implementation for each programmed task in the Comprehensive Plan
Green Community Initiatives
• The 2009 International Building Codes and the 2008 National Electrical Code were
reviewed by the Construction Board of Adjustment and Appeals and adopted by City Council
in December of 2009. Among other things, the codes help improve energy efficiency.
• Also in December an ordinance amendment was passed to the Landscaping and Tree
Protection regulations that requires the planning of trees on residential lots and encourages
the protection of existing trees during site development.
• In January, the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan was adopted.
Implementation of the plan will further alternative transportation choices and use.
• A program of rain water harvesting has begun at City facilities.
• Neighborhood Services has partnered with other City departments to expand public
outreach to raise awareness about topics such as recycling, waste reduction, composting,
and hazardous waste.
• Planning and Development Services created and distributed an educational brochure
containing landscape irrigation standards.
• A CFL Rebate program is now offered through Electric Dept.
• A Sustainability Coordinator position was made possible through a Department of Energy
grant and the new Coordinator began work in April.
• Development Engineers are currently investigating storm water treatment techniques.
• The Central College Station Neighborhood Plan included a chapter on Sustainability that
includes a profile of resource use/recycling of the plan's area and a number of strategies to
increase education and efforts regarding recycling, utility conservation, stormwater
management, and alternative transportation and land use.
• Planning staff, the Sustainability Coordinator, and the Water Resource Coordinator have
been working with the landscape architect community to revise the College Station Plant
List for development credit to include those that have low-water dependency. They are also
exploring the demand for xeriscaping and how xeriscaping might be encouraged.
UDO amendments consistent with new plan
While all Unified Development Ordinance amendments are consistent with the new plan,
one amendment has actively assisted in the implementation of the goals of the plan-
allowing Planned Development Districts to guarantee specific building characteristics and
apply additional development standards through the rezoning process (July 2009). This has
Page 1 of 13
furthered community character and neighborhood integrity while permanent zoning solutions
to implement the Comprehensive Plan are being researched and developed.
Continued phased expansion of water supply resources and production capacity
• Anticipated to be complete in July, Well No. 8 will boost production capacity by 3 million
gallons per day.
• A collection line for Well No. 8 has been completed.
• A parallel collection line for all wells along Sandy Point Road was completed in May.
• The Water/Wastewater Master Plan is currently in development.
Economic Development Master Plan
A Request for Proposals was issued this February and Economic and Community
Development is currently reviewing the submittals.
Plans for specific neighborhoods districts corridors, and redevelopment areas
• The Neighborhoods, Districts, and Corridors Planning Handbook was developed by
staff last summer to guide a predictable, but flexible, process of the small area planning
prescribed by the Comprehensive Plan. Following the guidelines, the planning process was
completed for the neighborhood planning area encompassing Southwood Valley, Edelweiss,
and their surrounds. The Central College Station Neighborhood Plan was adopted June
1 0th
• On May 27th, the City Council approved funding to allow the Spring Creek District (also
referred to as the "Medical Corridor") planning process to move forward.
• The Oakwood Historic Preservation Study and Draft Design Guidelines is near
completion (anticipated to be complete by the end of June). This study of the historic
significance and residential design of the Oakwood Subdivision will serve as the basis for a
Historic Preservation Overlay rezoning, should one ever be proposed in this area.
Strengthened code enforcement program
• The commercial code enforcement officer began concentrated enforcement-focusing on
specific code violation issues across the business community-in addition to general
enforcement responsibilities. Since the adoption of the plan, he has successfully resolved
all known issues of nonconforming portable storage structures and nonconforming and
abandoned signage.
• Residential code enforcement has continued working with Neighborhood Services, the
Police Department, and Texas A&M University to educate those in single family residences
and prevent common code violations. In addition to partnering with the entities listed above,
enforcement officers perform surges of neighborhoods with large concentrations of rental
property.
• Enforcement of Rental Registration began in June of 2009.
• Code Enforcement began extended shifts to address evening residential parking issues
on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights.
• Code Enforcement extended shifts to cover code enforcement issues on Saturdays.
Page 2 of 13
• In the past year there has been an increased focus on apartment complexes, with regular
communication with their management teams. Code Enforcement has offered on-site
classes to prevent common code violations, but the complexes have not yet been interested
in this service:
• Code enforcement activities increased into mobile home parks.
• There is continued partnering with Keep Brazos Beautiful. In the annual Brazos Valley
Trash Off, the City collected over two tons of tires.
• Communication was increased with the Police Department and Neighborhood Services to
identify problem areas in the City and to work together to resolve issues in those
neighborhoods.
