HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/05/2012 - Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission (*ff
CITY 01' C01.1.1 IGI SLvlfoN MINUTES
Home oJ' Texas At,ti1 University' PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Workshop Meeting
July 5, 2012, 6:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
College Station, Texas
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Mike Ashfield, Craig Hall, Bo Miles, Jodi Warner, and
James Benham
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Jim Ross and Jerome Rektorik
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: None
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Bob Cowell, Molly Hitchcock, Carol Cotter, Jennifer Prochazka,
Matt Robinson, Morgan Hester, Teresa Rogers, Erika Bridges, Danielle Singh, Joe Guerra, Adam
Falco, Braxton Bragg, Randall Heye, Brittany Caldwell, and Christina Raeshler
1. Call the meeting to order.
Chairman 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
4.4.
Staff Planner Hester stated that there would be a condition on Regular Agenda Item 7 that
was not included in the staff report. The condition is that a note would need to be included
on the Plat stating that any structure that encroaches a setback be removed.
3. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the status of items within the 2012
P &Z Plan of Work (see attached). (JS)
Executive Director Cowell gave an update on the 2012 P &Z Plan of Work.
4. Presentation and discussion regarding an update on the Wayfinding Program for
Bryan/College Station. (RH)
Economic Development Analyst Heye gave an update on the Wayfinding Program for the
Bryan/College Station area.
There was general discussion amongst the Comission regarding the Wayfinding Program.
5. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update on the Economic
Development Master Plan. (RH)
July 5, 2012 P &Z Workshop Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 3
Economic Development Analyst Heye gave an update on the Economic Development
Master Plan.
There was general discussion amongst the Commission regarding the Plan.
6. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an update on the following item:
• A zoning request from A -0 Agricultural -Open and A -P Administrative Professional to
C -1 General Commercial for a 0.85 acre tract located at 111 North Dowling Road,
near the intersection of Harvey Mitchell Parkway South and Wellborn Road. The
Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on May 17 and voted 7 -0 to
recommend approval. The City Council heard this item on June 14 and voted 6 -0 to
approve the rezoning request.
There was no discussion.
7. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the P &Z Calendar of Upcoming
Meetings.
• Tuesday, July 10, 2012 - Southside Neighborhood Plan Open House — Council
Chambers — 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
• Thursday, July 12, 2012 — City Council Meeting — Council Chambers — Workshop
6:00 p.m. and Regular 7:00 p.m.
• Thursday, July 19, 2012 — P &Z Meeting ... Council Chambers — Workshop 6:00 p.m.
and Regular 7:00 p.m.
Chairman Ashfield reviewed the upcoming meeting dates for the Planning & Zoning
Commission.
8. Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Design Review
Board, Joint Parks / Planning & Zoning Subcommittee, Neighborhood Plan Stakeholder
Resource Team, BioCorridor Committee, Lick Creek Nature Center Task Force, Zoning
District Subcommittee, Joint Task Force on Neighborhood Parking Issues, and Wellborn
District Plan Resource Team.
Commissioner Warner gave an update on the Joint Parks / Planning & Zoning
Subcommittee and the Joint Task Force on Neighborhood Parking Issues.
9. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items — A Planning & 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 Benham asked when the block length item would be brought to the
Commission.
Executive Director Cowell said that the item is scheduled for the meeting on July 19.
July 5, 2012 P &Z Workshop Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 3
10. Adjourn.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:52 p.m.
Appg cza . k At st:
0 4-LIAILQ- 1 -
Mike Ashfield, 4hairma Brittany ldwe Admin Support Specialist
Planning & Zoning Commission Planning & Deve pment Services
July 5, 2012 P &Z Workshop Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 3
Gir
(;rr� t�l COl.la.c ;ii „no MINUTES
/Iumc ,1c r ;11 1'rr,verr,r,° PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
July 5, 2012, 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
College Station, Texas
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Mike Ashfield, Craig Hall, Bo Miles, Jodi Warner, and
James Benham
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Jim Ross and Jerome Rektorik
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: None
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Bob Cowell, Molly Hitchcock, Carol Cotter, Jennifer Prochazka,
Matt Robinson, Morgan Hester, Teresa Rogers, Erika Bridges, Danielle Singh, Joe Guerra,
Adam Falco, Braxton Bragg, Randall Heye, Brittany Caldwell, and Christina Raeshler
1. Call meeting to order
Chairman Ashfield called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Hear Citizens
No one spoke.
