HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/09/2009 - Workshop Agenda Packet - City CouncilOn Behalf of the Citizens of College Station, Home of Texas A&M University, We will continue to Promote and Advance the
Community’s Quality of Life
Mayor Councilmembers
Ben White John Crompton
James Massey
Mayor Pro Tem Dennis Maloney
Katy-Marie Lyles
City Manager Lawrence Stewart
Glenn Brown David Ruesink
Agenda
College Station City Council
Workshop Meeting
Thursday, July 9, 2009 3:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
1. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on items listed on the consent agenda.
2. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a recap of the 81st Texas Legislative Session, the
Special Called Session that began on July 1, and potential future legislative issues.
3. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the Water Conservation and Irrigation Plan for the
College Station Parks and Recreation Department, as requested by Council.
4. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding development/redevelopment activities and issues
in Northgate
5. Council Calendar
July 11 Household Hazardous Waste Collection at TAMU Services Bldg, 7:00 a.m.
July 14 Audit Committee Meeting in Admin Conference Rm, 5:00 p.m.
July 15 Exploring History Lunch Lecture Series at CS Conf. Center Rm 127, 11:30 a.m.
July 17 Aggie Field of Honor Dedication at Memorial Cemetery in Aggie Field of Honor, 9:00 am
July 18 Hispanic Forum Scholarship Gala at Brazos Center, 6:00 p.m.
July 20 IGC Meeting at BVCOG, 12:00 p.m.
July 21 Council Transportation Committee Meeting in Admin. Conference Rm, 4:30 p.m.
July 23 Council Workshop/Regular Meeting, 3:00 p.m. & 7:00 p.m.
6. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on future agenda items: A Council Member may inquire
about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the
recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the
subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting.
7. Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Arts Council of the Brazos
Valley, Audit Committee, Brazos County Health Dept., Brazos Valley Council of Governments, Brazos
Valley Wide Area Communications Task Force, Cemetery Committee, Design Review Board, Historic
Preservation Committee, Interfaith Dialogue Association, Intergovernmental Committee, Joint Relief
Funding Review Committee, Library Committee, Metropolitan Planning Organization, National League
1
Page | 2
City Council Workshop Meeting
Thursday, July 9, 2009
On Behalf of the Citizens of College Station, Home of Texas A&M University, We will continue to Promote and Advance the
Community’s Quality of Life
of Cities, Outside Agency Funding Review, Parks and Recreation Board, Planning and Zoning
Commission, Sister City Association, TAMU Student Senate, Research Valley Partnership, Regional
Transportation Committee for Council of Governments, Texas Municipal League, Transportation
Committee, Wolf Pen Creek Oversight Committee, Wolf Pen Creek TIF Board, Zoning Board of
Adjustments, BVSWMA, Signature Event Task Force, (Notice of Agendas posted on City Hall bulletin
board).
8. Executive Session will immediately follow the workshop meeting in the Administrative Conference
Room.
Consultation with Attorney {Gov’t Code Section 551.071}; possible action. The City Council may seek
advice from its attorney regarding a pending or contemplated litigation subject or settlement offer or
attorney-client privileged information. Litigation is an ongoing process and questions may arise as to a
litigation tactic or settlement offer, which needs to be discussed with the City Council. Upon occasion the
City Council may need information from its attorney as to the status of a pending or contemplated
litigation subject or settlement offer or attorney-client privileged information. After executive session
discussion, any final action or vote taken will be in public. The following subject(s) may be discussed:
a. Application with TCEQ for permits in Westside/Highway 60 area, near Brushy Water Supply
Corporation
b. Sewer CCN permit requests for Brushy & Wellborn Services Areas
c. Water CCN permit requests for Brushy & Wellborn Services Areas
d. Bed & Banks Water Rights Discharge Permits for College Station and Bryan
e. Legal aspects of Water Well, permits and possible purchase of or lease of water well sites
f. Cliff A. Skiles, DVM & C.A. Skiles Family Partnership, Ltd. Water permit applications with the
Brazos Valley Groundwater Conservation District
g. TMPA v. PUC (College Station filed Intervention)
h. City of Bryan suit filed against College Station, Legal issues and advise on Brazos Valley Solid
Waste Management Agency contract, on proposed methane gas contract
i. Update on legal proceedings for Grimes County Landfill site and contracts for development of
Grimes County site
j. Weingarten Realty Investors v. College Station, Ron Silvia, David Ruesink, Lynn McIlhaney, and
Ben White
k. Chavers et al v. Tyrone Morrows, Michael Ikner, City of Bryan, City of College Station, et al
l. Rogers Sheridan v. Barbara Schob & Greg Abbott
m. Clancey v. College Station, Glenn Brown, and Kathy Merrill
n. Legal issues related to Economic Development Agreement between City of College Station &
Sahara Realty
o. The rights and obligations under one or more leases at Chimney Hill city-owned property along
University Blvd. located in the City.