• In the past year Code Enforcement began making personal contact to distribute
educational materials with those that are on the Police Department's loud party report.
Commercial area redevelopment focus (Northgate, University Drive, Post Oak Mall, Ramada,
retail centers)
• In the past year, the Northgate. District has seen: four new pub/restaurant establishments
opened in previously vacated locations; one new restaurant/pub (under construction); one
major renovation of a current restaurant/pub; and the completion of two significant multi-
family residential developments.
• The Economic and Community Development Department successfully implemented the
Northgate District Management Division, which not only oversees the maintenance and
operations of the City's major parking assets throughout the District but also maintains the
appearance of public spaces, facilitates special events, and serves as an ambassador
between Northgate stakeholders and the City all to ensure that visitors and citizens alike
receive the best customer experience possible.
Water/ wastewater/ drainage rehab projects in older neighborhoods and redevelopment areas
• A water and sewer rehabilitation Capital Improvement Program project is currently in design
for Southwood 5-7 the vicinity of Southwest Parkway, Harvey Mitchell Parkway, Glade
Street, Welsh, and Shadowood.
• A water and sewer rehabilitation Capital Improvement Program project is currently in design
for South Knoll/The Glade in the vicinity of Haines Street, Southwest Parkway, Glade
Street, and Langford Street.
• A water rehabilitation project is currently in design review for Patricia Street in Northgate.
• The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project development process has been
amended so that potential projects are presented to and discussed by the P&Z before
inclusion in the proposed budget to City Council. This process allows the P&Z the
opportunity to ensure that CIP projects help further the objectives of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Implement context sensitive roadway design approach - and coordinate on TxDOT corridors
• The B/CS Unified Design Guidelines was updated to reflect the right-of-way widths
described in the Comprehensive Plan that would be needed to provide different elements of
context sensitive design.
Page 3 of 13
• The City worked with TxDOT during the Texas Avenue widening project to provide street
trees at the intersection of Texas and Harvey Mitchell Parkway. The City is developing a
10-ft. wide multi-use trail will extend from this intersection to A&M Consolidated High School
and the trees will provide increased pedestrian comfort in the immediate area.
• The Barron Road Widening and Victoria Extension, and Holleman Extension Capital
Improvement Program projects are providing context sensitive elements such as bike lanes,
sidewalks, and landscaping.
Streamlined neighborhood traffic management processes (traffic calming parking)
• While a formal process has not yet been developed to respond to issues of neighborhood
traffic management, staff has discontinued the previous, cumbersome standard operating
procedure. Concerns are currently being addressed ad hoc between the Neighborhood
Services Coordinator, Traffic Engineer, and Transportation Planner.
• Parking concerns are still being addressed by the City's Traffic Management Team.
Rejuvenate existing parks (master plan implementation)
• While the Parks and Recreation Master Plan is still in progress, improvements have been
designed and are in development review for Brothers Pond Park.
• A pavilion for Pebble Creek Park is currently under construction.
• A new concessions and restrooms building at Stephen C. Beachy Central Park is in design
through the Capital Improvements Program.
• Castlegate Park is currently in the process of being enhanced with a tot playground.
• The playground equipment at Wolf Pen Creek Amphitheater is in the process of being
replaced. In addition, a Capital Improvement Program project is in design to develop a
water feature and plaza, and to add landscaping.
"Natural Corridor" greenway initiatives (Carters Creek and Lick Creek corridors)
• Staff has pursued grant funding to assist in the process of planning the Lick Creek Natural
Planning Corridor, but to date has been unsuccessful.
• The Texas Water Resources Institute and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
is currently performing a water quality study and implementation report for Carters Creek
and Burton Creek that will help direct the City's future planning efforts of the Carters Creek
Natural Planning Corridor.
• The purchase of 120 acres along Carters Creek is currently being pursued in conjunction
with the water reclamation project.
City-wide public "Wi-FP network (with other partners)
• The City has provided Wi-Fi to cover the softball fields at Veteran's Park and City Hall.
Staff if working on providing wireless networks at other City facilities.
• The City responded to a Request for Information from Google for consideration of their trial
Google fiber (an ultra-high speed broadband network) that could improve private internet
service (note-not Wi-Fi) throughout the community. Google plans to announce their trial
community(ies) later this year.
Page 4 of 13
Extend water/ wastewater impact fees to ETJ growth areas, where appropriate
No impact fees have been or are currently being explored for the ETJ.
