Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/29/2007 - Agenda Packet - Planning & Zoning CommissionFILE COPY • AGENDA. Workshop Meeting City Council CITY OF COLLEG1pSTATION planning and Zoning Commission Plannin er Drvelo meat Servicer Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Tuesday, May 29, 2007, at 12:00 P.M. Council Chambers, College Station City Hall 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 1. Call the meeting to order. 2. Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding the results of a growth management study prepared by Kendig Keast Collaborative in joint session with the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. 3. Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding the results of the East College Station Transportation Study prepared by Kimley- • Horn in joint session with the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. 4. Adjourn. ~on~ulltetion v~itl~ AttorneY_fGov't Code Section 551.071 ; oossible action. The Planning and Zoning Commission may seek advice from its attorney regarding a pending and contemplated litigation subject or attorney-client privileged information. After executive session discussion, any final action or vote taken will be in public. If litigation or attorney- client privileged information issues arise as to the posted subject matter of this Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, an executive session will be held. Notice is hereby given that a Workshop Meeting of the College Station City Council, Planning and Zoning Commission and Parks and Recreation Advisory Board College Station, Texas will be held on the Tuesday, May 29, 2007, at 12:00 P.M. at the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda. • • Posted this the day of May, 2007, at By Connie Hooks, City Secretary • I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the City Council, Planning and Zoning Commission and Parks and Recreation Advisory Board of the City of College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said Notice and that I posted a true and correct copy of said notice on the bulletin board at City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, in College Station, Texas, and the City's website, www.cstx.eov. The Agenda and Notice are readily accessible to the general public at all times. Said Notice and Agenda were posted on May _, 2007, at and remained so posted continuously for at least 72 hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. This public notice was removed from the official posting board at the College Station City Hall on the following date and time: by CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS Dated this day of , 2007. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the day of , 2007. Notary Public- Brazos County, Texas My commission expires: This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for sign interpretive service must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Agendas may be viewed on www.cstx.gov. Planning and Zoning Commission meetings are broadcast live on Cable Access Channel 19. • • • 29 May 2007 Workshop Agenda Growth Management Options To: Glenn Brown, City Manager From: Lance Simms, Acting Director of Planning & Development Services Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action and discussion regarding the results of a growth management study prepared by Kendig Keast Collaborative in joint session with the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Parks Board. Recommendation(s): After consideration and discussion of growth management options, provide policy direction to the consultant and City staff. Summary: The City of College Station has recently experience an increase in the rate of residential development, particularly in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). In an effort to identify options for managing development, particularly in the ETJ, staff retained the services of Kendig Keast Collaborative, a planning consultant. Kendig Keast developed a report designed to assist the City in this regard (see attached) and will present the results of the report to the City Council, Planning & Zoning Commission, and Parks Board for discussion and feedback. Budget & Financial Summary: N/A Attachments: 1. Draft Growth Study • TOOLBOX OP GROWTH MANAGEMENT TECt1NIQUES CITY OF COLLEGE STA"I•IUN, TEXAS 1 ~'~1 f ; .~' !~~1'; 7 ' ; (_) ~ v C 1~: 'r '- ~ ~ , !+.1 1 r , ~(r ?('il `,~ (wer the course of the last six decades, College Station has experienced rapid growth, averaging 90 percent per decade. Excluding the 1940s (263 percent) and 1970s (111 percent), the average rate of growth per decade has been 42 percent. While the amount of growth has slowed since 1980, with 29 percent growth during the 1990s (compared to 111 percent and 41 percent during the 1970s and 1980s, respectively) it exceeds the rate of growth of Brazos County (34 percent) and Texas (22 percent).z From an economic perspective, the increase in population and corresponding employment growth is a positive indicator of the City's economic competitiveness and stability. A continuation of this economic growth is -and must remain - a primary goal of the community. sv ~R .i :. . ~., Q - Pn ~ } 4~:~'! Y ~'~' ~ c~~:re_ : ing ~~ ., .. 1 L r._ . +~ ' t R ,a .~ . ~/ ~~ ~~ ~ a c....~~a:.. a......a:..,. ~_ The urbah form hc~s become Increasingly fragmented since the 1980s. SourGc~: City qF College Statlan ~ -Peter Drucker z This is partially explained by the relative size of the respective jurisdictions. A question confronting this community, hug-vever, is not onl)~ how to attract and sustain ea~nomir development but how to maximize its net fiscal benefits. l he pattern of growth and efficiency of service provision are contributing factors, among others. As displayed in l~ii~,urt~ 1, llititoric (;iv,~~~th 9',atterns, beginning in the 7970s the form of development has become increasingly scattered. hl fact, since the Year 2000, the number of platted lots in the ETJ has averaged 16.6 percent of the total annual platted lots. As for the projected population, assuming a continuation of recent trends, the IiTJ is expected to increase in population by 17 percent by the Year 2016.E 1'he trend of peripheral growth is long-standing as development began to scatter in 1980s and has since increasing sprawled outward. Continuation of this pattern -and trend - will become increasingl~~ problematic, resulting in an increased inefficiency of services thereby lessening the economic gain and placing a growing strain on the fiscal resources of the COIIIInLlnlty. ~-,.. ;+ r~ «,t_;~t.)~l~ii.l l:` ~fv'v',i ~r11 c3iTl There are several reasons why this growth pattern has occurred, including, but nut limited to, the following: There is a lure to green field development due to the ease of development approval, particularly since the City has no authority within its ETJ to regulate: The ttse of any building or property for business, industrial, residential, or other purposes; The bulk, height, or number of buildings constructed on a particular tract; The size of a building that can be constructed on a particular tract of land, including without limitation any restriction on the ratio of building floor space to the land square footage; Che number of residential units that can be built per acre of land; or fhe size, type, or method of construction of a water or wastewater facility that can be constructed to serve a developed tract of land, subject to specified criteria.s a The City's oversize participation ordinance allows the City to pay up to 100 percent of the total cost for any over-sizing of improvements drat it requires in anticipation of future development. There are no stated exceptions or criteria regarding its cost effectiveness; financial feasibility; or conformance with utility master plans, the comprehensive plan, or other development policies. Furthermore, the current Comprehensive Plan does not define a designated growth area nor is it directly coordinated with the utility master plans. Therefore, there is no mechanism to coordinate the pattern and timing of development and ensure cost efficiency in the provision of adequate public facilities and services. 'This must be a focus of the current Comprehensive Plan, coordinated with updates of the City's water, wastewater, and drainage master plans. • The City's decision to extend its Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) boundary for sewer service to coincide generally with its ETJ enables development to occur throughout the ETJ. While there are advantages by way of limiting the number of private package plants and controlling the quality of sewer infrastructure, this contributes to an inefficient pattern of development. Without a growth sequencing plan to direct the location and timing of development, consistent with the City's infrastructure planning and capital programming, the City has limited control of its development pattern. • The fiscal impact analysis used to judge the feasibility of annexation appears to be an abbreviated model that does not fully account for the long-term operating and maintenance costs, the distance 3 Based upon plat data provided by the City a Based on a City forecast, "Development Trends in the Extra-territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) s Section 212.003, Extension of Rules to Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Draft 05/15/07 Page 2 of 23 reyuirrd to extend utility services, or the timing of build-out. Further, the City's Future land use plan and corresponding zoning districts are too general and thus, du nut offer a char indication of the likely uses and densities. Therefore, to more accurately determine the net fiscal benefit of annexation a more elaborate, robust model must be developed and used. • There are both allowances and limitations within the zoning ordinance, including: The minimum lot size within the Agricultural-Open "A-O" district is only five acres. lnstead, the minimum lot size could be increased to 20 acres or larger ensuring preservation of the agricultural character and enabling the City to determine the timing by which facilities will be provided and urban development is allowed.l_oning, in this case, may serve. as an effecti~'e growth management tool. The Rural Residential Subdivision "A-OR" district allows a minimum lot size of one acre meaning that residences on septic systems and wells are permitted. Use of this district in the outlying areas of the corporate limits where adequate municipal facilities are not yet available is contributing to development fragmentation. There are a relatively large number of use-based zoning districts. Essentially, this means that a zone change is necessary to respond to a shift in the market, which adds process and delays development. This is a disincentive Eor development to occur in the City rather than the ETJ where it is much easier and with less delay. Instead, the ordinance should allow more flexibility while increasing the development standards in line with the City's expectations and desired OLl tcomes. There is a multi-step process required for the Planned Mixed-Use "['-MUD" and [Tanned De~~elopment "PDD" districts, which lengthens the review and appro~~al time, increases dc~~elupment costs, and is a disincenti~'c for ~~•hat is other rise a preferred de~~elopment type. The ordinance allows for zoning classification at the time of annexation without any criteria as to when and under what circumstances the City will consider a change in zoning. Therefore, a zone change to a more intensive district may be allowed without consideration as to its consistency with the City's growth plan, capital improvement plan, or other criterion. - There are no incentives, such as density bonuses, integrated into the ordinance to encourage certain development types. An increased density in exchange for development clustering and increased open space could allow a rural development environment within the City limits rather than necessitating ETJ development to achieve this character. - The requirements for use transitions and buffering are generally ineffective providing reason to develop in the open countryside in relief of the impacts of abutting development. • There are several rural water providers (Wellborn Special Utility District, Brushy Creek Water Supply Corporation, and Wickson Creek Special Utility District) and sewer providers (Carter Lake Water Supply Corporation and River Side Wastewater Treatment Plan) around the periphery of the City and ETJ, meaning that development may get access to public water and sewer systems that meets the standards of the Texas Council on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) without requiring connection to the City's utility systems. • The Brazos County Health Department's requirements for permitting septic systems is a minimum of a one acre lot, whether there is public water available or a private well. This exceeds the State's one- half acre minimum, and is now being considered by the County Commission for an increase to a minimum of two acres. While an increase in the minimum allowable lot size for authorization to construct a septic system is both warranted and helpful, unless it is further increased it still allows rural development throughout the ETJ. Draft 05/15/07 Page 3 of 23 I here is a five-wire exemption ul the platting requirements within State law that allows rural development to occur without platting anti thus, without any provision fur right-of-wa}~ dedication, delineation of easements, or other applicable -and warranted -development requirements.b r The City's parkland dedication requirements apply only within the City limits meaning that there are no requirements for the provision of parkland or payment in-lieu of land dedication. Therefore, effectively, this is an economic advantage for developing outside of the City limits to ovoid payment of these fees. • Development outside the City limits does not pay City taxes. Therefore, residents and businesses outside the City limits benefit from access to municipal facilities and services, such as parks, hails, libraries, and other community facilities, but do not share the tax burden associated with constricting and maintaining those facilities and services. Over time this increases the tax burden on in-City residents. Land is less expensive outside the City limits due, in part, to the absence of public infrastructure and improvements, which equates to cheaper development and hence, lower home costs. q There is an attraction to the open, rural landscape, which will slowly disappear with increasing development over time and a lack of land use controls to protect the desirable character. f'C~[F~f1Tl~"11 il~i1{?II( ~11~tifl`~ t I -,h~~:`~^<I While the growth of the community has brought great opportunity, without adequate foresight and preparedness it may involve long-term consequences, including: • Erosion of a defined community edge thereby blurring its boundaries and contributing to a loss of community identity. This can be most readily seen along each of the entrances into the community where there is a proliferation of uses extending well beyond the City limits. Degradation of environmental resources, e.g. floodplains, wetlands, habitat, vegetated areas, etc. Overwhelmed public infrastruchre (e.g., roads, water, and wastewater systems) and services (e.g., police and fire protection, parks, libraries, and schools), in some cases, creating unsafe conditions. • A lack of coordinated plamling between individual developments leading to, among other things, a discontinuous and disjointed street system and inability to plan for linear linkages and greenways. • Premahire and ttnexpected shifts in traffic patterns causing congestion and environmental impacts as development occurs in an uncoordinated fashion before adequate road infrastructure is in place. • The provision of private streets and infrastructure systems such as package treatment plants, for which the burden may shift to the City in future years without the requisite funding to pay for it. • Cumulative impacts on the natural environment due to stormwater runoff and non-point source pollution of area streams and watercourses. • Inefficient provision of services meaning a larger investment in infrastructure systems with fewer than the optimal number of connections to pay for it. • Increased traffic, as vehicles have to traverse relatively longer distances to reach places of work, shopping, services, education, recreation, and entertainment. This means that more public dollars must be expended on road building, expansion, maintenance, street lighting, and traffic enforcement. • Declining community character and agricultural operations, as formerly large, contiguous farms are broken up by scattered development and the proliferation of "exurban", 5-plus acre lots. The agricultural industry is a significant sector of the regional economy, and the presence of local b Section 212.004. Plat required (a) Draft 05/15/07 Page 4 of 23 agrirulttn~al products is good fur luc~il cunsunu~rs. Nlureuvcr, farming is an important part ul thr rugiun's heritage that continues to contribute to the quality of life and identity of the cunununit~~. Often, the elements that fuel growth (e.,q., community livability, quality schools, economic diversity, etc) arc slowly ^nd ultimately sacrificed by the pattern, quality, and rharach~r of development. The integrity of public Fiscal resources is also compromised because the new development is inefficient and does not iunh•ibute sufficient revenues to cover the costs ut tiu' services it demands. Modern "growth nrmagement" is ~~ a~mbinatiun of techniques that allutiv nuu~icipalities h> direct it, pattern ul growth and