HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/29/2007 - Workshop Minutes - Parks Board Pam Springfield
Staff Assistant
AGENDA
Workshop Meeting
City Council
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning&Development
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.
Consultation with Attorney {Gov't Code Section 551.0711 ; possible 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
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION,TEXAS
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.gov. 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
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 ET), 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
3
TOOLBOX OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT TECIINIQUES
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION,TEXAS
Over 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).'-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.
C a:.11T
* 'y '
,w
4,4
4�
- I 4#
Scatterd Speradic Sprawling
t r,
I I Increasing Develbpnnent Fragmentation
The urban form has become increasingly fragmented since the 1980s.
Source.City of College Station
1--Peter Drucker
2 This is partially explained by the relative size of the respective jurisdictions.
4
A question confronting this community, however, is not only how to attract and sustain economic
development but how to maximize its net fiscal benefits. Inc pattern of growth and efficiency of service
provision are contributing factors, among others. As displayed in ' ,, p, '
beginning in the 1970s the form of development has become increasingly scattered. In fact, since the Year
2000, the number of platted lots in the ETJ has averaged 16.6 percent of the total annual platted lots.3 As
for the projected population, assuming a continuation of recent trends, the Ell is expected to increase in
population by 17 percent by the Year 2016.+ The 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 increasingly problematic, resulting ill an increased inefficiency of
services thereby lessening the economic gain and placing a growing strain on the fiscal resources of the
community.
There are several reasons why this growth pattern has occurred, including, but not 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 use 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;
The number of residential units that can be built per acre of land;or
the size, type, or method of construction of a water or vvastewater facility that can be constructed
to serve a developed tract of land, subject to specified criteria.5
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 that 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
4 Based on a City forecast,"Development Trends in the Extra-territorial Jurisdiction(ETJ)
5 Section 212.003,Extension of Rules to Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
Draft 05/15/07 Page 2 of 23
3
required to extend utility services, or the liming of build-out. further, the City's futore land use plan
and corresponding zoning districts are too general and thus, do not offer a clear 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. Instead, 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. 'toning, in this case, niaV' serve as an effective
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 for development to occur in the City rather than the Ii 1'J
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
outcomes.
There is a multi-step process required for the Planned Mixed-Use "P-NICD" and Planned
Development "I'DD" districts, wihich lengthens the review imi.1 approval time, increases
•
diwClopinent i:osty, and IS a disincentive for vv llat Is othcrvv'Itis'a I?r tem rCd dt.'v'elii)'mllent t\'p1'
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
There is a five-acre exemption of the platting requirements within State law that allows rural
development to occur without platting and thus, without any provision for right-of-way dedication,
delineation of easements, or other applicable—and warranted -development requirements.
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 avoid payment
of these fees.
Development outside the City limits does not pay City taxes. Therefore, residents and businesses
outside the City limits benefit trom access to municipal facilities and services, such as parks, trails,
libraries, and other community facilities, but do not share the tax burden associated with constructing
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.
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.
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 infrastructure (e.g., roads, water, and wastewater systems) and services (c.g.,
police and fire protection, parks, libraries, and schools), in some cases, creating unsafe conditions.
• A lack of coordinated planning between individual developments leading to, among other things, a
discontinuous and disjointed street system and inability to plan for linear linkages and greenways.
• Premature and unexpected 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
SII
6 Section 212.004.Plat required(a)
Draft 05/15/07 Page 4 of 23
agricultural products is good for local consumers. Moreover, farming is all important part of the
region's heritage that continues to contribute to the quality of lite and identity of the community.
Often, the elements that fuel growth (cy., community livability, quality schools, economic diversity, etc.)
are slowly and ultimately sacrificed by the pattern, quality, and character of development. The integrity
of public fiscal resources is also compromised because the new development is inefficient and does not
contribute sufficient revenues to cover the costs of the services it demands. Modern "growth
management" is a combination of techniques that allow municipalities to direct its pattern ut 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 institution and administration of growth
regulations;
Regulatory approaches, including zoning and subdivision controls, which to varying degrees,
directly impact the character, form, location, and quality of development.
Annexation, which expands the geographic jurisdiction of the City to implement a 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 funding for capital improvements that are needed to serve new
development.
Improvement districts and political subdivisions, which are independent entities that provide for
infrastructure funding and operation,
JJ Interlocal cooperation contracts as a means for local governments to agree with other units of
government with regard to providing administrative functions, infrastructure, and public services.
Extension of publicly-owned utilities by way of capital improvement programming.
In 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:
7 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 Plan!' 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 not limited to, provisions on land use, tronTortation, and public
facilities;
consist or a single plan or a coordinated set of plans organized by subject and
geographic area; and,
be used to coordinate and guide the establishment of development regulations.
State law provides that "A municipality may define,
'
in its charter or by ordinance, the relationship
between a Comprehensive Plan and development
regulations, and may provide standards for
determining the consistency required between a
plan and development regulations." In other words,
there is not a requirement that the comprehensive
plan be applied in strict terms in all land use
decision-making. However, there is latitude
regarding the extent to which the land development regulations may be used to implement the plan. l'his
is essential it the City is to successfully control its destiny.
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 studies 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
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.
9 Section 1.6,Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan,Unified Development Ordinance,July 3,2006
Draft 05/15/07 Page 6 of 23
_ _ — „ _ „ _ _ - —
Therefore, to further strengthen the relationship between the Comprehensive Ilan and UI)'.), the
following should occur in the interest of better managing growth:
Areas within the City limits that are not within the defined "growth area(s)" should be zoned
Agricultural-Open "A-O", provided the minimum lot size in increased from five to 20 acres,or more.
The decision as to the zoning of newly annexed property must strictly adhere ti) the City's growth
plan. Annexation of land that is not within the defined "growth area(s)" must be zoned "A-U",
giving the City the decision as to the timing of development and its provision of services.
The area defined as "Rural" on the Iand Use Plan'" should strictly adhere to the Citv's growth plan.
Those portions of this area that are inadequately served and are not feasible for 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.
• The use designations on the Future Land Use Plan should be reconciled with the zoning districts.
Rather 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 floor area ratios will better ensure the development
outcomes. Otherwise, if more than one zoning district is allowed and there are not definitive
standards, there is no mechanism for the City to control the development character. ,As it relates to
growth management this Is essential as a Means for iinproAt'd utility systems planniti (sine' the
density and hence, infrastructure demands are known) as veil 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 he
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,
10 Land Use Plan,November 2004
Draft 05/15/07 Page 7 of 23
the City may proactively direct development to occur in appropriate locations and concurrent with the
availability and provision 01 adequate public facilities and services.
`l'hrough the course of plan development the following areas should be identified and delineated, as
displayed in the illustrative examples:
The developed area is wlieri-' there is existing
infrastructure. Remaining opportunities within
0 this defined area would consist of infill
development, redevelopment, and areas that are
immediately contiguous to existing
development. It is important to note than there
�� t`., is approximately 2,010 acres of vacant,
residentially-zoned land within the City limits.
7 This amount of developable land will support
an additional population of 14,651) persons",
which is approximately 60 percent 01 a mid-
,r range estimate of added population by the Year
l*. 5 tr "' ► t°: `s * ,-, 2025. Therefore, the plan must quantify and
.r'
determine the area necessary to support the
projected population and employment
ncreases, and coordinate the infrastructure
plan,accordingly.
!he protection area enconrpasscw ueas of
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
p { prohibit development. The protection area may
also include the Agricultural-Open "A-0"
,�
" �, district that is intended to remain in agricultural
�^� �• � `'x� use and where residential development is
' •I restricted.
The growth area is where new growth is to be
cr � encouraged for which there are readily available
I .4r ` ' services that may be efficiently extended. This is
ti• " �- 1 M the area where the City will commit to
. . extending infrastructure and improvements to
ct ti 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.
11 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
_ _ tt
The holding zone is all remaining land in the
IJ and outside of that identified above - —
described areas. Due to the limitations of State
law, this is the most difficult of the four areas to
address. Given the reasons identified earlier,
development may now occur within this ami.
Development in areas for which the City cannot
readily and efficiently provide services is clearly
premature and results in sprawl. Therefore, the
question is to what extent the City is willing to
enact control by the below described growth ti
management techniques. wew fro
y :, ; to ," ,#
In order for the City to manage the location of ,r1 -"
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 0
development. The controls must be designed to
minimize the amount of urban development in the
holding zone.
The most readily available means for minimizing they 14,
impacts of peripheral growth is by way of amending
the subdivision regulations. However, while certain
controls may be put in place to solve anticipated t i"
problems, this approach will not have any materials
affect on the pattern or timing of urban growth. It
remains though, a warranted and necessary step to I„ t
ensure quality development and to ameliorate -- - �
unnecessary problems. Holding Zones
Unlike zoning regulations, the value of the subdivision regulations is that they may be extended into the
ETJ.12 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.
13 Section 212.003,Texas Local Government Code
Draft 05/15/07 Page 9 of 23
12
Provided the Comprehensive I'la n is sot specific,
subdivision controls can be a strong tool for ensuring that
-444 "4"46 °''' ` ` " adequate water, sewer, and road service is provided to new
Purpose: Generally,the purpose of
subdivision controls is to development in the City, and more importantly, in the GT).
regulate the dimensions of lots This is so because State law provides that a plat shall be
and the provision of access, approved if:
utilities, and public facilities. it conforms to the general plan of the municipality and its
Strengths: Along with zoning, access current and luture sl reef s, ,aIle splaygrounds, and
��,
management, and other
y. parks, i
regulatory tools, subdivision public rrtilitr/f riilitir°s;
controls are an important it conforms to the general plan for the extension of the
means to ensure adequate municipality and its roads, streets, and public highways
infrastructure and regulate
community character. within the municipality and in its extraterritorial
Generally, utilities may not be jurisdiction, taking into account access to and extension of
connected to subdivided sewer and water mains and the instrumentalities of public
property without an approved
plat. utilities;
it conforms to any [adopted subdivision] rules . . . .'+
Weaknesses: Subdivision controls generally
must stand alone in the ETJ
(where zoning is not allowed By implication, the plat can be denied if the standards are not
without consent). Statutes do met. This requires a Comprehensive Plan that sufficiently
not allow regulation (without
consent) as to land use, bulk, defines the standards by which development must uphold.
height, number of buildings, For instance, the thoroughfare plan must encompass the entire
see of buildings, or residential !L t( — and beyond in some cases—with denoted alignments of
units per acre in the ETJ.
collector and arterial streets, and other regional, intra- and
inter-state highways.
Potential amendments to the subdivision regulations may
include the following:
(1) Access management standards could — and should —
Y �\ lc
be imposed consistent or similar to those
M- 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
Y �
X03 , r i arterial standards in the future. Strict application of
spacing requirements would: (1) encourage platting
Acce-Ss'rrictricidenieOt standards apOWIWithin the ETJ' (which is required when infrastructure — here, access
would help to avoid unsafe conditions while preserving streets — is dedicated); or (2) likely reduce lot depth,
the capacity of the roadway.
which would make more efficient use of the land.
14 Section 212.010,Texas Local Government Code
Draft 05/15/07 Page 10 of 23
13
(2) Although the City is not allowed to directly
regulate the number of . . . units . . . per 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 rules like minimum lot size,
minimum lot width, and right-of-way
dimensions.H Therefore, if the City were to
require a minimum lot size of five acres, for
instance, due to the capacity of the adjoining
roadway and/or where there are not public
water and sewer systems available, effectively, a
relationship may be forged between lot size,
infrastructure demands, and the availability of
adequate public facilities. This authority is
granted to the City "to promote the health,
safety, morals, or general welfare of the
municipality and the safe, orderly, and healthful
development of the municipality."'
