HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/12/2020 - Regular Agenda Packet - Comprehensive Plan Evaluation Committee
AGENDA
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EVALUATION
COMMITTEE
Tuesday, May 12, 2020, 6:00 PM
Virtual Meeting via Zoom
By Computer: https://zoom.us/j/94382380801?pwd=RXpGWFM2aUtCQ3d3MFVtRmZqRDNCQT09
By Phone: 888-475-4499 US and enter Meeting ID: 943 8238 0801 and Password:
747086
A quorum of the College Station City Council or the College Station Planning and
Zoning Commission may or may not be present at this meeting.
1. Call the meeting to order.
2. Consideration, discussion and possible action to approve meeting Minutes.
• January 29, 2020
3. Presentation and discussion of a revised working timeline and process changes due to
COVID-19.
4. Presentation and discussion of potential revisions to the Future Land Use categories.
5. Presentation and discussion of the draft scenarios.
6. Presentation and discussion outlining next steps in the Evaluation process.
7. Adjourn.
I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted at College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas
Avenue, College Station, Texas, on May 7, 2020 at 5:00 p.m.
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
By_________________________________
City Secretary
This building is wheelchair accessible. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting
and who may need accommodations, auxiliary aids, or services such as interpreters, readers, or
large print are asked to contact the City Secretary’s Office at (979) 764-3541, TDD at 1-800-
735-2989, or email adaassistance@cstx.gov at least two business days prior to the meeting so
that appropriate arrangements can be made. If the City does not receive notification at least
two business days prior to the meeting, the City will make a reasonable attempt to provide the
necessary accommodations.
Penal Code § 30.07. Trespass by License Holder With an Openly Carried Handgun.
“Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with an openly carried
handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun
licensing law), may not enter this property with a handgun that is carried openly”
Codigo Penal §30.07. Trespasar Portando Armas de Mano al Aire Libre con Licencia.
“Conforme a la Seccion 30.07 del codigo penal (traspasar portando armas de mano al aire libre
con licencia), personas con licencia bajo del Sub-Capitulo H, Capitulo 411, Codigo de Gobierno
(Ley de licencias de arma de mano), no deben entrar a esta propiedad portando arma de mano
al aire libre”
MINUTES
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EVALUATION
COMMITTEE
Wednesday, January 29, 2020, 5:30 PM
CSU Meeting and Training Facility
1601 Graham Rd
College Station, Texas, 77845
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Dennis Christianson, Lisa Halperin, Elianor Vessali, John
Nichols, Jeremy Osborne, Elizabeth Cunha, Julie Schultz, Brad Brimley, Michael Buckley, Linda
Harvell and Clint Cooper
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Shana Elliott
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning and Development Jennifer Prochazka, Assistant
Director Molly Hitchcock, Transportation Planning Coordinator Jason Schubert, Long Range
Planning Administrator Alyssa Halle-Schramm, Staff Planner Jade Broadnax and Staff Assistant
Robin Macias
1. Call the meeting to order.
The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m.
2. Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes.
• October 30, 2019
This agenda item was discussed after agenda item 5. There were no oppositions to the
minutes.
3. Presentation and discussion of highlights of the Best Practices Report.
Planning Next consultant Jaime Greene gave an overview of the report.
There was general discussion amongst the committee regarding the case studies in the
report.
Many of the studies shown have a slower rate of growth than Texas A&M.
Mobility was not featured in many of the case studies.
Most of the case studies have a large commitment from the Universities.
Surprised San Marcos was not part of the case study.
4. Presentation to introduce potential updates to the Comprehensive Plan Maps.
Planning Next consultant Michael Curtis gave an overview of the Concept Map,
Thoroughfare Map and Future Land Use map. He presented considerations for each.
There was general discussion amongst the Committee regarding the different
considerations of each map.
Concept Map
Considerations
o Make the map more strategic and highlight areas for change or areas with
special plans
o Show only neighborhood planning that have neighborhood plans
o Add text showing a definition of each area
Discussion
o Use hash lines for borders instead of harsh lines
o Committee members expressed concern that citizens may believe these
areas are more fixed rather than conceptual and ways the map could be
depicted differently to emphasize it is conceptual.
Thoroughfare Map
Considerations
o Consolidate categories (major arterials)
o Designate bike/pedestrian corridors on concept map
o Placement of context zones in response to any changes to the concept
map
Discussion
o Possibly have a mobility map
o If keeping different maps for bicycle and pedestrian mobility, they should
be integrated with the Thoroughfare Map
o Consolidating arterials would align with the MPO categories
o Do not want bike paths to be over looked
Future Land Use Map
Considerations
o Consolidate land use categories from 25 to 15
o Rename future land use category names to be distinct form zoning district
names
Discussion
o Look at amount of zoning categories in comparison to other cities.
5. Presentation and discussion of proposed direction for scenario planning.
Planning Next consultant Greene gave an overview of the six scenario areas:
1. University Dr. east of Texas Ave
2. Texas Ave. across from Texas A&M
3. Post Oak Mall area
4. Harvey Rd. across from the mall
5. George Bush Dr. and Wellborn Rd.
6. George Bush Dr. across from Texas A&M
There was discussion regarding the committee’s definition of mixed use:
Is the term used solely for vertical mixed use or also horizontal? The committee
preferred horizontal that allows for vertical, but not mandated vertical.
A good example of a mixed use development is Century Square
What are the qualities of a mixed use development:
o Walkable
o Green space between buildings
o Public realm
o Controlled entrance and exit
o Multiple uses/variety of attractions for a mixed audience
The committee discussed each scenario area to determine what they would like to see in
each scenario:
Scenario 1
Something that ties in with the new City Hall and the Eastgate neighborhood
Vertical development (10 stories or more) at old Albertsons site
Hospitality oriented with entertainment
Bicycle and pedestrian friendly
Internal connectivity
Limited entrances and exits / access management
Opportunity for Class A office space
Scenario 2
Leverage new City Hall investment
Thomas Park integration
Move the Best Buy shopping center into Scenario 1 and start Scenario 2 at
Lincoln Ave.