the timing of infrastructure provision, leading to better long-term economic sustainability. In broad terms, growth management techniques include: • Comprehensive planning to establish the policy basis for the instihrtion and administration of growth regulations; Regulatu~y approaches, including zoning and subdivision controls, which to varying degrees, directly impact the character, form, location, and quality of development. Annexation, ~~~hich expands the geographic jurisdiction of the City to implement ~ Full range of regulatory and fiscal approaches to growth management. • Development and/or participation agreements, which provide for infrastructure funding (and may, in some instances, include land use controls). Impact fees, which provide hmding for capital improvements that are needed to serve new development. Improvement districts and political subdivisions, ~~~hich arc independent entities that provide For infrastructtn~e funding and operation. • lnterlocal cooperation contracts as a means for local governments to agree with other writs of government with regard to providing administrative functions, infrastructure, and public services. Extension of publicly-owned utilities by way of capital improvement programming. hz Texas, state law provides a complex set of rules regarding which growth management techniques are available, and how those techniques may be implemented. The purpose of this issue paper is to summarize the provisions that may serve as viable and practical solutions for the City to manage its community character, efficient provision of adequate public infrastructure and services, and long-term fiscal health. This paper also establishes a framework for growth management, with strategic directions as to the changes in policies and practices to better manage future growth and development. There are an array of strategies for managing the pattern and timing of development, ranging from simply minimizing the impacts of growth without affecting the pattern to strictly controlling it. Given the limitations of Texas law there are few, if any, mechanisms currently available to entirely prevent sprawl. For the purposes of this discussion the growth management techniques are as follows: This review of the applicable statutes is intended to provide a general overview of available tools and techniques, and shall not be considered legal advice with regard to the validity of any of the identified approaches or the potential legal consequences of implementing any particular approach. Potential risks are identified only if explicitly set out in the statutes. KKC recommends that the City consult with its attorney with respect to the legality and potential risks and exposures presented by any particular approach. Draft 05/15/07 Page 5 of 23 Chapter 213 of the "Texas Local Government Code contains a broad authorization to develop and adopt a Comprehensive Plana The statute allows the City to decide for itself what its Comprehensive Plan will address and how it will relate to the land development regulations. With regard to content, the statute says a Comprehensive Plan may: Include, but is nut limited to, pro~~isions on land use, transportation, and public facilities; con~i~t of a single plan or a ioordinatcd s~~t of plans organii.cd b}' subject and geographic area; and, • be used to coordinate and guide the establishment of development regulations. State law provides that "A municipality may define, ~ "~'' ~ `' "~ ~ ''~ ' ~ !'° ~'~ i~_i~ ~_;rc~w~h _:r in its charter or by ordinance, the relationship behvicen a Comprehensive Plan and development regulations, and may provide standards for determining the consistency required behveen a plan and development regulations." In other words, there is not a requirement that the comprehensive , plan he applied in sh~ict terms in all land use decision-making. However, there is latitude regarding the extent to t~~hich the land de~~elupment regulations may be used to implement the plan. This is essential iF the Cite is to successfullt~ control its destine. It does not appear that the City Charter specifically authorizes the purpose or use of a Comprehensive Plan. While a plan is generally recognized as a "guide" for decision-making, given its relevance and essential role in managing the City's growth and development, it is advisable for the City to specify its value in its long-range planning interests. Therefore, this may be an opportunity to make the plan for authoritative in land development decisions and capital expenditures. The City's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) identifies as one of its objectives to "Implement the Comprehensive Plan through compliance with its individual elements." Furthermore, the relationship between the UDO and Comprehensive Plan is expressed as follows: • "It is intended that this UDO implement the City's planning policies as adopted as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended and periodically updated. • The City's Comprehensive Plan, and any associated plans or shidies adopted by the City Council, shall be required to be amended prior to, or concurrent with, permitting development which would conflict with the plan. • The alignments of proposed thoroughfares and bikeways on the "College Station Thoroughfare Plan map? And the "College Station Bikeway and Pedestrian Plan map" are generalized locations that are subject to modifications to fit local conditions, budget constraints, and right-of-way availability that warrant further refinement as development occurs. Alignments within 1,000 feet of the alignment shown on the aforementioned maps will not require a thoroughfare plan amendment."9 s Chapter 213 is not the only source of authority to adopt a comprehensive plan. Home rule may also be a source of authority, which is accomplished via the City charter is some Texas communities, e.g. Georgetown. 4 Section 1.6, Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan, Unified Development Ordinance, July 3, 2006 Draft 05/15/07 Page 6 of 23 Ihi~refurc, to further strengthen the relationship behv~rcn thr ~-umprrhensi~~~ flan and UlX), the following should occur in the interest of better managing growth: Areas within the City limits that are nut within the defined "growth area(s)" should be zoned Agricultural-Open "A-O", provided the minimum lot sire in increased from five to 20 acres, or more. '1'hc derision as hi the inning of nc~al~~ annexed hruhcrt~' must strictly adhere to the City's gru~~~th plan. Annexation of land that is nut within the defined °growth area(s)" must be zoned "A-0", giving the Cite the decision as h> the timing of development and its pro~~isiun of services. 1~hc area defined ~~s "local" on the Land Use Ilan"'should strirtl~~ adhere to the (~ih'~s gru~~~th pl~u~. Those portions of this area that are inade~luately served and are not feasible fur the extension of adequate public facilities and services should be re-designated as Agricultural-Open. • The Rural Residential Subdivision "A-OR" district should coincide with the boundaries of the "Rural" designation on the Land Use Plan. The ordinance should subsequently be revised to increase the minimum lot size from one to five acres, with density bonuses for development clustering and increased open space. "Che use designations un the Fuhn-e Land Use Plan should be reconciled with the zoning districts. [lather than indicating land use with a general reference to density, both should more clearly define the intended character of development In other words, low, medium, and high density residential should include additional performance standards to ensure the intended character. Standards such as maximum gross density and open space and fluor area ratios will better ensure the development outcomes. Otherwise, iF more then unc coning district is allowed and there arc nut definitive standard, there is nu mech~~ni;in for the Cite to control the de~~elopment rh~irarter.:~s it rrlatrs to ~r11VA't ~l m~lnagl'InCnt ells Iti e5~t`ntl ll ~1K .l mCln~ tl~i' 1111hr~~V~Cd ntlhtV' SV's to m> h~<l ilmn~.~ ltilllc ~` t~ll' density and hence, infrastructure demands are known) as well as controlling the form and character of development. The Comprehensive Plan offers the ability for the City to establish its growth policies, which must then be directly related to the zoning regulations to effectuate them. This must be accomplished in tandem with the City's water, wastewater, and drainage master plans, as well as the capital improvement program. Generally, the Comprehensive Plan should direct development first, to the areas where there is already adequate infrastructure and secondly, to the areas that may be readily and efficiently served with public facilities and services. Targeted upgrades of the infrastructure may be required to facilitate an infill development program. Lastly, the areas around the periphery of the City that may not be efficiently served - or are simply premature for development -should be reserved in the near term for agricultural (Agricultural-Open) or very low intensity uses (Rural Residential Subdivisions) with infrastructure staging for longer-term development. The means of executing these general policies are described in detail below. The City's over-sizing policy should cite as an exception for refusing to extend water or wastewater mains consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The update of the plan must then define the area for which urban development is to be accommodated. More specifically perhaps is the definition of the areas that are not intended for infrastructure investment during the horizon of the plan and thus, subject to the growth control mechanisms of this paper. In so doing, rather than responding to development, instead, ~~ Land Use Plan, November 2004 Draft 05/15/07 Page 7 of 23 the City nr,i~~ proacti~~cly dirc~~t dc~~rlupnurnt to attar in apprupriatr lucatiun~ and coniurmnt ~rilh thr ~~v~iilability and provision of adcquale pui~lic facilities and x~n~iccs. I'hruugh the course of Alin development the following areas should bu identifird and delineated, as displayed in the illustrative examples: use and where residential development is restricted. • The growth area is where new growth is to be encouraged for which there are readily available services that may be efficiently extended. This is the area where the City will commit to extendine infrastruchire and imnrwements to 'The developed area is wh~~rc there iti rxisting infrash•uchirc. Ilcmaining opporttmities within this defined area would consist u( intill develupnu~nt, redevelopment, ,uul arras that are inunediatcly contiguous to existing development. It is important to note than there is approximately 2,010 acres of vacant, residentially-zoned land within the City limits. This amount of developable land will support an additional population of 18,650 persons", which is approximately 60 percent uF a niid- range estimate of added population by the Year 2025. Therefore, the plan must quantify and determine the area necessary to support the projected population and employment increases, and mordinah~ the infrastruchn•e plans accordingly. l~hr protection area rncrmp.~s~rs ,irras ~~f floodplain, wetland, streams and drainage ways, or other natural areas that warrant permanent protection. These are areas where the City's zoning or subdivision regulations should prohibit development. The protection area may also include the Agricultural-Open "A-O" district that is intended to remain in agricultural Prolee tip - ~ ~i~, 7 ~ support urban development. The size of this area should support 20 years of development potential. This area may be further delineated to include five-year growth increments to be timed with the extension of facilities and services. It is common to upsize this area by 20 to 30 percent to allow market flexibility. The size and location of the growth areas need to be closely evaluated and clearly defined given the amount of currently available land. The City would also need to revisit these areas and make periodic adjustments. ~~ This assumes four units per acre and 2.32 persons per dwelling unit (U.S. Census, 2000) Draft 05/15/07 Page 8 of 23 fhe holding zone is all rem~iining land in the I~;l) anal outside of th~il identified above described areas. Due to the limitations of State law, this is the must difficult of the four areas to address. Given the reasons identified earlier, develupnu~nt nr~y now occur within this area. Development in areas for which the City cannot readily and efficiently provide services is clearly prcnrihn-e and results in sprawl. 'I'herclore, the question is to what extent the City is willing to enact control by the below described growth management techniques. fn order for the City to manage the location of development it must employ some of the techniques described below. Effectively, the strategy should direct a vast majority of development to occur in the developed and growth areas as infill or contiguous development 'l~he controls must be designed to minimize the amount of urban development in the holding zone. The most readily available means for minimizing the impacts of peripheral growth is by cvay of amending the subdivision regulations. However, while certain controls may be put in place to solve anticipated problems, this approach will not have any material affect on the pattern or timing of urban growth. It remains though, a warranted and necessary step to ensure quality development and to ameliorate unnecessary problems. . -..\ V f( ~ 4 lrypmi i~ S ~ ~ c r ar ~ ~~ 5 ~ , ca ~ ~ ~ e Holding Zones Unlike zoning regulations, the value of the subdivision regulations is that they may be extended into the ETJ.~z While subdivision controls typically include requirements for lot size, access, and infrastructure, State law also authorizes the City to adopt "other municipal ordinances relating to access to public roads or the pumping, extraction, and use of groundwater by persons other than retail public utilities ...for the purpose of preventing the use or contact with groundwater that presents an actual or potential threat to human health" within the ETj.13 12 Unlike subdivision controls within the City, enforcement of the subdivision regulations in the ETJ is limited to injunctive relief (fines and criminal penalties in the ETJ are prohibited). See § 212.003(b) and (c), TLGC. is Section 212.003, Texas Local Government Code Draft 05/15/07 Page 9 of 23 Purpose: Generally, the purpose of subdivision controls is to regulate the dimensions of lots and the provision of access, utilities, and public facilities. Strengths: Along with zoning, access management, and other regulatory tools, subdivision controls are an important means to ensure adequate infrastructure and regulate community character. Generally, utilities may not be connected to subdivided property without an approved plat. Weaknesses: Subdivision controls generally must stand alone in the ETJ (where zoning is not allowed without consent). Statutes do not allow regulation (without consent) as to land use, bulk, height, number of buildings, size of buildings, or residential units per acre in the ETJ. Access mdnagerne+~t standards applied wkthin the ETJ would helpto avoid unsaf~> cgnc~ltlons while preserving .the capacity cf the roadway. ~~ Section 212.010, Texas Local Government Code Pnwidcd the Cumpreht~nsivc Ilan i, ~ulfiriently spriilic, subdivision controls can be ~~ sh~ung tool fur ensuring that adequate water, sewer, and road service is provided to new development in the City, and more importantly, in the G'I'J. This is so because State law provides that a plat shall be approved if: it conforms to the general plan of the municipality anti its current and ttrhn-e strt~rtti, alleys, parks, playgrounds, and inil~li~~ utilih/ fnrililii~~; it conforms to the general plan for the extension of the numicipality and its roads, streets, and public highways within the municipality and in its exh•aterritorial jurisdiction, taking into account access to and extension of sezner• and rorztrr mains and the instrumentalities of public utilities; it conforms to any (adopted subdivisiun~ rules ....'' By implication, the plat can be denied if the standards are not met. This inquires a Comprehensive Plan that sufficiently defines the standards by which dcaelupment must uphold. For instance, the thoroughfare plan must rncomp,~ss tht~ entire Fa~J -and bc~~ond in some cases - ~~~ith denoted alignnu~nts of a~llechn~ and arh~rial ~h~crt>, and uthrr regi~~nal, intro- and inter-state highways. Potential amendments to the subdivision regulations may include the following: (1) Access management standards could -and should - be imposed consistent or similar to those recommended by TxDOT. For example, if the spacing requirement between driveways is 360 feet (recommended for streets with 45 m.p.h. posted speed), then 100 to 200 foot frontage lots with individual drives would not be allowed. This would preserve the safety and traffic carrying capacity of roadways that may be improved to collector or arterial standards in the fuhtre. Strict application of spacing requirements would: (1) encourage platting (which is required when infrastructure -here, access streets - is dedicated); or (2) likely reduce lot depth, which would make more efficient use of the land. Draft 05/15/07 Page 10 of 23 (2) Allhuugh the Cite is nut allu~rcd to dircrtl~~ regulatr "the number of ...units ...her acre'" in the ETJ, as a practical matter, because the City ` may regulate the dimensions and layout of the lots, density may be, more or less, influenced by ~ , authorized rubs like minimum lul sirs, minimum lot width, and right-of-way dimensions.'' "i'herefore, if the Cily were to require a minimum lot size of fi~~e aires, fur instance, due to the capacity of the adjoining roadway and/or where there arc not public water and sewer systems available, effectively, a ~ ~~,;~c, •L ire ~~ r:, r r. i i itii~ a rr~, relationship may be forged between lot size, r, i _ ~ a~r;~~„._I infrastructure demands, and the a~~ailability of adequate public facilities. This authority is granted to the City "to promote Nze health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the municipality and the safe, orderly, and healthful development of the municipality."'