(3) Together with the requirements for an increased
lot size could be an allowance-or incentive- for
development clustering. The option would be
en to the land owner as to \\hether they
choose to develop with 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
protection and preservation of its resources.While the '
City has regulations for floodplain areas,there are few
( 4f, • I A
other standards for the delineation and protection of , :„
• t arsit
wetlands, habitats, mature vegetated areas, or other
natural features. Resource protection standards *
would provide a method and means for requiring
.5
varying degrees of protection of resource features,
depending on their scale and significance, with By clustering development open views may be
protected thereby preserving a rural, open character..
development flexibility and incentives by way of
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 Ell 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.
16 Section 212.002,Rules,Subchapter A,Regulation of Subdivisions,Texas Local Government Code
Draft 05/15/07 Page 11 of 23
114
•
may allow a higher gross density as an incentive by adjusting lots sizes or using different housing
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
nary otherwise be exempt from the subdivision plat process,'7 The City has provisions for
development plats, with stated exemptions. it is advisable for the City to reconsider the waiver
allowance as well as the exemptions and instead, require submittal of a development plat for all
projects in the LI'J. Such a requirement would he of great value to document all improvements,
easements, and rights-of-way, and most importantly, because it must be approved to conform to: (I)
the general plans, rules, and ordinances of the municipality concerning its current and future streets,
sidewalks, alleys, parks, playgrounds, and public utility facilities; (2) the general plans, rules, and
ordinances for the extension of the municipality 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 E'lJ.'H
(6) Incorporation 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 ETJ. 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 Eli,
The means that 'nest communities use to exercise control of 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;
17 The authority to require a development plats is provided in Section 212.044,Local Government Code.
a Section 212.049,Texas Local Government Code
Draft 05/15/07 Page 12 of 23
Potentially entering into arbitration proceedings it annexation planning and negotiation is
unsuca;sful; and,
+ Potentially negotiating "strategic partnership agreements" with special districts.
Of significance in the law is an exemption from
the above requirements for annexation proposals ____ _ m-, _
that will involve [ewer than lilt) tracts of land -
where each tract contains at least one residential If the level of services,
infrastructure,and
dwelling. With the exceptjrnm of sizeable infrastructure
developments, most annexations are exempt maintenance in the Then services, infrastructure, and
from the above requirements. Also, the City may affected area before infrastructure maintenance must
annexation was: be:
not annex more than 10 percent of its land area
Lower than in the "Comparable to the level . . ,
in any given year. if it does not annex all of the municipality available in other parts of the
land that is allowed, the difference rolls over to municipality with topography, land
the next year. It multiple carryovers are use, and population density similar
accumulated, the City can annex up to 30 to those reasonably contemplated
or projected in the [annexed]
percent of its land area in a single year. area."
Equal to the municipality "[T]hat same[pre-annexation]level
State law provides for the minimum level of
service that must be extended to the annexed Superior to the
areas, as described in municipality
Re: services "Comparable to the level . . .
available in other parts of the
municipality c,ii topography, land
Significantly, State law does "not require that a use, and population density similar
uniform level of full municipal services be to those reasonably contemplated
provided to each area of the municipality if
orprin the [annexed]
different characteristics of topography, land use, Re: operating and Equal to or superior to the pre-
and population density constitute a sufficient maintaining annexation level.
basis for providing different levels of service."'" ' 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 City's 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
roivth management techniques in these areas to prevent premature development. i'or 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 Agricultural-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 'tiexas Local Government Code -- --
authorizes the City to enact zoning regulations to
control building height and size; lot coverage; yards
and open spaces; population density; the location to ,
and use of buildings; the location of land that may " n`a
be put to various business, industrial, residential, or
other purposes; the extraction of groundwater
(except by retail public utilities); and, in home-rule
municipalities like College Station, the bulk of
buildings. Zoning regulations are not authorized
outside of the municipality's corporate boundaries
without the consent of the affected laandowner(s).21
En concert with dune tion, all newly incorporated arL.a, should to he toned "A-0" agricultural-Open,
as ithout ctansideration of♦anti' other 'zoning district claitication unies,: merited by way of being within a
defined "growth 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 improvement plans.
The City could allow for very low density residential y
development in these agriculturally zoned areas by - ' � e _y
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 4
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 � t � r �� � ��«
percent open space equates to the same 0.150 units per ,• t., - `r
acre. Therefore, clustered residential development may be Clustering allows development value while preserving
allowed with a corresponding high open space
the rural,open character.
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 Local Government Code. See §
212,172(b),TLGC.
Draft 05/15/07 Page 14 of 23
17 — _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ___
requirement to preserve the agricultural character. Slightly higher levels of density nnay also he permitted
to allow inure development value without compromising the cln :acter ul 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 bind area, followed by annexations of the maximum allowed 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 long-term growth boundary. This 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.
Zoning Ordinance Simplification and Development Streamlining
if the City is to successfully entice development to occur within the City limits rather than the ETJ, its
development processes and timing of approvals must not he a constraint. Since a plat is the only required
approval for development (of less than five acre lots) in the I-LTJ, the complexity of the process and length
�� of bole to gain approval within the City may outweigh the benefits of in-City development (public
utilities, improved emergency response times, increased convenience, zoning controls, etc.). Therefore,
although the City's current process is not atypical, there arc significant improvements 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. The 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 future 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 infrastructure needs.
- Allowance for mixed use without a separate Planned Development District zoning process.
Draft 05/15/07 Page 15 of 23
[ ____
District and Development Min. Required
Minimum Site
Type OSR Max.Gross
Max. I Utilities Area
Suburban(S)
Single-Family 0.10 1.92 1.92 public 15,000 sf
Cluster 0.30 2.17 2.17 public 5 ac
Planned 0.85 2.25 3.50 public 15 ac.
Auto-Urban(AU)
Single-Family 0.10 2.61 2.90 public 20,000 sf.
Cluster 0.30 3.23 5.54 public 10,000 sf.
Planned 0.35 4.37 7.50 o public 10,000 s(
Urban(II)
Single-Family 0.10 3.27 3.64 public 15,000 sf.
Cluster 1 0.25 4.15 5.54 public 8,000 sf.
Planned 0.35 _ 5.56 8.50 o public 6,000 sf.
Thu above approach incur p rote,; planned dei eli>pment as an option th,lt i.s permitted by right,
-.1_11,))ect tel opplie ible tindntd,. Deimity Monoses are used os on incentive for on,outoging thi,. hype 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,
-,:d . ' .- -'. .rt .c,";:',..-"--"-,. r ',.r= to determine where and when infrastructure will be
tr, , t. provided. If the City commits to provide sewer service
-u with an expanded CCN and water is readily available
o through other sources, then the question of adequate
• 'Z4 4%. `r+uy
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
with development. Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances
Adequate public facilities requirements would essentially (APFOs) require applicants for new development to
stogp,the-scale of.die'veiapment concurrent with IN,
,requisite capacity improv ents,This may be applied.to demonstrate that facilities and services will be available to
roads,.utilities,andsc ls,among others, serve the project at the time the development is available
Draft 05/15/07 Page 16 of 23
1�_ . —_- _ __ _ w __ m_ ...
for occupancy. Utilizing this system, the City is able to adopt Icvel-of-service standards, which can be
used as criterion for judging conformance with the subdivision regulations. the provisions of State lacv''
allow the City to condition property development for a portion of the infrastructure costs, which
supports this method. As an alternative, higher impact fees and/or increased developer participation in
infrastructure construction and financing may he necessary to shorten development timeframes.
This approach is practical in that it ties development to the capacity of the infrastructure systems to
support it. The 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 welfare. The general components include:
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.
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 ll.re amount of capacity projected for a development during the time hetivern approval of a
project and its completion, which counts against the total capacity of public facilities in future
applications her development. An rspiration date for approved projects may he necessary so as not to
unnecessarily burden or deny other projects.
Provisions related to adequate public facilities could be added to the subdivision regulations. Icor
instance, the following — or similar — language could be used: "Tire City dors not direct/rt 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 within the development is sufficient to provide necessary potable water and 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.
22 Section 21.2.904,Apportionment of Municipal Infrastructure Costs
Draft 05/15/07 Page 17 of 23
20
Many argue that the market is the hest way to regulate development. This has merit only when all
elements are properly priced in the market. A problem as it relates to infrastructure, though, is that
support of development by adequate roads, police and fire services, schools, and other public services is
not part of the market equation. For example, road improvement and long-term maintenance are not
considered in a real estate transaction. A person who purchases a home on a gravel road does not
necessarily pay less for the Limine. "Therefore, when the road requires maintenance it heconies the City's
obligation to mike the improvements. Except for the most expensive housing, the tax revenue from
residential development is insufficient to cover the requisite costly infrastructure improvements and
service expansion.
A market performance ordinance addresses the capacity of
infrastructure. 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 cinder-improved roads.
Since the traffic volumes and capacity of the road may he known, there _
may be an allotment of dwelling units per acre based upon a
proportionate share of the road capacity. Therefore, the capacity is P,
spread evenly across all properties in the traffic-shed rather than on a
first-conte-first-serve basis as in the AF'FO approach.
Loch landowner has the right to use their proportionate share of the
„i ailalile road capacity'- loads with v en' l00 capacity or where there 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
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.
• A new road may be constructed to create a new traffic-shed,which may reduce the size of the traffic-
shed allowingincreased density. This option is available onlywhere there is direct access to an
tY P
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.
I ,
Draft 05/15/07 Page 18 of 23
21
Since State law specifically indicates that "a municipality shall not regulate: ... (4) the number of
residential units that can be built per acre of land",'' there would have to be a legal basis established for
the ordinance based on the City's jurisdiction to "promote the health, safety,morals,or general welfare of
the municipality and the safe orderly, and healthful development of the municipality."2
Impact fees are charged to new development for the construction of new infrastructure that is needed to
serve the development. They are related to special assessments, except that: (1) they are 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 infrastructure required as a result of the new development. Provided in
is a summary of their purpose, strengths,
liable 2, Impact Fees and limitations.
Purpose: To allocate the costs of Impact fees facilitate a planned, coordinated approach to
providing additional providing infrastructure. In Texas, impact fees may be used to
infrastructure to serve new fund water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities;
development to that new wastewater collection and treatment facilities; storm water,
development.
Strengths: Fair share fee allocation; cash drainage, and flood control facilities; and roadway facilities
payments help avoid that are needed to serve new development according to a
potentially dangerous capital improvements plan (including planning, engineering,
piecemeal improvements to land acquisition, and construction).2' They cannot be used to
dedicated rights-of-way.
fund:
Limitations: No street impact fees may be
charged in the ETJ (where Facilities that are not in the capital improvements plan;
formerly rural roads are likely to Repairs,operation,or maintenance of existing facilities;
be more easily overwhelmed Upgrades to existing facilities to meet new standards;
by new development).
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;
23 Section 212.003,Extension of Rules of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction,Texas Local Government Code
24 Section 212.002,Rules,Texas Local Government Code
23 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
22
kstimate the total number of projected service units necessitated by and attributable to new
development within the service area, based on the approved land use assumptions and calculated 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 up to 10 years.