Real Estate {Gov’t Code Section 551.072}; possible action The City Council may deliberate the purchase,
exchange, lease or value of real property if deliberation in an open meeting would have a detrimental effect
on the position of the City in negotiations with a third person. After executive session discussion, any final
action or vote taken will be in public. The following subject(s) may be discussed:
a. Possible Purchase or Exchange of Property near E. University and Tarrow
2
Page | 3
City Council Workshop Meeting
Thursday, July 9, 2009
On Behalf of the Citizens of College Station, Home of Texas A&M University, We will continue to Promote and Advance the
Community’s Quality of Life
Personnel {Gov’t Code Section 551.074}; possible action The City Council may deliberate the
appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer.
After executive session discussion, any final action or vote taken will be in public. The following
subject(s) may be discussed:
a. Planning and Zoning Commission
b. Zoning Board of Adjustments
c. Construction Board of Adjustments and Appeals
d. Parks and Recreation Board
9. Action on executive session, or any workshop agenda item not completed or discussed in today’s
workshop meeting may be discussed in tonight’s Regular Meeting if necessary.
10. Adjourn.
APPROVED:
___________________________________________
City Manager
Notice is hereby given that a Workshop Meeting of the City Council of the City of College Station, Texas
will be held on the 9th day of July, 2009 at 3:00 pm in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue,
College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be discussed, to wit: See Agenda
Posted this 6th day of July, 2009 at 2:00 pm
__
E-Signed by Connie Hooks
VERIFY authenticity with ApproveIt
_________________
City Secretary
I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body 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 July 6, 2009 at 2:00 pm and remained so posted continuously for at
least 72 hours proceeding the scheduled time of said meeting.
This public notice was removed from the official board at the College Station City Hall on the following date
and time: _______________________ by ___________________________.
Dated this _____day of _______________, 2009.
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By____________________________________
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the ______day of _________________,
___________________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. Council meetings are broadcast live on Cable Access Channel 19.
3
July 9, 2009
Workshop Agenda Item No. 2
Legislative Update
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: David Neeley, Assistant City Manager
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding a recap of the
81st Texas Legislative Session, the Special Called Session that began on July 1, and
potential future legislative issues.
Recommendation(s): N/A
Summary: Dan Shelley was hired three years ago as the City’s state legislative lobbyist.
He and Jennifer Shelley Rodriguez came to College Station last September to meet with
Council and discuss the City’s state legislative priorities for the 81st Texas Legislative
Session this past spring. Different legislative issues pertaining to the City were discussed at
this meeting; the consultant team has tracked these issues, notified staff of important
hearings, and provided weekly updates on issues important to the City.
Mr. Shelley and Mrs. Rodriguez are present today in order to discuss the results of the
recently completed legislative session, the special session which began on July 1 and
potential future legislative issues.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Attachments: N/A
4
July 9, 2009
Workshop Agenda Item No. 3
Water Conservation Plan - Parks and Recreation
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: David Schmitz, Assistant Director, Parks and Recreation
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the Water
Conservation and Irrigation Plan for the College Station Parks and Recreation Department,
as requested by Council.
Recommendation(s): Staff requests that the Council provide input and policy direction on
the current water conservation and irrigation plan for the College Station Parks and
Recreation Department.
Summary: The City of College Station Parks and Recreation Department has set a goal to
modify the current system wide water use and irrigation procedures to assist in the City of
College Station water conservation efforts. The plan focuses on more frequent irrigation
systems checks, repairs and modifications to existing systems, reducing the number of
watering days to coincide with the City’s water conservation plan, reducing run times to the
minimal needed, and replacing select planting beds with low water use perennials.
Budget & Financial Summary: Funds for the implementation of these water
conservation and irrigation efforts will be funded from the current FY09 General Fund
budget.
Attachments: None
5
July 9, 2009
Workshop Agenda Item No. 4
Northgate Development/Redevelopment Discussion
To: Glenn Brown, City Manager
From: Bob Cowell, AICP, Director of Planning & Development Services
Agenda Caption: Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding
development/redevelopment activities and issues in Northgate.