° (3) Together ~~•iti~ the requirements for an increased lot size could be an allrn~~ance - or incenti~~e -fur development clustering. Thr option could he ~;i~rn to thr lend ~n~~ncr as h> ~~~hrthrr thi~~~ choose to develop ~-vith a large lot size or select a clustering option that allows more density. In other words, rather than constructing a rural large lot subdivision with no public open space, smaller lots would be required with a high ratio of public open space. The result allows the rural character to remain with the advantages of fewer required access points, less impervious cover, reduced water demands, increased recharge, and land conservation. Given certain performance standards, the open land could continue to be used for agricultural purposes. (4) Through the delineation of "protection areas" the City may strengthen their standards relating to the ~"~ ~~-~ f ""~' ,.., protection and preservation of its resources. While the ~~~~ _ ^ : ~ f~'' ~ " ~~\ City has regulations for floodplain areas, there are few ^ " \~ F`, ~ other standards for the delineation and protection of ~ .' ~ ~ "~ ' ~ ~, wetlands, habitats, mature vegetated areas, or other ~ ^ ~^ w ' ' r natural feahires. Resource protection standards `~ , . ^ ^ r' would provide a method and means for requiring '\ ~ ^, ~i~,-,~ ~ •~.,__ varying degrees of protection of resource features, depending on their scale and significance, with By clustering development open views may be development flexibility and incentives by way of protected the[eby preserving a rural,. open character:. density bonuses for constructing on the developable portions of the site. The use of density bonuses 15 Such rules are permitted by Section 212.010(4), TLGC, which allows the same rules for subdivision in the ETJ as in the municipality. Of course, in the ETJ, these rules are limited by Section 212.003, TLGC, so, for example, if a developer found a market for multiple homes or buildings on a single lot in the ETJ, the City could not prohibit the development. ~e Section 212.002, Rules, Subchapter A, Regulation of Subdivisions, Texas Local Government Code Draft 05/15/07 Page 11 of 23 u~i~, allu~r a higher gross density ~~s an inventive by ~~djusting lots si~.es ur using diflen~nt huusin;; types in combination with an open space ratio. (5) A development plat is a way for the City to regulate development within the City limits and ETJ that may otherwise be exempt from the subdivision plat process.~~ The City has provisions for development plats, with stated exemptions. It is advisable for the City to reconsider the waiver .~Iluwance as well as the exemptions ~u~d instead, require suLimithil of ~~ develupnu~nt plat fur all projects in the Fi'I'J. Such a requirement would be of great value to document all improvements, casements, and rights-of-way, and must importantly, bemuse it most be approved to conform tu: (I) the general plans, rules, and urrlin~inces of the municipalil~~ runrerning its current and future sh~erts, sidewalks, alleys, parks, playgrounds, and public utility facilities; (2) the general plans, rules, and ordinances for the extension of the nmicipality or the extension, improvement, or widening of its roads, streets, and public highways within the municipality and in its extraterritorial jurisdiction, taking into account access to and extension of sewer and water mains and the instrumentalities of public utilities; and (3) [the subdivision plat regulations. The subdivision plat process does not allow the municipality to require building permits or enforce its building code in the Ii~rJ." (6) lncurporation of the parkland dedication requirements into the subdivision regulations, which will allow the dedication or fee in-lieu provisions to be extended into and throughout the E"fJ. Effectively, this will ensure that development outside of the City limits is fulfilling its proportionate demands on the community's park system similar to the requirements for development inside the City. This would remove this current advantage for developing in the ETJ. I~he means NZat must communities use lu exercise control ut the pattern and type of development outside of the City limits is to extend the City limits by annexation. Annexation allows the City the ability to impose its land development regulations, which provides an essential growth management tool to implement the Comprehensive Plan. Annexation also extends the City's ETJ enabling it to regulate the subdivision and development of land over a larger area. However, it is important to realize the stringent requirements mandated by State law for extending services to newly-annexed areas in a timely and adequate manner, which must be comparable to pre-existing services and service levels in similar incorporated areas. Requirements for annexation include: • A three-year annexation plan to identify specific properties the City intends to annex following a three-year waiting period; • Acting on annexation proposals within 31 days after the three-year waiting period to prevent the subject properties from becoming exempt from annexation for another five years; • Inventorying all current services in the annexation are (including services provided by all entities, the condition of facilities, existing public safety response times, and current service costs); • Preparing a municipal service plan for the targeted area within 10 months of receiving data for the service inventory; • Immediately extending basic public services (police, fire, and EMS) and "full municipal services," including necessary capital improvements, within 2.5 years of annexation, unless certain exceptions apply (such as a negotiated service schedule for a requested annexation); • Possibly negotiating agreements in lieu of annexation to formalize interim service provision and cost- sharing arrangements and possible compliance with City ordinances or development standards; "The authority to require a development plats is provided in Section 212.044, Local Government Code. 1e Section 212.049, Texas Local Government Code Draft 05/15/07 Page 12 of 23 I'utentially enterin); into arbitration prucecdin)s if annexation planning and nef;utiatiun is unsucccs;tul; and, + Potentially negotiating "strategic partnership agreements" with special districts. Of significance in the law is an exemption from the above requirements for annexation proposals that will involve fewer than 100 tracts of land where each h•act contains at least one residential dwcllinf;. With the exception uF sizeable developments, must annexations are exempt from the above requirements. Also, the City may not annex more than 10 percent of its land area in any given year. If it does not annex all of the land that is allowed, the difference rolls over to the next year. If multiple carryovers are accumulated, the City can annex up to 30 percent uE its land area in a single year. State law provides for the minimum level of service that must be extended to the annexed areas, as described in Significantly, State law does "not require that a uniform level of fitll municipal services be provided to each area of the municipality if different characteristics of topography, land use, and population density constitute a sufficient basis for providing different levels of service."79 .'i~ i~r; i ~+111' it .4(~IIIC rt ~ I ~. ,,E,i ~ a., f<'rr.. li ~~({. ~~ ~ ,>r ii~:: If the level of services, infrastructure, and infrastructure maintenance in the Then services, infrastructure, and affected area before infrastructure maintenance must annexation was: be: Lower than In the "Comparable to the level . , , municipality available in other parts of the municipality with topography, land use, and population density similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in the [annexed] area." Equal to the municipality "[T]hat same [pre-annexation] level Superior to the municipality Re: services "Comparable to the level available in other parts of the municipality with topography, land use, and population density similar to those reasonably contemplated or projected in the [annexed] area." Re: operating and Equal to or superior to the pre- maintaining annexation level. infrastructure Therefore, the law appears to allow the City to annex territory and provide minimal services if those services are commensurate with that provided in areas of similar "topography, land use, and population density" within the City. Yet such a strategy is not necessarily without risk -- disputes with affected landowners over levels of service could expose the municipality to civil penalties, court costs, and attorneys' fees.20 Accordingly, the City should plan carefully and involve the City Attorney early in the process if it chooses a growth management strategy that involves providing a minimal (rural) level of service to a newly annexed area. • Often, there are warranted reasons for considering annexation, including, among others, the ability to impose the Cites land development regulations along major transportation corridors and in prime development areas that may otherwise compromise the community's long-term interests. There are several areas for which the City is now considering annexation. Since the primary purpose for annexing these areas is to exert control of probable growth areas, it is advisable for the City to employ 19 Section 43.056(m), Texas Local Government Code 20 Section 43.056(1), Texas Local Government Code Draft 05/15/07 Page 13 of 23 grin-rth management techniyucs in these areas to prevent prenwture devtaupment. 14~r instance, unless the City is prepared to extend full municipal facilities and services -and such are determined to be efficient and feasible -these area should be zoned for Agricttlhiral-Open, which may serve as a holding zone until which time as the City determined development to be appropriate and of fiscal benefit. Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Government Curie authorizes the City to enact zoning regulations to control building height and size; lot coverage; yards and open spaces; population density; the location and use of buildings; the location of land that may be put to various business, industrial, residential, or other purposes; the extraction of groundwater (except b}~ retail public utilities); and, in home-rule municipalities like College Station, the bulk of buildings. Zoning regulations are not authorized outside of the mtmicipality's corporate boundaries without the consent of the affected landowner(s).' .'. 5! ~ ~I ~~:'E: Cy rfC)In ~IJ6', FJI~fIIC, Qlili .%Illi.Jf I!;~1CJ~c'f S; pror-,r~t~~ heal?~~ c~ne~ the aener~~l vreifar~~: ~. Ex~>viclE~~? c7~ir~~7t;c7t~~ light c~nCl c~ir' [n concert with annexation, all newly incorporated areas should to be zoned "A-O" Agricultural-0pen, without consideration of am' other zoning district classificatirni unless merited by ~~'av of being within a defined "grov,~th area." However, to serve its growth management function, the minimum lot size must be increased from five to 20 or more acres. Therefore, the open, rural character of these areas would be maintained and their rezoning to another district classification could be timed with the City's staged growth plan and infrastructure impro~'ement plans. The City could allow for very low density residential development in these agriculturally zoned areas by allowing extreme clustering. This enables there to be development value to this land and also allows for construction of additional homes. As an example, one dwelling unit per 20 acres with no required open space equates to a gross density of 0.050 units per acre. A one acre lot with a septic system and well and 85 percent open space allows an increase to 0.070 units per acre. Similarly, a one acre lot with a septic system and public water and 90 percent open space equates to the same 0.150 units per acre. Therefore, clustered residential development may be allowed with a corresponding high open space tip rural, oven cEla~oateE; 21 Generally, the power to zone may only be exercised within the municipality. "The governing body of a municipality may divide the municipality into districts of a number, shape, and size the governing body considers best for carrying out this subchapter." § 211.005(a), TLGC (emphasis added). However, one way to enforce zoning regulations in the ETJ is to enter into a development agreement with the affected landowner pursuant to Subchapter G of Chapter 212 of the Texas Loca] Government Code. See § 212.172(b), TLGC. Draft 05/15/07 Page 14 of 23 recluirenurnt h> preserve the agriculhu-al character. Slightly higher levels of density nu~y also be permitted h> allow more development value without compromising the character of pattern of peripheral development. The most viable means of growth management for the City, given the limitations of State law, is to annex the maximum allowable 30 percent of its land area, followed by annexations of the maximum allu~ved 10 percent each year until the incorporated area encompasses land sufficient to support 30 to 50 years of growth, all areas of strategic interest, and the defined lung-term growth buundaiy. `I'bis strategy, however, requires the City to establish that there are areas within the corporate limits that have similar "topography, land use, and population density" to those being annexed for which there are minimal facilities and services being provided. If this is the case, a uniform level of municipal service is not mandated making large-scale annexation more feasible. If this cannot be established, a service plan must be prepared and robust cost-benefit analysis conducted to determine the feasibility of the annexations. Then, a policy decision would be necessary to consider the value of annexation and growth control versus the added cost for providing the state mandated services. "Coning Ordinance Simplification and Development Streamlining If the City is to successfully entice development to occur within the Cit}> limits rather than the ETJ, its development processes and timing of approvals must not be a constraint. Since a plat is the only required approval for development (of less than five acre lots) in the ETJ, the complexity of the process and length of time hi gain approval within the City may outweigh the benefits of in-City development (public utilities, improved emergency response times, increased convenience, zoning amtrols, etc.). -therefore, although the City's current process is not atypical, there are significant improvenunts to be made, of which the more significant and relevant include the following: + First and foremost, there are opportunities to reduce the number of zoning districts. T11e structure of the current districts requires a zone change should a property owner decide to development more than one use or to change the use. At the same time, use-based districts offer no assurance of the character of compatibility of abutting developments. + The use-based districts may be consolidated into fewer districts that are based on the intended character of the district. For residential districts, character is defined by the allowable density and required open space ratio, as well as other performance standards relating to the floor area ratio (FAR), landscaping, etc. The character of non-residential districts is defined by the use intensity (measured by FAR) and a landscape surface ratio, along with standards relating to building scale, lighting, signage, and other design requirements. As displayed in Figure 3, Illustrative District Classification, within each district is allowed a range of development options, each with corresponding standards to retain the intended character. The benefits of this approach include: - Ability to determine the character of fuhire development. - Increased certainty in the development process and assurance of outcomes. - Improved compatibility within and between districts. - Multiple development options within each district adding flexibility while preserving development character. - Fewer zoning map amendments. - Ability to preserve resources while achieving an equivalent or higher density. - Ability to better plan for infrastructureveeds. - Allowance for mixed use without a separate Planned Development District zoning process. Draft 05/15/07 Page 15 of 23 Dl trl t d D l t Mi Densi R i d Mi i Slt s c an eve opmen Typa n. OSR Max- Gross N~' equ re Utilitles n mum e Area Suburban Sin le-Famil 0.10 1.92 1.92 ublic 15,000 sf Cluster 0.30 2.17 2.17 public 5 ac P-anned 0.85 2.25 3.50 ublic 15 ac. Auto-Urban (AU} Sin le-Family 0.10 2.61 2.90 public 20,000 sf. Cluster 0.30 3.23 5.54 ublic 10,000 sf. Planned 0.35 4.37 7.50 ublic 10,000 sf. ._ Urtian • Sin le-Famil 0.10 3.27 3.64 ublic 15,000 sf. Cluster 1 0.25 4.15 5.54 public 8,000 sf. Planned 0.35 5.56 8.50 public 6,000 sf. ~~~~~~~eicprnent b~ ~ /; :~ o` inerF_~r7s~ d Cic~nsity while r toinlnc~ f ~ ~:~rrer~t c;(, -n space:. i_ ii.~,in~,,:~.,nu; ~~-i:,u,.«~'~,:~ilii U;~~'u',~ i irn~~.