Image and beautification initiatives
• In accordance with approved bond packages, the following projects have recently been
completed: the William D. Fitch Parkway Widening Phase II, which included landscaped
medians and the University Drive Beautification project, which included the planting of
trees at the University Drive and Earl Rudder Freeway.
• The following Capital Improvement Program projects are in design: the Victoria Avenue
Extension, which includes landscaping and the Wolf Pen Creek Water Feature and Festival
Area, which will include a water feature, plaza, and landscaping.
• The City worked with TxDOT during the Texas Avenue widening project to provide street
trees at the intersection of Texas and Harvey Mitchell Parkway and it has been agreed that
the City will provide trees at the Harvey Mitchell Parkway and Wellborn interchange.
Expanded and enhanced local transit services
While there have not been any expanded or enhanced local transit service projects, there
have been increased communications with transit providers about stop locations and
amenities through the neighborhood planning process and the plans review of the new high
school.
Annexation / service extension planning and strategic annexations based on these plans
• In June 2009, the City accepted five annexation agreements representing a total of 281
acres in the area of Wellborn and Greens Prairie roads.
• In June 2010, seven acres on Rock Prairie Road West and 52.73 acres on Greens Prairie
Trail were annexed by petition of the property owners.
Texas A&M University coordination
• Two university student representatives, as recommended by TAMU, served on the Central
College Station Neighborhood Plan's Citizen Resource Team.
Host signature event (develop, promote, execute)
Economic and Community Development worked with a subcommittee to explore possible
signature events.
2. Obstacles or problems in the implementation of the Plan, including those encountered in
administering the land use and transportation aspects, as well as any other strategies of
the Plan
• One obstacle encountered in the implementation of the Plan is the amount of education
necessary to make it successful. The updated Plan differs from the 1997 Comprehensive
Plan. While all intents of citizens and decision makers may be to support the Plan, many
rely on memories of now-outdated visions, goals, and/or policies that may actually conflict
with successful implementation of the new Plan.
• Another obstacle has been the inability of City leaders to focus on the Plan. City Council's
adoption of the Plan gave community stakeholders and City staff the vision of what the
Page 5 of 13
community should be and direction on how to accomplish that. Because the
Comprehensive Plan is long-range in nature, some policies and strategies can be
implemented quickly, but there are many actions that will take years to complete and many
actions that build upon each other over the years to help reach the vision. Significant
deviations from one element in the Plan will likely create a ripple effect into other areas of
the Plan. If significant deviations are able to be isolated, at best they call into question the
integrity of the Plan when similar situations occur in the future. Focused action to implement
the Plan provides the predictability essential for citizens and stakeholders to feel secure in
investing their resources (both tangible and intangible) in College Station.
• Thousands of hours of volunteer and citizen time went into the creation of the Plan. While
each individual may not agree with each point of the Plan, it was a Plan built out of
compromise and consensus. It is a long-range Plan that is meant to transcend the politics
of individual staffs, committees, commissions, and City Councils, providing consistent
direction to a stated future. Weak (or lack of) support by City leadership for the Plan as a
whole, or to continue to press issues that have already reached compromise and have been
adopted in the Plan, creates confusion and unpredictability, the effects of which are
discussed above.
• Planning staff has been challenged with the development of new zoning districts that will
reflect the goals and strategies of the land use and character designations. The
designations were created to provide land use flexibility that could respond to market
demands. The flexibility of entitled land uses would be balanced with strong form-based
prescriptions. Later in the comprehensive planning process the City Council determined
that they were not comfortable in a scenario where appropriate form could override land use
decisions.
A hybrid form of Euclidian, incentive, and form-based zoning is now necessary to implement
the plan. Staff has researched and discussed recent codes from across the United States in
an effort to determine best practices. While a new zoning approach is being developed,
Planned Development Districts have been used in rezoning requests this past year to entitle
land uses with some concept as to how they will be laid out on a tract and how they will be
designed. These rezonings have also provided staff with valuable information as to how
land use and character designations may be implemented.
3. Proposed amendments that have come forward during the course of the year, which may
include revisions to the individual Plan maps or other recommendations or text changes
There are two property owner-initiated Future Land Use and Character Map amendments
currently in progress: a change from General Commercial to Urban on an infill tract in the
Southwest Parkway/Wellborn area (which staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission
support) and a change from General Suburban to Urban for 93 acres in the area between
Wellborn Road and Jones Butler, north of Rock Prairie Road West (which staff and the Planning
and Zoning Commission do not support). These items are scheduled to be presented at the
June 24 City Council meeting.