Recommendation(s): Staff recommends that Council reaffirm their commitment to
the adopted vision, goals, and strategies for the development/redevelopment of Northgate
and direct staff to identify issues/opportunities to:
· Conduct further assessment of parking issues in the district and the development of
a comprehensive parking management system
· Refine development regulations to better address limited physical improvements
· Enhance development regulations, standards, and practices to make the urban
district more functional (loading areas, centralized sanitation facilities, etc)
Summary: Council recently requested that a future agenda item be scheduled regarding
current development/redevelopment practices and issues in Northgate. Specifically, Council
stated an interest in how current practices are (or are not) successfully implementing
adopted plans for the District and what (if any) issues may need resolution.
Since the inception of the City of College Station, Northgate has been the focus of intense
development and redevelopment, resulting in the only area of the City developed in an
urban fashion. Northgate represents the only area in the City that residences, businesses,
faith-based organizations, and institutional uses co-exist in a dense, urban, walkable
environment. This built-environment and the District’s proximity to campus have
contributed to Northgate being one of the most exciting and valuable places to live, work,
worship, and play.
This has not always been the case. Only a decade or so ago, though many of the
foundational elements existed, Northgate was falling short of its potential. Properties had
fallen into disrepair, parking problems were prevalent, public infrastructure had become
obsolete and over-capacity, property values had remained stagnant or declined, and the
entire area lacked a “sense of district”.
Through a partnership between the City of College Station, Northgate property owners and
businesses, Texas A&M University, the Texas Department of Transportation, faith-based
organizations, and others a specific vision for the future was established, goals were stated
and strategies identified. Since 1996 these partners have taken action. Actions that have
included millions invested in public infrastructure, in private development, in expansions of
faith-based organizations, introduction of regulations and development standards to ensure
high quality development and to protect these investments, and enhanced city services.
The results of these efforts have been many. The District has begun to exhibit a strong
sense of place, redevelopment/development has occurred in a compatible and harmonious
manner, issues with public infrastructure have been resolved in many locations, and
6
economic opportunities and land values have increased dramatically. In short, the District
is progressing toward the vision the partners established more than a decade ago.
The strategies and actions have not been perfect or without problems. Likewise the work is
far from done. Indeed, one could argue the real change envisioned by the partners is just
now beginning to truly occur. Every so often, the City and its partners have stepped back
to affirm their commitment to the vision for Northgate and to make adjustments where
necessary. This was done in 1998 when design guidelines for the area were established,
again when the Unified Development Ordinance was revised to better manage the
development/redevelopment occurring in the district, again in 2003 when a more detailed
implementation plan was developed, and most recently this year when administrative
changes were made to bring a more responsive “district management system” delivery of
city services to the area.
Through engagement of stakeholders, discussion by the Council, and analysis performed by
the staff, staff believes that the vision, goals, and general strategies established by the
partners in 1996 remain valid and achievable. Staff concurs that certain specific elements
of the general strategies and actions need further refinement. These include:
· Further assessment of parking issues in the district and the development of a
comprehensive parking management system
· Refinement of development regulations to better address limited physical projects
· Enhance development regulations, standards, and practices to make the urban
district more functional (loading areas, centralized sanitation facilities, etc)
Budget & Financial Summary: Funds are currently allocated for EDC to initiate an initial
phases of the parking analysis.
Attachments:
A. Staff Memo Regarding Northgate Development/Redevelopment
B. 1996 Northgate Redevelopment Plan (on file with the P&DS Department)
C. 1998 Northgate Design Guidelines (on file with the P&DS Department)
D. 2003 Northgate Redevelopment Implementation Plan (located at
http://www.cstx.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=2660
and on file with the P&DS Department)
7
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: BOB COWELL, AICP, DIRECTOR PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
SUBJECT: NORTHGATE DEVELOPMENT/REDEVELOPMENT
DATE: 7/6/2009
CC: GLENN BROWN, CITY MANAGER
Overview
In 1996, the City of College Station, property and business owners in Northgate, faith-based
organizations, and Texas A&M University officials recognized that the Northgate area was falling
short of its potential. To that end, the parties worked with consultants to identify specific issues
that needed attention and opportunities that existed or could exist. These included:
Issues
· Lack of an overall plan or design
· Not developed with a “sense of district”
· Parking concerns, especially between University and Church
· Limits on east-west traffic movements
· Limited and aging infrastructure
· Drainage concerns (site level and area-wide)
· Presence of historic structures
Through a series of planning efforts conducted in 1996, 1998, and 2003, the following goals
were developed and adopted by the City Council for the Northgate area:
Goals
· Revitalize Northgate as a campus-neighborhood that includes both residential and
commercial developments (inclusive of institutional uses and places of worship)
· Encourage the development of additional owner-occupied residential units to
compensate for the transient nature of Northgate’s student population
· Encourage the development of new retail/commercial/office space that maximizes
Northgate’s proximity to the University and its location along three state controlled
roadways.