~~.. The abu~~e approach incorporates planned development as an option that is permitted b}~ right, subject to applicable standards. Dcnsih• bonuses arc used as an incentive fur enann~a~in~ this t~~pc of development, offering more density in exchange for increased open space and amenities. Therefore, the approval process is streamlined by avoiding the timely zoning map amendment process. An approach that may help to manage the pattern of growth is allowing development to occur only as adequate facilities and services are available. This requires other growth management provisions though, to determine where and when infrastructure will be provided. If the City commits to provide sewer service with an expanded CCN and water is readily available through other sources, then the question of adequate public facility availability is a moot point. If however, facilities are requested outside of the City's designated growth area, this mechanism may be effective if there is not other means of acquiring the requisite infrastructure. Also known as concurrency requirements, essentially this mechanism ensures that infrastructure is existing or readily -and efficiently -available prior to or concurrent Adequg ' ' ~ublfc fete}flti~s r ui;ements wau[d essentially with development. Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances sta~~.,t(~e s,c~al~ of c€~lQfar~@nt ~ot1GWl'~"~€?t Wit11 tl~i~ (APFOs) require applicants for new development to . ;: roqu'fS('tE:y c;apraGtly lr'r~~FOV~~ta~ri~~: ?hi~~t t_,e ap~~~d'n " demonstrate that facilities and services will be available to roads; ~ltillt}Frs, and sch~~ols; c~mon~ chtfi®rs, serve the project at the time the development is available Draft 05/15/07 Page 16 of 23 Fur occupancy. Utilising this system, the City is able to adept level-uf-scrviu~ standards, which can be used as criterion Fur judging amfurnuurce with the subdivision regulations. The provisions of State law' allow the City to condition property development for a portion of the infrastrtrchrre costs, which supports this method. As an alternative, higher impact Fees and/or increased developer participation in infrastructure constriction and financing may be necessary to shorten development timeframes. 't'his approach is practical in that it tics development to the capacity of the infrastructure systems to support it. "I'he value of this approach is its ability to establish a direct, causal link between the provision of public facilities and the public health, safety, and ~velfare.'fhe L;eneral components include: I. Determining a service threshold at which demand exceeds the desired capacity of public facilities, whether it is water and wastewater systems, roadways, parks, or schools. Generally, the difference between the established threshold and the existing level of service is the amount available for development. ?. Determining if there are projects that will be exempted or receive flexibility in meeting the threshold requirements by way of achieving other community objectives, such as infill development, mixed use, aFfordable housing, etc. 3. Determining the measures to remedy situations when the threshold is exceeded, including delay of development until such time as the project no longer exceeds the threshold, reducing the project's impact to the point that it meets requirements, or mitigating the impact of the project by upgrading public facilities or infrastructure. Reserving the anunmt of opacity projected fur a development during the time behveen approval of project and its completion, ~~~hich counts against t}~~e total capacity of public facilities in Future applications for de~~clupment. An rxpiration date fur approved projects may be nrcr~~~ir_v su a~ nut to unnecessarily burden or deny other projects. Provisions related to adequate public facilities could be added to the subdivision regulations. For instance, the following - or similar -language could be used: "The City does not direct! y regulate the use; density, or intensity of development in the ETJ. However, neither subdivision plat nor development plat approval shall be granted for property located in the ETJ unless all of the following are demonstrated: 1. The water service to or zuitllin the development is sufficient to provide necessary potable water acrd sufficient volume and pressure for fire flows to an appropriate number of appropriately spaced fire hydrants that are necessary to protect the development. 2. The wastewater service to or within the development is sufficient to protect the health of the residents or the general public. 3. The proposed subdivision plat or development plat has no material potential to cause contamination of a municipal water supply that the City has jurisdiction to protect. " Market Performance Standards This approach is an alternative to an APFO, which better addresses the conflict between property rights and the City's obligation to provide infrastructure and services in a fiscally responsible manner. It accomplishes the same things as performance standards in terms of added flexibility and clustering, but it alters the approach to density and infrastructure level of service. u Section 212.904, Apportionment of Municipal Infrastructure Costs Draft 05/15/07 Page 17 of 23 Nlany argue that the market is lhr best way to regulate devclupnunt. 'I-his has merit only when all elements arc properly priced in the market. A problem as it relates to inh•ash-uclure, though, is that support of development by adequate roads, police and fire services, schools, and other public services is nut part of the market equation. Fur example, road improvement and long-term maintenance are nut considered in a real estate transaction. A person who purchases a home on a gravel road does not necessarily pay less fur the home. Therefore, when the road requires maintenance it becomes the City's obligation to make the improvements. Except for the most expensive housing, the tax revenue from residential development is insufficient to cover the requisite costly infrash•ucture improvements and servicr expansion. A market performance ordinance addresses the capacity of infrastruchire. Where growth occurs roads will eventually require widening or surface improvements as the traffic volumes exceed the road capacity. Therefore, market performance ordinances create what is known as traffic-sheds for unimproved and under-improved roads. Since the traffic volumes and capacity of the road may be known, there may be an allotment of dwelling traits per acre based upon a proportionate share of the road capacity. Therefore, the capacity is spread evenly across all properties ii1 the traffic-shed rather than on a First-come-first-serve basis as in the APFO approach. Each landu~~•ner has the right to use their proportionate sham of the available road capacit~~. I~oaiis ~~ ith ~~en~ lu~~• capacity' or ~~•herc~ thrrr is a very large area within the traffic-shed result in lower densities. The difference is that the market offers the landowner a range of options not c'~~~>v~~c~Ui<_ ci~:nsi~:~~~ i;ase~~ upon a available under other types of ordinances, including the following: The allowable density may be altered by improving the road as part of the development cost. If a few hundred feet of improvements are needed to improve capacity, the improvements will likely be funded. If there is a long distance that must be improved it is unlikely that it will be funded, meaning that the development pattern occurs in a more contiguous -rather than leapfrog -manner. • Anew road may be constructed to create a new traffic-shed, which may reduce the size of the traffic- shed allowing increased density. This option is available only where there is direct access to an improved collector or arterial roadway. • Development may occur in phases reserving the balance of land for subsequent phases as additional capacity becomes available upon improvement of the road. • Development may occur at the permitted density with large acreages. If the acreages are of sufficient size and have proper frontage, there may be added development potential upon improvement of the road. • There may be a transfer of development rights to other property. Upon improvement of the road the agricultural area may receive additional density allowing development at that time. • A landowner or group of landowners could form an improvement district to pay for road improvements, subject to City standards and criteria. Draft 05/15/07 Page 18 of 23 Since State law spcrifically indicates that "a numicipality shill nut regulate ... (~) the number of residential units that can be built per acre of land",'` there would have h> be a legal basis established fur the ordinance based on the City's jurisdiction to "promote the health, safe morals, or general welfare of the municipality and the safe, order) and healthful development of the municipality."'~~ Tpble 2, Impact Eees Purpose: To allocate the costs of providing additional infrastructure to serve new development to that new development. Strengths: Fair share fee allocation; cash payments help avoid potentially dangerous piecemeal improvements to dedicated rights-of-way. Limitations: No street impact fees may be charged in the ETJ (where formerly rural roads are likely to be more easily overwhelmed by new development). hnpact fees are charged to new development for the construction of new infrastructure that is needed to serve the development. The}~ arc related to special assessments, except that: (1) they arr charged to new development upon approval rather than to all owners within a particular district; and (2) they may only be charged for the fair share of infrastruchire required as a result of the new development. Provided in ~,ii,4~ :, .iral>..,: 1:.~ ;, is a summary of their purpose, strengths, and limitations. Impact fees facilitate a planned, coordinated approach to providing infrastructure. In Texas, impact fees may be used to fund water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities; wastewater collection and treatment facilities; storm water, drainage, and flood control facilities; and roadway facilities that are needed to serve new development according to a capital improvements plan (including planning, engineering, land acquisition, and consh•uction).'' "I-hey cannot be used to fund: facilities that are not in the capital improvements plan; Repairs, operation, or maintenance of existing facilities; Upgrades to existing facilities to meet new standards; Upgrades to existing facilities to better serve existing development; + Operating costs of the local government; and • Payments on debt that is not related to expenditures that may be paid by impact fees. Impact fees must be supported by technical analysis of qualified professionals, set out in a capital improvements plan. The plan must: • Describe existing capital improvements and projected costs to meet existing needs (including stricter safety, efficiency, environmental, or regulatory standards, if applicable); • Analyze the total capacity, the level of current usage, and commitments for usage of capacity of the existing capital improvements; • Describe the capital improvements (including costs) that are necessitated by and attributable to new development based on the approved land use assumptions; • Provide a definitive table that relates capital improvements costs to "service units" that will serve as the basis for impact fees; ~ Section 212.003, Extension of Rules of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, Texas Local Government Code 24 Section 212.002, Rules, Texas Local Government Code zs Impact fees for roadway facilities may not be charged in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. See § 395.011(b), TLGC. Draft 05/15/07 Page 19 of 23 Listimate the total number of prujechxl service units necessitated by Anil attributable to new development within the service area, based un the approved land use assumptions and caiculatcd in accordance with generally accepted engineering or planning criteria; and - Project the demand for capital improvements required by new service units, over a reasonable period of time ttp to 10 years. Impact fees use the same theomtical basis as adequate public facilities ordinances. Essentially, the City would establish the capacity of all applicable facilities and the required standard; for example, the level of service (I_,OS) for roads ur number of acres of parks per one thousand persons. The impact fre is then established to generate the funds needed to provide the desired level of service for all facilities. Rather than exhausting capacity, impact fees retluire payment for a proportionate share of the burden created. Since the City has impact fees for some defined service areas,26 this instrument could be expanded to encompass other areas of the City and ETJ, as allowed by State law. Impact fees may be particularly appropriate for portions of the City's defined growth area for which there are no plans for infrastructure improvements within the five-year capital improvement program. This would essentially allow development to occur consistent with the growth plan, but without committing the City to prematurely construct such facilities and services. Specific criteria mast be established as to the appropriateness of and under what circumstances the City may consider the use of impact fees to allow development to occur - or not occur - in areas outside of the defined growth area(s). This would be an essential prerequisite for the development of this program to ensure that the integrih~ of the City's growth strategy may be upheld. Conservation easements cover a broad range of purposes, whether it is for wildlife or resource management, scenic preservation, or to limit the use of land. A few communities are using conservation easements to control their growth and preserve their agricultural areas, such as Solebury Township in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. With a conservation easement, the landowner continues to own the land and is responsible to maintain it. The land remains on the tax roles although there may be significant tax advantages to the landowner for the dedication of an easement, which also lowers the cost of acquisition. An agricultural easement could allow the landowner the right to continue to farm the land and keep their home and buildings. It could also allow some additional development. An important aspect of this concept is its flexibility. It can identify a variety of restrictions and development options that may be tailored to the needs of the landowner and the City as the agency accepting the conservation easement. This provides an opportunity to tailor the acquisition to meet landowner concerns and reduce the cost of the easement. This instrument is most appropriate for and may best be used to supplement a host of other management techniques, rather than as an independent method of conserving resources and open space. For instance, there may be attractive incentives integrated into the zoning ordinance whereby density bonuses are offered in exchange for preservation of open space. This tool can and is being used effectively in some jurisdictions. ze Chapter 15, Impact Fees Draft 05/15/07 Page 20 of 23 Development agreements are written contracts that can be used for a wide variety of purposes, including to impose land use and environmental controls (planning authority, existing zoning regulations, new land development regulations, or specific uses and development, and environmental regulations) over property in the ETJ in exchange for the provision of infrastructure and public services (e. Q., streets; drainage; and ~.vater, wastewater, and other utilities), and/or a guarantee to annex the property (an agreed upon terms), or not to annex the property for a period of not more than 15 years. Development agrrc~nu~nts run with the land, but do not binii end-buyers of fully developed lots, except ~~~ith respect to land use and development regulations that apply to the lots. I'ruvided in ti~;r~~~~r~iu~~i~~., is a summary of their purpose, strengths, and limitations. Development agreements are contracts, and as such, require Table 3, C3evel opment Agreerrtents ,,. negotiation and execution by the City and developer. In many cases there is little incentive for the developer to Inter into a Purpose: Allow municipalities and , development agreement because the City has relatively little developers within the ETJ to negotiate and agree to terms leverage. For example: regarding annexation, land ~ The City may not condition the provision of municipal use controls, Infrastructure and utilities on the execution of a development agreement.'' utilities. No levera e is created b im act fees for roadwa facilities g y p y Strengths: Allows municipalities to because such tees "may not be enacted or imposed in the exercise some control over the use, character and quality of extraterritorial jurisdiction." "Chis is apparently su even if the development within the the roadway facilities are provided by development ETJ, provided that the agreement. landowner consents. Developers have several alternatives to provide for Limitations: Many limitations reduce the leverage of the municipality to infrastructure and utilities, such as a petition for the encourage developers to creation of a political subdivision (as described below). The enter into a development City may place only very limited conditions on the agreement. formation of the political subdivision.'