Bob Yancy said:

---

metroid_84 said:

---

Quote:

---

Munson to six

---

I don't think any stretch of Munson is more than two lanes, and they wanted to make Munson six-lanes??

Personally I think the east neighborhood is quite easily traversed, I often go down Glenhaven, to Dominick, to George Bush, to Holleman, or do it in reverse, to sidestep a lot of the traffic on University and Texas.

---

Never heard that on Munson. Pretty certain that's false- just clarifying before that spreads!

Respectfully

Yancy '95

---

It was proposed and scrapped a long time ago. But before you declare it "fake news" give me a chance to look it up on the newspaper archives. I'll bring the receipts tomorrow.

Edit: For your infotainment...

PS3D said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

metroid_84 said:

---

Quote:

---

Munson to six

---

I don't think any stretch of Munson is more than two lanes, and they wanted to make Munson six-lanes??

Personally I think the east neighborhood is quite easily traversed, I often go down Glenhaven, to Dominick, to George Bush, to Holleman, or do it in reverse, to sidestep a lot of the traffic on University and Texas.

---

Never heard that on Munson. Pretty certain that's false- just clarifying before that spreads!

Respectfully

Yancy '95

---

It was proposed and scrapped a long time ago. But before you declare it "fake news" give me a chance to look it up on the newspaper archives. I'll bring the receipts tomorrow.

Edit: For your infotainment...

---

Wow! Receipts indeed. Thanks.

Respectfully

Yancy '95 Place 5

Bob Yancy said:

---

EliteElectric said:

---

https://www.boringcompany.com/

---

I spoke to them 2 years ago. Their technology works, and they're hungry for business as not many use it.

They wanted $15,000,000 for three tunnels (verbal quote). We went over the map and they identified 3 crossings under University they thought would work. I passed the info along.

Respectfully

Yancy '95

---

15 million? Peanuts.
Heck, sell a couple of city owned properties and get that done!

PS3D said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

EliteElectric said:

---

https://www.boringcompany.com/

---

I spoke to them 2 years ago. Their technology works, and they're hungry for business as not many use it.

They wanted $15,000,000 for three tunnels (verbal quote). We went over the map and they identified 3 crossings under University they thought would work. I passed the info along.

Respectfully

Yancy '95

---

I believe the Boring proposal was pedestrian walkways though I'm not sure of the route.

When I was a student I imagined a fully-enclosed tunnel system linking the basements of various buildings much like the Houston tunnels. But such a project would basically require a LOT of tunnels to be useful and would have to be ADA compliant and all that.

I think that a new road project would be more useful.

---

I thought the Boring company proposal had merit worth considering. We're trying to get pedestrians and micromobility vehicles from one side of University to the other, right? If we did that in 3 lighted tunnels spaced right from Polo drive to Wellborn that moved those kids safely UNDER University Drive, and at a fraction of the cost of what we're looking at today- isn't that worth just looking at?

As one member of council.

Respectfully yours,

Yancy '95 Place 5

@Yancy- May I respectfully ask what the thought process was on the Windham Tract Rezoning approval from the council? Why was it declined previously but approved this time?

I'm shocked at the attention Pebble Creek has received in this thread, yet no one has mentioned the DR Horton proposal and likely devaluation of property values in Greens Prairie and Castlegate.

D_Wag97 said:

---

ATXAGGS12 said:

---

@Yancy- May I respectfully ask what the thought process was on the Windham Tract Rezoning approval from the council? Why was it declined previously but approved this time?

I'm shocked at the attention Pebble Creek has received in this thread, yet no one has mentioned the DR Horton proposal and likely devaluation of property values in Greens Prairie and Castlegate.

---

The checks must have gone through. Seriously, though, how can that be justified with how busy Greens Prairie already is combined with what the current home values and densities are in the area?

---

I'm onto reviewing the Tourism Strategic Plan draft, but let me take a moment and address Windham Ranch.