· Provide opportunities for existing District businesses to expand and relocate within
Northgate
8
2
· Create a safe, secure, and attractive campus-area neighborhood that provides an
alternative for student apartments/housing that is within walking distance of the main
campus.
· Create a “gathering place” in the commercial core of Northgate that would be
patronized by students and City residents alike.
These planning efforts further developed a series of strategies to be used in the achievement of
the stated goals. These strategies are as follow:
Strategies
1. Support development of strategic parcels in three different distinct sections of
Northgate in a unified manner to encourage redevelopment due to increasing property
values. (University-owned properties adjacent to College Avenue, the “mud-Lot”, and
the core area between Patricia Street and Church Avenue).
2. Strengthen the edge of Northgate through the development of a mixed use
development and parking garage near the intersection of University Drive and Nagle
Street (conference center and hotel)
3. Improve the core area through improved pedestrian and parking facilities and additional
retail uses
4. Develop a linear park in the northern portion of Northgate to act as a buffer, add new
park space for residents, and aid in stormwater management
5. Develop the vacant land owned by the University as townhomes and condominiums for
sale rather than as rental apartments.
6. Develop more dense apartments and private dorms in the interior of Northgate
7. Strategic removal and consolidation of parking with redevelopment activities
8. Increase off-street parking requirements for residential, institutional, and places of
worship
9. Focus on limited short-term (1-2 hour) on-street parking and longer-term off-street
parking (parking garages, shared parking lots, etc)
10. Develop and implement design guidelines that will contribute to the development of a
“sense of district” (streets, land uses, building height, building setbacks, building
materials, signage, screening, awnings, windows, off-street parking, and graphics
11. City investments in infrastructure to lower development costs
Finally, a series of actions were identified to implement the stated strategies. These actions
were as follow:
Actions
ü Pursue state and federal grants
9
3
ü Establish a TIF District
ü Establish a District Association (involve City, businesses, property owners,
churches, tenants, etc)
ü Encourage partnerships to address property maintenance responsibilities
ü Encourage City/University joint ventures (funding of the District Association,
development of a parking garage, development of the linear park)
ü City should provide additional off-street parking areas in core
ü City should rezone Northgate and establish design guidelines as discussed in the
Redevelopment Plan
ü City should upgrade water and wastewater mains
ü City should rebuild primary streets to add curb and gutter, storm sewers,
sidewalks, landscaping, and street furniture
ü TxDOT and City to widen sidewalks along University Drive
10
4
Analysis
In fulfillment of the identified actions, strategies, and goals the City rezoned all of the Northgate
area to facilitate more flexible and rapid development opportunities, the City has invested more
than $30 million in public infrastructure and amenities, and substantial private investment and
development has occurred.
At this point, more than a decade since the planning for Northgate was initiated it is reasonable
to step back make some observations and ask a few questions.
Are the vision and goals for Northgate still relevant and still practical?
Do the strategies and actions remain valid?
Are the intended results occurring in Northgate?
What problems/limitations have been noted as the plans are implemented?
The following information is intended to provide a brief response to each of these questions and
may serve as the basis for the Council discussion and for the staff recommendations contained
in this memo:
Are the vision and goals for Northgate still relevant and practical?
This question is analyzed by looking at the adopted vision and goals and evaluating them against
recent policy statements issued or acted upon by the Council. Additionally, the general market
conditions will be evaluated to determine market viability of the adopted vision and goals.
Vision & Goals
Central to the redevelopment vision for Northgate of all the plans prepared by the City, is that
redevelopment occur in a “consistent and harmonious fashion” resulting in a “sense of district”.
Further, the plans establish a vision that redevelopment be “compact” and “compatible with the
original Northgate character”.
As stated previously the various plans have established a series of goals related to the stated
redevelopment vision. Again, these goals are as follow:
· Revitalize Northgate as a campus-neighborhood that includes both residential and
commercial developments (inclusive of institutional uses and places of worship)
· Encourage the development of additional owner-occupied residential units to
compensate for the transient nature of Northgate’s student population
· Encourage the development of new retail/commercial/office space that maximizes
Northgate’s proximity to the University and its location along three state controlled
roadways.
· Provide opportunities for existing District businesses to expand and relocate within
Northgate
11
5
· Create a safe, secure, and attractive campus-area neighborhood that provides an
alternative for student apartments/housing that is within walking distance of the main
campus.
· Create a “gathering place” in the commercial core of Northgate that would be
patronized by students and City residents alike.