-s This is not to say however, that the City has no leverage. Indeed, cooperation may bring mutual advantages to the City and developer, especially if the City is able to provide timely infrastructure and services on reasonable terms. Since the City may enter into development agreements with landowners in the ETJ29 this may offer an opportunity for providing services in exchange for abiding by the City's development regulations and meeting other community objectives, e.g. resource protection, etc. Improvement Districts Improvement districts may be created to fund infrastructure improvements by special assessment against the property owners who principally benefit from them in fair proportion to the level of their benefit. Improvement districts are run by the governmental unit that creates them, in this case, the City. They have the power to impose a special assessment, but not to tax. Provided in Table 4, Improvement Districts, is a summary of their purpose, strengths, and limitations. ~ "A municipality may not require [a development] agreement ... as a condition for providing water, sewer, electricity, gas, or other utility service from a municipally owned or municipally operated utility that provides any of those services." § 212.174, TLGC. ~ The conditions do not involve land use controls or annexation. z9 Development agreements are authorized by Subchapter G of Chapter 212, Texas Local Government Code. Draft 05/15/07 Page 21 of 23 Public improvements that nu~y be horded by an improvement district include: I. landscaping; 2. erection of fountains, distinctive lighting, and signs; Tat~le ~1, iri~C~~r~wen~leitt t)istric;ts 3. acquiring, a>nstructmg, rmprovrng, wtdenmg, narrowing, closing, or rerouting of sidewalks or of streets, any other roadways, or their rights-of-way; ~1. construction or improvement of pedestrian malls; 5. acquisition and installation of pieces of art; (~. acquisition, cunsh•uction, ur improvenx~nt of libraries; 7. acquisition, construction, or improvement of off-street parking facilities; 8. acquisition, construction, improvement, or rerouting of mass transportation facilities; 9, acquisition, construction, or improvement of water, wastewater, or drainage facilities or improvements; 10. the establishment or improvement of parks; 11. projects similar to those listed in 1 through 10 above; '+ ~ Purpose: To fund public Improvements and programs by assessing those landowners who benefit from them. Strengths: Those who pay special assessments are those who directly benefit from the improvements funded by them; improvement districts are administered by the governmental unit that formed them. Limitations: Potentially lengthy process for improvement district formation. 12. acquisition, by purchase or otherwise, of real property in connection with an authorized improvement; 13. special supplemental services for improvement and promotion of the district, including services relating to advertising, promotion, health and sanitation, water and ~~~aste~~•ater, public safety, security, business recruitment, development, rrcreatiun, and cultural enhancement; and I-1. p~~~ment of expenses incurred in the est~~hlishment, ~iiiminishation, and operati~~n of the district. And, in the case of home rule municipalities like College Station: 15. levying, straightening, widening, enclosing, or otherwise improving a river, creek, bayou, stream, other body of water, street, or alley; [and] 16. draining, grading, filling, and otherwise protecting and improving the territory within the municipality's limits. The City may create an improvement district within its corporate limits or ETJ, after a process in which: • A petition is initiated by the affected landowners or the local government; • One or more public hearings are held regarding: the advisability of the improvement; the nature of the improvement; the estimated cost of the improvement; the boundaries of the public improvement district; the method of assessment; and the apportionment of costs between the district and the municipality or county as a whole; • The local government issues an improvement order (by majority vote); and • Notice of the order is published ~ An ongoing service plan must be approved by the City. The plan "must cover a period of at least five years and must also define the annual indebtedness and the projected costs for improvements." The ~ The local government may also undertake a feasibility study and appoint an advisory committee with regard to the formation of the improvement district. See §§ 372.007 and 372.008, TLGC. Draft 05/15/07 Page 22 of 23 service plan must include an assessnurnt plan" and must "bc reviewed and updated annually (ur the purpose uF determining the annual budget fur improvements.,, Use of this instrument may be feasible and wan•anted as a means for meeting the infrastructure needs within the City's "growth area(s)" for which the City is not yet prepared to commit capital resources. This may include outlying portions of the "gro~~~th area(s)" where near-term infrastruchn•e provision and service expansion is not yet feasible. Interlocal cooperation contracts are authorized by Chapter 791, Texas Government Code (TGC). The purpose of the interlocal cooperation contract is to: "increase the efficiency and effectiveness of local governments by authorizing them to contract, to the greatest possible extent, with one another and with agencies of the state." Provided in "1'alil~~ ~, Int~~rlorai (:nol~er~~ti+~ra C'c~ntracts, is a summary of their purpose, strengths, and limitations. Chapter 791 provides broad authority for municipalities to contract with each other, with cotmties, with special districts and political subdivisions, with federally recognized tribal governments that are located in the state of Texas, and iu~rrL :, i~~s:~iocut L.i~~:.Ncruti;rr ~..:vrt~~:~Lis with state agencies to provide "governmental function[s] or Purpose: To increase the efficiency of local governments by enhancing cooperation among them. Strengths: High degree of flexibility to contract in order to provide a wide variety of governmental services. Limitations: Interlocal cooperation contracts facilitate the use of other growth management tools, therefore their effectiveness depends largely upon how well they are implemented and what they .provide for. service[s] that each party to the contract is authorized to perform individually." Such functions and services include: "Functions normally associated with the routine operation of govermnent, including tax assessment and collection, personnel services, purchasing, records management services, data processing, warelwusing, cyuipment repair, and printing." "Police protection and detention services; Fire protection; .streets, roads, and drainage; .public health and welfare; ...parks and recreation; ...library and museum services; ...records center services; ...waste disposal; ...planning; ...engineering; ...administrative functions; ...public funds investment; ...comprehensive health care and hospital services; or other governmental functions in which the contracting parties are mutually interested." • Water supply and wastewater treatment, various types of correctional and criminal justice facilities, transportation infrastructure, and purchasing contracts.sz Growth management is most effective when approached from several levels of government. Therefore, interlocal cooperation contracts are advised between the City, Brazos County, as well as each of the applicable water control and improvement districts (WCIDs). STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS To be completed... 3' City and County owned property is not exempt from assessment. See §§ 372.014,'IT.GC. sz Sections 791.021 et seq., TGC set out additional substantive and procedural requirements for these types of agreements. Draft 05/15/07 Page 23 of 23 • May 29, 2007 Workshop Agenda East College Station Transportation Study To: Glenn Brown, City Manager From: Mark Smith, Director of Public Works Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the East College Station Transportation Study in joint session with the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Parks Board. Recommendation(s): Provide direction to the consultant and City staff. Summary: On January 11, 2007, Council approved a contract hiring Kimley-Horn and Associates to conduct a transportation study of the east side of College Station. Since that time, the consultant and city staff have hosted two public meetings to gather public input and the consultant has studied the transportation issues and made recommendations to improve the transportation system in east College Station. The East College Station Transportation Committee has reviewed the recommendations and has recommended that following this council update, the City of College Station host a public meeting where these recommendations can be presented to the public and their questions and comments can be addressed. It is anticipated that following this meeting, the final recommendation would be presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City • Council for final action. Budget & Financial Summary: N/A Attachments: 1. Draft East College Station Transportation Study Report • 27 • ~3 ~'~~ S` _` ~, ~~=> i .. ,. ~ np ° e ~ ~"A,Sa g~~, l'. _ , ,~. ~ - ~~. ~.fi,~ ~~~. .,., .tip 'x b ..-.YW 1 '~~ ~~~~ ~ ~'.., ^ ~ ^ lGmley-Hwn ~ and Associates, Inc. • • Acknowledgements ~~Gre ~~-cncld like to thank the mam- citizens and ~~c~lunteers that tcx~l< time rn~t c~~f their hus~~ schedules tc~ help the (;it~~ cif Cc~llc~e Station tlnd a long-tcrn~ sustainahlc solution tc~ the traffic issues fc>r the l~:astside of G~llc~;c Station. In particular we ~~-oulcl like to thank the :\d~~isor~~ Conu~aittcc ~~lcmbcrs: • Michael Park,.r, Assistant Director B i~COG • I~ittrla La.S'art, Director BCS'~~IPO • Dennis Christianson P.E., Director of TI7, Texas Transportation In.rtitrrte • ~Bt~~an IE'IOOd P.E., Distrzct Err~ineer T.~DOT Br7~nn • ]ohu Hrpf~, C'bairi~ian TizJtr.ipnr7ation Coiratirttee crud Cornn~il Pc-rrou, Cit}~ of CollE,;e .S'tation • Lpnu _llcl/Gnne~p, Corntci/ Person, C.~it~~ o% Co/%~e .S't~rtioa • Kon Ga}~, Connci/ Ferran, Cit}~ of C.'o/le,e ,S'tation • Charlotte Slack, Nei~hliorhood Representative • BillStock--.ton P.L., i\'ei~hhorL~oorl Repre.rentatit~e • liar Khoiin-, ~\'ei~hborl,ood Krpre~~entatit~e • C.%rn~k. l.lle~on, Mere%un~nt IZe~ie.centutrre C, "Never underestimate the power of a small group of dedicated people to change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead • G ® Kimley~Hom • Table of Contents Actin o n Icdgerne! t is Table of Contents List of Tables and Figures Introduction Study Purpose Report Outline The Planning Process Study Goals and Objectives Scenario Planning Forming the Preferred Scenario _ Eastside Plan Recommendations • • Goal Number One: L~crcase the compatibility bet~~cen existing and planned land uses and the transportation system. .:. . i !.' ~ ~f .. 2 ,1 5 5 6 7 7 7 11 12 12 12 13 Recommendation #1-Incorporate New Street Standards Reconunendauon #2 - Develop a Context Sensitive Design Process Goal Number T~vo: To preserve mobility without negatively impacting existing neighborhoods with additional traffic. 14 Reconunendation #3 -Adopt the Recommended East College Station Thoroughfare Plan 14 Goal Number Three: To plan for a multimodal transportation system that addresses the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders. 19 Recommendation #4 -Adopt the proposed East College Station Hike/Bike Plan as part of the Parks Master Plan. 19 Goal Number Four: To put in place an implementation plan that is phased in a manner to address mobility needs as land development occurs. 20 Goal Number Five: To generate a plan that is both affordable and achievable. 21 Appendix A: Technical Process Basic Modeling Theory 2007 Model Assumptions 2030 (Build-out) Model Assumptions 22 22 24 24 Four-Step Modeling Process 25 Trip Generation 25 Trip Distribution 31 Modal Split 32 ~ Kimley-Hom ~ ~~ atKl Associates, Inc. 30 • • TrafFc Assi~rnmcnt Model Calibruiun and Validation Evaluating the Thoroughfare Scenarios Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Vehic/e Hottrs of Travel (VHT) Dcla~- (VND) _ __ Traffic Modeling Findings - 3? 33 36 36 36 36 37 Appendix B -Public Meeting Summaries 38 Public Meeting 1 38 Workshop ResWts 39 Public Meeting 2 40 lY/orkshop 12esults __ 40 Appendix C -Context Sensitive Design Street Realms -; ~-. ,: . ,, ~ 42 42 New Street Standards for College Station Commercial Streets Residential Streets Industrial Streets Industrial Streets Mired Use Streets 45 46 =~(i -- --- - _ _ 47 48 ~ Kimley~Horn ~ __ _ ~a ~~, inc, 31 44 3 • • ~J Planning Process 7 irhle l: Tin/%ir 1 'oliu~ie.r a/~ Rem,~uurnderl Plnrr 7 r,blr '. l,urlrnnvNnlion I'lrrrr - ------ - - -- 7~~,ble ~: Plnrari,{;~ (.art f : ~tr,inrte .~=-, `•• i - ... f 17 -- --- ------- - ?0 ?? f ~ig{„a- /: 11u.rt Collrge ,S7~rtio,r s~nrrlJ~ 1 I rt+u .llul~ S F~i~ure Z.• ,S'kelch R~ra"t Outlare 6 figure 3: Process Flow lliagrnm 6 Fig{ue 4: P/aurrlug Procerr Diagram 7 Figure 5: Thorn{rgh~arz Plan Scenario 8 f i,ror (: Couinrro,itp C:orntrls .Srerrnio --- _ - - --___- -_ 10 f •~arr 7: f Ipbrirl.S're,rurio 10 _-- f ~{~nrr b: 1'nbG~ .S,~r,r~nro Pre/r~rrua" _ I l I~iguri~J: CoonuariuL-lrterial 1~egrue 10: Conu~{rrcial Collector 12 Fi;nrr- 11: Rerirlentrrr/:"1,te,ru/ I'~wn~ 12: fZrJideutiul Collr~hir 13 I ~wni• 1 ~: Irrrln.;hi~rl.S7reet _ l 'i~m'r l -l:.llr.~'rrl l ~r .1 /r~rrl - , ----------__...--- ~---_ I ~ -- - I 'r~la'r l >: 1.,u! C / llr~r .Sl,rhna I Ir~r ou hj~ur 1'l n l~S i'l~lll'r l~: f Irks' NIlrl I)/,~"r iV rCri/l,///Nlrldll~~rlr 19 Technical Process (Appendix A) Tab/e ,= -1: Demogrzrpbic comrarrso,r 30 7i,b/e a-2: I "~,/idotion tab/e fa•2007.11ode/ 33 7~nb/e ~l-3: .1tr,rlp; Ireu.Ilobi/itp.Sunuuurp Cbu,t 37 Tab/e A-4: Regiam/;llobilih~ ,Snn„na,~~ Ghurt 37 FrgureA-1: I-louseholds zoo? for the study area 23 Figure A-2: Households 2007 for the study area 25 Figure A-3: Households 2030 for the rtudy ana 26 Figure Ate: Population Density 2007 far the study area 27 Figure A-S: Population Density 2030 for the study area 28 Figure A-6: Emp/oyment 2007 for the study area 29 .Figure A-7: Employment 2030 for the study area 30 Figure A-8: Trip Patterns 2007 from the study area 31 Figure A-9: 2007 Network oath number of lanes 32 Figure A-10: 2007 Existing Traf j'ic County 34 Figure A-11: 2007 Mode! Traffic Volumes with percentage difference 35 Technical Process (Appendix B) Figure B-1: Public Issues Map 39 Figure B-2: Public Thoroughfare Disagree 39 ' ~ KimleyHom ~ _-_- ar~J fetes, inc. 32 4 List of Tables and Figures • Introduction ... y s , ~ n;~~ The Eastside of College Station is facing ever-increasing traffic demands with backups on State Highway 6 (SH 6) near Rock Prairie Road and also incremental increases along all cif SH 6 and most major arterials. Coupled ~~~ith ne~c commercial /retail development proposals near R~cl< Prairie Road and SI 16, the traftlc pressures are only going to increase. Neighborhood associations an the Eastside fear that the additional h~affic demands arc g~~ing eo spill o~•er onto their ncighh~,rh~x~d streets thereb~~ affecting their yualit~ of lift:. "1"hest challenges ar~~ not unique to (:allege Station; mane communities ehroughaut the country' arc Facing similar issues. In response to these pressing issues the City of College Station, City Council, and staff realized that the eminent development pressures at Rock Prairie and SH 6 would in time replicate along the entire SH 6 corridor. The concept of an area-wide transportation study was developed and soon after, the study area emerged (see Figure 1). The stud- area is bounded b~~: SI-1 6 an the ~~~est, Carter Creeh on the cast, SII 30 (IIar~~c}~ Road) on the north, and r11um Creel: (including the SI-f 6 ~ Nantucket lnterchange) on the south side. The ultimate goal of this Fast College Station transport orderly wav as to avoid wondering if the transportation system will handle the added trafllc. To accomplish this goal the Cit}~ and their consultants evaluated the existing thoroughfare plan, based on the implementation of the props>srd ]and use Klan. In addition to the technical anal~~~is of the traft7c demands, an etitensive public outreach process was conducted to better understand the issues at hand and begin to develop consensus on a preferred plan. The recommendations contained herein will guide the City into the future and provide clear priorities to decision makers for funding of the needed improvements. ation study is to plan for the build-out of this area in an Y F __ a ,, ~; ~. , a ,'~~ ~~ ~' ~ a:-~ x P av e 4p ,v _,,. _ _ l.- _ o ` a ~, -' "w~ , Figure 1: East College Station Study Area Map r~ Study Purpose To help guide the study, the City of College Station formed an Advisory Committee to oversee the staff and consultants. This committee is responsible for ensuring all the residents are properly represented. More specifically, the purpose of the study is to enhance the existing City of College Station Thoroughfare Plan. This will be achieved by: 1. Generating study goals and objectives from the Advisory Committee and citizens. 2. Creating two thoroughfare plan scenarios based upon Advisory Committee and citizen input. 3. Testing these two scenario plans against the currently adopted thoroughfare plan and, in the end, create a preferred thoroughfare plan that best meets the goals and objectives of the study. ®/ KimleyHom ~ C _ 7 and Associates; Inc. 33 5 • Report Outline In the earh~ phases of this stud~~ the team envisioned a process that would have an intense amount of public input ~~-hilc at the same time running a technical process that was objecti~-e and dcf~nsibalc. Figure 2 is an actual lill~lge ~"CtiLllUng ta'Om an eal'i~' brainstorming session that guided this process to the end. . The Planning Process ds~ joc-rr~ed orr zrarfer~taadrug nrrd ~r~ldre~.nrrg tGe concerns and needs of all parties inflz>enced by transpo~7ation decisions in the star(}~ crz-ea. There~ozz~, public pmticipatiozt is a parzrarount component of the p/~rru-ring process (nnd is discussed rn detail in the~allorr~ing section). The Technical Process is focused on having ~~stematic methods to determine the future traffic demands. The technical analysis will be completed for both the current and build-out conditions based on the existing and proposed comprehensive land use plan of the City of College Station. Many of the technical findings will be screened through the Planning Pzncess. The technical process is discussed in grater detail in Appendix A Figure 2: Sketch Report Outline ~!'