More of a multi-modal development
Bus access to City Hall
Bicycle and pedestrian walkway off Texas Ave. (Texas Ave. is noise and not
pedestrian-friendly with the high volume of traffic and higher speeds)
Scenario 3
A activity center or attraction people would want to go to
Business development
An example is The Domain in Austin
Better incorporate Wolf Pen Creek into the Scenario
No more student housing – maybe a retirement center
Convention center
Open air retail
Regional accessible area
Bring Wolf Pen Creek across Holleman Dr
Hotels with connections to conference centers – example: Kansas City
Scenario 4
Restaurants
Lower density
Dependent on the development of the Mall site
No office space
Retail/commercial along Harvey then residential behind the commercial
More intense residential
Commercial establishments for tomorrow – something sustainable
Needs to be an experience
Scenario 5
Mid Rise condos – 6 to 8 stories
Sensitive to what is happening around the neighborhood
Walkability
Improving current area – preserve that area of town
Must look at Wellborn Rd. and George Bush TXDOT improvements
Berkley House
Scenario 6
Opportunity at Houston St. and George Bush (near the alumni center / Old Jersey
St. area)
Educational and institutional that aren’t going away – look at what can happen
around these developments
Owner-occupied historical homes in this area
New vision in certain sections – Redmond/Armistead/Rosemary area
There were discussions about looking at the success of Downtown Bryan. The committee
also agreed that there should be a variety of scenarios.
6. Presentation outlining next steps in the Evaluation process.
The scenario workshops will be in late March / early April.
The committee would like another meeting before the scenario workshops to discuss the
proposed scenarios.
7. Adjourn.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:43 p.m.
Future Land Use Category Consolidation
Draft April 21, 2020
Existing categories Proposed categories Map color Color value (rgb)
Mixed Use Centers
1 Urban Mixed Use Urban Center 122 0 0
2 Village Center (unmapped) Neighborhood Center 180 120 100
Commercial Areas
3 General Commercial General Commercial 237 18 18
4 Suburban Commercial Neighborhood Commercial 250 162 162
5 Business Park Employment Center 149 100 189
Neighborhood and Residential Areas
6 Urban Urban Residential 235 152 0
7 NEW Mixed Residential 235 194 61
8 Restricted Suburban Suburban Residential 247 239 87
General Suburban
9 Estate Estate Residential 255 255 179
10 Neighborhood Conservation Neighborhood Conservation 176 179 14
Institutional and Special Districts
11 Texas A&M University Texas A&M University 216 226 237
12 Institutional/Public Institutional/Public 158 210 232
Utilities
13 Medical Use Medical 0 97 199
14
Wellborn Preserve (open)
Wellborn Estate (open)
Wellborn Business
Wellborn Commercial
Wellborn Preserve
Wellborn Estate
Wellborn Restricted Suburban
Wellborn Suburban
Wellborn
0 149 168
Limited Development Areas
15 Natural (protected) Parks and Greenways 92 120 68
16 Natural (reserved) Natural Areas 192 214 154
17 Rural Rural 224 242 194
Example Future Land Use Definitions based on proposed categories
Urban Center
Areas that are appropriate for the most intense development and mix of
uses arranged in a compact and walkable pattern. These areas will tend to
consist of multi-story residential, commercial, and office uses that may be
mixed vertically within mixed-use structures or horizontally in an integrated
manner. Urban Centers should also incorporate consolidated parking
facilities, access to transportation alternatives, open space and recreational
facilities, and public uses.
Building Height: 5 stories average
Mobility: Walking, biking, transit, automobile.
Intent
• Create and reinforce walkable activity centers with small blocks that
are connected to surrounding development and include a mix of
complementary uses.
• Accommodate a mix of building types including freestanding and
attached structures that frame attractive pedestrian zones between
buildings and streets.
• Encourage commercial uses along primary streets.
• Encourage vertical mixed-use structures with ground-floor retail in
appropriate locations such as along major corridors.
• Support multifamily residential as a secondary component of a center.
• Encourage shared surface parking located behind buildings or to the
side of buildings; structured parking; and on-street parking where
possible.
Appropriate zoning districts*:
MU Mixed-Use (revised)
In Northgate only: NG-1, NG-2, and NG-3
In Wolf Pen Creek only: WPC
*Future Land Use and Zoning
The Future Land Use Map and categories are general policy guides for how areas of the City could develop
in the future. The zoning map is a legal document that that regulates how a specific property can be
developed today. Each property in the City is assigned to one zoning district. The Future Land Use
categories reference multiple potentially appropriate zoning districts. Zoning map changes are considered
based on the Future Land Use Map, other City policies, and the context of a specific site. Zoning changes
involve a public hearing process.
Neighborhood Center
Areas that are appropriate for a mix of uses arranged in a compact and
walkable pattern at a smaller in scale than Urban Centers. These areas
consist of residential, commercial, and office uses arranged horizontally in an
integrated manner and may be mixed vertically within structures.
Neighborhood Centers should also incorporate consolidated parking
facilities, access to transportation alternatives, open space and recreational
facilities, and public uses.
Height: 3 stories average;
Mobility: Walking, biking, transit, automobile.
Intent
• Create and reinforce walkable activity centers that are connected to
surrounding development and include a mix of complementary uses.
• Accommodate a mix of building types that frame attractive pedestrian
spaces.
• Encourage commercial uses along primary streets.
• Support vertical mixed-use structures with ground-floor retail in
appropriate locations such as along corridors or major intersections
• Support multifamily residential as a secondary component of a center.
• Encourage shared surface parking located behind or to the side of
buildings, with some limited parking in front of buildings; structured
parking; and on-street parking where possible.
Zoning districts: MU Mixed-Use (revised)
General Commercial
Concentrated areas of commercial activities that cater to both nearby
residents and to the larger community or region. Generally, these areas tend
to be large and located along regionally significant roads. Due to their
context, these areas tends to prioritize automobile mobility.
Height: 1-2 stories average
Mobility: Primarily automobile, but accessible by walking, biking, and
transit.