4. Consent Agenda
4.1 Consideration, discussion, and possible action on Absence Requests from
meetings.
• Jerome Rektorik — July 5, 2012
• Jim Ross — July 5, 2012
4.2 Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting Minutes.
• June 21, 2012 — Workshop
• June 21, 2012 — Regular
4.3 Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat for Saddle Creek
consisting of 14 residential lots on approximately 19.8 acres located at 5449
Prairie Dawn Trail, generally located west of Duck Haven Subdivision,
approximately one mile south of Greens Prairie Road in the City's Extraterritorial
Jurisdiction (ETJ). Case # 12- 00500102 (TR)
July 5, 2012 P &Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 3
4.4 Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a Final Plat for Castlegate II
Section 202 consisting of 38 single- family lots on approximately 11.9 acres
generally located near Greens Prairie Road west of the Castlegate Subdivision.
Case # 12- 00500105 (MR)
Commissioner Benham motioned to approve Consent Agenda Items 4.1 — 4.4.
Commissioner Warner seconded the motion, motion passed (5 -0).
Regular Agenda
5. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items removed from the Consent
Agenda by Commission action.
No items were removed from the Consent Agenda.
6. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a waiver request to Unified
Development Ordinance Section 8.2.K "Sidewalks" and presentation, possible action,
and discussion regarding a Final Plat for BVCOC Subdivision consisting of one lot on
approximately 5 acres located at 13979 Wellborn Road, generally located south of the
Southern Trace Subdivision. Case # 12- 00500106 (TR)
Staff Planner Rogers presented the waiver request to not construct sidewalks and
recommended approval of the Final Plat if the waiver request was approved. She said that
the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board recommended approval of the
waiver request.
Commissioner Miles motioned to approve the waiver request. Commissioner
Warner seconded the motion, motion passed (5 -0).
Commissioner Miles motioned to approve the Final Plat. Commissioner Warner
seconded the motion, motion passed (5 -0).
7. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a waiver request to Unified
Development Ordinance Section 8.2.H.2 "Platting and Replatting within Older
Residential Subdivisions ", and public hearing, presentation, possible action, and
discussion on a Final Plat for West Park Addition Lots 27R, 28R, 29R, and 30R, Block 9
being a Replat of West Park Addition, 25 feet of Lot 26, Lots 27, 28, and 29 and 25 feet
of Lot 30, Block 9 consisting of four R -1 Single - Family Residential lots on
approximately 0.7 acres located at 201 and 205 Grove Street. Case # 12- 00500113
(MTH)
Staff Planner Hester presented the waiver request to lot size and lot width and
recommended approval of the Replat if the waiver requests were approved and with the
condition that a note be included on the plat stating that any structure that encroaches a
setback be removed.
Chairman Ashfield opened the public hearing.
July 5, 2012 P &Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 3
Sharon Menn, 200 Grove Street, College Station, Texas, asked the applicant questions
regarding the type of structure he would be building.
The applicant stated that he may not be the person building the structures, but he would
assume that the appearance would stay in line with the rest of the neighborhood.
Chairman Ashfield closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Warner motioned to approve the waiver requests. Commissioner
Miles seconded the motion, motion passed (5 -0).
Commissioner Warner motioned to approve the Replat with the condition that a
note be included on the plat stating that any structure that encroaches a setback be
removed. Commissioner Miles seconded the motion, motion passed (5 -0).
8. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items — A Planning & 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 Miles inquired when the BioCorridor item would be brought to the
Commission.