Impact fees use the same theoretical basis as adequate public facilities ordinances. hssentially, the City
would establish the capacity of all applicable facilities and the required standard; for example, the level of
service (I.OS) for roads or number of acres of parks per one thousand persons. The impact fee is then
established to generate the funds needed to provide the desired level of service for all facilities. Rather
than exhausting capacity,impact fees require 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 must 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 integrity 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.
it
26 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.g., streets;
drainage; and water, wastewater, and other utilities), and/ora guarantee to annex the property (on
agreed upon terms), or not to annex the property for a period of not more than 15 years. Development
agreements run with the land, but do not bind end-buyers of fully developed lots, except with respect to
land use and development regulations that apply to the lots. Provided in
is a summary of their purpose, strengths, and limitations.
Development agreements are contracts, and as such, require
,., «, IrrirF. ,,r t„ 7negotiation and execution by the City and developer. In many
cases, there is little incentive for the developer to enter 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.27
utilities. No leverage is created by impact fees for roadway facilities
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." This is apparently so even if
the development within the
p the roadway facilities are provided by development
ETJ, provided that the agree Hent
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.
27"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.
28 The conditions do not involve land use controls or annexation.
29 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 urry be funded by au improvement district include:
I. landscaping;
2. erection of fountains,distinctive lighting, and signs;
3. acquiring, constructing, improving, widening, narrowing,
closing, or rerouting of sidewalks or of streets, any other
Purpose: To fund public improvements
roadways, or their rights-of-way; and programs by assessing
4. construction or improvement of pedestrian malls; those landowners who benefit
5. acquisition and installation at pieces at art; j from them.
acquisition, construction, or improvement at libraries; Strengths: Those who pay special
7. acquisition, construction, or improvement of off-street assessments are those who
directly benefit from the
parking facilities; improvements funded by
8. acquisition, construction, improvement, or rerouting of them; improvement districts
mass transportation facilities; are administered by the
governmental unit that formed
9. acquisition, construction, or improvement of water, them.
wastewater, or drainage facilities or improvements; Limitations: Potentially lengthy process for
10, the establishment or improvement of parks; improvement district
l I, projects similar to those listed in 1 through 10 above; 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 wastewater, public safety,
security, business recruitment, development, recreation, and cultural enhancement; and
H. payment of e pcnsc'+ incurred in the establishment, administration, and operation 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 30
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
30 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
z5
service plan must include an assessment plan" and inust "he reviewed and updated annually for the
purpose ut determining' the annual budget for improvements."
Use of this instrument may be feasible and warranted 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 "growth area(s)" where near-term infrastructure 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 I1t,la' i r•rle,,.i t me' '.';A+i,in 4.:'rr r,zci , is a summary of their
purpose, strengths, and limitations. Chapter 791 provides broad authority for municipalities to contract
with each other, with counties, with special districts and political subdivisions, with federally recognized
tribal governments that are located in the state of Texas, and
M ; r s with state agencies to provide "governmental function[s] or
mr /, "r "" `'"'s"v` , service[s] that each party to the contract is authorized to
Purpose: To increase the efficiency of
perform individually." Such functions and services include:
local governments by "Functions normally associated with the routine operation
enhancing cooperation of government, including tax assessment and collection,
1 among them,
--_ personnel services,ices, purchasing, records management
Strengths: High degree of flexibility to services, data processing, warehousing, equipment repair,
contract in order to provide a
wide variety of governmental and printing."
services, "Police protection and detention services; . . . tire
Limitations: Interlocal cooperation protection; . . . streets, roads, and drainage; . . . public
contracts facilitate the use of health and welfare; . . . parks and recreation; . . . library and
other growth management museum services; . . . records center services; . . . waste
tools,therefore their
effectiveness depends largely disposal; . . . planning; . . . engineering; . . . administrative
upon how well they are functions; . . . public funds investment; . . . comprehensive
implemented and what they health care and hospital services; or . . . other
provide for.
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.32
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...
31
City and County owned property is not exempt from assessment.See§§372.014,TLGC.
3"-Sections 791.021 et seq.,TGC set out additional substantive and procedural requirements for these types of agreements. j
Draft 05/15/07 Page 23 of 23
May 29, 2007
Workshop Agenda
East College Station Transportation Study
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
Fromn, 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
s.
} sx . , ,d� `.,k
r _.
1 '" CITY OF COLLEGE STATION r
.+'
711
( , '-V.- .r ;r
r
rw - � Y
;` „? y5- lM' I '` 1 ,. ailwd,. . r::J4t�( � . .. y.ty .......1...,....... .rrnsp, e ; `_.. !� ! , $„yi.4',, '' a' ` ty.7#?'gi.> � ` ”Kc s A4 x ,:,NA
^ ti t .;. "'', f44i > 1*' fi .i ca m x v
l l 1 T '-','"I
eS; tnns, '� +., ,# tr *a,.f..?,‘:,'-''''',,-;',..:,-;:':,.-....::,,....-.',':','..,;..,..,e., • . '� `l'"`tiN.,*-'�.� lll °ads, -.uA t
iC '§r s { . bha w ,C mayr --.„. m ` } " frr�x ,,:� w,, }+k n � .'[d €:-i1'P°C +r ,` # ^f, x >,.8 'fill- 3 ,,- i,, ' ''''!:::'",*;.'"7
.,� . - r
u�_rl IQmley-Horn
II and Associates,Inc.
28
t 4,
FAst (;orrrc;r: Si 'rtov y • f.-
i t .,A
cmc.r.WRSTAMM
Acknowledgements
w(mid like to thank: the many citizens and volunteers that took time out of their husv schedules to help the
Cit) MICitllege Station find ;t long-term sustainable solution to the tr,tttic issues for the H(Istside Collei4e
Station.
In particular we would like to thank the .\.t.1\'son Committee ,Alcmhers:
• i\licbael Parks, Assistant Director B I COG
• Linda I_u.Sut, Director I3C:SLbJPO
• Dennis Christianson P.E., Director of 111, Texas Transportation Institute
• Bryan !Food P./ District L'ntiueerTvDOT Bryan
• /oiru I Lapp, Cauirrnuu 7 iorusportation Cammitice(aid(onuci/Person, C.ilp of Callt,pr.Stuliorr
• I.Pmu.11c1/1nruct, (74 hr/ion
• fou Gal', C:onncil Perron, Cite of College.Station
• Charlotte,Slack., Aretghborlrood Repre.rentatire
• 131/1.1tockton P.! ., A'ei:'hboir/rood Represenfutire
• 7i R/onne, Aoitf/iorluurd Representative
• Chuck. 1:1/iron, 1)rrrlopuioiN Ivo /0 reut�rtirr
"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
NM Kand
and associates,Inc. 29
EAST GoilEGE STATION 11,{ 0
TuANspoia.vrioN Sri.DV
',aril . Grim/Cow=Stumm
Table of Contents
Acknowkagements
Table of Contents 2
List of Tables and Fignres 4
Introduction 5
Study Purpose 5
Report Outline 6
The Planning Process 7
Study Goals and Objectives 7
Scenario Planning 7
Forming the Preferred Scenario 11
Eastside Plan Recommendations
Goal Number One: Increase the compatibility between existing and planned land uses and the
transportation system. 12
Recommendation#1—Incorporate New Street Standards 12
Reconunenclation#2—Develop a Context Sensitive Design Process
Goal Number Two: To preserve mobility without negatively impacting existing neighborhoods with
additional traffic. 14
Recommendation#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 22
Basic Modeling Theory 22
2007 Model Assumptions 24
2030 (Build-out)Model Assumptions 24
Four-Step Modeling Process 25
Trip Generation 25
Trip Distribution 31
Modal Split 32
Kimley-Horn
116...:1111111! 1 and Associates,Inc. 30 2
QST COLLEGE STATION
'ISz:��aro�z�rArtow S-rt;uY ��"�' � � • � _ , ,1
1 QrropCouuG Sraisox
Traffic Assignment
Model Calibration and Validation 33
Evaluating the Thoroughfare Scenarios 36
Vehicle Miles Traveled(VMT) 36
Vehicle Hours of Travel(VHT) 36
Dela.% (VIID) 36
Traffic Modeling Findings 37
Appendix B—Public Meeting Summaries 38
Public Meeting 1 38
Workshop Results _ �_. 39
Public Meeting 2 40
Workshop Results 40
Appendix C—Context Sensitive Design 42
Street Realms 42
New Street Standards for College Station V_ 44
Commercial Streets 45
Residential Streets 46
Industrial Streets 46
Industrial Streets47
Mixed Use Streets 48
"._ Kimley-Horn
W 1 and Associates,Inc. 31 3
, . .
EAST COLLEGE St/MON " `
4 ,9TitANSPORTNISON 5U.D3Y
H f F x j um*cow=5uxant+
List of Tables and Figures
Planning Process
"I-able I:!A//c I 'olmitn r o/Recomaeuded Plan 17
1P/54 2: Iii;i' II iiGitiou Plan 20
Table is P/ni,mii»(:o;t I`stimale
I'i int-I:1 astC.oile,r,S't.rtiou.Stue1}': lien;11afi— —_,— --.-------- 5
I gore 2:,S'X-,ieb Report Oratline 6
Figure 3:Process Flow Diagram 6
Figure 4:Planning Process Diagram 7
Figure 5:Thoroughfare Plan Scenario 8
1 iyiir 6:(.oivalnnit7 C.ouctpts 10
7:1!Jinni.Scella lio 10
I7�rtIM'r5:P;flrlfi.VtCIkU70 Ptt'ICti7ltt
11
Ii jive 9:("ommmial. !aerial
Figrue 10:Commercial Collector , 12
Finn 11: R'Sidelltial. lit,iia/
I'i;vmr 12: Resileirtial Co/lertor 13
I.{t;rrre 13:lirelustin!!Shirt
1riri< 13:_1lltiiet I ;:,.SJi<</ 13
1 :
S
l�tnr 16: i difd
19
Technical Process(Appendix A)
Table;1-1:Demographic compaiisou 30
'1 able 1-2: 1 u/Aitioori table for 2007.1 lode! 33
lab/e:-1-3:.Strnlp:-lreaMobility Summai) Chart 37
Table A-4: Regional-tlobilitp Snmmai}'Chant 37
Figure/1-1:I-lousehokls 2007 fir the stud}'area 23
Figure A-2:Households 2007 for the study area 25
Figure A-3:Households 2030 for the study area 26
FigureA-4:Population Density 2007for the study area —� — 27
Figure A-5:Population Density 2030 for the study area —. — 28
Figure A-6:Employment 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 with number of lanes i - 32
Figure A-10:2007 Existing Trac counts 34
Figure A-11:2007 Model 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
INN r and Associates,Inc. 32 4
(biP
�
EAST COLLEGE S"C�fInN �
`I1t•Nsrvirar:rra(r Esc
yR r� `� a Cmoe(ia waSTAnON
Introduction
The Eastside of College Station is facing ever-increasing traffic demands with backups on State 1lighway 6 (S.I1
6) near Rock Prairie Road and also incremental increases along all of SI 16 and most major arterials. Coupled
with new commercial /retail development proposals near Roc : Prairie Road and SI l 6, the trattic pressures are
only going to increase. Neighborhood associations on the I'.astside fear that the additional traffic demands are
going to spill oyer onto their neighborhood streets thereby ,tltecting their .lu;tlity of life. These challenges arc
not uttiyue to College Station; many communities throughout 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 study area is bounded by: S1 I on the wrest, Carter Creek on the east, SII 30 (I Iaryey Road) on
the north, and rAlum Creek (including the SI 16 / Nantucket Interchange) on the south side.
The ultimate goal of this Cast College Station transportation study is to plan for the build-out of this arca in an
orderly Nvav as to avoid wondering if the
transportation system will handle the added traffic.