~ _ E --~ Figure 3: Process Flow Diagram The ultimate goal of these two processes is to have a plan that is both technically sound and community based. The following section goes into much more detail on the Planning Process and begins to unfold all the recommendations for the study area. • ^-.,i ~ l . _~ andl~yASSOCiates, InC. 34 6 • • The Planning Process _- ~ .- The planning process used for this study was based on facilitation the participation of the community, private developers, and agency representatives. A~~ith quality of life issues, dc~~clopers on hold, and cite leaders scarchinb for solutions, de~~eloping consensus on what needs to he done can onh~ he done throcigh an extensive oun~each effort. In the end, dc~~cl~>ping the solution is gr>ing t~~ result in a comhr~nnisc h~~ all in~~ol~-ed tier the good of the comnnmit~~ as ~~-hole. ,,;r~~k: ,~ ~.:, -;~ > Pori The outreach was conducted through a series of advisory Committee, Public, and City Staff meetings. Appendix B provides a summary of the two Public Meetings. This section will further discuss goals and scenario planning, and finally show the preferred plan. - '._ Study Goals and Objectives r1n advisoi-~~ Committee meeting was held on February 27, 2007, in which members established study goals and ~>bjecti~~cs. s -=s Figure ~: Planning Process Diagram advisory Committee goals and objectives for the Fast College Station plan include: 1. Increasing compatibility- between existing and planned land uses and the transportation system. 2. Preserving mobility without negatively impacting existing neighborhoods with additional traffic. 3. Planning for a multimodal transportation system that addresses the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders. 4. Putting in place an implementation plan that is phased in a manner to address mobility needs as land development occurs. 5. Generating a plan that is both affordable and achievable. • Scenario Planning With the goals and objectives determined, the next step in the planning process is to devise alternative thoroughfare plans for the study area. A technique called "scenario planning" was used throughout the planning process. Think of the scenarios as if having your choice of multiple futures. Three different scenarios were developed for this study. The first scenario (Thoroughfare Plan) came from the current thoroughfare and land use plans. This scenario provided a benchmark for the other scenarios. Another scenario (Community Concept) was developed in workshops with the community, Advisory Committee, and consultant expertise. And yet another (Hybrid) was developed using a mixture of the Community Concepts and Thoroughfare Plan scenarios. The following pages illustrate maps of the scenarios and point out major attributes. ~-/'~ KimleyHom ~ [__~ and ASSOCiaies, (nc. 35 7 • . ~: i ~ .~ ~ ~, ~ u .___s , t.nti~uc:~~ii~~~lnri~,~ ~~ Y ~*~ ! .. , ,; ~ , :. ; , .... ~5~~ ~" ' ~" and AssociatPS Inc • Highest hours of delay and travel ~~ Most cul-~gestor'; ire {~UCkets `` Higher levels of traffic on _. collector streets Least relativ e construction cost ,,r ... ,..~.u,_., . ~~ ., ~~ .. ,.,. ~ .. _.. . '. t ~~ v ~: ~,~ \,, '~ , '~, ~ ._, Functional Classification Map ~•`•;. ~ ~^~ ___ - ~'~, (Thoroughfare Plan Scenorio) ~ ~ ~ ~~' `4 y`~ o Mixed Use ,~~`~~, ` , '~ ~`~. - Commercial Arterial ~ ~ ~~'~' -- Commercial Collector '~.` `~, ~''~ ;~~~~.• - Industrial Arterial '}_'_,,1 - Industrial Collector - r. ---~ Residential Arterial ~~~ -- Residential Collector 0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2 ~~ Miles ~\ Figure 5: Thoroughfare Plan Scenario • ~.J r ~~ and ~YAssociates, Inc. 36 $ • r ,_ i ~~ ""..t'~.""' ~ ' l~,,. ~„ Kimley-Horn Cn ut> C~ ri-i.r~ S i u'i~ ~~ ~ """ ~"~tt`I R to ~I - , . ~~ andAssociztes Inc. °3 ,r } ~' Functional Classif (Community Conce o Mixed Use ~- Commercia - Commercia - Industrial Ai - Industrial G Residential -° Residential i 0 0.25 p.5 1 Lot~vrc~st holvar~ :~f delay and travel • Least levels of traffic on collector streets • Highest relative construction cost ~~ ~, ®~~ Kimleyliom ~ ___.-- and Associates, Inc, 37 9 • • ® ~y "~ ----e~- ~ ...:, :'~:' / ~ .. .Kim ~ -Horn '' Cn r car l;rn t r< f S i ~ i .uv ...,~~~...~..-r='~~~~~~' ~ ~ ~~~' ~ ,, , : !d ~ /, and Associates, Inc. _ ,. _r, Functional Classic (Hybrid Sce~ ~ Mixed Use - Commerci< - Commercit - Industrial A -- Industrial C - Residentiol ---- Residential 0 0.25 0.5 1 .., ' s: 1 Ei~urc C: Community Concerts Scenario Mid-level hours of delay ;end trevel • Mid-levels of traffic on collector streets • Second lowest relative construction cost ~ ~ ~~~ Kar>d~A~ociates, Inc. 38 10 Figure 7: Hybrid Scenario The three scenarios found on the previous pages were presented at the final public meeting for input on the most preferred. Among attendees, ~i7'%, agreed that the 1l~~hrid scenario hest met thlll' LL'lllltipOrtatlOn 11(:CdS. 1-1(Jw~~'C C, lltt(:nd(:Cti and Ciro Staff did pro~-ide comments on all the sccnari~,s, ~~~hich ul~imatef~~ led to nc~ recommended thoroughfare plan toe this area (see Figure 15). The following section details many of the recommended thoroughfare changes and proeides the reasoning and justification for each project. t ~~ _k Scenario Preference ~o~~ A .fig ~,. .`.~23% OThoroughfare ©Community Concept OH Wid Scenarb 67 Figure 8: Public Scenario Preference • ~"'1 ~ /~ KimieyHom ~.,,,~ ~ __ _. arxl Assocaates, Inc. 39 11 Fornzrnb the Preferred Sccn~uio • Eastside Plan Recommendations The Following recommendations strive to exceed the goals and objectives stated in the previous section, including speciFc recommendations focused on polio- changes for the Cite of College Station. These final recommendations ~~~crc deri~~ed front conullunit~~ input and technical traftlc anal~~sis. In the end, to meet all the goals set forth h~~ the ;Advisor~~ Committee, see°cral critical re~-isions and or additions need to be trade to the the>r~nighfarc elan. 'hhc g~r,ils and subsequent rec~~mmendati~ms t~:und bcl~>~~~ detail ho~~~ each rec~xumcndatiun affects each respccti~~c goal. Goal Number One: Increase the compatibility between existing and planned land uses and the transportation system. Ccnnpatihilit~~ bet«-een land use and transportation should be ~~iewcd from two different perspectives. First, how well (if at all) does the system of planned streets handle the current and future traffic forecasted for the stud~~ areas Second, do the planned streets add sustainable value to the surrounding neighborhoods, and are those planned streets designed in such a «-a~~ as to blend into the surrounding land uses? Too often streets are dcsi~ned r~nh fc~r automobile uses and d~~ n~~t ena>uragc ~~r- acc~nnm<xlate pedestriiln and hic~~cle users. The re:commendati~~ns t~~ reach this ~.;~>al stri~~c to accomnu~datc thr future traffic demands ~~~hile at the same. time provide street designs that encourage the use of alternative modes of travel. Recommendation #1-Incorporate New Street Standards Incorporate the following new street t<~pes into the City's design standards. Then, based on the recommended thoroughfare plan, incorporate the associated elements (found below) into the design and ultimately the construction of the streets. The images below represent roadway defined by land use and functional class. From Commercial and Residential to Industrial and Mixed-Use streets for both arterial and collector classes, these streets will begin to add character and value to the areas. The thoroughfare map (Figure 15) connects each new roadway type to the existing and planned thoroughfares. .. r .: ~4~ e 1. PetloVlm PeaXn Tr I~Xralm Pedauian Rolm .I Im TeloblflgMaf~Wry fm shobeaOluwMro 130'IOZCwnmoOae 61xrt~ • Figure 9: Commercial Arterial ., ~ ,. Figure 9: Commercial Collector ~ f ~ Kimley~Hom ~ -. _-- and Associates, Inc. 40 12 • [7 Figure 1l: Residential Arterial • Pede trun ~ ~Aa~J'ien I P!tle5t~ ^ Prilm E Figure 13: Industrial Street • Recommendation #2 -Develop a Context ~ensitive Design Process Develop and adopt a Context Sensitive Design (LSD) process that is integrated into the Comprehensive Planning Process. The end result should be a vatiery of roadway cross-sections that are tied the surrounding lane uses. Appendix C illustrates the above cross sections in more detail. This process would allow for use of these types of cross sections Citywide. i _,. - .,. - n ~~ i Figure 10: Residential Collector a __ I ". _....._... a------ ____ __ Figure 14: Mixed Use Street Kimley~Horn i~ ._~ and Associates, Inc. 41 13 • ., .~ • ' f:. ` L Goal Number Two: To preserve mobility without negatively impacting existing neighborhoods with additional traffic. To accomplish this goal the street system must be designed to provide several options for travelers to get to their desll'ed destinations. Thls means ]ntrOdUGn~T nCw srYeel"S, 1'e-a~l~?Yl1n~r Or CStendin~r eSltitln~r StreCtti tc) ;, ,~ ;,, pro~~ide more than one option to satisf~~ the trip. In several cases, innoyati~'e techniques must be used to mitigate or calm traftlc flows on neighborhood streets. After rccei~~ing input from the ,April public meeeing, the rea_mu»a~ded tlu~r~,ughfare plan emh~xiies mangy' of the elements from the Cunuuunit~~ (:unecpts scenario and the 1{~~brid scenario. Recommendation #3 -Adopt the Recommended East College Station ThoroL~ghfire Plan Amend the City of College Station Thoroughfare Plan as depicted in Figure 15. The following is a bulleted list of recommendations that accompany the thoroughfare plan map: ~,',` ~~, ~ ~~-~ _ , • Appomattox Street. Extend Appomatto to Switch Station Road. This 'ti connection provides an alternative route for the neighborhood. There are ~,~ ;~~ r~ emergency vehicle concerns when there is only one way into a `" ;~r, '~ `~'"~`'~ neighborhood. To mitigate amp increased traffic to and from Harvey Road _ '~ . into the \~'indwood neighborhood, a raised median is recommended at the ~,~~p~~,'•~_.'` intersection of flarve~~ and ~lppomattos to dem- left-in or left-out access. The traftlc anal xis performed in this area sho~~~s that the median barrier ~~~~~uld limit n~afric to its current traftic tlo~~- and eliminate an~~ cur-thr~~ugh traffic c~~nccrns. New SH 6 Backage Road from south of Rock Prairie Road to Emerald Parkway. This new two-way street would provide north-south mobility without haying to access d1e frontage roads and a-turn. ~A'hile this street many not be feasible to construct due to existing commercial development (near Rock Prairie and an existing church north of A~'oodcreek); however, this alignment should remain on the plan in the event that redevelopment occurs. It is also recommended that a detailed alignment study be conducted to investigate the true feasibility of building this road. The traffic analysis for the thoroughfare plan was performed with and without this alignment and the subsequent neighborhood impacts to Foxfire and Stonebrook were less than 200 vehicles per day. • Barron Road Extension from SH 6 to Bird Pond. With a new interchanage at SH 6 and connecting Barron to Bird Pond, this four-lane alignment would allow for increased east-west mobility, while at the same time providing excellect commercial access. Consideration of flood plain issues should be accounted for when developing final alignemnts. -I ~ C _~ andleAyssotiales, Inc. 42 14 • • • Emerald Parkway Extension from its current terminus near the Emerald Forrest neighborhood to the south to Bird Pond. 1'he final alignment would need to be determined via a detailed alignu~cnt stud~~. "l'~~ minimize neighborhood disruption, a major goal should be to place the r~rul 17rt~~ren nc~ tl~~~xl plain area ,uui existing ncighhorho<~cl. The existing tour-lane di~~ided Emerald Parkway cross section would remain as is; however, near SH 6 this road should be widened to six lanes and include new signal hardware to improve the intersection operations. ~- r ~,, ,,~j .. • Lakeway Drive Extension from ~~'.D.Fitch to a new east-~~~est arterial. This ne~~- r~rul ~~~ill allo~~- for greater access to hrcure commercial and retail developments while at the same time improve mobilit<~ for the Pebble Creek neighborhood and neighborhood churches. }, ;,~~~ ,i. cam:, ~%g , _ _ .. :~i ~, ~.. .. ... • New East-West Arterial fr~~nl SII G t~> Rocl: Prairie Road. ~: "Phis nc~~- r(rul~~-tl~~ ~~ ill ha~~e access tt~ the Sl l (~ n~~rthbc~und tr~mtagc r~rul, ally>~~ ing access t~~ and fi~~m~ this road. AV~hilc nn interchage is planned in this area (due to close proximity to " ;. •,~ ~ ~.~~..,..~~ ~~ Fitch) the thought of an overpass has been discussed at this location (or farther to the south near Arrington). While the recommendation for this road is to tie into the li-ontage road at SH 6 without an overpass, the alignment should remain flexiable enough to make the overpass feasible should the need arise. • Pebble Creek Parway Extension from W.D. Fitch to Rock Prairie Road. Beginning at Fitch as a Residential Collector and traveling north across the flood plain, it transitions to a Mixed-Use Street, and ends at Rock Prairie Road as a Commercial Collector. Also, it would provide relief to SH 6 and associated intersections, while at the same time forming the backbone to future development. This Pebble Creek extension will be a new roadway that is a great amenity to the neighborhoods with on-street bike lanes and wide pedestrian areas. ~..J ~ ~ ]aril Associates, lnc. 43 15 • ~:, y ' .~ North Forrest Parkway from SH 6 to Linda Lane. 't'aken from the current thoroughfare plan, this four-lane arterial provides improved east-west mobility, ultimately to Harvey Road. ~~G'ith a major flood plain crossing, careful alignment studies and Rood cc>nn~ol measures should be undcrtal:en eluting the prcliminar~~ engineering phase of this project. • Kaintrec/Appomattox area. ~\n cstcnsiun of ,~ppomatto~ just west of Raintree has been found to reduce die future traffic on Rountree by up to 50`%~. This new road will also form an excellent buffer between the future commercial development to the West and the existing Raintree neighborhood. • Rock Prairie Road from the south stud~~ area to Barron Road. Imprcfvements involve a bask four-lane divided road with a raised meclian. However, from Barron Road to the SH 6, this ~~ -~~ ~. ;, !,~ ?~ ee n .,h d. ~ >4 ,: ..f 1 t~'r x .~.7 3.~:v ,~ t ate. t P 4~ - ~.. ;~ road is recommended to be six lanes. Major ';~~ :. ~:~_~_ L ~ . - ~~ ., improvements to the intersections (including ,•~,~,,, ~ ;. I <. ~~ adding southhc,und and ncn-thbound dual lefts ~. ~~~ith three thrffu~h lams and tree right turn • Lucas) ~~c~uld in~pnf~~c circulati~fn. :Adclitiunall~~, adding U-turn lanes is another needed improvement. Consideration needs to be given to carrying the six-lane widened Rock Prairie to the west to Longmire. Stonebrook/Foxfire area. This area has been the nexus of many traffic and circulation discussion for several years. `With eminant plans to develop the southeast portion of SH 6 and Rock Praire Road, the major question has been what infrastructure needs to be in place to handle the future traffic demand without impacting the existing neighborhoods. This study has shown that with improvements to Rock Praire (noted above), and with developing a connection from the Pebble Creek extension to Rock Prairie (about 500 feet east of Stonebrook), the increase to the neighborhood traffic would be minimal (2,100 vehicles per day [vpd]) -which is similar to the current traflie flows. If the intersections are lined up as the current thoroughfare plan shows, the traffic volumes go up to about 3,000 vpd on Stonebrook. While 3,000 vpd is still under capacity, the differences in land uses on the roadways, trip purposes, and neighborhood concererns lead to recommending the option illustrated below. Some argue that offset intersection are not wise, but in this case this area will have sufficent capacity due to the non-competing left turn movements along Rock Prairie Road and with access to the new • development surrounded by frontage roads, collector streets, and an on-ramp before Rock Prairie Road. Foxfire also benefits from the recommendations noted above. While Foxfire is a narrow two-lane collector, it is recommend that it be brought up the new design standards (outlined in Goal Number One) to be a two-lane Residential Collector, which includes on-street bike lanes and potentially a raised landscaped median area. Bike lanes and a landscaped median could also be retrofitted onto Stonebook. // ~~ ~ // Kimley~Hom r-1 ~ C_ ~ arxl Associates, Inc. as 16 • ~ 5. i . - i Trillic Volumes from the Recommended Scenario The following table presents the traffic volume results from the recommended thoroughfare plan. ROAD FROM TO Recommended Plan Volume Lanes Capacity V/C \PPO\1;~TTO1 Han-c~~ Road End 1500 2 5000 0.30 li;AC:l~,AGI~. S;~ndSr<~„c -~:~„cr;ild 2600 ~ 12000 0.22 BAClu1GE Nc~c Pebble Creek RP 6900 2 12000 0.58 Bt1RRON SH G East of SH G 4900 4 30000 0.16 BARRON Rock Prairie Frost 6500 4 26000 0.25 Ei\lERALD PIC~~'I' SH 6 East of SH 6 31800 G 45000 0.71 EIIF.,RALD PK~`~!Y A omattox Barron 26000 4 26000 1.00 V('D F1TCH SEI 6 Lakc~~:i~- Dr 25000 4 26000 0.96 \C'17 F1TCH Lake~~~;i~~ Dr Pebble Crcck 13900 4 26000 0.53 \V'D 1~1TCH Pebble Creek East co end 7100 ~ 26000 0.27 HARVEY SH G A pomattox 17100 4 30000 0.57 EiAR~'E1' .1~xnnattos \V'cst of SH 3l) 13100 -I 30000 0.44 L,~1~E~V'~1Y DR Ditch Park~-ie~~- 11000 ~ 12000 0.92 L;1KF.\\ ;\l' DR Parkeic~~- Gatc~~•a~ BI~-d 12000 ? 