Executive Director Cowell stated that the item is scheduled to be heard at the July 19
Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
9. Adjourn.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 p.m.
vd• /, - r ( Att
Mike Ashfield hairm. Brittany ldwdl , Adm. Support Specialist
Planning & Zoning Commission Planning & Development Services
July 5, 2012 P &Z Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 3
Phase One — Economic Development Strategic Plan College Station, Texas
Executive Summary and General Points
Many metropolitan areas of College Station — Bryan's size increasingly rely on "eds and meds" —
education and health care — for their economic foundation. Essentially, they become educational and
medical service centers for a surrounding mostly rural region. The "eds" portion of this picture is usually
a moderate size public and / or private university and community college.
The presence of Texas A &M University (TAMU) — a very large research institution with national renown
— takes College Station's "eds and meds" profile to an entirely different level. The large numbers of
well- educated faculty and staff paid well enough to be middle or upper middle class creates a
compelling demographic profile for the adult population in the City itself. The population tied to the
MSA's blue collar heritage tends to reside in Bryan, satellite towns, or unincorporated areas.
Population growth in College Station has been led by the growth of the student population, though this
may be changing as enrollment growth levels off. This gives the chance for the adult population, which
also has been growing, to assert itself to a greater extent in the City's local economy. The first response
has been the growth of the health care sector, illustrated by growth in the designated "Medical District"
in the southern part of the City.
Regarding growth in other sectors of the economy, particularly "basic" industries such as manufacturing
and technology, College Station has a mix of opportunities and challenges:
Opportunities and Advantages
• The City has access to a continuous stream of educated, innovative science and engineering
graduates emerging from TAMU, as well as its faculty and other intellectual resources.
• Its basic infrastructure and public services are considered good quality.
• The College Station Independent School District is considered very attractive to middle class and
affluent residents who value education — a value shared by skilled knowledge workers in
industries such as technology. Outside of the presence of TAMU, this should be considered the
City's core competitive asset.
• The overall cost of living is moderate when compared against coastal knowledge worker
destinations (or Austin). This is achieved while still offering the basic services and conveniences
found in a typical suburban environment with less traffic congestion and a shorter commute.
• With its parks and trails, educational / athletic organizational infrastructure and facilities,
increasing health care services, and low crime rate the City's general quality of life for families
and older residents is strong.
• Existing actors in economic development are actively working to foster additional knowledge -
based industries, with a focus on bioscience technology.
Challenges and Barriers
• Limited air service and convenient connections to Easterwood Airport are a significant
inconvenience for high -level workers in some industries as well as business and group visitors to
the City.
• The stock of older multifamily rental units may lose appeal to students as new properties come
online. The question of who will reside in the older units has repercussions for public service
CDS 41 1
SPILLETTE
2
Phase One — Economic Development Strategic Plan College Station, Texas
provision and in particular future public school performance in CSISD, which is critical to the
City's appeal.
• It is difficult to compete with larger Texas metropolitan areas in appeal for newly minted
University graduates and young adults less than 10 years out of school. The vast employment
base in knowledge- intensive industries, relatively higher pay levels, and myriad opportunities for
career advancement in larger cities holds strong appeal to ambitious young workers.
• Energy companies continue to keep their operations and research consolidated in the Houston
area rather than locate offices close to TAMU's related academic research facilities and
graduating students.
• New businesses and ventures dependent on public spending through the University or state and
federal government are at risk of contraction if public budgets become further constrained.
• The overall cost of living is not lower in College Station than in Houston, North Texas, or San
Antonio for suburban home buyers (though commute costs are probably lower), which removes
one form of potential competitive advantage over these metros.
• The City is only now starting to reach a critical mass of affluent adult households to create a
retail and service environment that is not heavily oriented to and patronized by college
students. The lack of an "adult shopping, dining, and culture world" can be off - putting to
knowledge workers who are used to having this at their disposal in larger cities. This also
correlates to the lack of an urban neighborhood environment with retail, entertainment, and
cultural offerings for adults that contrasts with both the Northgate college student
entertainment area and the typical non - unique suburban chain retail establishments.