1'o accomplish this goal the City and their
consultants evaluated the eyisting thoroughfare pian,
based on the intplementati,,n (It the proposed land
use plan. Lt additiont t,) the technic.rl .ut:rl\pis �f t1
traffic demands, an extensive public outreach process
was conducted to better understand the issues at a
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.
Figure 1:East College Station Study Area Map
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.
�' Kimley.Horn
►. and Associates,Inc. 33 5
1='..hiST COLLEGESTATION` 411
-.6.111Prie CMOS re. STAMM
Report Outline
In the early phases of this study the
team envisioned a process that would
have an intense amount of public
input while at the same time running
a technical process that was objective
.ind defcnsilalc. Figure 2 is an actual
image resulting from in cart\
brainstorming session that guided this
process to the end.
Figure 2: Sketch Report Outline
The Planning Process is Jotnsed or micleiitanding and addressing/l
concerns and needs of all parties influenced by transportation decisions in the
study area. I helefoie,public pad/Oat/OH 1S a paramount component of the n:
pjaimlllg prt a is (altd is diSC1ussi d ill detail 111 tin folioll'llig,i`1't 11011).
-41
The Technical Process is,focused on having systematic methods to
deter nine 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 Process. The technical
process is discussed in greater detail in Appendix A.
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.
Kimley-Horn
r I and Associates,Inc. 34 6
EAST COLLEGE STATION '� �. (rI5"
'�
TteA:sFVFt-r:':n ;v
oSn_tyv ` *,,
The Planning Process
The planning process used for this study was based on facilitation the participation of
the community, private developers, and agency representatives. With quality of life
issues, developers on hold, and city leaders searching for solutions, developing consensus
on what needs to he done can only he done through an eytcnsiv c outreach effort. In the
end, de_yduping the solution is going to result in a compromise l0y ail involved for the
good of tltc conlntunity as whoic.
The outreach was conducted through a series of Advisory pit
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
,An Advisory Committee meeting was held on February 27,
2007, in which members established study goals and VISION
r)hjccti'es.
Figure 4: PI:umning Prnecss Di;i;gum
Advisory Committee goals and objectives for the East College Station plan include:
I. 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.
Kimley.Horn
F and Associates,Inc. 35 7
------
....
EAST COIJEGE STATION
s,, ),-, - '' ..,,,-.L-t I ; . I
vitipie Agi ,_ 4; ,„ •,,:i.„ ,,„4 OrrwCougceSTATiam
1 ' ' 10.711EN Sri Kimley-Horn
t4'^--- ArfOgr 1 arid Assoctiitec inr
9 Highest hours of delsry and
travel
Most concestic; i :ii pockets
. ,
. , • Higher levels of traffic on
., collector streets
.. ,,
• Least relative construction
cost
. .
/
. ss
i
:-/
.
. ,
.
I
••
Functional Classification Map - „
'
(Thoroughfare Plan Scenario)
..,,
1-----i Mixed Use '
— Commercial Arterial
,
Commercial Collector ...-'
..,
--- Industrial Arterial
\
.i.<
Industrial Collector \ ,,,,:\ ei
— Residential Arterial
--- Residential Collector
,
o 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2 . e
-- Miles
Figure 5:Thoroughfare Plan Scenario
Kimley-Horn
11111•0.:MN r 1 and Associates,Inc, 36 8
EAST GOI.LEGE STATION 1 '. 41/ i ' . ' , , Pi /4"4144
THAN.spoRTATIoN S 11:DV ' -:" ,''... ' :' r ... t limit';•;'„ 1 -
ClitcoCouscaSTAnoN
. . ,
(4.-.1 :4:1',, ,( ...iiii,! ',1,1tw, \ ,'IP"Mell prl Knley-Horn
W.-- r'mll f 1 'Ind AsQ,nc?!.(3'3 Inc
) Lov:ect hour"2-, ,,--::f cir;171\i' 'Lind
travel
:,..., • Least levels of traffic on
...
collector streets
.. .
• Highest relative
construction cost
...,
....... , 1'''' i
. - .
, ,.. •
- '
N \ I
*
. -,...,,
/ / /Functional Classification Map N.. N
(Community Concept Scenario)
i Mixed Use ..-‘, , ,/
,
Commercial Arterial ''')):',„ \ /7/-
- Commercial Collector N,.-‘ --" „
„,
/
—0 Industrial Arterial '''),, -`'''''”, /
---- Industrial Collector /
/
x;
-00.-- Residential Arterial
- Residential Collector
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2
Miles N. a,
Kimley-Horn
NM r 1 and Associates,Inc 37 9
EAST COLLEGE STATIONFlfroi. - ,-, #
op -p."`
112ANSPOrZTAI ION Sri Dy W
: crrY of comma sunom
Figure 6: Community Concepts Scenario
' '''. .Fil Kimley-Horn
and Asscciales,Inc
d,
Mid-level hours of delay
ld travel
..." • Mid-levels of traffic on
collector streets
..„
---- , • Second lowest relative
construction cost
, ..
i
„....- ,„
. ,
' :....
N.. ,
. ,
;-7
/
Functional Classification Map „, .,
/
(Hybrid Scenario)
'''''r:N /
i----- Mixed Use „../
—.-•i Commercial Arterial
‘i .i . /
Commercial Collector
— Industrial Arterial ,. ',
Industrial Collector
i.,..m... Residential Arterial \\ ,1.
Residential Collector
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2
,..._._.........____,..._Miles
Figure 7:Hybrid Scenario
OW , it ii
KimleyHom
Ihb.i IMP 1 and Associates,Inc. 38 10
EAST COLLEGE STATION 4441
'ruANSF>ufrf:�r1oN S rf Dti �+.� •" : 147A2:°: 1`11'''::':'';4*w,
1111114•"
,NR ..� CMoBeougceSTetsox
Forming the Preferred Scenario
The three scenarios found on the previous pages
were presented at the final public meeting For Sceneno Preference
input on the most preferred. Among attendees,
6710 agreed that the I Ivhrid scenario hest met
their transportation needs. I IoweVer,attendees
and City Staff did provide comments on all the
-,ccnarios, which ultimately led to the
recommended thoroughfare plan tier this area zs�o
(see Figure 15). ❑Thoroughfare
i. ❑Community Concept
4 ,.:.,,}$ ❑Hybrid Scenario
The following section details many of the
recommended thoroughfare changes and provides 67%
the reasoning and justification for each project.
Figure 8:Public Scenario Preference
KimleyHorn
1160—;11111.1F 1 and Associates,Inc. 39 11
l F
EAST COLLEGE STATION #rift10Arilt
`liausPoIO rioN STI lw .�
.. �1. ' i M r a r,:at CITY CO CDU EG STAmtr
Eastside Plan Recommendations
The following recommendations strive to exceed the goals and objectives stated in the previous section,
including specific recommendations focused on policy changes for the City of College Station. 'T'hese final
recommendations were derived trom community input and technical traftie analysis. In the end, to meet all the
goals set forth by the ,\dyisory Committee, several critical revisions and or additions need to he made to the
thoroughfare plant. The goals and subsequent recommendations tions found below detail how each recommendation
ftects each respective goal.
1
Goal Number One: Increase the compatibility + x ; , /
between existing and planned land uses and the
�� " `� •
transportation system. t' +
Comp itthility betwccn land use and transportation should he viewed
from two different perspectives. First, how well (it at all) does the _,;lidtror �t !'i
system of planned streets handle the current and future traffic
forecasted for the study area? Second, do the planned streets add
sustainable value to the surrounding neighborhoods, and are those
planned streets designed in such a way as to blend into the surrounding land uses? Too often streets are
designed only for automobile uses and do not encourage nr accommodate pedestrian and bicycle users. The
recommendations to reach this goad strive to aeconunoxlate the future traffic demands while at the same time
provide street designs that encourage the use of alternative modes of travel.
Recommendadon #1—Incorporate New Street Standards
Incorporate the following new street types 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.
�t.. .r
t wistattmo
I Machan J
Ib' rareM9 Nealm P�estran flealm
Pedestrian Neafm
Tra elway Neafm } 4 10.5' I_
Peaasuite, ea' eede,Man Nealm 4 Atnn<.of-Woo
xINY
xmm of way
loft
The total fllgtrt.d•Way<an also be adjusted to 120 ao accom modete a lanes
Figure 9:Commercial Arterial Figure 9:Commercial Collector
Kimley-Horn
and Associates,Inc. 40 12
EAST COLLEGE STATION •)i V
. yrs%
lla,Nsrei_wlov Suuv ,1 • ! ,
:1411 0 AlA! .. tom- ..i1 C]novCouRceSurioN
r---
. . n
Figure 11:Residential Arterial Figure 10:Residential Collector
r
c� . . n
. i I4-0I
4
4tr. T 4 T
4 T <-------T
14
Figure 13:Industrial Street Figure 14:Mixed Use Street
Recommendation #2—Develop a Context Sensitive Design Process
Develop and adopt a Context Sensitive Design (CSD) process that is integrated into the Comprehensive
Planning Process. The end result should be a variety 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.
Kimley.Horn 13
INand Associates,Inc. 41
EAST COLLEGE STATION . Gorfl‘
'tltvcspcxrr noN S"ru1>v .„ ><4 I < "' 71
wr y�r�; ' `."I (Ire asCow:clams=
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 desired destinations. This meads introducing new streets, re-aligning, or extending existing streets to
provide more than one option to satisfy the trip. (n several cases, innovative techniques must he used to
mitigate or calm traffic flows on neighborhood streets. Ater receiving input from the .April public meeting, the
recommended thoroughfare plan embodies elanv of the elements from the (:ontmunity (:oncepts scenario and
the I brid scenario.
Recommendation #3—Adopt the Recommended East College Station Thoroughfare 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 Appomattox to Switch Station Road. This
connection provides an alternative route for the neighborhood. 'There are -
emetgency Vehicle concerns when there is only one way into a
neighborhood. To mitigate any increased traffic to and from Harvey Road � N
into the \V indwood neighborhood, a raised median is recommended at the .
intersection of I larvey and Appomattox to deny left-in or left-out access.
The traffic analv sis performed in this area shows that the median barrier
would limit traffic to its current traffic- flow- and eliminate ani cut-through
traftic concerns.
• 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 having to access the frontage roads and u-turn. While this street
mangy" not be feasible to construct due to existing commercial development
(near Rock Prairie and an existing church north of\V'oodcreek)• however, this �r
alignment should remain on the plan in the event that redevelopment occurs. h ; "t
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. f
Kimley-Horn
IIIMI1 and Associates,Inc. 42 14
EAST COLLEGE STATION : r Sruuv „ • '4'• orip
�t ,i-.w v (YExoscvuzciaSrox
• Emerald Parkway Extension from its current 301w1,-,:.
terminus near the kmerald Forrest neighborhood t fir
to the south to Bird Pond. The final alignment
would need to he determined via a detailed
alignment study. To minimize neighborhood
disruption, a major goal should be to place the
road between the flood plain arca and existing
neighborhood. The existing tour lane div icled
I merald Parkway cross section would remain as ` ,
is; however, near 511 6 this road should be tat w 1;a i
widened to Sl\ lanes and include new signal •
hardware to improve the intersection operations.
• Lakeway Drive Extension from \V'.D. bitch to a neve east-west
arterial. This new road will allow for greater access to future
commercial and retail developments while at the same time
improve mobility for the Pebble Creek neighborhood and
neighborhood churches.
• New East-West Arterial from SI 16 to Rocl< Prairie Road.