12000 1.00 L,;\hF':U ;\l L)R tic~~~ cast-~~'cst Pitch 5400 =' 12000 0.45 ~;~~~ F:\\ Sf 16 1_.,ikcaa~ l~r 7800 -+ 30000 0.26 PL~I3BL.G CRL:I~a: SH 6 liurr~m 9700 -1 16000 0.61 PEBBLE CREEK Barron Nc~~ cast-~~~cst 4300 4 16000 0.27 PEBBLE CREEK New east-~~-est Fitch 4000 ~t 10000 0.40 NORTH FOREST PK~~'I' SH 6 East of SH G 5900 4 30000 0.20 R.IINTREE SH G End 2500 ? 5000 0.50 APPOi\L-1TTOt Raintrec North Forrest 2500 2 5000 0.50 ROCK PR°1IRIE West FR East FR 48000 6 45000 1.07 ROCK PRAIRIE SH 6 Stonebrook 38900 6 45000 0.86 ROCK PRAIRIE Stonebrook Bird Pond 33600 6 39000 0.86 ROCK PRAIRIE Bird Pond Fitch 22700 4 26000 0.87 ROCK PRAIRIE Fitch End of Study Area 14300 4 26000 0.55 SEBESTA SH 6 East of SH 6 2300 2 12000 0.19 STONE BROOK Wood Creek Sebesta 2000 2 5000 0.40 STONEBROOK Rock Prairie Wood Creek 2300 2 5000 0.46 WOOD CREEK SH 6 Stonebrook 2100 2 5000 0.42 WOOD CREEK Stonebrook End 1400 2 5000 0.28 Table 1: Traffic Volumes of Recommended Plan • -) ~ (~ and eAssoc~ateS, InC. 45 ~ 7 • • Rccc~mmendcd Scenario Map "1'he following map represents the recommend thoroughfare map for the lsast College Srition "Transportation Study. Because of the significance of Linda Lane to this study area it has been included on this map. t11so, note that recommend street types are themed on this map by color as they represent the wishes and aspirations of the citizens of College Station. ~.! ~ ~ Ka»d1eyAssoaates, inc. 46 ~ 8 Figure 15: East College Station Thoroughfare Plan { • r Goal Number Three: To plan for a multimodal transportation system that addresses the needs ofpedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders. Recommendation #4 -Adopt the proposed East College Station Hike/Bike Plan as part of the Parks Master Plan. 1, ~~ ~ t\\\~ t` ~ ~ ~, ~ I • • " ,~ _ .. - Proposed Hike/Bike Plan ,-''~~ ---- ~,,,-- Bike Pplhs ~ _.~._'a ---- Bike Trnil Haad ,"_ - ,'4 ~ ` %I _. Path Existing ~+ R ,. `t)f ~ - _ Path Proposed ~ ~~* _....,. .C~. / i Route Existing ~ ~' ~~ tr\ ~. _ ~s - - - - Route Proposed ,` ~ ~' ,\~M1 a 1 5<t,~i: \ ,- -Park Areos _ - - .\ ,\ .' ~ ~ .tiX~ S $Wdy Meo ~ FEAAA Flood Ploin 0 0.25 0.5 1 }''' ~ ~ _ ..= ~-~-~-~Miles Figure 16: Hike and Bike Recommendations ~ ~_~ aKna motes, Inc. a~ 19 • 1r u • ~._. ,• '~~:_ ,~~.,,a on plan ;. r~ i that is phased in a rnanncr This goal is aimed at developing a list of recommendations that can be put in place to guide dte implementation of this plan. The list was based on technical information of traffic demands, combined with local knowledge and staff expertise on areas that arc ripe for de~~clopme~nt. This list ~~~as dc~•eloped to help police makers to prioritise the needed improeement for this area. KOAll FROM TO Comments Priority Br\CKAGLi ROAD New Pebble Crcck Rock Pr.urie Build with dcaelu mcnt I ROCK PRAIRIE West FR East PR ~~'iden to six lanes l ROCK PRAIRIE SH 6 Stonebrook Widen to six lanes 1 ROCK PRAIRIE Intersections U-Turns U-Turns and intersections 1 BARRON SH 6 East of SH G New interchange with 6 2 B,1RRON Rock Prairie Emerald New road L.11~E~V'~1Y I)]Z Nc~v' C;ltit-R'CSC I'ltch NCw CU;Kl ~ APPOI[.~TTO\ R,iintrec North Forrest New road/ takes u~aftic off of Raiutrce ROCK PR:\TRIE Stonebrook Bird Pond \G'iden to six lanes 2 ROCK PRAIRIE Bird Pond Pitch \~'iden to four lanes 2 ROCK Plt~~\IRIE Pitch End of Stud~~ Area AV'iden to four lanes 2 ST( )\;I : BROO1~ AV'ood Crcck Schc~ta Pcdcsui;ul bike impro~-cmcnts ; traffic csilmin~ ~ S"I'ONI~BR( ~Oh Roch Prairie U~~xxl Crcrh Pedcsn ian hike im~~r~,~ cmcnr~ / n~ufhe admin ~\ OOD CRE[31~ SfI G Stonebrook Pcdcsui;ui bil:c impro~~cuunu ; ^~;iffic calnvrnr ~~'OOD CREEK Stonebrook End Pedestrian bike improvements /traffic ralnunr; 2 APPO\IATTO~ End Switch Station Connect to Switch Station/ No left in or out at Han-cv 3 HARVEY SH G A omattox Improve intersections /widen to 41anc/median at A omattox 3 HARVEY A omattox West of SH 30 VG'iden 3 PEBBLE CREEK SH 6 Barron New road 3 PEBBLE CREEK Barron New east-west Ne~v road 3 PEBBLE CREEK New east-west Fitch New road 3 NORTH FOREST PKWY SH 6 East of SH 6 Widen 4 Backage Sandstone Emerald Section in deli n/construction 5 EMERALD PKWY SH 6 East of SH 6 Widen at SH 6 /add edestrian elements S EMERALD PKWY A omattox Barron New road 5 NEW EAST-WEST SH 6 Lakewa Dr New road 5 Table 2: Implementation Plan ~.I r C_~ arxl eyAssoaates, Inc. 48 Z~ Goal Number Four: To prat in place an implerncntati to address mobility needs as land development occurs. • ~.,, ,~ I Goal Number Five: To generate a plan that is both affordable and achievable. The Following cost estimate was developed using planning costs (per mile). This is not applicable for use in construction or bidding. It should, however, be used for comparison purposes only. funding for these impro~~ements needs to come hxx» mane different sources. T'he rraciitional sources such as the general fund, T~DC)'I', and hond programs might not be enough to fund all the needed improvemenes. Inno~-ati~~c funding approaches must he esplorcd. l~:~amplcs include traFfic impact fees, shad~~~~~ tolling, and 'fas increment financing llistricts ('I'll's). ROAD FROM TO COST ESTIMATE t\PPOiAIr1TTC)t Raintrcc North Forrest ~i75(l,(l0(1 _1PPO~Ir\TT'O\ Land S~~~irch Station 5150,000 13.101::\G L? Ne~~~ Pebble Creek RP ti3~5,000 B,1CK,~GE Sandstone Emerald X1,500,000 BARRON SH 6 East of SH 6 $3,000,000 B.IRRUN Ease of SI I G E~.ntcrald $S,000,O00 I:AIL?R~\1_.D P[~1V~1' SH 6 h:nd SU L:~(F:R:1I,D P1~AC"Y End Barron 5:4,3?5,UI1(1 H:ARV'F.Z" SH 6 :A~~pomntrox ~?Sti,luin li:ARV'I~.l" ;A~~~~~m~atros I.ind:~ I.:~nc ~?,~IIU,IIU(1 L;\h L;AC~r1~~ DR Nc~~° cast-west birch sTU,UIiU New E14' SH 6 Lakewav Dr $500,000 New E\Y' Lakcwa~~ Rock Prairie $2,500,(Hl0 NORTH PORF_.ST PK1\Y Sli 6 Linda Lanc X3,750,000 PEBBLE CREEK SI-1 6 Barron $3,000,000 PEBBLE CREEK Barron New cast-west $625,000 PEBBLE CREEK New EW Fitch $3,75Q000 ROCK PRAIRIE West FR East FR $525,000 ROCK PRAIRIE SH 6 Stonebrook $1,400,000 ROCK PRAIRIE Intersections U-Turns $2,500,000 ROCK PRAIRIE Stonebrook Bird Pond $1,750,000 ROCK PRAIRIE Bird Pond Fitch $5,000,000 ROCK PRAIRIE Fitch End $5,000,000 STONEBROOK Wood Creek Sebesta $0 STONEBROOK Rock Prairie Wood Creek $0 WOOD CREEK SH 6 Stonebrook $0 WOOD CREEK Stonebrook End $0 Total Cost Estimate Table 3: Planning Cost Estimate $48,950,000 • -~;~/"~ Kimley~Hom t ___. and Associates, Inc. 49 2~ • • ,: r-. ~~ <'Y ~ The following section provides the City with technical information on the tools used to complete the analysis of the l:asr College Station Transportation Stud~~. The primar~~ tool used b~~ transportation planners and engineers is a eravel demand model "These models enable agencies to estimate traffic demands. In the simplest terms, the model turns people and emplo~~ees into trips, t7uds their origin and destination, and assigns them a path to c~>n~plerc their nip (see the ad jaecnt graphic). "1'hc trips arc dail~~ su it accounts ti,r home r~~ ~~~urk, home to shop, and bacl: to home. With the use of a travel demand model, planners and engineers are able to „v, ~ .o' ,,;r„~, ~,~~~ estimate current and also future traffic demands. The model can also be used to compare ho~v changes to land use and demographics will impact the local and ~; regional transportation network. Simply put, the model allows us to test ~ .: ' :a ~.~ -•' III zi transportation and land use ideas. ~eaw~ The following section will describe the basic theory of the travel dem~uld model. T.ater sections will describe the major findings from the model 'eat Basic Modeling Theory 13~~ creating and using a tra~~el model, one is attempting to hroducc a mathematical rcprescntati~~n of an indi~-idLiaPs decision-making process: ~~'h~- to make a trip ~ ~~'hen to make the trip ~ ~~'here to make the trip ~ How to make the trip ~ \y-'hat route to follow to complete the trip These individual choices are then combined so aggregate impacts can be determined. The model structure should also be manageable and supported with obtainable data. As a project develops, travel demand models may be used to make planning level decisions regarding future transportation needs. Models estimate the overall demand on a roadway system based on the proposed land uses. Models are also used to answer questions such as the number of lanes required along a given roadway or the need for a new roadway or interchange. Travel models are best suited to provide a comparison between alternatives, and the traffic projections provided will show general trends between these alternatives. The model for the East College Station Transportation Study was done using TransCAD software. Brazos County Model is divided into 514 Traffic Survey Zones (TSZ), out of which 14 zones are external stations. Zones from 465 to 499 are dummy TSZs located at the southeast corner of Brazos County that can be used for land use testing and TIA modeling analyses. Figure A-1 shows the TSZ structure for the region and also highlights the study area. r C__ l aritll~AyS.soCiates, InC, 50 22 Appendix A: Technical Process • • ... , . Y / .ti/' ` ~ -'t ~ ~, __. ~ / t~ i' ~~~-~~ / ~ . ~ r. _. , , .~ < .. ~ ~, .. ~ ._~, Legend ~ Tt1Z 0 stay Arm E 4 Figure A-i: Households 2007 for the study area Special generators (such as airports, regional shopping malls, universities, etc.) and external stations use trip generation parameters (productions/attractions by trip purpose) contained in a separate data base file. T'he special generator zones (TSZs) and external stations are defined by BCSMPO; the external stations have ID numbers 501 to 514. BCSMPO uses a spreadsheet (spec gen.xls) to externally calculate additional trips to be added to specified zones that contain special generators. ~ ~~ Kimley~Hom ~ and Associates, Inc. 51 23 • ~ 1' ~ ,. { Netlvurk Tl1e College Station base year (2007) model network was developed using BCSI~'IPO 1996 base network for the study area. Current aerial photography and field reconnaissance methods were employed in developing the network for Cite of College Station within the stud' area. The field reconnaissance focused on verif~~ing the cross section (number of lanes) and the posted speed limit for each roadway section. The: net~~•orl: is comprised of freewa~~s, highway's, arterials, and collectors. 1)eiuu~;~u~~bn:. The City of College Station base year (2007) demographics estimate was developed based on BCSIVIPO's 2000 demographics for the study area. Current aerial photography and field reconnaissance methods were employed to estimate households (rooftops) and non-residential building floor area within the stud}' at'ea. Population estimates and median income were based on BCSt~'IPO TSZ-level household size and median income data. ~llodel T "~~/rdutinu ~~fter i1Lll1]et'Ullti lteratlonti, base V'Cat' 21lodel V"alldaC]Un \vas aCCOmphshed Us111~ the aboV'C: netR'orli and demographics data and a combination of various adjustments of zone centroid connector locations and network speeds. Validation was based on comparison of estimated (assignment) link volumes to ground counts conducted in late 200 and 2005. 2030 (Build-oc~t) Model Assumptions ~ ~ l'~ v~r,~: The build-out model network was developed using 13CS~yIP(.) 2030 ~Iobiiit}- Plan nctworl: for the overall region. In addition, the network for City of College Station within the study area was developed using the adopted ThoroLi~hfare Plan by the City. IDe~no~ra~hicr The build-out demographic estimates within the study area were based on existing land uses for developed areas; current zoning density regulations and land uses contained in the currently-adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plan were used to estimate households, population, and employment for undeveloped areas. Median household income was based on BCSMPO TSZ-level data. • 2007 Model Assumptions • • .,;., , x. - .;, ~~ . Four-Step Modeling Process The model is comprised of a series of mathematical models that simulate travel on the transportation system. "1"his macroscopic,process encompasses the tour primary steps taken to estimate travel demand from a liven land use and transportation network. The four steps in this approach are as follows: Trip Generation "l'lic '1'rih Gencrati<m nu>dulc clm~~crts drml>~rai~hic dat;l into pcrslm cries f~lr different pur~~llscs. "I'hc demographic data for the trip generation module .includes population, number of households, median househ~:>ld income, the number of basic, retail, and service employment. 81 ,~ ~ 200 ~. I ill ~'t _ `A ~, i it ~#~:.,._ o ,_,~ ly 10I n r.~~ ..; vu '-~,,,,,,~~ ~~ y 7i .i.l 15 0 _. 0 IB 0 0 0 0 0 ~. 0 .._... .., ~~ ~ ~- ----1, p0(/ \ 180 ~_ \ ~. \ / ~ '~\ U ~\~ \ 0 , M8rte ._ \ ., .~,\jC\. J LEGEND Households 2007 u - l uu _.1 lCl I - ZIHI ?nl -inn _. ;ni - IJrtui I,iNil -~,-4uu z a,l,~,i, ~~~.1 E 3 2 ~ . ~ J Figure A-2: Households 2007 for the study area C, ~~~~~ KandleyAssoctatesr Inc. 53 25 r~ ..~; 5 ~• 1. nu ~z~\ ~, INU j Im ~ u I 33i. I - 4 o `~ .~w ~, ,... ~,~ . ~, y 'In 4 JII ~l 6~7 ~~1 z ,~ .; ,,~ ,~ a ~ fir, M1 , i31 '~ sx u 'W i~ nz - wv H: „~_~~"~ n _. - _.. Sol Ixu rr1~ u S!o 'U] ~.~ X31 ``, i/ ~Qe~~ Lr6 ~N; ~: b~ ,':. LEGEND Households 2030 II- ~I111 ~Il~ - ?INI .'11~ ~I III illy ~ 111111 ~~ I,WI -2,dUU s«la, ,~~~:I E Figure A-3: Households 2030 for the study area • ~ /' Kimley~Han r[.. ~ and Associates) Inc. 54 Zs • • r '...~ _~ i L.EGENll Population Per Square Mile '; 11 ~ 51111 ,,,~ ,,~~ ~ (I~ -il11111 '~,~ _ _ ~1111~ - it 111 -illy X11 111111 - ~ IU,f1UU :In~l acct (' ...: C _ i. ,~ 4,.~.g „~ ~ '„~ ;~, Figure A-4: Population Density 2007 for the study area • /""I ®~ KimleyHom ~„J ~ __ and ASSOCiates, IrtC. 55 27 • • >.~. r ~~? 4~ v~ .~.ua,. t` ~, .~ Figure A-5: Population Density 2030 for the study area • ~r~'~ ~ Kimley~Hom `.J ~~ ar~i Associates, Inc, 56 LEGEND Population Per Square Mile 2030 u ;u11 >,SIII - i UI111 ~,I111~ -",11111 ~'lll~ III 111111 ~~,,~,N~ ...,,.11,~ 1 E Z$ ~~ '9.`: • • ~ 7- ^• s 1 z IA'1 ~;,; u ,~~, ;a u u uo __ 0 37 11 11 w u u tier 13 l7 ~N~ .,:.:.,~. >~J LEGEND Employment 2007 n i;n isl - ilul 5iil Lunn i nul I,;uu i01 - 3,WU 11~1,~ ;~«~ E 1 ~1 ?Il ~ ~'_ 11 i,`'~ ~+ ~, ~yY Figure A-6: Employment 2007 for the study area G ~ C~ and1eyASS~oc',iales, Inc. 57 29 • F r . ~ z 191 ''' o `. nx `'"~'= n0 0 0 2b3 1 0 , 0 lifA U U 2fi7 R U U J112 ¢ G19 vva ul -I ,~`! 4 lfii U 'R 1019 zu;~ 11 fil.i lU nz isle z LEGEND Employment 2030 n I;u I ;I if 111 ;nl - I iuni I lull I,;nn r~,ti~,,~ 1,501 - 31N)0 ® Studs ~1rca ti" ~..a.:«r.~~a..w..4y u/A Figure A-7: Employment 2030 for the study area The following table shows the comparison between the study area and Brazos County region demographics 2007 2030 Po elation Em to ent Po elation Em loyment Study Area 10,500 5,900 30,270 17,100 Brazos Coun Re •on 164,890 82,700 205,000 104,700 Percent Pro ortion 6% 7% 15% 16% Table A-1: Demographic comparison • /~", ~ C~ KimleyHom ~ . - . and Assaiales, Inc. 58 30 r~ ~~ ti. ,~ .+ 1 Trap Distribution 'T'his step estimates the number of trips between each regional zone pair. The output from "Trip Generation module is the input for this step. 2% • Figure A-8: Trip Patterns 2007 from the study area • /'"i ~ /'~ Kimley~Hom ~„J ~ [-----1 and Assoaates, inc. 59 31 C • Figure A-9: 2007 Network with number of lanes • 1~ Modr-l Split 't'his is the prediction of the number of trips made by each mode of transportation between each zone pair. T'tafflc Assignment 'I'bis includes the estinuui~m of the anu>unt ~,f a<-~~cl (ur numlx~r ut trips) that is l~r,~dccl unu> the tr:u~spurtati~~n nctworl: thro~i~h path-building; and is used to determine nctworl: performance. The following ti~;ure shows current (2(.11)7) nctw~n~l: fc>r the snid~° area with number cif lanes. ~rceni~ .,\ t ` E ~f s ^-1 ~ ~~ Kand ~eyAssociates, inc. 60 32 -,~ This process includes bringing the model output traffic volumes to match as close as possible with the observed or ground traffic counts. Table A-2 shows the comparati~-e results of both model output traffic ~•olume data and ground traffic counts for the year 2007. Se >ment From To 2007 Count 2007 Model lt2 II.AKV'I~.1' R(>:AI) SII G \~~~~unl~utoX 21,95 21,126 i.ll?°~~ ~~ ~ xnnattu~ U~cst of SI LiU 9,249 9,2UU -U.53"'.. Rr11N'TREI_: SH G Lind 3,277 3,5711 8.94`%~ N~)RTIi 1~ORRti.ST Pl{~~~'~' SH G East of G 2,550 2,647 3.80`%~ EMERALD PI{~Y'Y SH 6 East of 6 5,800 6,180 6.55% SEBESTr1 SH G East of G 1,799 1,884 4.72% \V~OODCRIIiK Sf 1 G Stoucbax~k 2,293 2,339 2.00",~~ Stonebrook I?nd 1,238 1,217 -1.70': ~~ STONl?BR(X )I: Rack Prairie U~oudercch 2,315 '', 3~5 ? GU°%~ \V'oodcrcck I~c~stire 872 925 6.04°~~~ ROCK PRAIRIE SH G Stonebrook 6,777 6,900 1.81°/, Stonebrook Bird Pond 4,1164 4,20U 3.35",~~ laird Pond Greens Prairie 1,9UU I,SU(1 -5?G"'~~ C;rccns Pr;uric I~.nd tiff; 9~0 9.85°~ (~RI~.I~.A~S PR.AIRII~. SI I G I.akc~~~~,i~ I~r "6~- 'I -iln .}.I-}°„ I..~kc~~:~~ l~r Pehhlc(~r~~cl: -.I~~~~ -.148 ~~.68"~~ PcbblcCrcck Mast to end 2,1 G8 2, 300 G.U7° ~~ Lr1KEV('AY DR Greens Prairie Parkview 6,598 7,400 12.15% Park~-icw Gatcwaa BI~•d 8,513 0.00°%, SH G I lar~-c~~ Road 7?,500 83,00(1 7.10",~, Emerald 46,400 57,600 24.14°/, Rock Prairie 62,5(10 67,800 8.48°/~ Greens Prairie 30,800 35,200 14.29% Average volume difference 4.69% Table A-2: Validation table for 2007 Model The locations considered for the validation process (as seen in the above spreadsheet) are presented in the maps below showing the 2007 ground traffic volume counts, 2007 model traffic volume and the percentage difference between them respectively. The percentage difference values in the table show the model volumes generated fall within the acceptable range when compared to the existing traffic counts. • !~ Kimley-Hom ~ _' ana lei, it,~. s~ 33 .Model C:tlibrutic~n a~~d Validutiu» • '., ..