• More upscale and destination channels for spending discretionary income — "name" designer
boutiques, luxury chain retail, cutting -edge chef - driven restaurants, and major cultural events
such as opera and major concerts — also require a trip to Houston or Austin and will continue to
do so for the foreseeable future.
• While College Station residents likely appreciate the City's high standards for land use and
extensive regulatory framework, the resulting increased costs of developing and occupying
commercial space potentially discourage independent and startup businesses of various types —
both technology- oriented and retail businesses for example — from successfully locating in the
City. (It should be noted, however, that many who were interviewed during this research
process believed that the City has recently been improving its relationship with the business
community with regard to its regulatory environment.)
Area Economics and Demographics
• Total non -farm payroll employment in the College Station — Bryan MSA is projected to have
increased by 14,600 jobs between 2000 and 2012, reaching a total of 97,300 employees in the
MSA.
• The fastest growing industries in the College Station — Bryan MSA are "Food Services and
Drinking Places ", "Ambulatory Health Care Services ", and "Hospitals"
• Government and public sector employers make up a large percentage of the major employers
base in the MSA. Of the fifteen largest employers, seven of them are either public / higher
education related or local / regional government related.
CDS
SPL LE TTE 2
Phase One — Economic Development Strategic Plan College Station, Texas
• Unemployment in both the City of College Station and the MSA are lower than in the State of
Texas as a whole.
• Population has grown significantly in the City of College Station, from 67,890 in 2000 to 93,857
in 2010. The 18 to 24 age bracket makes up an outsized 47.3 % portion of this population in
2010 (due primarily to Texas A &M), but this percentage is down from 51.2% in 2000.
• The population of the City of College Station is generally well educated with 64% of residents
aged 25 or older having achieved at least an Associates Degree, and the largest percentage of
that group has a professional or graduate degree (30.6% of total population).
• The City of College Station contains the majority of each the following Occupation Categories in
the entire MSA per the US Census:
o "Life, physical, and social science occupations" (82.8 %)
o "Education, training, and library occupations" (72.3 %)
o "Personal care and service occupations" (66.3 %)
o "Education, legal, community service, arts, and media occupations" (64.1 %)
o "Computer, engineering, and science occupations "(61.2 %)
Retail / Commercial Market Analysis
• When compared to other high growth, metropolitan counties with a substantial population of
educated residents (Williamson, Montgomery, Collin), Brazos County has a substantially lower
level of retail spending per capita.
• When compared to smaller metropolitan counties in lower- growth areas (Nueces and
McLennan) Brazos County also has a somewhat lower level of retail spending per capita.
• These trends may be attributable to the departure of the student population during summer
and holiday breaks. Increasingly, this trend may also be attributable to College Station's
location in close proximity to Houston and Austin. The Cypress Premium Outlets and The
Woodlands Mall / Woodlands Market Street are both less than one hour's drive away from
College Station and provide a greater variety of stores and goods than does Post Oak Mall or
other CS -B MSA retailer areas.
• Interviewees indicated several key points related to retail and commercial development:
o Rental rates in College Station are generally higher than can be afforded by a startup
small business.
o University Drive is the heart of the market area for retailers or restaurants with just one
location in the MSA.
o As residential development continues to grow in southern College Station, a critical
mass of roof tops could materialize sufficient for additional upscale and "adult class"
retail development to be brought to market in that area.
o It is difficult for retailers without a current presence in the market to understand the
outsized buying power (relative to their income level) of the large student population.
This presents a continual challenge for retail and restaurant recruitment.
SPILLETTE? tw,) ;,; 3
Phase One — Economic Development Strategic Plan College Station, Texas
Office and Industrial Market Analysis
• The office market in College Station — Bryan MSA was generally described as soft because the
employer base in the College Station area is not focused on firms that occupy typical office
space.
• Because of relatively little demand for office space being present in College Station, the City
should not likely expect any large scale new office building development in the near to middle
term. Any additions to inventory are likely to be small scale 1 to 2 story "local professional"
office buildings.
• The employment base in College Station — Bryan MSA is even less focused on manufacturing and
industrial users than office users.