In May of 2009, the City Council unanimously approved the revised Comprehensive Plan for the
City. Central to this plan was the establishment, protection, and enhancement of places of
distinction. The vision established in the Comprehensive Plan reads:
College Station, the proud home of Texas A&M University and
the heart of the Research Valley, will remain a vibrant, forward-thinking, knowledge-based
community which promotes the highest quality of life for its citizens by …
· Ensuring safe, tranquil, clean, and healthy neighborhoods
with enduring character;
· Increasing and maintaining the mobility of College Station citizens through a
well planned and constructed inter-modal transportation system;
· Expecting sensitive development and management of the built and natural
environment;
· Supporting well planned, quality and sustainable growth;
· Valuing and protecting our cultural and historical community resources;
· Developing and maintaining quality cost-effective community facilities,
infrastructure and services which ensure our City is cohesive and well
connected; and
· Pro-actively creating and maintaining economic and educational opportunities
for all citizens.
College Station will continue to be among the friendliest and
most responsive of communities and a demonstrated partner in maintaining and enhancing all
that is good and celebrated in the
Brazos Valley. It will continue to be a place where Texas and the
world come to learn, live, and conduct business!
The Comprehensive Plan identifies a number of special districts that represent unique
development opportunities and warrant special attention. Northgate is one such district. The
Plan states the following specifically about the Northgate District:
12
6
· The focus of this district plan should be to update the previous planning efforts and
continue development of this area into a vibrant entertainment district that includes
mixed-use projects, tourist attraction, and existing faith-based organizations.
The Plan identified a number of land use strategies that are applicable to Northgate. These
strategies are as follow:
· Develop and maintain, through regular review, a land use plan that identifies,
establishes, and enhances community character.
· Establish and protect distinct boundaries between various character areas
· Promote public and private development and design practices that ensure distinct
neighborhoods, districts, and corridors.
· Promote public and private development and design practices that encourage resource
conservation and protection.
· Focus community enhancement activities to promote a strong sense of community
identity.
· Identify, protect, and enhance unique community assets in our natural and built
environment.
Finally, the Council has continued to authorize significant investment in Northgate in
furtherance of the adopted vision and goals. Recent examples include the redevelopment of
Church Street, construction of public restrooms, additional revenues toward maintenance and
cleaning of public areas and facilities, and the adoption of a “district management model” for
the public components of the area.
All of these most recent actions by the Council appear to validate that the original vision for
Northgate and the adopted goals remain valid and relevant.
Market Conditions
Market information will be provided at the Council meeting by the Economic Development
Department.
Do the strategies and actions remain valid?
This question is analyzed by looking at the strategies and actions that have been deployed and
their effectiveness at achieving the stated vision and goals for Northgate.
A number of strategies and actions have been identified in the adopted plans for the Northgate
area. The general strategies deployed are as follow:
13
7
· Support development of strategic parcels in three different distinct sections of
Northgate in a unified manner to encourage redevelopment due to increasing property
values. (University-owned properties adjacent to College Avenue, the “mud-Lot”, and
the core area between Patricia Street and Church Avenue).
The city has supported development of these sites through direct cash incentives,
infrastructure improvements, and development assistance. The core area has been the
only area to experience any significant development activities. The University-owned
properties remain the focus of discussion with TAMU about large-scale mixed use
development. The first phase of this development (replacement of student dorms is
imminent).
· Strengthen the edge of Northgate through the development of a mixed use
development and parking garage near the intersection of University Drive and Nagle
Street (conference center and hotel).
Though several efforts at development of a conference center and hotel have been
made by the City, none have succeeded. Currently, the City is pursuing the
development of a convention center on University outside of Northgate.
· Improve the core area through improved pedestrian and parking facilities and additional
retail uses.
Significant improvements in pedestrian and parking facilities have been made in the
core area, including wider sidewalks, planting of street trees, placement of street
furniture, construction of a public parking garage, etc. The majority of new business
activities that have opened in the core area have been focused on entertainment (i.e.,
bars), though a few new retail operations have been established in the core.
· Develop a linear park in the northern portion of Northgate to act as a buffer, add new
park space for residents, and aid in stormwater management.
The city has acquired (and continues to seek) property in this area. Currently, the
property remains undeveloped.
· Develop the vacant land owned by the University as townhomes and condominiums for
sale rather than as rental apartments.
The University is engaged in discussions with private developers regarding the
development of this property with the construction of new dorms imminent. The long-
term vision for the property includes a diverse mix of use that could include owner-
occupied dwelling units.
· Develop more dense apartments and private dorms in the interior of Northgate.
14
8
Most of the large-scale new development in the core area has been dense apartment
buildings. These include the Factory and Warehouse projects. Additional projects are
currently under review/construction.