Page 6 of 13
4. Recommendations for needed actions, programs and procedures to be developed and
implemented in the coming year, including recommendation of projects to be included in
the City's Capital Improvements Program, other programs/projects to be funded, and
priority coordination needs with public and private implementation partners
• The next neighborhood plan staff would like to pursue is in the vicinity of the area between
University Drive and Harvey Road, and Texas Avenue and Earl Rudder Freeway.
Background data collection on the next neighborhood plan will begin this summer.
• Implementation of the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan should continue in
the next year.
• Implementation of the Central College Station Neighborhood Plan should begin in the next
year.
• Prioritization of UDO amendments needs to be by the impact the amendments will have
on the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan.
• Staff has identified that a text amendment would be beneficial to address what may be
appropriate at the intersection of two collectors in the Restricted Suburban area of Growth
Area V.
• Staff has identified several map amendments that will be brought forward for consideration
as time permits, unless direction is given to the contrary.
Page 7 of 13
M
O
N OD
(n ~ ~ _ of ~~~$♦s d
- _'r•#♦
O
.C cu Q = ~i~ tt~~ c[ Q
e ti r,
ci C:
O O lJ V V aT 4l Ir0
_0 cu
cu (D f
h
p O 7 t`ti♦ 1
O V Lts~0 t, r 3 _ .
U R tsp. ♦i~ ~ ~
V t~J ~1;t1, ♦~ea.jlik}}IlifIt11441iB~Hi• N
O N y s.
C
(6
(u U Q s,
N (0 O W sat \ g4. ti U`
' t ` Q o
Q O a
CU Y
M 4)
W- 0. C
O U) -0
i ~ ~ _ - _ F y, ~r t♦1 fS ip
O c $ t, i -o
U N O g t ° o s z \ ~iRF at` N
z is u - 0
cu :3 (u in M
ca A _ n
cu a)
C7 aj E _ / . 4 .
t♦~{
v- O O gas r'
O 'a .~tt+41 r L
O t4 _ _
M a)
(D O N f f tit t v♦
O O titt ♦ .tom ,rti, EItRx
(U 0) CU , ~1 {t{ttlkl}t11t11 1~14o~+a
W (j) 75 (Lj
lA Z ♦ v
-r- tt1t \ :fit, J.
(a V O L
c
F- w
-a C: lo
O 70 N (/j U u'- . tit 4.
U N Qj ;'F ccQ
C L- Q O 7
UU NQ 0
M
r
4--
O
CF)
c O
O _
(o
a) ca C-n E
-0 Co
cc C:
L 2 J r'n X C)¢
r -ca
> C. fl. 0 7 D 0 Z { R
a> cot a) 01 £
\
13
U) (n 0 INN
(o a) (n
M \ \ / _
L -0
O E l , \ v~
Q U)
\ N
0 U \ f'
0 3: :s :3
a) L V \ \ U
4) CL
a) 0 -j
r- 0
Li) 0 4)
C: D
N O (o -0
A
0 O N
Q 0 (o Q `c
y... N m l~ .1 s 1 d
0 O N d U N t GP Go\~ w
o C:
a) a)
c coo U-Cf 0 n a E ti~ " batn_ \ Y/ U
n m o
ca M (D (n >1
( (n c m m i N
~ o
Q C 9 m m c r` \
m 0 CL a.
(D c
C: -0
O
~ 0 J U
N
0 co =3 E p
(Lo 0- N C:
_0 0 c 0 N -0 U) k` f O.
V .0 > -0 X O
AA r L
_0 0
\
cn c ~P \ f
CO -0 -0
c o ca o co w 0~~ \ - a~° g 1
> 0 -0 CL
a) co -
:3 -C 0 3 0 c°)
U
N
M
g 4--
m~
rn n m E o. ¢ - I
~ in v n N 4 4 4V~~y` L~_ ~
's= 'L s¢ 0 0 m z z:3 ti0
d v C
cn 'c~ e u sso ~s~; ao~ „
m Q
0
CY) F gn c c a / s `i Q.
_O a o a 9 5 0 e ~t
s a ti n a` y 4 p ~`~•ai Q C
c4 a u a O 1 ~P 1` is
C U 4i a rr 1t ~~J`'~ p ~P~i LL
7C r-
. r • o
(D
Q- v
~ OL J oJj 4 6 F
v Q ,J ~j 6 R~~.pnra~aP o
ntai}e
:3 0
~G U Z 4~~`0' Ft ~t. g Ftd 9 dtulujjU
X11 0
r NS t
0 N 0) o
a q,
o
cn LL co (0
`o -C o Y
LL o x
Y ~ L
Z y c
0 O N 7
a
0 10
lA O $ v E n O
> C' E m N C
W V) N m m
> a• C C (o m z z~ C =
o c'L=' "ttox Dr az = m
CD ul
o o~ 4~ wry
cu a)
V U f
L O S ~ o ~ ss fsr
d DO ,
N u~. d 2 a i0 Sd ~ra y
45
> N N d o rr 1 l Or • ti ~Q~ yi`C a 0.