• Nearly all manufacturing and industrial real estate observed in the market was located in Bryan
and not College Station. Interviewees spoke of past decisions by the College Station city
leadership to minimize and discourage location of heavy industry within the City boundaries
through development policy and regulation.
Health and Wellness
• Health and wellness care (as opposed to biomedical research) is one of College Station's most
prominent growth industries and a significant part of its economic base.
• The Texas Workforce Commission estimates that the Brazos Valley Workforce Development
Area (Brazos, Burleson, Grimes, Leon, Madison, Robertson, and Washington Counties) had an
estimated 29,000 health related employees and this is projected to grow to 37,730 by 2018.
• College Station may be a larger than typical demand center for healthcare services because the
American Community Survey from the Census Bureau estimated that only 12.2% of College
Station residents were uninsured in 2010. This is far lower than the 23.7% estimate for Texas
and better than the overall 16.4% estimate for the College Station- Bryan MSA.
• Significant investment in new health care facilities is exhibited in the area, notably in South
College Station where the new Scott and White facility is under construction and in the Medical
District along Rock Prairie Road.
• Additionally, major investment has been made in Bryan in the initial development of the Health
Science Center (HSC) in far west Bryan.
• It should be anticipated that as overall population grows and specifically the increasing
population of affluent retired and senior adults, health and wellness businesses will continue to
expand.
• The Health Science Center's expansion efforts will also likely continue to drive growth in this
sector in College Station and the College Station — Bryan MSA.
CDS
SPLLETTE cO sit .me; 4
Phase One — Economic Development Strategic Plan College Station, Texas
Technology
• Various forms of entrepreneurial, cutting -edge businesses are a subject of focused economic
development interest in the College Station area. This could include electronics and digital
engineering , software, and bioscience and biotech, which has garnered the most significant
recent publicity.
• Census data indicates that College Station is a relatively highly educated community, which
could provide adequate human resources for Technology companies.
• Multiple interviewees noted that there may be opportunities to capture the research and
technology piece of energy companies. Many TAMU graduates are educated to work in such
fields and many firms engaged in such work are nearby in Houston. However there are few
industry facilities of this type in College Station to capitalize on both of these situations. Such
TAMU graduates typically end up moving to Houston or other larger metros to gain
employment.
• Two challenges to College Station increasing this employment sector were mentioned by
interviewees:
o The relative lack of ease of air travel out of Easterwood Airport for Technology firm
executive, and
o The potential need to add another dimension to the College Station urban experience
beyond suburban style development and college oriented venues in order to attract top
notch scientists and technology researchers from larger cities who provide the creative
brain power behind the success of technology firms.
Hospitality and Entertainment
• College Station — Bryan hotel revenue trended upward from 2002 to a peak of over $60,000,000
in 2008 but has since trended slightly downward.
• The College Station — Bryan hospitality market suffered less during the recent recession than
other larger markets, since it was bolstered by Texas A &M and its relative affordability for more
cost conscious events and conferences.
• The area is challenged by only having one full service conference hotel (The Hilton).
• Significant hospitality revenue is derived from Texas A &M football ticketholders. With TAMU's
entry into the SEC, the local hospitality industry is excited by the prospect of how well the SEC
travels to away games, but is concerned about a potential period that TAMU home games could
be held in Houston or elsewhere while stadium renovations are made.
• Mixed beverage sales have continued to trend upward for the City of College Station (while
remaining flat for Bryan) during the period from 2000 through 2011.
• Opportunities likely exist for additional upscale adult (not college oriented) restaurants and
entertainment venues in College Station.
CDS 1
SPILLTT E7 5
Government and Higher Education
• A large percentage of employees and major employers in College Station — Bryan MSA are
engaged in either education or government. Seven of the fifteen largest employers in the area
are engaged in these sectors.
• Per the 2010 Census, 18.5% of all employed College Station residents work in the "Education,
training, and library occupations"
• State government makes up the single largest industry by employment in the College Station —
Bryan MSA per the Texas Workforce Commission. This includes TAMU System employees and is
currently reported at 26,200 employees.