· Strategic removal and consolidation of parking with redevelopment activities.
On-street parking that was substandard and/or a risk to health and safety (head-in
parking for example) has been removed with both public and private development
projects. Where possible parking has been consolidated in new garages or replaced
with safer parallel parking.
· Increase off-street parking requirements for residential, institutional, and places of
worship.
Off-street parking requirements remain minimal and quite lower than where required
elsewhere in the City. As a result most uses in the area rely upon on-street parking and
the city parking garage to meet the parking demand.
· Focus on limited short-term (1-2 hour) on-street parking and longer-term off-street
parking (parking garages, shared parking lots, etc).
Portions of the on-street parking have been converted to short-term time limits and are
meter controlled while other portions remain unlimited. Further, a number of the on-
street parking spaces are permit controlled for adjacent private development (though it
is not clear such practices are authorized). Long-term parking is also accommodated in
private and public parking lots and parking garages.
· Develop and implement design guidelines that will contribute to the development of a
“sense of district” (streets, land uses, building height, building setbacks, building
materials, signage, screening, awnings, windows, off-street parking, and graphics.
Design guidelines were established in 1998 and later codified in the UDO. These
guidelines have been revised a number of times and are enforced by City staff and the
Design Review Board. The guidelines have resulted in a harmonious development
pattern with high-quality building materials that all contribute to a sense of district
while avoiding repetition or monotony.
· City investments in infrastructure to lower development costs.
The City has invested more than $30 Million in infrastructure improvements that have
substantially lowered private development costs and have aided in expanding the
development opportunities present in the District. Replaced water mains have enabled
buildings to add fire sprinkler systems which have allowed uses that include large
congregations of people. Replaced streets and sidewalks have enabled the heavy
pedestrian use in the district to be accommodated. Parking facilities have
15
9
accommodated parking needs for many of the businesses who would otherwise need to
include parking facilities on their lots.
The specified actions are as follow:
ü Pursue state and federal grants
Numerous grants (largely through the Housing and Urban Development
Administration) have been pursued and used in the redevelopment of
Northgate
ü Establish a TIF District
A TIF District was established to aid in the funding of a convention center in
Northgate, though it was recently dissolved as a result of locating the
convention center outside of the district
ü Establish a District Association (involve City, businesses, property owners,
churches, tenants, etc) The Northgate Merchants have continued as a formal
organization that interacts regularly with the City regarding issues in the District.
The City has recently adopted a number of service practices that replicate a
“district management model”, though no formal City District Management
organization (i.e., funded by City, staffed by City, etc) currently exists.
ü Encourage partnerships to address property maintenance responsibilities.
The City partners with the area businesses, TAMU, and the Municipal Court to
address the maintenance and cleaning of properties in Northgate.
ü Encourage City/University joint ventures (funding of the District Association,
development of a parking garage, development of the linear park).
There have been some successes at partnering on planning for the Northgate
area, but partnerships involving physical construction of items such as parking
garages or parks have not occurred to date.
ü City should provide additional off-street parking areas in core
The City constructed a new parking garage in the core
ü City should rezone Northgate and establish design guidelines as discussed in the
Redevelopment Plan
The City rezoned Northgate to NG-1, NG-2, and NG-3 and established
development criteria and design guidelines unique to the Northgate area and
consistent with the redevelopment plan and 1998 design guidelines
16
10
ü City should upgrade water and wastewater mains
The City has and continues to upgrade numerous water and wastewater mains
in the area
ü City should rebuild primary streets to add curb and gutter, storm sewers,
sidewalks, landscaping, and street furniture
The City has and continues to rebuild primary streets in the area, adding curb
and gutter, storm sewers, wider sidewalks, street trees, and street furniture
ü TxDOT and City to widen sidewalks along University Drive
TxDOT has completed preliminary designs for the installation of wider sidewalks
and other pedestrian improvements along University Drive. The City has
completed designs for the installation of traffic calming devices and bollards to
aid in the closure of certain streets to better safely manage pedestrian
movements in the area.
Many of the strategies and actions identified in the planning documents have been
accomplished or are in some state of completion. Some of the strategies and actions such as
street and water upgrades remain a work in progress. Still other strategies and actions no
longer seem relevant or practical, such as city involvement in a convention center in the area or
the use of a TIF District. Further, certain strategies and actions have generated concern or
opposition, such as the design guidelines and directive for parking removal.
Are the intended results occurring Northgate?
This question is analyzed by looking at the issues identified in the 1996 redevelopment plan and
the goals stated in the various plans in comparison with the situation in Northgate today.