Intent
• Accommodate a wide range of commercial uses.
• Concentrate future commercial development at major intersections.
• Provide connectivity to surrounding bicycle and pedestrian networks
and provide safe pedestrian facilities within sites.
• Encourage transitions in building height and mass when adjacent to
residential neighborhoods.
• Support multi-family residential as secondary uses on a site.
• Encourage shared surface parking
Zoning districts: GC General Commercial, O Office, MU Mixed-Use
Neighborhood Commercial
Areas of commercial activities that cater primarily to nearby residents. These
areas tend to be smaller format than general commercial and located
adjacent to major roads along the fringe of residential areas. Design of these
structures is compatible in size, architecture, and lot coverage with
surrounding residential uses.
Height: 1-2 stories average
Mobility: Primarily automobile, but accessible by walking, biking, and
transit.
Intent
• Accommodate limited commercial services compared to General
Commercial.
• Provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to surrounding
neighborhoods and nearby public uses (schools, parks, etc.).
• Support some residential use that is compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood character.
• Encourage transitions in building height and mass when adjacent to
residential neighborhoods.
• In a walkable neighborhood context, locate new buildings near the
street and accommodate parking to the side or rear of buildings with
some limited parking in front of buildings and accommodate on-street
parking where possible.
Zoning districts: SC Suburban Commercial, O Office
Employment Center
Areas that include office, research, or industrial uses that may be planned
and developed as a unified project. Generally, these areas need convenient
access to arterial roadways.
Height: Varies
Mobility: Primarily automobile
Intent
• Accommodate a variety of large footprint buildings.
• Accommodate commercial and service uses within Employment
Centers.
• Accommodate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connectivity to and
within Employment Centers.
• Provide buffering through landscaping and building placement where
large-scale employment sites are adjacent to residential areas.
Zoning districts: BP Business Park, BPI Business Park Industrial, CI
Commercial Industrial
Urban Residential
Areas that are appropriate for a range of high density multi-family and
attached residential development in various forms including townhomes,
apartment buildings, mixed-use buildings, and limited non-residential uses
that are compatible with the surrounding area.
Height: 3 stories average
Mobility: Walking, biking, transit, automobile.
Intent
• Accommodate a wide range of attractive multi-family housing for a
diverse population. Buildings may be clustered and grouped. Building
setback from street varies but is generally consistent within a
development.
• Provide vehicular and pedestrian connectivity between developments.
• Accommodate streetscape features such as sidewalks, street trees,
and lighting.
• Support commercial, service, office uses, and vertical mixed-use
within redevelopment areas.
Zoning districts: MF Multi-Family, MU Mixed-Use, T Townhouse
Mixed Residential
Areas appropriate for a mix of moderate density residential development
including, townhomes, duplexes, and small (3-12 unit) multi-family
buildings, and limited small-lot single family. These areas are appropriate
for residential infill and redevelopment that allows original character to
evolve. These areas may serve as buffers between more intense multi-
family residential or mixed-use development and suburban residential or
neighborhood conservation areas.
Height: Varies (generally 2-3 stories)
Mobility: Walking, biking, transit, automobile.
Intent
• Accommodate a walkable pattern of small lots, small blocks and well-
connected street pattern.
• Accommodate streetscape features such as sidewalks, street trees, and
lighting.
• Encourage community facilities, parks, and greenways within
neighborhoods
• Support neighborhoods with a mix of housing types and where larger
or more dense housing is located near community facilities or adjacent
to commercial or neighborhood centers
Zoning districts: D Duplex, T Townhouse, limited scale MF Multi-Family
Suburban Residential
Primarily single-family residential areas that consist of low to moderate
density single-family lots. These areas may also include limited
townhomes, duplexes, other housing types, and some non-residential
uses that are compatible with surrounding single-family areas.
Development types tend to be highly consistent within a subdivision or
neighborhood.
Height: 1-2 stories average
Mobility: Primarily automobile, but accessible by walking, biking, and
transit to surrounding neighborhood services and centers.
Intent
• Accommodate streetscape features such as sidewalks, street trees,
and lighting
• Support neighborhoods with a mix of housing types
• Encourage community facilities, parks, and greenways within
neighborhoods
• When establishing new residential areas or expanding existing
developments, provide pedestrian and vehicular connectivity
between adjacent developments
Zoning districts: RS Restricted Suburban, GS General Suburban
Estate Residential
Primarily single-family residential areas that have a low level of
development activities. These areas are appropriate for very low-density
residential lots one-acre or greater lot sizes or average 20,000 square
feet lots when clustered around open space.
Height: 1-2 story average
Mobility: Primarily automobile
Intent
• Support a wide range of lot sizes, long blocks, and curvilinear
streets. Buildings tend to be located greater than 30 feet from a
fronting street.
• When establishing new residential areas or expanding existing
developments, provide pedestrian and vehicular connectivity
between adjacent developments
Zoning districts: E Estate, R Rural, MHP Manufactured Home Park
Neighborhood Conservation
Residential areas that are essentially “built-out” and are not likely to be
the focus of extensive infill development or redevelopment. These areas
often were platted before current development regulations were in place
often resulting in non-conforming situations. These areas are appropriate
for overlays or zoning classifications that provide additional character
protection and address non-conforming issues.
Height: 1-2 stories
Mobility: Walking, biking, transit, automobile. On-street parking and
private off-street parking.
Intent
• Maintain the existing housing stock, lot patterns, and character
of neighborhoods.
• Support infill housing that fits-in with neighboring homes (scale,
placement, use, etc). Address non-conforming lot issues through
flexible development regulations.
• Maintain established trees
Zoning districts: GS General Suburban and RS Restricted Suburban
Texas A&M University
Areas owned by Texas A&M University and are appropriate for campus development as described in the
Texas A&M Master Plan and related documents.
Institutional/Public
Areas that are, and are likely to remain, in some form of institutional or public activity. Examples include
schools, libraries, municipal facilities, and major utilities.