Construction and Development
• Construction and development are a sizable employment sector in the College Station — Bryan
MSA with annual permitted improvement value (both new construction and renovations of
existing properties) ranging from $200M to $500M combined in the cities of Bryan and College
Station.
• Significant land exists in and near College Station for additional real estate development should
the market demand it, and allowing for Construction and Development to continue to be a large
industry sector in the area.
• Annual gross sales of goods related to construction in the City of College range from $60M to
$110M in the period from 2002 to 2011, providing significant economic momentum to the
community.
CDS
SPIlt ETU'
4 E C Sd$ .INC
6
Area Economics and Demographics
Employment and Industry Trends
Employment Estimates 2000 College Station - Bryan, TX Metropolitan Statistical Area
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Employment as of February Change
(thousands) 2000 - 2008 - 2000 -
Industry 2000 2008 2012 2008 2012 2012
Mining, Logging, and Construction 4,500 7,000 6,500 2,500 (500) 2,000
Manufacturing 5,800 5,500 5,200 (300) (300) (600)
Wholesale Trade 1,400 1,800 1,800 400 - 400
Retail Trade 9,200 10,000 10,300 800 300 1,100
Transportation, Warehousing, and Utilities 800 1,400 1,400 600 - 600
Information 1,600 1,100 1,200 (500) 100 (400)
Financial Activities 3,300 3,300 3,700 - 400 400
Professional and Business Services 4,900 5,600 6,300 700 700 1,400
Educational and Health Services 7,900 10,000 10,000 2,100 - 2,100
Leisure and Hospitality 7,600 9,900 10,300 2,300 400 2,700
Other Services 2,600 2,900 3,100 300 200 500
Federal Government 1,100 1,000 900 (100) (100) (200)
State Government 23,400 25,400 26,200 2,000 800 2,800
Local Government 8,600 9,900 10,400 1,300 500 1,800
Total Non -Farm Payroll Employment 82,700 94,800 97,300 12,100 2,500 14,600
Source: Texas Workforce Commission
The table above summarizes employment by industry in the College Station -Bryan MSA (BCS) in the
period between 2000 and 2012. Total non -farm payroll employment increased meaningfully during this
twelve year period, by 14,600 employees or 17.7 %. The recession that began in late 2008 through 2009
resulted in a slowdown in total job growth, but the metropolitan area has recovered and added more
jobs than were lost during that period.
Over the total twelve years, the industries that saw the greatest growth in number of employees are
State Government (which includes the Texas A &M University system), Leisure and Hospitality, and
Education and Health Services. During this same period Manufacturing, Information, and Federal
Government all saw decreases.
A significant percentage of MSA employees in the area are engaged in some part of the public sector.
Thirty nine percent are engaged in Federal, State, or Local government and an additional large share are
public employees in the Educational and Health Services field.
Professionals that were interviewed by CDS 1 Spillette indicated that they expect general employment
growth to continue. The BCS Chamber of Commerce polls local business people each year, and in the
most recent survey, 60% of respondents stated that sales in their businesses were up over last year.
Secondly, 40% reported that they will be adding additional staff in the next year.
The medical and health care industry sectors have also been growing in BCS.