This new roadway will have access to the SI 16 northbound
tr��ntagc read, allowing access to .incl from thisIS CLI. A\ bile MC)
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 tic into
the frontage road at SI 16 without an overpass, the alignment should remain tlexiable 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 y, $r
transitions to a Mixed-Use Street, and ends at Rock ;
Prairie Road as a Commercial Collector. Also, it would ;; I
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.
Kimley-Horn
and Associates,Inc. 43 15
EAST COLLEGE STATION - (40efs-%
`tIL1:tiSPOR'i_\fIO.J STI ir)v `° •illB
171.8'I ie1. '1 Urn*CO asSTA181H
• North Forrest Parkway from SH 6 to Linda Lane. Taken from
the current thoroughfare plan, this four-lane arterial provides ,
improved east-west mobility, ultimately to I larvey Road. With a
major flood plain crossing, careful alignment studies and flood
control measures should lie undertaken during the preliminary
engineering phase of this project.
• Raintree/Appomattox area. ,An estcnsion of;Appomattox just .
west of Raintree has been found to reduce the future traffic on > ,,t ;
Raintree by up to 5U')/0. This new road will also form an excellent
buffer between the future commercial development to the West , '
� �k ,
and the existing Raintree neighborhood.
�
• Rock Prairie Road from the south study area
to Barron Road. improvements involve a haste t
four-lane divided road with a raised median. '' e
however, from Barron Road to the SI! 6, this
road is recommended to be six lanes. Major
improvements to the intersections (including
adding southbound and northbound dual lefts
with three through lanes and free right turn
1,111csi bold improv circul:uion. Additionally,
adding L-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 simlar to the current traffic 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 a
will have sufficent capacity due to the non-competing left turn l"{
movements along Rock Prairie Road and with access to the new
development surrounded by frontage roads, collector streets, and an 0,0-
on-ramp before Rock Prairie Road. Foxfire also benefits from the 49
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 RO6N PRAIA*
Residential Collector,which includes on-street bike lanes and
potentially a raised landscaped median area. Bike lanes and a P
landscaped median could also be retrofitted onto Stonebook.
Kirnley-Horn
SII_ 1 and Associates,Inc, 44 16
EAST COLLEGE STATION
1i2ANSPORTAIION STUI A" I,
Traffic 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
APP(fiNI:VITON flarve\ Road Ind 1500 ,
_ 5000 0.30
-
nAcR \(;i s.lruiSI.Tic F iileralil 2600 2 12000 0.22
pd,bk,
BACKAGE Creek RP 6900 2 12000 0.58
BARRON S116 East of SI 1 6 4900 4 30000 0.16
BARRON Rock Prairie Frost 6500 4 26000 0.25
EN'FRALD PK\X!).' SH 6 East of SH 6 31800 6 45000 0.71
EMERALD PKWY Appomattox Barron 26000 4 26000 1.00
\\1) I11C11 Sf 16 1,akcwa\ Dr 25000 4 26000 0.96
\\I) FII( II Lakcwa\ Dr Pebble Creek 13900 4 26000 0.53
_
\ND FIFO i Pebble Creek Iiist to end 7100 4 26000 0.27
11.A RV EY SH 6 Appomattox 17100 4 _ 30000 0.57
I1ARVIN Appomattox West of 5113n 13100 4 30000 0.44
1.AKIAVAY I)R _ Pi _ arview _ 2 Itch Pk11000
12000 0.92
1.AK1',W.1.Y DR Parkview Gatewm Blvd 12000 2
12000 1.00
R\icr.\\ \Y DR 1Ncw -w
cast cst 1 710: '1 5400
- 12000 0.45
N(\\ IA\ SI 1 6 1.Acv,m Dr 7800 4 30000 0.26
14,BEI,11,CRI A,K Si I 6 Barr(al 9700 4 16000 0.61
Pt 111111 E CREEK Barron New east ss 4300 4 16000 0.27
PEBB1.17,CREEK New east west Fitch 4000 4 10000 0.40
NORTI I FOREST PKWY SH 6 Fast of Sf16 5900 4 30000 0,20
_
RAINTREE S1I6 End 2500 2
5000 0,50
APPONIXFRA Raintrcc North Forrest 2500 2 5000 0.50
ROCK PRAIRIE 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
End of Study
ROCK PRAIRIE Fitch 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
Kimley-Horn
illto.j IMP 1 and Associates,Inc. 45 17
EAST COLLEGE STATION
li Lvsr>ortT-Nrury 5rt.'r>v '' `..,
�l _ sem,ios
Rccornrnendccl Sccruario Map
Tile following map represents the recommend thorouglrtatre map for the Last ollege Station 'Transportation
Study. Because of the signihtcance of Linda I ane to this study area it has been included on this map, Also, note
that recommend street hypes are themed on this map by color as they represent the wishes and aspirations of the
citizens of(;allege Station.
'
�m,egend
t:
��„ t eccrnrnr`nderl i'lan
Q % Functional Caassification
��0 • t`r ' Oil" ,.....%:,&:',,f1 • Freeway
� '
` 5' r -,,<,;,,%,,, i' vs _rr,1ti+ .C` I m Use Street
J, " �� . ., " 1l i .�.Commercial Arterial
Cornn�ercicil C ,II.>aar
Industrial.atrial
Indu riul Coli-...,..1,4
•
�� Residential Arterial
J�'
�P ia` Residential Collector
r..-- n �
Pia I,-3nta i Fvtr.rs >
S' `j' c,
v R-�rnt,. F.
--,1--z,'11
'.S
O� ,
Q .
l
°O� ROCK PRAIRIE Rp
s b .r'a'h , ~•<.i.>0...,4,,,.','¢ s'L .`�':1,1'2..,51 . r 4,,.--.-4_:1,-,:- "r �
c:�$, '+ ��.`` 3� � � `rgLrL >:.;.--''. ar ae+t''�r`w x,�a :'''',4',..,f,-;,,,.-
"
dam+� ;
�c^sh''''r''''';'''=::''''':'''.::-':,'If":'-',,i,;•:; ;;','
k. - .s�*2. �O�,,,Cr� _ *�` r a: ' .
9a d c4
�`" �` wi?� a +r; Y,#'sem �..^ww t s'`, ,} , .
4!' �..� � y k:', El k �.*A '� ''' 1 1. t `i �} �:'#,,, "fin.
�� '� s3 �� 3 . 1 r �. � �' +,,�`t�,.:_ ':.,6'6-, �� !r �, r ". �t ��.ea" an �,fiy�a�" I `,r, g+' r� '..
- " 5, 'a',� .'''Q-,,!,;`,"'i.„
i ♦Oa wp t }� ,, a `, r ie'S .:,.,..',�'.^' 8 �Y'� ;,
Q
S—;;;••••:!:‹Y''''').-1
Y�Nfi ' �' ,';':,:,..;,,,,L .,:''''''',:-:',;';".„;',',:‘::,4-';';'''� V- k ::✓"K '�r� q< � � p.
:,.','.';;''''';;.,,f'''''':"._.;:“'''','"' �,ti"4. � � � �e�r3. acr. �. '. i7�
t
rrr
t F, k
�ry � Q� , r�� .. 'f
Figure 15:East College Station Thoroughfare Plan
=w r 1 Kimley-Horn
6. and Associates,Inc. 46
1 , 18
EAST COLLEGE STATIONI
"' Cioerpli
\NspoicoN S )y „ 1 s -
V CUTOPrra MMSOSION
Goal Number Three: To plan for a multinodal transportation system that addresses the
needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders.
Recommendation #4 Adopt the proposed East College Station Hike/Bike Plan as part of the Parks
II/faster Plan.
•,
Proposed Hike/Bike Plan
•
Me Paths
R lee Trail
Path Existing V \<,
4,
Path Proposed
Route Exrstrag
-- sure Proposed
Schools
Park Areas
1:7 Study Area
4r 4 FEMA Flood Pluto
0 0.25 0.5 1
as....Art_ Miles
Figure 16: Hike and Bike Recommendations
#10'
bob..Mir 1 and Associates,iric 47 19
EAST COLLEGE> ci: ST^r�orr ,
ll ``� rips
"tk\.N;st'OizrArtoN Salim-
'
ii !' , t t i s
+r 2'1 f P a� t'R. �. ..1 �RaCvuucasr�t
Goal Number Four: To put in place an irnplenicntation plan that .1:1:.13':1-1:'
5 phased in a manner
to address mobility needs as land development occurs.
This goal is aimed at developing a list of recommendations that can be put in place to guide the implementation
of this plan. The list was based on technical information of traffic demands, combined with local knowledge
and staff expertise on arcis that are ripe I,)r drvclopntetu. This list was drvclopcd to help Hicv makers to
prioriii?..c the needed improvement for this area.
ROAD FROM TO Cunuucnts Priority
B;\CK;\Gt. ROAD New Pebble Creek Rock Prairie Build with development I
ROCK PRAIRIE West t'R Bast FR Widen to six lanes I
ROCK PRAIRIE SD 6 Stoncbrook Widen to six lanes I
R(.)CK PRAIRIE Intersections U-Turns U-Turns and intersections I
BARRON_ SH 6 East of SH 6 New interchange with 6 =_
B;ARR()N Rock Prairie Emerald New road
LAKEWAY DR New east-Leese hitch Ncw road "'
\PI'()\l:A•C['()N Ritinu'ce North Forrest New 111)01/ rake;trattic otf int R,iintre ?
R()CK PRAIRIE Stonel.>rooh Bird Pond Widen to six lanes 2
ROCK PRAIRIE Bird Pond Fitch Widen to four lanes
R()CK PRA IRI L'; Pitch End of Studv .Arca Widen to tour Lines _ -�
--
Pcdc�ui:ut hike improvements/ traffic
)N1. IBR( IO1; AWood Creek Schtsea calming
1'6.clr0rri,in hike imhroLt mems ' trattic
ST( t( )I. Roel I'rairiu A\ootl (:rea. c;tlniiii
I'ctie>trian Iiil.c impr„Ccntrut� ; trtttie
\WO(_)D(;REEK SII 6 Stoncbrook calming
— Pedestrian bike improvements / traffic
\\OO1,)CREEK Stunchn,uk land admin )_
Connect to Switch Station/ N., left in or out
API'(_)M \F1ON End Switch Station at Harvey 3
Improve intersections /widen to
HARVEY SH 6 Appomattox 4 lane/median at Appomattox 3
HARVEY Appomattox West of SH 30 \Viden 3
PEBBLE CREEK SH 6 Barron Ncw road 3
PEBBLE CREEK Barron New cast-west New 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 design/construction 5
EMERALD PKWY SH 6 East of SH 6 Widen at SH 6/add pedestrian elements 5
EMERALD PKWY Appomattox Barron New road 5
NEW EAST-WEST SH 6 Lakeway Dr New road 5
Table 2:Implementation Plan
Cam rr KlmleyF{orates,Inc. 48 20
EAST COLLEGE EGE S1 vTION
'lii�4Nsrotrt:rru:>N �rurn' .'_r; _"t^° r • � � ,.: 1 _ Plill
iN • :, Pk, t..wk's•.1 ern 01 COULAMSTATiam
Goal Number Five: To gen crate a plan that is both affordable and achievable.
The following cost estimate was developed using planning casts (per mile). This is not applicable for use in
construction or bidding. It should, however,be used for comparison purposes only.
funding for these intprovLiucnts needs ii) come tram many dittercttt sources. The trarlitiunal st)urces such as
the general fund,TND()"l', and bond programs might not be enough to fund ,ill the needed improvements.