The primary issues identified in the 1996 plan and the current conditions are noted in the
following:
· Lack of an overall plan or design
Through the adoption of the 1996 Redevelopment Plan and the subsequent 2003
Implementation Plan an overall plan to guide the development/redevelopment of
Northgate has existed for more than a decade. Further, the recently revised City
Comprehensive Plan reinforced the overall plan for this area as well as recognizing that
the need to update the plan at some point in the future.
Use of the 1995 “Comprehensive Survey of Northgate Historic Resources”, the City’s
Façade Improvement Grant Program, the 1998 “Northgate Design Guidelines” and the
codification of design requirements and standards in the Unified Development
Ordinance, the District has begun to evolve an overall design. This design is sensitive to
17
11
the historic fabric of the District (street design, historic buildings, etc.), includes
consistent treatments for sidewalks, street furniture, street trees, utilities, etc. Private
development is occurring with the use of high-quality materials and in a manner that
reinforces an overall and compatible design without being homogenous.
· Not developed with a “sense of district”
Use of consistent high-quality building materials, uniform design in sidewalks, street
furniture, street trees, utilities, etc. have all contributed to an evolving unique sense of
district. The diverse mix of uses (entertainment, institutional, faith-based, residential,
and retail) further enhances the sense of district. All of these elements combined in a
dense urban fabric clearly “announce” Northgate’s unique sense of place.
· Parking concerns, especially between University and Church
The construction of additional parking facilities (both by private and public interests) has
addressed some of the concerns. The necessary removal of parking to remove unsafe
conditions (head-in parking), create space for wider sidewalks and street trees, etc. has
resulted in concerns expressed by adjacent property owners.
· Limits on east-west traffic movements
Though improvements have been completed on Church Street (removal of head-in
parking, resurfacing, installation of curb and gutter, etc) to enhance its capacity as an
east-west route, it remains the only direct east-west route
· Limited and aging infrastructure
Significant improvements have occurred throughout Northgate, especially in regard to
water lines (improved fire flow) and stormwater management. Improvements in fire-
flow have perhaps been the most significant infrastructure improvement in the district,
enabling high-density uses and uses that congregate large groups to be introduced.
· Drainage concerns (site level and area-wide)
Site level drainage issues have improved substantially through the upgrade of several
streets and the introduction of curb and gutter to manage the stormwater. Area
stormwater management (in the form of regional detention or reclamation of portions
of the floodplain in the area remain as issues need additional attention.
· Presence of historic structures
Many historic structures have been revitalized through private investment and use of
the City’s façade improvement program. In many instances these historic structures
have been renovated to accommodate ever-changing uses and have been adapted to
modern business practices (such as conversion from office or retail to restaurants and
18
12
bars and the accommodation of roof-top facilities). These structures do present
challenges associated with fire protection, adequate means of ingress/egress, etc. In
some instances it has been difficult to determine how much/ and to what extent
adaptation should occur without compromising the historic integrity/character of the
building. As well in some instances historic buildings have been removed to
accommodate redevelopment.
The various planning efforts conducted by the City have resulted in a series of goals as outlined
previously in this memo. To fully understand the successes of planning efforts, it is necessary to
evaluate to see if progress is being made toward achieving the stated goals.
· Revitalize Northgate as a campus-neighborhood that includes both residential and
commercial developments (inclusive of institutional uses and places of worship)
Private and public actions have continued to make Northgate a vibrant district. The
area remains strongly linked to the University and includes new and expanded
businesses, residences, faith-based organizations, etc. Further, this development is
occurring in a more organized and harmonious manner than in the past. Recent market
information illustrates that Northgate is now one of the strongest markets for
development, rents, and sales.
· Encourage the development of additional owner-occupied residential units to
compensate for the transient nature of Northgate’s student population
Despite several efforts by the City to encourage options, essentially all of the recent
development/redevelopment of residential properties has been for rental units. The
Northgate population continues to be one nearly completely composed of students.
· Encourage the development of new retail/commercial/office space that maximizes
Northgate’s proximity to the University and its location along three state controlled
roadways.
The redevelopment plans specify the need for the City to assume much of the costs
associated with infrastructure upgrades to lower the private costs of redevelopment.
Through the issuance of debt, use of general and enterprise funds, and the pursuit of
grants, the City had invested more than $30 Million dollars in street improvements,
parking facilities, aesthetic improvements, water lines, stormwater facilities, etc. These
improvements have helped lower the private costs of development/redevelopment and
coupled with the market opportunities due to the proximity of the University have
resulted in substantial development of new retail/commercial activities. Much of the
development/redevelopment activity remains concentrated in the areas of
entertainment, and particularly entertainment focused on the student market.