CDS
SP)LLETTE 'r w,, 7
The table above summarizes the location quotient of various industry sectors for the State of Texas and
the College Station -Bryan Texas MSA versus the Nation as a whole. Location Quotients compare the
frequency of presence of certain industries within certain geographies with the frequency of those same
industries' presence in the nation as a whole. A location quotient of 1 indicates the industry has the
Location Quotients
2010 Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Nongovernment Industries
Location Quotient vs. USA Total
Texas -- College Station -
Two -Digit NAICS Level Industry Statewide Bryan, TX MSA
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting 0.64 1.31
Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction 3.99 5.10
Utilities 1.11 1.01
Construction 1.31 1.52
Manufacturing 0.90 0.81
Wholesale trade 1.16 0.55
Retail trade 1.00 1.32
Professional and technical services 0.97 0.87
Management of companies and enterprises 0.54 0.10
Administrative and waste services 1.08 0.54
Educational services 0.63 ND
Health care and social assistance 0.92 ND
Transportation and warehousing 1.14 0.45
Information 0.92 0.69
Finance and insurance 1.03 0.54
Real estate and rental and leasing 1.13 1.51
Arts, entertainment, and recreation 0.73 0.97
Accommodation and food services 1.03 1.49
Other services, except public administration 0.86 0.97
Unclassified 0.37 0.20
(ND) Not Disclosable
(NC) Not Calculable, the data does not exist or it is
zero
same concentration in a geography as the United State. Less than 1 indicates the industry is less
concentrated locally, and above 1 means the industry has higher concentration in a local geography than
the United States as a whole. Key findings to note:
• Firms engaged in mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction are located in both Texas and in
College Station -Bryan MSA to a much greater degree than the nation overall.
• Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting related industry has a more significant presence in
College Station -Bryan MSA than it is in the State and Nation as a whole.
CDS
SPILLETTE k s , i 9
........................
Population by Age - MSA Comparative Overview
2010 Census Estimates
Number Share % Change 2000 - 2010
College College College
Station Station Station
College Brazos - Bryan College Brazos - Bryan College Brazos - Bryan
Age Distribution Station County MSA Station County MSA Station County MSA
Age 0 to 4 4,526 12,506 14,742 4.8% 6.4% 6.4% 49.3% 31.8% 25.6%
Age 5 to 17 9,326 27,325 33,347 9.9% 14.0% 14.6% 38.0% 17.5% 29.1%
Age 18 to 24 44,398 60,112 62,695 47.3% 30.9% 27.4% 27.7% 23.1% 22.1%
Age 25 to 34 13,922 29,816 33,341 14.8% 15.3% 14.6% 57.2% 34.5% 29.3%
Age 35 to 44 7,134 19,168 23,127 7.6% 9.8% 10.1% 27.0% 10.2% 5.5%
Age 45 to 49 2,895 9,210 11,598 3.1% 4.7% 5.1% 26.1% 27.1% 22.5%
Age 50 to 54 2,901 9,008 11,657 3.1% 4.6% 5.1% 63.3% 52.3% 46.4%
Age 55 to 64 4,380 13,647 18,317 4.7% 7.0% 8.0% 87.9% 72.4% 64.0%
Age 65 and over 4,375 14,059 19,836 4.7% 7.2% 8.7% 77.8% 37.5% 27.2%
Total 93,857 194,851 228,660 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 38.2% 27.8% 23.7%
Median Age 22.30 24.50 25.80
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 American Community Survey, Census 2000 Summary File 3
Between 2000 and 2010 the age groups of 55 -64 and 65 and older all rose in share by at least 100 basis
points. This supports a trend of Texas A &M affiliated empty nesters and retirees relocating to College
Station, as reported to CDS Spillette by professionals interviewed in the region. The median age of the
City's population increased slightly as a result, though it is still quite young by typical standards.
The 25 -34 age group increased between 2000 and 2010 and accounts for the second - highest share of
the population. Several persons interviewed by CDS 1 Spillette noted that TAMU graduates were leaving
the region after graduation, mostly for larger metropolitan areas. It is possible that a large amount of
this age cohort could then be explained by the graduate student enrollees at TAMU (estimated to be
9,000 to 10,000), many of whom likely live in College Station. This would also help explain the
significant drop in share for the age group 35 -44; most of the graduate students probably also leave the
area upon obtaining their degrees. Several factors were mentioned during interviews as contributing to
the lack of retention of graduating students:
• Perception of a larger number of better / higher paid career advancement opportunities in
larger metros
• Relative lack of entry level professional jobs in College Station - Bryan
• Current suburban style development patterns of BCS do not offer the type of environment in
which urban - oriented young professionals of the "creative class" wish to live
The table above summarizes and compares the age distribution and total populations of residents in
College Station, the County and the MSA as a whole. College Station accounts for 48% of the County
population and 41% of the MSA, and has grown faster since 2000 than either of the larger geographies.