Medical
Areas appropriate for medically-related uses and supporting office, commercial, and residential uses. The
medical land use designation surrounding Rock Prairie and State Highway 6 is further detailed in the Medical
District Master Plan, which envisions a wide array of medical and supporting services and activities
concentrated in the district. This includes the two major hospitals in close proximity to residential
neighborhoods, neighborhood centers, offices, and commercial uses.
Height: Varies
Mobility: Walking, biking, transit, automobile.
Zoning districts: Varies
Wellborn
The Wellborn Community Plan envisions the future of Wellborn to maintain its rural character with open
space that is both privately and publicly held. The area will continue as a place where neighborhood
commercial uses support surrounding low-density residential properties.
Height: Varies
Mobility: Primarily automobile
Zoning districts: Where appropriate as specified in the Wellborn Community Plan - WE Wellborn Estate, WRS
Wellborn Restricted Suburban, WC Wellborn Commercial
Parks and Greenways
Areas that are permanently protected from development. Such areas are preserved for their natural function
or for parks, recreation, or greenways opportunities. These areas include, publicly owned open space,
conservation easements, and public parks.
Natural Areas
This land use designation is generally for areas that represent a constraint to development and that should be
preserved for their natural function or open space qualities. These areas include floodplains and riparian
buffers.
Intent
• Conserve environmentally sensitive land.
• Buffer incompatible land uses with open space.
• Develop a connected open space network through the city for recreation.
Zoning districts: NAP Natural Areas Protected
Rural
Areas that, due to public service limitations, inadequate public infrastructure, or a prevailing rural or
agricultural character, should have very limited development activities. These areas will tend to include a mix
of large acreages (ranches and farmsteads) and limited large-lot (one acre or larger) residential developments.
Open space is the dominant feature of these areas.
Height: Varies
Mobility: Primarily automobile
Zoning districts: R Rural, MHP Manufactured Home Park
Area 1: University Drive East of Texas Avenue
U-
V
R
O
W
T
A
R
R
O
W
S
T
R
E
E
T
E
A
S
T
W-
X
R
O
W
C
E
N
T
U
R
Y
C
O
U
R
T
C
E
N
T
U
R
Y
S
Q
U
A
R
E
D
R
I
V
E
FLORICULTU
R
E
R
O
A
D
C
H
A
P
P
E
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
T
U
R
N
E
R
S
T
R
E
E
T
PA
S
L
E
R
S
T
R
E
E
T PRESTON STREETS
O
U
T
H
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
ARGUELLO DRIVE
M
A
C
A
R
T
H
U
R
S
T
R
E
E
T
N
O
R
T
H
P
O
I
N
T
L
A
N
E POPLAR STREETC
H
U
R
C
H
I
L
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
TA
R
R
O
W
S
T
R
E
E
T
NU
N
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
B
A
L
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
EI
S
E
N
H
O
W
E
R
S
T
R
E
E
T
JA
N
E
S
T
R
E
E
TCOONER STREETNI
M
I
T
Z
S
T
R
E
E
T
PURYEAR DRIVEF
R
O
N
T
S
T
R
E
E
T LINCOLN AVENUEASH STREETBANKS STREETCOLUMBUS STREETAV
E
N
U
E
B
HENSEL STREETMOORE AVENUEMONTE CARLO
AV
E
N
U
E
A
W
A
L
T
O
N
D
RI
V
EPEYTON STREETHENSEL DRIVEWELLESLEY COURTVASSAR COURTHA
R
R
I
N
G
T
O
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
T
E
X
A
S
A
V
E
N
U
E
UNIVERSITY DRIVEUNIVERSITY DRIVE EASTSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Land Use Types*
TE
X
A
S
A
V
E
N
U
E
UNIVERSITY DRIVEUNIVERSITY DRIVE EASTSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• Northern commercial to be
redeveloped
• New urban residential
housing in place of duplexes
Zone 2
• Redevelopment of underutilized
low density commercial sites into
focal points that serve as a gateway
between the university and its
surrounding commercial
Retail: 120,000 sqft
Office: 170,000 sqft
Residential: 152 units
Zone 1
• Focused on redevelopment of larger
tracts that are underutilized for
residential gateway at University Drive
U-
V
R
O
W
TA
R
R
O
W
S
T
R
E
E
T
E
A
S
T
W-
X
R
O
W
C
E
N
T
U
R
Y
C
O
U
R
T
C
E
N
T
U
R
Y
S
Q
U
A
R
E
D
R
I
V
E
FLORICULTUR
E
R
O
A
D
C
H
A
P
P
E
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
TU
R
N
E
R
S
T
R
E
E
T
PA
S
L
E
R
S
T
R
E
E
T PRESTON STREETS
O
U
T
H
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
ARGUELLO DRIVE
M
A
C
A
R
T
H
U
R
S
T
R
E
E
T
N
O
R
T
H
P
O
I
N
T
L
A
N
E POPLAR STREETC
H
U
R
C
H
I
L
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
TA
R
R
O
W
S
T
R
E
E
T
NU
N
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
B
A
L
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
EI
S
E
N
H
O
W
E
R
S
T
R
E
E
T
JA
N
E
S
T
R
E
E
TCOONER STREETNI
M
I
T
Z
S
T
R
E
E
T
PURYEAR DRIVEFR
O
N
T
S
T
R
E
E
T LINCOLN AVENUEASH STREETBANKS STREETCOLUMBUS STREETAV
E
N
U
E
B
HENSEL STREETMOORE AVENUEMONTE CARLO
AV
E
N
U
E
A
W
A
L
T
O
N
D
R
I
V
EPEYTON STREETHENSEL DRIVEWELLESLEY COURTVASSAR COURTHA
R
R
I
N
G
T
O
N
A
V
E
N
U
E
TE
X
A
S
A
V
E
N
U
E
UNIVERSITY DRIVEUNIVERSITY DRIVE EASTSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• More redevelopment with a
mixed-use pattern
• Adding residential on
top of the proposed new
commercial
Zone 1
• Neighborhood mixed use
development that offers access to
both vehicles and pedestrians
• More balance between office and
commercial
Retail: 140,000 sqft
Office: 480,000 sqft
Residential: 313 units
Zone 2
• Urban mixed use, creating strong focal
points moving away from university
campus to draw people in
• Corners are set to frame an entrance
into the northern section of University
Drive
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
SCENARIO DESIGN CONCEPTS
8 9
*Land use types are for scenario development only and do not represent the existing Land Use Plan categories
Urban Center:
Vertical mixes of commercial, office, &
residential
Suburban Residential:
Single-family homes
Neighborhood Center:
Horizontal mixes of commercial, office, &
residential
Neighborhood Conservation:
Established Neighborhoods
General Commercial:
Retail, office, & commercial uses Institutional/Public
Urban Residential:
Apartment complexes Parks and Greenways
Mixed Residential:
Duplexes, townhomes, and small-scale
apartment
Unimproved/Vacant
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ANTICIPATED SCENARIO
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO
Scenario Assumptions
Scenario Assumptions
2
10 11
Area 1: University Drive East of Texas Avenue SCENARIO SUMMARY EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
HOUSING
Housing Units 255 407 568
Population 570 911 1,270
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Jobs 1,410 1,804 2,464
Commercial Square Footage 603,125 862,955 1,192,943
Property Tax Revenue (Annual) $849,000 $1,229,000 $1,662,000
Sales Tax Revenue (Annual) $412,000 $637,000 $675,000
TRANSPORTATION
Total Trips (All Modes) 23,320 39,637 42,401
Vehicular Trips 19,477 31,745 31,242
Intersection Density 0.28 0.28 0.26
Internal Capture Rate 2.60%6.60%10.40%
Multimodal Trip Rate Reduction 14.25%14.25%17.76%
INFRASTRUCTURE
Water Demand (WGD) 156,042 169,991 149,182
Wastewater Demand (WGD) 143,637 164,785 153,416
Requires upgrades to public utilities?