~ ;. Figure A-10: 2007 Existing Traffic Counts • ~~~~ Kimleyiiom ~ _ . aria assoaates, Inc. s2 34 • ~' Figure A-11: 2007 Model Traffic Volumes with percentage difference l~ u /'~ r KimleyHom -I ~ and Associates, Inc. 63 35 u Evaluating the Thorocight~irc Scenarios ^Y. ;. }, -~,; . v ~ The following information was generated using the refined Bman-College Station )V[etrc~politan Planning Urganiration transportation model. T'he relined model includes updates to the denwgraphics (households and emphwment) for the study area to reflect 2006 conditions. The model has three main measures of effectiveness that hl;tnncrs use t~> c~~aluat~ thc~r~tti;;ht,u•c plan altcrnati~~cs: Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) What does it mean? Vehicle i~~liles Traveled (VM1~ is the total distitncc traveled by all vehicles in a 24 hour period. This can reflect the spatial relationship between residence and emplo~-nunt or other destinations. Lo~~•cr average Yt\I"1' often reflects a better spatial match betv~-ecn residence and cmplo~~mcnt, ~~~hilc higher a~•cr;i~e V.~l'1' can indicate a spatial nvsmatch behvecn place of residence and place of employment. Vehicle Hours of Travel (VHT) How -vas it measured? The traffic volumes on each road network link arc calc>.dated using travel demand modeling sofhvare. The demographic, travel behavior, and transport infrasn•ucture data for each scenario :u~c used as ^u>dcl input 1/aeh link volume is multiplied b~• the avcragr vehicle occupanc~~ rate in the region. "1"his v;tlue is multiplied b~• the length of each link to determine the person-miles traveled on each network link. • LY~hat does it mean? How is it measured? The total number of hours of vehicle travel on the Vehicle hours of delay are computed by multiplying designated set of roadwa~•s. the total distance traveled by average network speed. Delay (VHD) What does it mean? Delay is a product of Traffic congestion, which is a road condition characterized by slower speeds, longer trip times, and increased queuing. It occurs when roadway demand is greater than its capacity. ..F..~...•_. ,~~ ,ter .~,_.._,r _.. ~ ,_ -tea Howls it measured? Delay is a function of vehicle speed and trip length. Slower speeds and longer trip lengths result in greater delay. Delay is represented by total person hours of delay. • ~ Kimley~Hom ~ ._..~ and Associates, lnc. sa 36 ~ +. t. „~ ~ ~.-1 1'he model provides planners with the ability to compare how changes the thoroughfare plan can improve the above measures of effectiveness. The transportation indicators helrnv are an output of this model. They represent what the demand on the transportation network will he based upon the three thoroughfare plan alternatives. GROWTI-I SCENARIOS RANSPORTATION INDICATORS T>-lOli~ U~NII~ARL: CONfMUNITY CONCEPT HYBRIll oTAL VMT 1,049,584 1,088,390 1,058,277 HT 31,807 31,450 31,482 OTAI. DELAY 7,052 5,589 6,466 (PERSON HOURS) Table A-3: Study Area Mobility Summary Chart • GROWTH SCENARIOS RANSI'ORTATION INDICATORS THOROUGFIFAILE CO!~411IUNITl' CONCEPT HIBRID I'L.AN oTAL VMT 5,429,716 5,394,480 5,413,076 HT 173,018 170,639 171,989 OTAL DELAY 22,056 20,764 21,437 (PERSON HOURS Table A-4: Regional Mobility Summary Chart • The three alternatives model above show that the Community Concept scenario and Hybrid scenario both out perform the Thoroughfare Plan Scenario. The final recommended plan for the East College Station Area is a combination of both the Hybrid and Community Concept scenarios. Refer to Table 1 for the traffic volume results. -Ji~~ a antes, Inc, ss 37 Traffic M~~delin~; Findings • • • Public Meeting 1 The initial public meeting of the T~.ast College Station Transportation Stud~~ was attended b~~ 95 people. The trap in the sidebar represents attendees' homes. ~~'hile mangy' portions of the stud~~ area where rcpre~senrcd, a majorit~~ of the attendees ~~~herc tronl either the ~V~oodcreeh or I~osEire neighborhoods. Thirty-seven of these attendees completed the questionnaire. The graphs to the right indicates the majority' of attendees where residential propert~~ owners and members of neighborhood aSSOC1at10IIS. The following Neighborhood Associations where represented: • ~~ ocxlcreel: • 1=oxfire • Shadowcrest • Stc nebrid ~e • Ambcrlake • ~~i'indwood • Raintree • Pebble Creek • Emerald Forest • Wilshire .,~ i. ~ ,; W~'.JT ' G ~ 4 ~r~~~ ' R ~~ a Rospwb~M Pmfl~ Swk3 Bulnu OwrNn ,x R~IW BWrru Mnw 01h.r'wri1. k, ,: ;, RwIMMial PropMy Owmn Membership in Business or Neighborhood Orgnmvihon College Station Deputy City Manager Terry Childers said he was encouraged by the turnout at the workshop, stressing that resident input is vital in the planning process, reported Eagle Staff Writer APRIL AVISON. She went on to quote Childers, "LY/e'vegot to do a better jab planning for the growth that is going to occur here. Future generations will live with many of the decisions that willgerminate here tonight." With Mr. Childers introduction the workshop began with a presentation by Kurt Schulte of Kimley-Horn, which concentrated on demographic trends in the region, College Station and the east side specifically. Then in groups of eight to 10 attendees provided comments and ideas about the future thoroughfare plan. ~, ~;.~ ("~C'~,,- car V .1'P # i.~'T31P! r7. t ~ .. r ~~~ Kimley~iiom -,J ~ and Assoc~atesr inc, ss 38 Appendix B -Public Meeting Summaries Workshop Results ~i The consultanes began to anal}~ze the ~~~orlahop input b~~ digitiring the workshop maps and creating compilation maps. The issue map represents j~su-tici~~ants' feelings ;shout cut through traffic, a~ngcstion, safct~• and hike/pedestrian needs. Participants also ~~oiced which planned thoroughfares ihc~~ agree and dis~igree with. f I ~. syA,~,.l " S '- ,i~N Workshop Maps 1 .~ 1 ~; ,. I • • ~-.;ri.~ Kandleyi~aates, Inc. 67 39 Figure B-2: Public Thoroughfare Disagree Figure B-2: Public Thoroughfare Agree • • j.. ~'~ ' ;, '. :t P~rhlic Mcetln~ 2 "1"he follow-up public meeting of the ~:ast College Station Transportation Study was attended by 75 people. "1"he meeting was aimed at attaining citizen input on three thoroughfare plan scenarios and how to implement them. The questionnaire was completed be 45 of the attendees. The majority of attendees ~aerc residential property ct~~~ners and members cif ncighhcinc~,c,cl associati<,ns. ~'hc t~~lltt~~~ing Nei~hlxtrlx~cxl :\ssc~ciatic~ns ~~crc re(~resentccl: • \X~oodcrcek ^ Foxfire • Shadowcrest ^ Stt~nebridgc • ~Amberlalce • \\'ind~~~oc~d ^ Raintree • Pebble Creek ^ Limerald Forest • \\'ilshirc • C.ilrter l.al<C Churches 4% Respondent Profile Service Business owners r~ + s Residential Property Own 94% Membership in Business or Neighborhood Organization No Yes 93% ~J ~-~~ "''I~a4SSOCIat° li1C. sa 40 • • A majority of attendees selected the Hybrid scenario. An overwhelming majority believe a change is needed to the existing thoroughfare plan. Attendees also commented on the funding mechanism to use ~~~hen implementing nc~ thorouglll-arc plan. Clcarl~~, citizccis do not believe the City should cover all the cost of building new thoroughfares in the study area. A majority thought a mixture of development impact fees and City funding should be used to construct ne~~- thoroughfares. "I'hc final question on the questionnaire ~~~as aimed at how to reduce neighborhood cut- through traffic. Attendees ranked techniques in the: following order from most desirable to least: 1. Streetscaping ?. l.anc ~iarro~~-ing i. Intersection Impro~~cmcnts 4. \'idco Sut~-eillance /'"j ~ Kimley-Hom ~ __ ~ and Associates Inc, • -;i• Scenario Preference ,t,~;. OThoroughfare O Community Concept O Hybrid Scenario 6~ % Funding Mechanisms ,~,- , ^CityFunds , 33 ~,Y ~`~ _ '~ Dlmpact Fees ^ M fixture 60% ss 41 Worksh~~p Results • Appendix C -Context Sensitive Design ii The proposed thoroughfare planning process presented in the nest section recognizes that the design of a thoroughfare needs to recognize the plan's role as part of a network of streets, and that the thoroughfare plan must amsider and balance the regional, suhregional, and neighborhood functions of the thoroughfare iu relation to conuliunit~~ form and character, and the entire transportation s~~stcm. The new thoroughfare planning process is grounded in using (amtc~t Scnsiti~ ~~ Design ((;Sly): A collaborative, intcrclisciplinary process to transportation planning and design that involves all stakeholders to develop a transportation facility that fits its physical setting and preserves scenic, aesthetic, historic, and environmental resources, while maintaining safety and mobility. CSD is an approach that considers the total context within which a transportation improvement project will exist. This approach will a~igment special land uses areas such as mired-use, transit-oricnte:d, and urban neighborhood developments ~~-ith contest sensitive transportation elements. The goal is to create a connection between land use and transportation in College Station. ,1 street may pass throLigh various land use contexts (as displayed in the graphic below). The land use context should int7uence the character of the roadway. To properh~ plan for a roadwa~° that is contc;st sensitive, we must di~~idc the road~~-a~~ right-of-~~-a~~ into separate (hut related) "realms." • Town C t Employment Regional Center District Residential en er Commercial Corridor T ,-~. Neighborhood y . ~ - .; - - ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Main Street Mixed Use Industrial St Residential Commercial Street Street Street Street Realms To properly plan for all the elements of a thoroughfare plan, it is essential to account for the three street "realms," which are the travelway realm (between curbs or other pavement edges), the pedestrian realm (pavement edge to right-of--way line), and the context realm (the interface with adjacent buildings, sites, and land uses). • ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ LN1D USi 4~w~lP~watwu X TMV6LWAY CT> Ao.euw MNO Ufe(wT dlr.{-~1 Pv.4N +I µ-F1 ~~~HI-1~ 7 STREET R5/'.1-M ©~ ~~ Kand'eyASSOCiates, Inc. 70 42 ~: "` T _ .. ~ 1'he tour realms rE1at together comprise the thoroughf~ue and its context are: Travelway Realm: Public right-of-way from curb-to-curb including parking lanes, which are part of an overlap zone with the pedestrian realm and travel lanes for private vehicles, goods movement, transit yehicacs, and bicycles. i~lcdians arc also part of the tra~~ch~~a~~ realm. "h'ransit sups and loading unloading cones are included in the traveway realm. • Pedestrian Realm: Public right-of-wa}~ t}~picall}~ including planting area and sidewalk, from curb to the front property line of adjoining parcels. The pedestrian realm is further divided into a series of zones that highlight different uses. These include: edge zone, furnishing zone, throughway zone, and frontage zone (on blocks with predominance of ground-floor retail). The relative importance of the zones is in part the function of land use. Transportation facilities including bus shelters and waiting areas and bicycle parking may be part of the pedestria^ realm. Often the on-street parking lane overlaps with the pedestrian realm because of the pedestrian activity~ generated b}. parked vehicles. • Context Realm: Properties and activities adjacent to the public right-of-wa}' with surroundings that contribute to character and mobility. Btuldings, landscaping, land use mix, site access, public and semi- public open spaces are the primary shapers of context. Some n~ansportation facilities, notably transit stations and parking lots and structures, are included in the contest realm. • Intersection Realm: Public right-of-way and a p~~rtion of abutting pri~~ate property that u,gether tin-m a frame including the intersectio^ at its centc;r. The intersection realm is characterized b}- a high level of activit}~ and shared use, multimodal conflicts, complex movements, and special design treatments. ~ _ f:' ~3: ~': '~,..•ti Context/Pedestrian Overlap. Ground floor building frontage and any '~` _,.F. ,,.~.--'~ overhanging elements (arcades, awnings, etc) create one part of the overlap '- ,r-,`' " between the.private development in the context realm and the public space ,.r~~uv ' R r i~, of the pedestrian realm. Also included are paths and walkways on private ;~- ~' `~iPF~` ,r.~';~ property adjoining the thoroughfare. t-~Mt-~;3~~1~~ Pedestrian/Travelway Overlap. The travelway areas where pedestrians are common are the parking lane and the crosswalks (marked or o 0 unmarked). The parking lane frequently doubles as space for transit loading and unloading and in some locations it may also occasionally be ~e Fwnlshines TTmu~wp Fmtoge used for community events such as farmer's markets, parade viewing, etc. _~~ zw~~ zu~. _.,~. In such cases use of the travelway realm is often restricted in order to maximize the comfort of people using the overlap zone. • ~ ~ KimleyHom ~~ and Assoaates, inc. 71 43 • .~ ~., _.- . ; New Street Standards for College Station Given an array of street tt~pes, each street can help to add more dimensions to the arterial and collector choices provided by the conventional functional classification sestem. These additions and refinements to the street t<-pes provide the Ciro with a great clcal of choices gi~~en the ~~arieh~ of urban em~ironments. "1'he thorough tare t~~pes shown below are the basis for contest sensitive design choices in the Cite of College Station. Sis ne~~- t~~pcs of streets ~~~ere cle~-e(opecl as an o~~erla~~ on the Cit~~'s current Lh(~roUghtal'e plats. ~ . • Commercial Streets ^ Arterials ^ Collectors • Residential Streets ^ .\rterials ^ Collectors • Industrial Streets • ~Ii~ed L!se Streets • • /^; ~ ~ KimleyHom V,,J ~ __. _. and Associates, IrtC, 72 ~ 1~ u ';; Commercial Streets are presently the dominant street form used in College Stations' coiiiiiterci~/crrtter:r/cor~zdorr, (~rr~iue~~ ce~rtter~/corizdar~• urrr/ c~nr~rr.r rli.rtrictr. High priority elements in this type of street are focused on mo~-in~ traffic and pro~~idin~ access to businesses. Thus, ehrsc streets characteristically have. tour to siY travel lanes that range from l l t~~ 12 feet wide, a high number of access points for de~~elopmcnts, and minimum pedestrian and bic~~clc facilities. ~~'~ ,` .._ ~~ ~•~ 1lo~vever, Commercial Streets can be both pleasant for pedestrians as "`~~~ well as efficient for vehicles and transit. Little adaptation needs to occur in the travelway realm for commercial areas to become walkable places. If people are going to walk between destinations in commercial and business districts, and if these districts are to be served well by transit, then efforts should be focused on improving shared parking and connectivity between separate parcels. Improvements in these areas can make a annmercial or business area a earl:-once district. Improvements in connectivity through shared parking and pedestrian facilities will also go a long way in improving vehicular capacity. Less traffic will occur on the main commercial street lanes if people are able to park once and frequent multiple locations in one trip. Commercial Arterial Fo~u Lanes, Divided • i Y~'i ~ n 1 ~ hkd~an 6' Ra~eRr peaNn pMnFbn balm Rwpsr' nReaYn iB rC n d inrc The rebl RlgMrcf-Way can alto GaEryued Io l IR rn ae[annwba 6 brcs -i Commercial Collector Four Lanes, Divided ~ ~~ ~',:-- ,~s ''~ r~ Ilan imvehva Rolm PeGes aYn 1 5' 10 BO • Mw~~~~ andieyiates, Inc. ~a 45 Commercial Streets • • • .. , ~~, ;i. As arterials, Residential Streets balance multimodal mobility with land access. As collectors, Residential Streets are designed to emphasise ~ `~'~' ~. walking, bicycling, and land access over mobility. In both cases, , _, Residential Streets tend to be more pedestrian-oriented than C;~>mmcrcial Streets, but not as multimodal as ~AIiscd Use or "1 ransit Streets. Residential Streets gencrall~~ consist of tt~~o to four tra~~cl lanes that arc l=1 t~~ 18 feet ~~ idr and h;«~c ~~n-street marking. C~~llcg~ Staii~ms' neighborhoods built in the last 3U years fcauire homes set back from Residential Streets to provide ample space for landscaping and trees. Sidewalks in these neighborhoods directly abut Residential Streets. In historic residential areas, homes are located more closely to Residential Streets. On-street parking is present and side~~~alks arc t~~picall~~ buffered b~~ a tree lined planting strip that is maintained b~~ the homeo~~-nc:r. Pedestrian ]c~-el lighting is also present on many Residential Streets in College Station. Residential Arterial Four Lanes, Divided . , ~ .~ .. I~ r Residential Collector Street Two Lanes, Divided ~ ~~ KimleyHom ~ _ and Associates, Inc. ~a 46 RE~stdential Streets • Indnstri~-I Streets Industrial Streets are typically designed for large vehicles, which means lane widths are wider than normal (13 m 15 feet). Sidewalks, when present, are usually attached and a small planting strip maybe on the outside of the sidewalk. On-street parkin, medians, bic~~de lanes, and street trees arc usuall~~ absent tr~x1~ the street design. Industrial Arterial Four Lanes, Divided • r~ ~„J ~ C. _.. and Associates, inc. 75 ~- , r _. t 47 Mired-Else Streets This street type is compatible with Mixed-Usel.Special Districts, Transit C:orirdorr and I1~/pan Nei;hbnihoods. The sidewalk in a mixed-use street is the primary physical environment of the street realm. Often sidewalks in mired-use areas are lamer than the travel lanes. The sidewalk is ~~~hcrc most of the acti~~it~- occurs. hot mired-use streets to be successful, the design of Facades and ground floors of buildings and their rclati~>nship to the street must focus their aurnti~>n to~~-,lyd the street. ,,; ~ , Beyond urban design features and sidewalks, on-street parking is the = ~ ~_ „~~~ most important element in a mixed use street design. The presence of parked cars reduces travel speeds, separates pedestrians from the travel way realm, and aids in the vitality of retail establishments. Mixed Use Four Lanes, Divided ., ~ j ;.;HI .~,~, ,~;;, ,,t F',~ M1~.01-1'la IW' • ~ KimleyHom -_ _ and Ass~ates, lnc. ~s 48 ~ P t`fr