College Station has a significantly higher percentage of residents aged 18 to 24 than the County and
MSA. Over two- thirds of the MSA population in this age group live in College Station. Conversely,
CDS
SPR F hs r3W 12
Household Profile - City of College Station
Census Estimates Change
2000 2010 2000 -2010
Household Type and Presence of Children Number Share Number Share Number % Change
1 Person Household: 6,691 27.1% 9,642 27.5% 2,951 44.1%
Male householder 3,537 14.3% 4,801 13.7% 1,264 35.7%
Female householder 3,154 12.8% 4,841 13.8% 1,687 53.5%
2 or More Person Household /Family Households: 18,000 72.9% 25,395 72.5% 7,395 41.1%
Married - couple family: 7,954 32.2% 10,936 31.2% 2,982 37.5%
With own children under 18 years 4,043 16.4% 5,222 14.9% 1,179 29.2%
No own children under 18 years 3,911 15.8% 5,580 15.9% 1,669 42.7%
Other family: 2,414 9.8% 3,953 11.3% 1,539 63.8%
Male householder, no wife present: 736 3.0% 1,260 3.6% 524 71.2%
With own children under 18 years 182 0.7% 371 1.1% 189 103.8%
No own children under 18 years 554 2.2% 889 2.5% 335 60.5%
Female householder, no husband present: 1,678 6.8% 2,693 7.7% 1,015 60.5%
With own children under 18 years 967 3.9% 1,558 4.4% 591 61.1%
No own children under 18 years 711 2.9% 1,135 3.2% 424 59.6%
Nonfamily households: 7,632 30.9% 10,506 30.0% 2,874 37.7%
Male householder 3,986 16.1% 5,531 15.8% 1,545 38.8%
Female householder 3,646 14.8% 4,975 14.2% 1,329 36.5%
College and Post - College Households:
Family households: 10,368 42.0% 14,889 42.5% 4,521 43.6%
Householder 15 to 24 years 1,472 6.0% 1,859 5.3% 387 26.3%
Householder 25+ years 8,896 36.0% 13,030 37.2% 4,134 46.5%
Nonfamily households: 14,323 58.0% 20,148 57.5% 5,825 40.7%
Householder 15 to 24 years 9,710 39.3% 12,603 36.0% 2,893 29.8%
Householder 25+ years 4,613 18.7% 7,545 21.5% 2,932 63.6%
Household Size:
1- person households 6,691 27.1% 9,642 27.5% 2,951 44.1%
2- person households 9,478 38.4% 11,957 34.1% 2,479 26.2%
3- person or more households 8,522 34.5% 13,438 38.4% 4,916 57.7%
Average Household Size 2.32 2.38 0.06 2.6%
Total Households 24,691 100% 35,037 100% 10,346 41.9%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 American Community Survey, Census 2000 Summary File 3
The preceding table summarizes the distribution of household types by householder and presence of
children for the City of College Station as reported in both the 2000 and 2010 US Censuses. The 2010
Census indicated that of the 35,037 households in College Station, 72.5% are 2 or more people in size.
However, only 31.2% are married couple households and only 14.9% of total households include their
own children 18 years of age or younger. This last percentage is down from 16.4% in 2000.
A relatively high 57.5% of households are Nonfamily households; over half of these contain two or more
people, indicating the large college student population that usually shares living quarters. The share of
such households remained relatively constant from 2000 to 2010.
CDS _.
SP ..LETTC >.� c „ 5,„,H, 14
PLANNING et ZONING COMMISSION
GUEST : GIS7hR
MEETING DATE UR, n, 301D,
NAME ADDRESS
1. Eli-- 1,we$ r
2. �/i A r.A. - 1
C 4e. S C � ��
3
4. ,- . 111 • ,/ c3 6 If! 1 4n-P e"
���
36o l oosiPs C "`\c--- C
6. '3 3 I 13 r; • / Sk_ / I /
f ..i� &A-As ..,��
7. �
8.
9.
1 0.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17. .
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23. .
24.
25.