Innnv-,ttiv c funding, approaches must Inc explored. I.vatnplcs include tratlic impact ices, . h RhivC tolling, and
Tax increment financing Districts (lib's).
COST
ROAD FROM TO ESTIMATE
\pp(.)m,A1 t()N Rnintrcc Nttrth Forrest S75H,tkiti
,AI'PO I\FlO\ I?nd Switch Station S I5u,000
Ii:A(.k \DI. Ncw Pchhlc (:reel; RP 5375,0Un
BACKAGL; SandSnnc h.tncrald ..S1,500,UU(1
BARRON SLI 6 East of SH 6 $3,1)00,000
B,ARR(IN Last (it SI 16 I.,incnilrl 55,111)11,11111
IMI.R.AI,I) Plc\V'u SI! 6 f:nd SU
L\II.R:AI.I) l'K\V ' l',nd Barron s-I.75,nnn
II \RV'1'.1" SI I (, I'1vun,unt5 —'5n,uno
I I.ARVI'.1 \pp'un.un)y I inch I ci roh,iuin
I.;AI.I A\;\l 1)R New c.tu-wc>t Fitch ;', .-)u,uuu
New L\\' SII 6 Lakewav Dr $500,000
New EV' I.akcvv-av Rock Prairie 5'_,500,(100
NC)RIAi FOREST
PISAV'i SI 1 6 Linda Lane $3,759,000
PEIII3LE,CREEK SLI 6 Barron 53,000,000
PEBBLE CREEK Barron New cast-west 5625,000
PEBBLE CREEK New E\\' Fitch $3,750,000
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 $48,950,000
Table 3:Planning Cost Estimate
,, Kimleylian
OW 1and Associates,Inc. 49 21
of�sry^�M
5 #
EAST Gori F:ce SrAnov •
'lizA.tispoRTATtoN Si' AUY
'' c , , x s
.O'cTw col E►casuma
Appendix A: Technical Process
The following section provides the City with technical information on the tools used to complete the analysis of
the I:,ast College Station Transportation Snide-. The prin-mry used he transportation planners ,and engineers
is a travel demand model. 'These models enahlc agencies Co estimate trsttlic demands. In the simplest terms, the
model turns people and empluVees into trips, tinds their origin and destination, and assigns them a path its
complete their trip (see the adjacent graphic). The trips are elailv so it accounts for Itunte to vcork, home to
shop, and hack to home.
qtr.
With the use of a travel demand model, planners and engineers are able to
estimate current and also Future traffic demands. The model can also he used to
compare how changes to land use and demographics will impact the local and
regional transportation network. Simple put, the model allows us to test ••lv• °111
transportation tad land use ideas.
The following section will describe the basic theory of the travel demand model.
Later sections will describe the major Findings from the model. 1
Bstsic Modeling Theory
I3v creatine and using ;i trav el model, ,)tie is .utempting to produce it nt.trl,cnrarical rrpl esentarion titan
India ideal's decision-making process:
Why to make a trip 4 When to make the trip 4 Where to make the trip 4 I low to make the trip 4
What.. 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.
Kimley+Horn
1 1 and Associates,Inc. 50 22
EAST COLLEGE STATION ,�t,. !
vis-%
_nine
_'_ .. ` (Iry ca;Comm Sun=
'<, - , /)- >a_
Illairellk
Legend
TAz
Study Area E
it V
Figure A-1: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. The
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-Horn
1116.1 1 1 and Associates,Inc. 51 23
5'r"♦?'3Jpi�
EAST COLLEGE STATION + 11$ Ivy; � ��
`lie.tvsroaT.\nov 5runv '
. •d 1 ern oi?c inuiUN
2007 Model Assumptions
The College Station base year (2007) model network was developed using BCSTIPO 199(i base network for the
study area. Current aerial photography and field reconnaissance methods were employed in developing the
network for City of College Station within the study area. "Hie field reconnaissance focused on verifying the
cross section (numl)er ut lanes) and the pasted speed limit for each roadway section. The neiwork is comprised
id freeways, highways, arterials, and collectors.
rhe City of College Station base year (2007) demographics estimate was developed based on BCSI\1PO'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 study area. Population
estimates and median income were based on BCSNIPO TS"Z-level household size and median income data.
.l1/NO I "alidalion
Atter numerous iterations, base year model validation was accomplished using the above network .and
demographics data and a combination of various adjustments of zone cent:mid connector locations and network
speeds. Validation was based on comparison of estimated (assignment) link volumes to ground counts
conducted in late 2004 and 2005.
2030 (Build-out) Model Assumptions
The build-out model network was developed using iiCS\IPO 2030 Mobility Plan network for the overall
region, In addition, the network for City of College Station within the study area was developed using the
adopted Thoroughfare Plan by the City.
I)riiioenip/in-
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.
OP- KirnleyHorn
and Associates,Inc. 52 24
FAST COLLEGE EGE STATION +�
'tltansPc>Izl:vnosr • � ,� �,�
inprioCorovau sc:aswnr,
Four-Step Modeling Process
'the model is comprised of a series of mathematical models that simulate travel on the transportation system.
This macroscopic process encompasses the four primary steps taken to estimate travel demand from a given
land use and transportation network. The four steps in this approach are as follows:
Trip Generation
The"Trip (u leration module converts demographic data into person trips for ditit'rrcnt purposes. The
demographic data for the trip generation module includes population, number of households, median
household income, the number of basic, retail, and service employment"
, LEGEND
Households 2007
n
29N xiro
U( 2.3411
201 -44444
xt
-0( L44444
101 )0l _2,.100
in
us �
'_9U
40 IM 290
"U
3
Ii 1
0 0
iA U
0 0 3
0 0
180 ''f
4-144.
_l.
a
0,. 148 w'k«
•
"N/
Figure A-2:Households 2007 for the study area
Kinley-Horn
Mo..— and Associates,Inc" 53 2�
EAST COLLEGE STATION ` #. »• Nile*
gal s, WI14
`IlatiuSI'012T.VrtON Stung
1
n!1 ESI w r , nrtoacouzcasrAnoa
IN LEGEND
72 x.
c
�� IlOIlseholds 2030
1 1 2H0 n 1i111
Inl Znn
3u•
11 ;nn
1710 1111 11 01
0!
334. k l IUUI
saG E
us ' c
f 1 1.4V1.4' 10'/,"'\
437. . . .
177
}t 111 417 '
23131
I 70
45
I+
110
0
� U
,17 `3:
9 4
32^ 0 n r..
5119 srx
422
23.5
3111
170 1713
5.70
;113
541
0 58
3
Figure A-3:Households 2030 for the study area
000- au Kimley-Hom
M 1 and Associates,Inc. 54 26
EAST COLLEGE STNItiON #,:lr 41 N-rf,
4015
S r,Dy
CITTOP STAMM
LEGEND
Population Per Square Mile
—01
WOW) Ilhi E
tc I
/9
\\./7
Figure A-4:Population Density 2007 for the study area
Kimley-Hom
Ilio6.11111111111I 1 and Associates,Inc 55 27
`4.--4,04,141
EAST COLLEGE STATION
fqf
11x.,,NspotzT.\noN Si 1 7,1)Y
CaT0FrrAisMISTATION
/\\\
LEGEND
Population Per Square Mile 2030
)
N
Figure A-5:Population Density 2030 for the study area
1101' Kirniey-Horn
UMW 1 and Associates,.Inc 56 28
EAST COLLN EGE STATIOv.
ILZANSPOIrrxnem
ZIPraill . :1;.:,1 ClITOpentisraSTAnom
/1\4\
LEGEND
c\1.19 2
Employment 2007
II Ill
0
.:011
7;o ".11! 1,14 01
'tk
2.40 1,501 - 1,000
f.13 NAIdy ArQa E
438
0
s7
1.1
1;0 "
13
'N'Ns
1.11
N, 73 41149:
Figure A-6:Employment 2007 for the study area
WO' NMI Kimley-Horn
Ilmhjant 1 and Associates,Inc. 57 29
EAST COLLEGE STATION .4141 iW Cii:40( 44
InArs-winnTI aym Snnv *4 r
Zane Ads f Car OP COLLEGESTATION
)0//\
LEGEND
c191 2 \
EmploNment 2030
1111
'is
1 i 141
263 0 1,i1/1 \MO
E
0
2fi7
ii
10'
"3 619
l463 0
oil
111/0
2331 1
-42
fo
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
Population Employment Population Employment
Study Area 10,500 5,900 30,270 17,100
Brazos County Region 164,890 82,700 205,000 104,700
Percent Proportion 6% 7% 15% 16%
Table A-1:Demographic comparison
um—r Kniey.Hortantes,Inc
58 30
_........ ....._.... ___
''/,111* (400P"1141
EAST COLLEGE STA rtUN NI:. •-
Ilay.,sr,orrrcnou S-rt� w
eN41 ' 4 Crrrov Uxu C9STAncui
Trip Distribrntioti
'Phis step estimates the number of trips between each regional zone pair. The output from "Trip Generation
module is the input for this step.
2%
4%
40%
50%
e � i
r�_ z
S }
Figure A-8:Trip Patterns 2007 from the study area
AWN Kimley-Horn
59 31
66...;°°'''
IS l� and Associates,Inc,
#`E 6y4^At6J Vm
EAST COLLEGE STATION OCI •- -4►
FizA,VsroR'rArtoY Sruiw
-ter _� '
Modal Split
This is the prediction of the number of trips made by each mode of transportation between each zone pair.
Traffic Assignment
This includes the estimation of the .tmount of trio el (or tnu»her of trips) that is loaded unto the transportation
network through path-building and is used to determine network pertormance. "I"lie following figure shows
current (2007) network for the study area with number of lanes.
IANts
Figure A-9:2007 Network with number of lanes
,.. Kirley-Horn
1116AMIll __ and Associates,Inc. 60 32
u
EAST COLLEGE STATION t
TRANSPORTATION Srunv ` E° ,1-." '., .. .:
a- ` ,_ . !�,R`-�tT'°:..c`i .,a CITY OP courcaSTADox
Model C.ilibnitiotr find ValicLuion
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 comparative results of both model output traffic volume data
and ground traffic counts for the year 2007.
2007 2007
Segment From To Count Model R2
If \RV'I'Y RO \D SII (, A1,Funr,uioy 21,-93 21,12_6 3.0-
\ppomattox \\est of SI laid 9,249 '),211(1 0:13"
R,AINTREI? SH 6 End 3,277 3,570 8.94''„
NORTH FORREST PK\\'Y SH 6 fast of 6 2,550 2,647 3.80%
EMERALD PKWY SH 6 East of 6 5,800 6,180 6.55°/n
SEBESTA SE!6 East of 6 1,799 1,884 4.72%
\\OODCRI'IIK SI16 Somchrook 2,223 2,339 2.11(1"
Stonehrook End 1,238 1,217 1.711"',
ST()NIa3R()OK Rock Prairie \\oodcrcck 2,315 2,3-5 '.6(1
\V'oodcrcek i Poxtire 872 025 6.04"
ROCK PRAIRIE SH 6 Stonebrook 6,777 6,9(1(1 1.81°
Stonehrook Bird Pond 4,064 4,211(1 3.35
Bird Pond Greens Prairie 1,000 1,800 5.26"I
Greens Prairie I i.ntl 8S3 9-U '( 55",,
GRI•.i N8 PR.AIRIIi Sit6 I..tkcvv.ty Dr 22,6;- 21,-nil 4.14%
I.,tl:e\,..t\ Di 1/661/n reek ,1110 -,I-18 1 i.()S"
PehhleCreek East to end 2,168 2,300 6.11
LAKE\X'AY DR Greens Prairie Parkview 6,598 7,400 12.15%
Parkview G,ttewav Blvd 8,513 0.00"i,
SH 6 harev Road 7.7,50(( 83,111(11 7.10III,
Emerald 46,400 57,600 24.14"/0
Rock Prairie 62,500 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.