Cost of Water/Wastewater Upgrades
Annual Water/Wastewater Revenue
Additional Infrastructure Cost
QUALITY OF PLACE
Land Use Mix Low Low High
Meaningful Open Space Medium Medium Medium
Street Level Activation Low Low High
Proximity to Places of Activity 6 9 11
Connectivity 0.50 0.67 0.75
SCENARIOS AT A GLANCE
-16%14%
--40%
67%52%15%
-8%22%
13%15%1%
10%--
4%5%4%
3%3%3%
2%1.5%2%
1%0.5%-
87 units 35 units 35 units
168 units 372 units 533 units
530,000 sqft 650,000 sqft 670,000 sqft
70,000 sqft 240,000 sqft 550,000 sqft
Neighborhood
Center
General
Commercial
Suburban
Residential
Mixed
Residential
Parks &
Greenways
Institutional/
Public
Vacant/
Unimproved
Urban
Residential
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Commercial
Office
Urban
Center
Neighborhood
Conservation
TBD BY CITY BASED ON DEMAND
EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
Area 2: Texas Avenue across from A&M Campus
NEW MAIN DRIVELOT 55 DWPOLO ROADR
O
S
E
M
A
R
Y
L
A
N
E
L
O
T
1
5
ARMISTEAD STREETMILLIFF ROADSTALLINGS
DR
IVEPOPLAR STREETLOT 54
D
W
NU
N
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
KYLE AVENUEF
O
S
T
E
R
A
V
E
N
U
E
EI
S
E
N
H
O
W
E
R
S
T
R
E
E
T
NI
M
I
T
Z
S
T
R
E
E
T
PURYEAR DRIVEJA
M
E
S
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y GILCHRIST AVENUEMI
L
N
E
R
D
R
I
V
E
MOSS STREETRAMP
WI
L
L
I
A
M
S
S
T
R
E
E
T
AV
E
N
U
E
A
W
A
L
T
O
N
D
R
I
V
E
BOLTON AVENUEA
S
H
B
U
R
N
A
V
E
N
U
E WOODLAND PARKWAYBROOKS AVENUEHA
R
R
I
N
G
T
O
N
A
V
E
N
U
EUNIVERSITY DRIVEHARVEY ROADG
E
O
R
G
E
B
U
S
H
D
R
I
V
E
E
A
S
T
TE
X
A
S
A
V
E
N
U
E
GEORGE BUSH DRIVESource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunityLand Use Types*
12 NEW MAIN DRIVELOT 55 DWPOLO ROADR
O
S
E
M
A
R
Y
L
A
N
E
L
O
T
1
5
ARMISTEAD STREETMILLIFF ROADSTALLINGS
DR
IVEPOPLAR STREETLOT 54
D
W
NU
N
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
KYLE AVENUEF
O
S
T
E
R
A
V
E
N
U
E
EI
S
E
N
H
O
W
E
R
S
T
R
E
ET
NI
M
I
T
Z
S
T
R
E
E
T
PURYEAR DRIVEJA
M
E
S
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y GILCHRIST AVENUEMI
L
N
E
R
D
R
I
V
E
MOSS STREETRAMP
WI
L
L
I
A
M
S
S
T
R
E
E
T
AV
E
N
U
E
A
W
A
L
T
O
N
D
R
I
V
E
BOLTON AVENUEA
S
H
B
U
R
N
A
V
E
N
U
E WOODLAND PARKWAYBROOKS AVENUEHA
R
R
I
N
G
T
O
N
A
V
E
N
U
EUNIVERSITY DRIVEHARVEY ROADG
E
O
R
G
E
B
U
S
H
D
R
I
V
E
E
A
S
T
TE
X
A
S
A
V
E
N
U
E
GEORGE BUSH DRIVESource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• Mixed residential along Texas
Avenue
• City Hall redevelopment with
parking garage and plaza
space
Zone 1
• Neighborhood center mixed-use to
compliment City Hall redevelopment
Retail: 86,000 sqft
Office: 121,000 sqft
Residential: (19) units
Zone 2
• New general commercial
development along George Bush DriveNEW MAIN DRIVELOT 55 DWPOLO ROADR
O
S
E
M
A
R
Y
L
A
N
E
L
O
T
1
5
ARMISTEAD STREETMILLIFF ROADSTALLINGS
DR
IVEPOPLAR STREETLOT 54
D
W
NU
N
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
KYLE AVENUEF
O
S
T
E
R
A
V
E
N
U
E
EI
S
E
N
H
O
W
E
R
S
T
R
EE
T
NI
M
I
T
Z
S
T
R
E
E
T
PURYEAR DRIVEJA
M
E
S
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y GILCHRIST AVENUEMI
L
N
E
R
D
R
I
V
E
MOSS STREETRAMP
WI
L
L
I
A
M
S
S
T
R
E
E
T
AV
E
N
U
E
A
W
A
L
T
O
N
D
R
I
V
E
BOLTON AVENUEA
S
H
B
U
R
N
A
V
E
N
U
E WOODLAND PARKWAYBROOKS AVENUEHA
R
R
I
N
G
T
O
N
A
V
E
N
U
EUNIVERSITY DRIVEHARVEY ROADGE
O
R
G
E
B
U
S
H
D
R
I
V
E
E
A
S
T
TE
X
A
S
A
V
E
N
U
E
GEORGE BUSH DRIVESource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• More neighborhood center
to compliment City Hall
redevelopmentRetail: 176,000 sqft
Office: 211,000 sqft
Residential: 11 units
SCENARIO DESIGN CONCEPTS
13
*Land use types are for scenario development only and do not represent the existing Land Use Plan categories
2
1
1
1
Zone 1
• Townhomes and mixed residential
along edge of sub-area to buffer
between neighborhood center and
single-family neighborhood
Neighborhood Center:
Horizontal mixes of commercial, office, &
residential
Neighborhood Conservation:
Established Neighborhoods
General Commercial:
Retail, office, & commercial uses Institutional/Public
Urban Residential:
Apartment complexes Parks and Greenways
Mixed Residential:
Duplexes, townhomes, and small-scale
apartment
Unimproved/Vacant
Suburban Residential:
Single-family homes
1
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ANTICIPATED SCENARIO
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO
Scenario Assumptions
Scenario Assumptions
14
SCENARIOS AT A GLANCE
-28%48%
27%17%17%
3%--
5%9%21%
17%--
22%21%-
16%16%10%
8%8%4%
1%--
82 units 49 units -
56 units 70 units 149 units
94,000 sqft 180,000 sqft 270,000 sqft
9,000 sqft 130,000 sqft 220,000 sqft
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Commercial
Office
Area 2: Texas Avenue across from A&M Campus
15
SCENARIO SUMMARY EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
HOUSING
Housing Units 138 119 149
Population 309 266 333
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Jobs 370 890 1,239
Commercial Square Footage 102,987 313,656 487,965
Property Tax Revenue (Annual) $231,000 $399,000 $581,000
Sales Tax Revenue (Annual) $1,245,000 $1,406,000 $1,575,000
TRANSPORTATION
Total Trips (All Modes) 5,553 8,118 10,230
Vehicular Trips 4,627 5,152 6,065
Intersection Density 0.28 0.28 0.25
Internal Capture Rate 1.00%24.60%25.30%
Multimodal Trip Rate Reduction 15.83%15.83%20.63%
INFRASTRUCTURE
Water Demand (WGD) 69,710 52,462 80,519
Wastewater Demand (WGD) 60,802 43,980 62,087
Requires upgrades to public utilities?
Cost of Water/Wastewater Upgrades
Annual Water/Wastewater Revenue
Additional Infrastructure Cost
QUALITY OF PLACE
Land Use Mix Medium Medium Medium
Meaningful Open Space Low Low High
Street Level Activation Low Medium Medium
Proximity to Places of Activity 2 4 4
Connectivity 1.55 1.74 1.78
TBD BY CITY BASED ON DEMAND
EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
Neighborhood
Center
General
Commercial
Suburban
Residential
Mixed
Residential
Parks &
Greenways
Institutional/
Public
Vacant/
Unimproved
Urban
Residential
Neighborhood
Conservation
Area 3: Post Oak Mall Area
HARVEY ROADSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Land Use Types*
16
*Land use types are for scenario development only and do not represent the existing Land Use Plan categories HARVEY ROADSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• Leaves mall intact
• Develop empty or
underutilized parcels into
urban center
Zone 1
• Urban center developments along the
corners and edges of sub area
• South-western developments to link
in high density residential to create
the feel of one contiguous walkable
development
Retail: (15,000) sqft
Office: 245,000 sqft
Residential: 215 units
HARVEY ROADSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• Assumes major rework of
Post Oak Mall
• Adds new minor collector
between Harvey Rd &
Holleman Dr
Zone 1
• Full redevelopment of Post Oak Mall
into a large urban & neighborhood
center
• Increased access points from
surrounding thoroughfares
• Replaces a large amount of
commercial square footage for office
and residential
Retail: (265,000) sqft
Office: 735,000 sqft
Residential: 1,209 units
SCENARIO DESIGN CONCEPTS
17
1
1
1
1
1
Urban Center:
Vertical mixes of commercial, office, &
residential
Urban Residential:
Apartment complexes
Neighborhood Center:
Horizontal mixes of commercial, office, &
residential
Institutional/Public
General Commercial:
Retail, office, & commercial uses Unimproved/Vacant
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ANTICIPATED SCENARIO
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO
Scenario Assumptions
Scenario Assumptions
18
SCENARIOS AT A GLANCE
-21%55%
--23%
70%67%10%
13%9%9%
4%4%4%
13%--
---
594 units 809 units 1,803 units
1,125,000 sqft 1,110,000 sqft 860,000 sqft
15,000 sqft 260,000 sqft 750,000 sqft
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Commercial
Office
Urban
Center
General
Commercial
Institutional/
Public
Vacant/
Unimproved
Urban
Residential
Area 3: Post Oak Mall Area
19
SCENARIO SUMMARY EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
HOUSING
Housing Units 594 809 1,803
Population 1,329 1,811 4,033
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Jobs 2,299 2,731 3,219
Commercial Square Footage 1,140,027 1,364,825 1,608,665
Property Tax Revenue (Annual) $771,000 $1,158,000 $2,217,000
Sales Tax Revenue (Annual) $1,974,000 $1,946,000 $1,477,000
TRANSPORTATION
Total Trips (All Modes) 28,543 59,626 70,312
Vehicular Trips 24,427 48,419 45,928
Intersection Density 0.06 0.06 0.11
Internal Capture Rate 0.20%5.30%12.70%
Multimodal Trip Rate Reduction 14.25%14.25%25.18%
INFRASTRUCTURE
Water Demand (WGD) 149,318 300,820 356,676
Wastewater Demand (WGD) 174,736 339,882 425,379
Requires upgrades to public utilities?