O~~~ J v n 1 ~ 0~ ♦ )J C
caa N--0 1J03
c
Co C)
LLI
N N -,NS 'r to°L. awo
D
O O C
0 CL
s - Q E
f-- M ca
M
M
> O
U - s c-
^ f * c-
70
o o H { m
O V
i 70 j E ro a rv *y ~y 1~
N t v v N c4 ~
d ~1lu
L- C13 E
4- _ L9
(o :3
N
m
m O & & C
C m a O
CO v A J J J J _ LL
L.. ~ d OD d' 9N N
A-- CL J
o 3 I~ 1' `a `s' a X
4- 0
O N ul ~ a~ ` b ~ ' un Lc
LL a
o
3 C ' R
O Y L _L
J U m
1,^ a O
Ul a) T.T
L y
to a a /4t t c
(CI O EE S
'Y O70 ' E E y a .'tit-, t,' C C
4) 41
'n o v i g a ds~0 T C~3 W
_0 x
J N
rya a
V U J[[ I ry d C
• i s r N m i i s ~VlM fCG
(6 'a C c4 " " f t''~ U
N - - fn
o d ~O C
Y cu
CO L Q 4 ory
N ? o o s s r4 4.-a v
o c: .2
ccaU _ ~CC~ g~ c ~
O a) N J J J J
(n C:
4
J I a o
0 L *i~ a u.
-r-
Zn-
to ~ ~ b e• ~
4- o o W any ~a
_ O
o Q
0 q)
d'
M
a) ~
O
co C:
rn
O d o ~J o IL -0 m
O O
O C1 r q'
u .i
W al
r
3 -__2
L m
O O a a
U k s s $
a) O 3 y~ s a a g-
~
a N Ttd PIu?owd
(n I
r Y,a
i N
W
a) &0
W Z nr mP•6 P23 9 a6e a ~j
U
O O R
c0 a) - U s U
cn a)
(6 C a
C y
O
a) C _ nn
a
C) L
O
V U '
-p a' a
U) a) c ~
O p U) O r~i O
U a) - CL
ca rn w
O C~~ F j 1~ a ~ ~
(0 7Z)- CL
X W s v d zId Plelaiu3
wa)a) a) ~olllll=1;°
a
c" -r cn `
f6 O 0) . ir
i,
a F_r_:3 :3
a)
O :3 rte. C
O Q
cy a) W n~ mp Pa 9
O Q OC
L a) OC
O a) C
C.) Q
L6
Cl)
r
v--
O
c l
~ a ~ b 2 r
(0 N m a "E o a` Ir
a' a c a Ig Ig - i,
O a t N U 0 4 4
a a 3
o m d m o ' 1~~~77^» II
S 2 K K V' 7 J C9 N 2 2
CD a
.
W 0
o
L L ~ N m - $y Y
Q1
O~ b ~d 0~ C
l'W^,, B
X .q N C C
(B W (4
.01
_ CC cc
LL N P LL J J J ? J ` G
s a m v a` V a n n TO O
v N ` r
(B O O a0+
- o
oCcL~~ Z
Qo rn
c 0 4
~ o
X C
(a ~
O 41
° ~ a)
L
0 U c N
00 X a a
LO O m ~ v ~ ,,r', l4
r °o `m ao tf
v a~
a~ O y a
U- 0 C)
O N 0 3 o y y " LL
> 3 o N s v E m m
*J r i ~ ~ o V m m o A ,ti N
C0 O N V c c
0
7
O lA s ` m m
r t C C j
C,) ki
W C6 .N 3 N N.2 N j i -
vJ
N ~Z~KC On, CZZ ~
O
(a M CD
C) 0 L r c
C c
Ile E
a w
u a) o m ao 0~
(n O u a 'm 'as c c -C 0 502
-0_ C: 9 o c C o c o c o O
0. CL CL 0- F- "O (f3 Z
O d J J J J - - ~L t•
N C CL U- rovavo_,va
a) CU
c: E
_a)a)
,i t..
O N Q
70
~ cn (tea 0
v - , 7