KimleyHorn
Mr 1 and Associates,Inc. 61 33
EAST COLLEGE STATION AltICI'
TRANSPORTATION STUDY "
..j Once U*RSre140M
-.w �'� p C4
I# I
1_L:GI:N l)
t$ .
114%
1
/ ------\
Figure A-10:2007 Existing Traffic Counts
IV iVii Kimley-Horn
MP and Associates,Inc. 62 34
EAST COLLEGE STATION
� '
f
rill:
'- -2' ';''' .'"-1 VC'
f�vvsrairrxriarSrt1r>Y w, R Utroenuascuwr..,e I,
. al
ilk-N., , , 1
...,..ND
E1 # , ,,,,,.",._
iii . 410k --\\
lir
i .
4 1 s 4o,,:
3):
t
411‘4411t\L ,N.,
•
/ ---\
�
`�
ti
Figure A-ll:2007 Model Traffic Volumes with percentage difference
11111'': Vli Kimiey-iiom
and Associates,Inc. 63 35
EAST COLLEGE STMION � '
fltANsr'ortn row STUDY TM pp.:" r' :
ZanOTTOICAllwaSTAIICIM
Evaluating the Thoroughfare Scenarios
The following information was generated using the refined Bryan-College Station Metropolitan Planning
Organization transportation model. The refined model includes updates to the demographics (households and
employment) Hr the study area to reflect 2006 conditions. 'lite model has three main measures of effectiveness
that planners use to evaluate thoroughfare plan .ilternatiyes:
Vehide Miles Traveled (V11T)
What does it mean? How was it measured?
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VM'1') is the total distance The traffic volumes on each road network link are
traveled by all vehicles in a 24 hour period. This can calculated using travel demand modeling software.
reflect the spatial relationship between residence and The demographic, travel behavior, and transport
employment or other destinations. bower aycr ge infrastructure data for each scenario arc used as model
V'a\I"l' tact reflects a better spatial match between input. Each link volume is multiplied by the ,av erage
residence and employ meai
t, while higher vera e vehicle occupancy rate in the region. This value is
VAI I can indicate a spatial mismatch between place multiplied by the length of each link to determine the
of residence and place of employment. person-miles traveled on each network link.
Vehicle Hours of Travel(WIT)
What does it mean? How is it measured?
The total number of hours of vehicle travel on the Vehicle hours of delay arc computed by multiplying
designated set of roadways. the total distance traveled by average network speed.
Delay (VHD)
What does it mean? How is it measured?
Delay is a product of Traffic congestion,which is a Delay is a function of vehicle speed and trip length.
road condition characterized by slower speeds, Slower speeds and longer trip lengths result in
longer trip times, and increased queuing. It occurs greater delay. Delay is represented by total person
when roadway demand is greater than its capacity. hours of delay.
-111111111,1
F. 1 Kar d1eAsscihooiaates,Inc, 64 36
_
EAST COLLEGE STATION '1 ' s p1/44,00,11
"Ih 'r
LvsPoavr1oN STviY _ .„ ,�: i
;,
C7(T OiI1711Jlc6STA'noA
Traffic Modeling Finciirws
The model provides planners with the ability to compare how changes the thorough tare plan can improve the
above measures of effectiveness. The transportation indicators below arc an output of this model. They
represent what the demand on the transportation network will be based upon the three thoroughfare plan
alternatives.
GROWTH SCENARIOS
TRANSPORTATION
INDICATORSTIIOROl1G1IIAltl� COMMUNITY CONCEPT HYBRID
PLAN
TOTAL VMT 1,049,584 1,088,390 1,058,277
VHT 31,807 31,450 31,482
TOTAL DELAY
7,052 5,889
(PERSON IIOURS)
Table A-3: Study Area Mobility Summary Chart
GROWTH SCENARIOS
TRANSPORT.ITION
INDICTORS THOROUGHFARE COMMUNITY CONCEPT HYBRID
PLA
TOTAL VMT 5,429,716 5,394,480 5,413,076
VHT 173,1118 1711,639 171,989
TOTAL DELAY
(PERSON HOURS) 22,056 20,764 21,437
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.
T
KimleyHom.
- _ and Associates,Inc. 65 37
EAST COLLEGE STATION d► 7 if
w �r�
t{2-lN`SF'tJ(2T:Al7t�h�71'UI:�Y try • -s .. ^... � _ i"p i
PIMP . , ;11 0.. CITY CV COW=STATION
Appendix B — Public Meeting Summaries
Public Meeting 1 �,
;.� 4 t
The initial puh1 a
lic meeting of the st College Station '1"raliT �rtation '
Study was attended by 95 people. The nlap in the si(leb.tr represents � 7" r
k �"
M.;,
elk,
�ittelulecs' Inomes. l�'hile nlanv portions of rhe stud\ arca ��hcrc �
i 1)rescnicd .1 tn�lj�n'ity i,f wthe
\\oodereek or l'oyfire neighborhoods.
1 htrty-seven of these attendees Respon�enl Prolie scrvi<.eut n..a
completed the questionnaire. The
,x M1 t
•
air Ralail euslereu
graphs to the right indicates the ". . ' +
majority of attendees where
residential property owners and �
members of neighhorh(aId
associations.
ua
86,
The following Neighborhood
lssociations where represented: -- o`
t f
r M ti„rshm in8 �s or N.:igtAo'hooci Ur9ani<.at on i { �^'* �
• I..
• \\oorlcreLt I
• 1 oslire � r � ike .
•• Shadowcrest + s F i
• Stonebridge '11.41%
• Annberlake
•• \V'indwo«d
• Raintree �
Yes
• Pebble Creek °` t•
•
Emerald Forest
• Wilshire
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, "We`ve got to do a
better job planning for the growth that is going to occur here. Future generations will
live with many of the decisions that will germinate 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
� � €� � muµ....
specifically. Then in groups of eight to 10 attendees provided � � -
comments and ideas about the future thoroughfare plan.
ColonKimley-Horn
and Associates,Inc. 66 38
EAST COLLEGE STATION
'tlzv�;srt�crr.tirx�;v S•rvr>v ° , "'w }"" �*
t�rroet ou�r5►�r�t�
NSR w w
Workshop Results
The consultants hei;an to analyze the workshop input by digitizing the
workshop maps and creating compilation maps. The issue map represents
p;utieipants' fcc:litt+ s ahuut cut thruutrh traffic, congestion, safete and
hike/pedestrian needs. Participants also voiced which planned thorough ares
they a,,vree and (1 tlisagree with.
Workshop Maps
•
f '
D gu��e Mcips
LEGEND
Generate Compilation
Nundx-r of Ra.ptu .
Maps
o
o
Figure B-1: Public Issues Map
I,
r
1 t ��
tioj
1
r� t 1
hw
t
4.
a� ,. �� % � I , ��,•: -mss. �t � � � �
Figure B-2: Public Thoroughfare Disagree Figure B-2: Public Thoroughfare Agree
e
m
KilyHorn
ry tis,Inc. 67 39
T`& Y#
FST COLLEGE STATION tl ;tt
NSP02'i5tii`1C?N�'.7`i'UI)Y fi .... F' a. ��
f. F da 111���
\
mal p i9 A, t,►hr a Ctrrc>pCn�tr caS'r�not�
Public Meeting, 2
The follow-up public meeting of the Last College Station 'Transportation Study was attended by 75 people. The
meeting was aimed at attaining citizen input On three thoroughfare plan scenarios and how to implement them.
The questionnaire was completed b1' 45 of the attendees. The majority of attendees were residential property
owners and members c}f orighht a hi od associate ms.
Thu tollowin
g .Ngoils were
Respondent Profile Churches 7,4„.1_.T,,
.1
Ser;:lB
usinessrepresented:
• Xoodcreek :,.,,,v4,?, ,,,,,,,
_ -
owners
• Foxtire 2%
• Shadowcrest j
• Stonebridge
• ,Ambcrlake.
• \\indvvood
• Raintree � �t f t ""
• Pebble Creek
• I.mcrald Forest
• \\ilshire
hake• Garter I,iLy Property owners
94%
Membership in Business or Neighborhood Organization
No
7%
Ippy
T
S
Yes
93%
. f andiaAssodates,Inc. 680
EAST COLLEGE STATION I '
'.010 40erp411
F1;t .... ;(iN r anroerrny,arssrenax
TRANspoRTAnosT S• LIW t
Workshop Results
A majority of attendees selected the I lybrid -----..-----
scenario. An overwhelming majority believe a Scenario Preference
change is needed to the existing thoroughfare
plan.
Altcnclees also commented on the funding
mechanism to use when implementing"the
thoroughfare plan. (llcarlb, citizens do 1101
believe the City should cover all the cost of a ❑Thoroughfare
Community Concept
building new thoroughfares in the study area. O Hybrid Scenario
A majority thought a mixture of development
impact fees and City funding should be used to 67%
construct new thoroughfares.
The final question on the questionnaire was
aimed at how to reduce neighborhood cut-
through traffic. Attendees ranked techniques in --- —the following order fn.)m most desirable to least: Funding Mechanisms
, St NCI
2. I .allc ,iii 1 v ill��
I11terSCCIa n Impro\enlcnts
-1. Video Surveillance
in City Funds
nItt,t,,:ttthTtaeg,tt0TT, 33°Io 0Impaci Fees
LO Mixture
60% 1*
'stift10
ttt
Kiniley-Horn 41
1
NW and Associates,Inc. 69
EAST COLLEGE STATION41P.
I t
lit.vs[K�a�.vr[o�c Sruov x' `I
Appendix C — Context Sensitive Design
-The proposed thoroughfare planning process presented in the next 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 thi>rongltfare plan
utast consider incl balancethe regional, subregional, ,aid neighborhood functions tit the thorougllt;trc iii
relation to community torn' and character, and the entire trnnshortation s\stem. The new thoroughfare
planning process is grounded in using Context Sensitive Design ((:SI)):
A collaborative, interdisciplinary process to transportation planning and design that involves all stakeholders
to develop a transportation facility that tits 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 augment special land uses areas such as mixed-use, transit-oriented, and urban neighborhood
developments with context sensitive transportation elements. The goal is to create a connection between land
use and transportatitin in College Station.
A street mai pass through various land use contexts (as displayed in the graphic below-). The land use context
should influence the character of the roads WAN. To prc)perly plan for a roaclwav that is context sensitive, we
must clivi[ir the a)advv-a\ right-of-fav into separate (but related) "realms
Employment
Town Regional Center District Residential
Neighborhood
Center
Commercial Corridor
I '' I; )' II I[
Industrial Sr Residential
Main Street Commercial Mixed Use Street
Street Street
Street Realms
To properly plan for all the elements of a
thoroughfare plan,it is essential to account for the J'-'-' ��i
three street"realms," which are the travelway realm I/ K S -�
(between curbs or other pavement edges), the '1,--: ? (--_-,,,,_55 &\c- 7;.
pedestrian realm (pavement edge to right-of-way �` a` `
il'Niline), and the context realm (the interface with M I ^ _ T ,, tea,"h,_I
adjacent buildings, sites, and land uses).