19
13
Further, as a result of the development requirements and standards for the area, this
development/redevelopment is occurring in a planned and harmonious manner,
contributing to the overall sense of place and to the values.
· Provide opportunities for existing District businesses to expand and relocate within
Northgate
Again, through public investments existing businesses have been able to expand and/or
relocate in the District. Challenges have been experienced with historic buildings as
owners seek to adapt them to modern demands while the City seeks to preserve their
historic integrity. Further challenges have been experienced with uses that are
transitional in nature (that is they may be a use between the historic use of the property
and an eventual final use) and with businesses seeking modest revisions (that may
require expensive and time-consuming upgrades for code compliance. Finally, conflicts
exist as the various entertainment establishments seek to maximize use of their
property (outdoor patios, rooftop bars, etc) that if done poorly diminish the overall
quality of the area, negatively impact development potential, compromise historic
integrity, and in the extreme endanger life-safety.
· Create a safe, secure, and attractive campus-area neighborhood that provides an
alternative for student apartments/housing that is within walking distance of the main
campus
Investments have been made in enhanced police presence, street closures, widened
sidewalks, enhanced public maintenance and cleaning, etc. all in an effort to make
Northgate a safe and secure environment. Northgate remains a safe and secure
entertainment and residential destination. Continued patronage and private
investments attest to the successes of these efforts.
· Create a “gathering place” in the commercial core of Northgate that would be
patronized by students and City residents alike.
Completion of the promenade and the construction of public restrooms in the area have
helped to create a unique sense of place and central gathering place. Northgate
festivals and events occur in this location as envisioned in the redevelopment plan.
Continued improvements in this area will further increase the usefulness and diversity
of this central gathering place.
What problems/limitations have been noted as the plans are implemented?
No plan is all-knowing or perfect and the plans for Northgate’s redevelopment is certainly no
exception. Though by most measures the plans for the area have been very successful there
have been problems and limitations noted as implementation has occurred.
20
14
Parking
First and foremost is that it is apparent that the concern regarding adequate parking has not
abated with implementation of the plan. Indeed, many would argue the situation has worsened
with implementation. Without resolution, this issue will continue to hamper the full
implementation of the plan and realization of the goals for the area. Stated strategies and
actions (wider sidewalks, street trees, street and infrastructure repair) are already being placed
in jeopardy as debates rage about the removal of parking.
Diversity and Mix of Uses
Key to the plan, and a significant justification for the substantial public expenditure in the area is
the goal of diversity in the mix and type of uses in the district. Bars and dorms are not the final
vision for Northgate. Dense, mixed use developments that include owner-occupied dwellings,
places of worship, bars, retail outlet, hotels, parks, etc. are the vision sought. In most successful
mixed use urban areas, this diversity is accomplished through significant private investment,
significant public investment, strong development regulations, and a great location. Northgate
has all of these and is poised for more. Care must be exercised to ensure that radical changes in
any of these not signal the market that private investments will not be rewarded.
Development Regulations
A contributor to the success of Northgate has been the design requirements established in the
UDO. Nearly every successful urban district includes stringent development regulations.
Investors in a multi-million dollar project want to know there investment is protected and will
be surrounded by quality development. As elsewhere in the City development regulations
remain controversial. How much is too much? How much is too little? While adjustments may
be needed in some instances care must be exercised to ensure that the lack or abundance of
regulations does not impede the market opportunities in the district.
Land Assembly
One of the most challenging aspects for private and public development in the district is the
assembly of land to facilitate large-scale development. This issue is further complicated by
property owners that may be holding onto under-performing land or buildings awaiting land
value increases. In many ways, this is not much different than other areas of the City, but the
dense, small-lot nature of the district causes this particular issue to be especially challenging.
21
15
Conclusion
Based on stakeholder input, Council discussions, and staff analysis, it appears that the adopted
vision, goals, and general strategies for the redevelopment of Northgate remain valid and
practical. The results of the focus by the City and private interests on Northgate for the past 13
plus years have been many and are yielding great successes. Successes that include increased
property values, increased business activities, a renewed sense of place, expanded faith-based
offerings, improved public infrastructure, etc. While not all is perfect, a great deal of what was
planned and is being implemented is working very well.
Remaining issues with parking need to be further addressed and some specific revisions to the
regulations may be warranted. Care must be exercised to ensure that the successes associated
with the implementation of the plan are not jeopardized for short-term relief to a select few. It
is imperative that the long-term view be maintained and that it is understood that to fully
realize the potential of this very special area how parking occurs in the area is going to need to
change, regulations will need to remain strong, and partnerships between all involved in the
district will need to be strengthened and contribute to solutions not just raise objections.
22