Cost of Water/Wastewater Upgrades
Annual Water/Wastewater Revenue
Additional Infrastructure Cost
QUALITY OF PLACE
Land Use Mix Low Medium High
Meaningful Open Space Low Low High
Street Level Activation Low Medium High
Proximity to Places of Activity 3 6 7
Connectivity 1.31 1.56 1.91
TBD BY CITY BASED ON DEMAND
EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
Neighborhood
Center
Area 4: Harvey Road (Opposite Post Oak Mall)
HARVEY ROADGEORGE BUSH DRIVE EASTSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Land Use Types*
20
*Land use types are for scenario development only and do not represent the existing Land Use Plan categories
HARVEY ROADGEORGE BUSH DRIVE EASTSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• Carries over urban style
mixed use from mall
redevelopment
• Mixing in more commercial
with existing multi-family
Zone 2
• Expanded general commercial
development along Harvey Rd across
from Post Oak Mall
Retail: 116,000 sqft
Office: 96,000 sqft
Residential: (163) units
Zone 1
• Smaller pocket of urban center
development towards the center of
the sub area
HARVEY ROADGEORGE BUSH DRIVE EASTSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• Activating Highway 6
frontage road
• Providing a buffer
between urban center and
neighborhood
Retail: 436,000 sqft
Office: 296,000 sqft
Residential: (308) units
SCENARIO DESIGN CONCEPTS
21
2 1
1
Zone 1
• Neighborhood center along Highway 6
Frontage Rd
• Commercial and office located near
highway, residential in the back closer
to the neighborhoods
Urban Center:
Vertical mixes of commercial, office, &
residential
General Commercial:
Retail, office, & commercial uses
Neighborhood Center:
Horizontal mixes of commercial, office, &
residential
Urban Residential:
Apartment complexes
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ANTICIPATED SCENARIO
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO
Scenario Assumptions
Scenario Assumptions
22
Area 4: Harvey Road (Opposite Post Oak Mall)
SCENARIOS AT A GLANCE
-11%-
--38%
19%26%26%
81%63%37%
---
1,501 units 1,338 units 1,193 units
114,000 sqft 230,000 sqft 550,000 sqft
4,000 sqft 100,000 sqft 300,000 sqft
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Commercial
Office
Urban
Residential
Neighborhood
Center
Urban
Center
General
Commercial
23
SCENARIO SUMMARY EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
HOUSING
Housing Units 1,501 1,338 1,193
Population 3,358 2,993 2,670
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Jobs 252 677 1,700
Commercial Square Footage 117,848 158,566 850,053
Property Tax Revenue (Annual) $342,000 $395,000 $727,000
Sales Tax Revenue (Annual) $113,000 $331,000 $931,000
TRANSPORTATION
Total Trips (All Modes) 12,426 17,689 31,310
Vehicular Trips 10,427 11,905 22,195
Intersection Density 0.19 0.19 0.19
Internal Capture Rate 1.00%20.60%13.80%
Multimodal Trip Rate Reduction 15.24%15.24%17.76%
INFRASTRUCTURE
Water Demand (WGD) 277,888 267,569 241,619
Wastewater Demand (WGD) 332,422 319,198 286,768
Requires upgrades to public utilities?
Cost of Water/Wastewater Upgrades
Annual Water/Wastewater Revenue
Additional Infrastructure Cost
QUALITY OF PLACE
Land Use Mix Medium Medium Medium
Meaningful Open Space Low Low Medium
Street Level Activation Low Medium Medium
Proximity to Places of Activity 3 4 5
Connectivity 1.29 1.52 1.56
TBD BY CITY BASED ON DEMAND
EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
Area 5: George Bush Drive and Wellborn Road Area
GEORGE BUSH DRIVE WESTHOLLEMAN DRIVEGEORGE BUSH DRIVEWEL
LBORN
ROAD
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunityLand Use Types*
24
*Land use types are for scenario development only and do not represent the existing Land Use Plan categoriesGEORGE BUSH DRIVE WESTHOLLEMAN DRIVEGEORGE BUSH DRIVEWELLBORN ROAD
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• Complete rework of the sub
area
• More density along George
Bush and Wellborn with
medium density residential
Zone 1
• Urban and neighborhood center along
George Bush and Wellborn
• Designed to be easily accessible to
both TAMU campus and nearby single
family residential
Retail: 46,000 sqft
Office: 70,000 sqft
Residential: 109 units
Zone 2
• Medium density residential to buffer
between new urban center and
existing Southside single-family homes
• Duplexes and fourplexes that match
the nearby suburban contextGEORGE BUSH DRIVE WESTHOLLEMAN DRIVEGEORGE BUSH DRIVEWEL
LBORN
ROAD
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• Assumes Bush-Wellborn
interchange construction
• Northmost parcel remains
general commercial
Zone 1
• Creating an enhanced pedestrian-
friendly urban center on the south
side of campus (similar to Century
Square)
• Road closures along Highland St and
Grove St (marked on map) due to
Bush-Wellborn interchange
• Highland St from George Bush Dr to
Grove St closed to vehicular traffic,
similar concept to College Main
Retail: 90,000 sqft
Office: 124,000 sqft
Residential: 97 units
SCENARIO DESIGN CONCEPTS
25
1
1
1
2
1
Urban Residential:
Apartment complexes
Neighborhood Center:
Horizontal mixes of commercial, office,
& residential
Mixed Residential:
Duplexes, townhomes, and small-scale
apartment
General Commercial:
Retail, office, & commercial uses
Suburban Residential:
Single-family homes Parks and Greenways
Urban Center:
Vertical mixes of commercial, office, &
residential
Unimproved/Vacant
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ANTICIPATED SCENARIO
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO
Scenario Assumptions
Scenario Assumptions= intersection closure
26
Area 5: George Bush Drive and Wellborn Road Area
SCENARIOS AT A GLANCE
-33%55%
-20%16%
5.5%--
0.5%--
7%47%26%
83%--
--3%
4%--
170 units --
17 units 296 units 284 units
34,000 sqft 80,000 sqft 124,000 sqft
-70,000 sqft 124,000 sqft
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Commercial
Office
27
SCENARIO SUMMARY EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
HOUSING
Housing Units 187 296 284
Population 418 663 635
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Jobs 68 317 497
Commercial Square Footage 33,851 158,566 104,620
Property Tax Revenue (Annual) $331,000 $521,000 $599,000
Sales Tax Revenue (Annual) $253,000 $339,000 $422,000
TRANSPORTATION
Total Trips (All Modes) 1,771 9,264 13,659
Vehicular Trips 1,536 6,751 9,839
Intersection Density 0.48 0.48 0.42
Internal Capture Rate 0.00%16.00%12.40%
Multimodal Trip Rate Reduction 13.25%13.25%17.76%
INFRASTRUCTURE
Water Demand (WGD) 63,920 95,232 75,562
Wastewater Demand (WGD) 46,555 75,966 69,174
Requires upgrades to public utilities?