�"wo u5D C- FT,P.T14.4 .---. TRA',I. WAY(T) /. an.4,,3' MNo u-G(u..�
PeI.LM Rain PEAI-M PSH PR+FM
_ STREET. REALM
(�
� ' iMr KimleyHorn 42
� M and Associates,Inc. 70
EAST COLLEGE STATION t •,
'Ih�srotzr,ynox 5��t;uv °''� ,
•
i !1 t#11t ik ist " SWIM
The tour realms that together comprise the thoroughfare 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
vehicles, and bicycles. ,Medians arc also part it the tray ckv<tv realms. "I ransii stops and loading/unloading
zones arc included in the travelway realm.
• Pedestrian Realm: public right-of-\\:n typically including planting :urea 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
111,ty he part of the pedestrian realm. ()ften the on-street parking lane overlaps with the pedestrian realm
because of the pedestrian activity generated by parked vehicles.
• Context Realm: Properties and activities adjacent to the public right-of-way with surroundings that
contribute to character and mobility. Buildings, landscaping, land use mix, site access, public and semi-
public open spaces are the primary shapers of context. Some transportation facilities, notably transit
stations :inti parking lots and structures, are included in the context realm.
• Intersection Realm: Public riglit-nt-way and a portion private prl,pi.brty tli:tt tolgcthcr term a
rante 11 its center. The it]terertit,ti le;tlnt is
characterized by a high level of activity and shared use, multimodal
conflicts, complex movements, and special design treatments. ;=
Context/Pedestrian Overlap. Ground floor building frontage and any
overhanging elements (arcades, awnings, etc) create one part of the overlap -•,
between the.priyate development in the context realm and the public space
of the pedestrian realm. Also included are paths and walkways on private
property adjoining the thoroughfare. , '
r -
Pedestrian/Travelway Overlap. The travelway areas where pedestrians
are common are the parking lane and the crosswalks (marked or :. it o E
unmarked). The parking lane frequently doubles as space for transit �� 10116
loading and unloading and in some locations it may also occasionally be -�
lye I...rt ThrTzho,,
used for community events such as farmer's markets, parade viewing, etc.
In such cases use of the travelway realm is often restricted in order to
maximize the comfort of people using the overlap zone.
Kimley.Horn
II t I and Associates,Inc. 71 43
EAST COLLEGE STATION 1 y
TRANst'omNnoN 5rt,,nv
Mire,�� . > 't
1I!!, ' i UsrwCauemSumt+
New Street Standards for College Station
Given an array of street types, each street can help to add more dimensions to the
arterial and collector choices provided by the conventional tunctional classification
system. These additions and refinements to the street types provide the Cite with a
:41c;II deal of choices given thL variety of urban environments. The thoroughfare types
shown below are the basis for contest sensitive design choices in the City of College
Station. Siy new types ofstrcets were (level,ved as an overlay on the City's current
thorougltta e plan.
• Commercial Streets
• Arterials
• Collectors
• Residential Streets
• Arterials
• (e)ilectors
• Industrial Streets
• \lixed 'se Streets
Kimley-Horn 44
L 1 and Associates,Inc. 72
yy 5k�4-'i'3i
EAST COLLEGE STATION t, lIli
*r, 1 ""`
`n2ANsi'OR1i:CrioN`STUi)e. .ci«j »x 1 �e. ,,,1l r .. ; ryl t_ .t.,11.*,
+ti., , (Qnoprni m'837ri11oN
Coln fiten:ht., .Strcets
Commercial Streets are presently the dominant street form used in
(:allege Stations' commorial certler_r/coriirlars, lrnsiuess dvtler:c/coriirlorr rurrl :::,,-;',:::'—'7'
,.- - "‘.
— ill '''' ' ''' ''
r�crlcrpris districts I ugh priority elements in this type of street are focused
n nioV'ilt r d
tfi and providing access to businesses. Tints, these 1'' I' fi - r1 '' ,4 r trt
streets characteristically- ii is e tutu to sig triv°cl I roes that range from 1 1c '4f.-741, .„),
tti 12 feet ',��id , a chigh ninullcr ofaccess points for dcv elupm ',Ind .
ents, n .: �
intuit-num pcdcstrian ',Ind b09ic%cic facilities. ' .
411.
1 lowever, Corntnercial Streets can be both pleasant for pedestrians as ' ''" `� '
well as efficient for vehicles and transit. Little adaptation needs to occur in the traveiwav realm for commercial
areas to become walkable places. If people arc 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 c()rirtectivitv between separate parcels. lmpriivements in these areas can make a ciimincrcial
or business area a park-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 Commercial Collector
Four L i1Os.DividedFour Lanes,Divided
«„vas ss neim
trcl.vuY Aeaim ( }
w. }t x''''''.«n Rent" ) �verwsrr05xaa4r,M toeiles<io xeakn}
4 w -ol Wa r9 4 xinrtl 30'of }
Ino
awm,.,t+ryre�r-fvr<«ni,x,aiam ur r ro ro a«o„roa,e a.,r+e.
1 i ' ' I "� I
1.'A= q1 5
` 1 k Fy . I I °a9
.
i I
fin nx 1 :4YlR # I
"- 4#" i fix` 1 1 J��,, , r,A -F'rf .. f m` t^v k45
zr I i " ' 1 3 !
I 1 ,"fi " 1 1
0
1l
! it
,' s 1 , �i
i i
t 1 1
°' V 11 Kimley-Horn
11110, Ili r 1 and Associates,Inc. 73 45
EAST COLLEGE STATION �+ �, ° " ���
p, Ill r.
i 1 n.R, *'::,,•.,,i'' :.:1 c trroscas cast.3oN
Rcsidcntial Streets
As arterials, Residential Streets balance multimodal mobility with land 4;1::::::: :'.';,::':,*'.,x .,I `> t
.tccess. ;\s collectors, Residential Streets sire designed to emphasize 3 ` `' ,,3,'
yy.i.:
walking, bicycling, and land access over mobility. In both cases, r < T a„ f 2','
Reside nti,il Streets tend to he more pedestrian-oriented thsin =' .,;(l ?rv� ' .
r
" ( torr'_ '} 1 11 :e
CcYruniuc�ial Streets, but not .is multimodal as ,Mixed L'sc or"I Transit .:_ ,
Sweets. Residential Streets generally consist of two to four travel 71 �„ '
lane's that arc 14 to 15 tcc.t vvide .uid have on street parking. ('{>llegc
Stations' neighborhoods built in the last .110 vears Iccuurc; liontes 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 sidewalks are typically buffered by a tree lined planting strip that is maintained by the homeowner.
l'eclestrian level lighting is also present on many Residential Streets in College Station.
Residential Arterial Residential Collector Street
Four Lanes,Divided
Two Lanes,Divided
WM Mr. R a
,.,r,,,. �}�
9 w At
,-,4--.5. 1,-.,..x—.4, t w m } � r.,'''''',7;'''''
T M, } +s' ua,�tw+vr axn
♦ Y. .in Heutm } i3' } Pednstdan Hnalm }
r 1 w n
M ‘a PI, I :‘, ' I :,, J , ,ti'f,':',-.-
' Y 1 � rriI X :!>--,,,41,,,,,,
> (�
1-yoWit ,:;,, I 11
. ,:,-, . i . ,,,,,,..„..„:„ ._, , .. ,
,.=-:. ,_ .,:,..,:::::,,,,,,,_, ,,,, 1 , ,-,.. A ,,,,,„.._1 ''. ' ';:,,..t.,1'..:,';':7:,,, 4 ,; , , ,
1 1
II :
4‘14447t:
;;;71.:i;i174.
.! W .n ... A •,eke
.."l Kinnley-Horn
einand Associates,Inc. 74 46
EAST COLLEGE STATION 11 c a, �
'� ' 0 4,r
lio..spoR Amoy..S-rt.:Dy '' ,_ �1 , , , 4 i
.wr+Ili i1t AA L .;,i Grryo,CouscaStasom
Iradrrstrial Streets
Industrial Streets are typically designed for large vehicles, which 1 � 4 ;
means lane widths arc wider than normal (13 to 15 feet). Sidewalks,
when present,arc usually attached and a small planting strip maybe , -, „ . „-, .,�.� a.:-At' A.r :,fir
on the outside of the sidewalk. tin-street parking, medians, bicycle `"�"' '
lanes, and street trees are usuail} absent front the street design. :its.=
Industrial Arterial
Four Lanes,Divided
s
4 )j
4 I( >
).
1 iH
I
I
I ''/,,e` I
yj� 1 Y''','"1 -.1"'
k 3.. 1
i T 1
11
Kimsey torn 47
.i Ill F 1 and Associates,Inc, 75
I
EAST COLLEGE STATION
S r
TRANS111011-ArioN t.aw :,,. 7 , ' *.,, . • - . —:‘,...,,,
.1 arfairtui'"511M°14
Nfixer/-Use Streets
"fhis street type is crimpatible with Mixerl-tise/Special Districts, l't•ansit
1
C'onirlori alld I Trbdii Nrit;hborhoods. The sidewalk in a mixed-use street is
the primary physical environment of the street realm. Often sidewalks
.... .,•:-,,, ., - 7
in mixed-use areas arc larger than the travel lanes. The sidewalk is :,.*itkr.o.;,A.t:•-i",.: .ar, 1.' .. .
\acre most of the ;..tctivit\ occurs. 1:01- riii\cd-USC 11111CC111 10 1)(1
'ktri.11 111.111;11.-4,11:'1,41"1'1$ ,1 i " '114 i
5tICCCSS1111, 111C design of f‘le',Ides and grmind floors of littiltlitigs '<Ind ,,, . , -.4,-,..41,-7,,,..,,,t,t,..,.„,,,ne.c.4. to: ,-.,.....A •' ' 'tz,
-t;'..V..1, t't --•"''''":7,_.` - _.2.--t•ir,i,T,-4.e.4
their relationshth
ip to e stit truist tOcus thtir ,ittention to\vartl the 1, novi*:-.....7,--, ---' —24‘".'4,: ' zt –,I
street. --
Beyond urban design features and sidewalks, cm-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
ret.',61 estal)lishments.
Mixed Use
Four Lanes,Divided
----
.._ . i
,--------_—_.
. I .. >
( oo
,
,
I ':',''',4' -. I
:' ' 1 i !I'•.",".„' C.'„It.44.
I 1 ,..,,,,-4r.,.' I ,>
',.
.,
I it,--;', ', I
I 0 I
i 7,,e:', I
,
_..,.. I I 7.7.7t.44:,cti.
I R : I
4
I i , I ' 1,,(11-411ic
,
;#.'„ ,
SY-,4 ',CQe1P:i I tT1' '''' I
We IIIV 11 Kimley-Horp
Mi.,:,111111111' 1 and Associates,Inc. 76 48
(5/29/2007) Pam Springfield - Special Meeting Reminder Page 1
From: Steve Beachy
To: 2007 Parks& Rec Board
Date: 5/23/2007 3:06 PM
Subject: Special Meeting Reminder
CC: Ploeger, Ric; Springfield, Pam
Joint meeting on Tuesday, May 29th (&, 12:00 noon in the City Hall Council Chambers. The
meeting will include the City Council, Planning & Zoning Commission and the Parks &
Recreation Advisory Board. The agenda will include a presentation and discussion regarding the
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN prepared by KENDIG KEAST COLLABORATIVE; and a
presentation and discussion of the EAST COLLEGE STATION TRANSPORTATION STUDY
prepared by KIMLEY-HORN.
A lunch meal will be served.
Steve Beachy '69
Director of Parks & Recreation
City of College Station, Texas
(979) 764-3413