Cost of Water/Wastewater Upgrades
Annual Water/Wastewater Revenue
Additional Infrastructure Cost
QUALITY OF PLACE
Land Use Mix Low High High
Meaningful Open Space Low Low Medium
Street Level Activation Low High High
Proximity to Places of Activity 10 13 13
Connectivity 0.29 0.96 1.02
TBD BY CITY BASED ON DEMAND
Neighborhood
Center
General
Commercial
Suburban
Residential
Mixed
Residential
Parks &
Greenways
Vacant/
Unimproved
Urban
Residential
Urban
Center
EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
Area 6: George Bush Drive across from A&M Campus
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
WELLBORN ROADTEXAS AVENUEHARVEY ROADGEORGE BUSH DRIVE EASTHOLLEMAN DRIVE
GEORGE BUSH DRIVE WEST GEORGE BUSH DRIVE
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Land Use Types*
28
*Land use types are for scenario development only and do not represent the existing Land Use Plan categories
ANTICIPATED SCENARIO
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO
WELLBORN ROADTEXAS AVENUEHARVEY ROADGEORGE BUSH DRIVE EASTHOLLEMAN DRIVE
GEORGE BUSH DRIVE WEST GEORGE BUSH DRIVE
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Scenario Assumptions
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• Full residential buildout of
neighborhood conservation
Zone 1
• Southside Neighborhood Area Plan
• Neighborhood conservation, historic
suburban context
• Development of currently vacant lots
to match context
Retail: -
Office: -
Residential: 4 units
WELLBORN ROADTEXAS AVENUEHARVEY ROADGEORGE BUSH DRIVE EASTHOLLEMAN DRIVE
GEORGE BUSH DRIVE WEST GEORGE BUSH DRIVE
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Scenario Assumptions
Proposed Land Use Change
(net new) Overall Notes
• Redevelopment of George
Bush Dr and Texas Ave
corner
• Maintains neighborhood
conservation
Zone 1
• New neighborhood center
development
• Old town style to match the character
of the surrounding neighborhood
Retail: -
Office: 20,000 sqft
Residential: 10 units
SCENARIO DESIGN CONCEPTS
29
1 1
1
Mixed Residential:
Duplexes, townhomes, and small-scale
apartment
General Commercial:
Retail, office, & commercial uses
Neighborhood Conservation:
Established Neighborhoods Institutional/Public
Neighborhood Center:
Horizontal mixes of commercial, office, &
residential
Unimproved/Vacant
Zone 2
• New mixed residential along George
Bush Dr
• Multi-family that matches the
character of the Southside
Neighborhood
• Brownstone style homes
2
30
Area 6: George Bush Drive across from A&M Campus
SCENARIOS AT A GLANCE
EXISTING
4%4%11%
40%41%31%
--3%
10%10%10%
45%45%45%
1%--
98 units 102 units 76 units
52 units 52 units 84 units
90,000 sqft 90,000 sqft 90,000 sqft
--20,000 sqft
300,000 sqft 300,000 sqft 300,000 sqft
Single-Family
Multi-Family
Commercial
Office
Education
31
SCENARIO SUMMARY EXISTING ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE
HOUSING
Housing Units 150 154 160
Population 336 344 358
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Jobs 834 1,201 1,218
Commercial Square Footage 95,827 95,827 104,620
Property Tax Revenue (Annual) $254,000 $257,000 $281,000
Sales Tax Revenue (Annual) $309,000 $309,000 $309,000
TRANSPORTATION
Total Trips (All Modes) 10,968 11,823 12,021
Vehicular Trips 8,636 8,357 8,225
Intersection Density 0.33 0.33 0.33
Internal Capture Rate 10.90%12.30%12.30%
Multimodal Trip Rate Reduction 15.24%15.24%17.76%
INFRASTRUCTURE
Water Demand (WGD) 98,256 103,099 105,877
Wastewater Demand (WGD) 94,118 90,075 92,011
Requires upgrades to public utilities?
Cost of Water/Wastewater Upgrades
Annual Water/Wastewater Revenue
Additional Infrastructure Cost
QUALITY OF PLACE
Land Use Mix Medium Medium Medium
Meaningful Open Space Low Low Low
Street Level Activation Low Low Low
Proximity to Places of Activity 41 41 42
Connectivity 0.86 0.89 0.94
TBD BY CITY BASED ON DEMAND
Neighborhood
Center
General
Commercial
Mixed
Residential
Institutional/
Public
Vacant/
Unimproved
Neighborhood
Conservation
ANTICIPATED ALTERNATIVE