This is a private property in Texas. It'll develop into something inarguably. The owner and DR Horton are under contract for 222 acres of proposed residential single family homes. Notably, we're 4200 shy of a balanced housing market. Final density will likely be about 650~ homes on this tract, once accounting for land required for open space, parks, streets, easements et al.

They originally were rejected because the prior rezoning ask was deemed incompatible with surrounding neighborhoods. So they responded to that decision by coming back and asking for the matching zone, Restricted Suburban.

To allay concerns about them building an entire Build to Rent community, they committed in writing to putting a purely voluntary, private party negotiated deed restriction that effectively disallows a BTR project.

Citizens also had concerns about traffic. That wasn't before us last night- but I called TxDot who reports the troublesome intersection of Arrington and Fitch is currently in design for a major upgrade. Citizens had concerns about sewer capacity, also not before us- but I checked and Alum Creek wastewater line is a funded capital project in design to address that. Citizens also had concerns about drainage and its effects on the county, et al. Commissioner Nettles and I spoke and after consultation with the County and at my suggestion, he came and spoke eloquently which I believe will result in close coordination between the city and county when staff are working on the plan to come. Folks had issues with school capacity- different government and not before us last night, but mayor addressed the fact that CSISD is losing students, not growing.

Bottom line was a resolution was in process on every concern by my analysis. We can't vote something down because we might not like the developer.

I would've absolutely voted against if they hadn't addressed the BTR issue. We are among the highest upside down cities in the entire nation with more rental units than owned. As one member of council, I believe that's been given rise to, or exacerbated by, a regulatory and fee regime that constrains housing artificially and unnecessarily toward deeper pocketed investors that can afford to build and want the ROI rentals afford- like student tower developers, Agshack investors and major national homebuilders that, by virtue of scale, can more readily afford to build here. I fight that, so far a losing battle, from a policy perspective constantly.

We have work to do in housing. Last night had those issues embedded but largely unspoken.

Bottom line: the same headache inducing research went into this councilman's decision that went into Pebble Creek. Both sets of constituents are my bosses, and voting against their wishes felt like cutting off a right arm, but an objective read of the variables demanded the vote I made. When BTR was addressed in writing, it tipped the scales.

Hoping that's fair, and respectfully yours

Yancy '95 Place 5

Good and thoughtful answer councilman. Just because some people don't like DRH doesn't mean they can't do business. It seemed to me they addressed all the issues raised previously that actually were in the purview of the City Council.

ATXAGGS12 said:

---

The thread title includes "Urban Planning and Traffic"

I'd think adding a reported +800 homes to a previously undeveloped 222 acre tract that sits directly in front of the brand new fire station is fairly relevant to general traffic and road planning conversations.

---

Yes, but we have a million topics on housing already, and I know that TexAgs isn't representative of the voting populace of College Station but it's disheartening to see how many people seem to believe that Northgate's densification is a good thing and not creating major problems downstream, such as the fact that there are students who have gotten priced out, or the fact that most of those students that live in Northgate are driving cars and pile onto roads that were last expanded 50 years ago.

I'm for neighborhood integrity, however, before we even think about densifying other neighborhoods, we have to look at the network of roads, and every single road project can't be shot down with "but I didn't KNOW that the road was supposed to be part of a major network" and "but you can't shave off part of my 200-acre ranch".

The city has really blown a lot of chances to fix things...even Longmire somehow got messed up and terminates at Barron, you can see the right of way where it was supposed to go toward Arrington...and while Arrington needs to be fixed, even Highway 40 got messed up that despite its ROW it's not the freeway it was meant to be. I believe the initial plan was to build it on Old Wellborn Road and continue it toward FM 2818. Even when Highway 40 opened in 2006, the idea that it could do that was very possible. Sure, there was the plant nursery and vet office that would have to go but The Barracks wasn't built yet, and we could've had that Highway 47-to-Highway 6 freeway.

Yes, there were some "dotted line maps" that weren't good, one of them went through Quail Run Estates but it was a vague idea without specifically condemning the subdivision, and it was one alternative...and in the end none of them got built!

Not enough rich folk in Greens Prairie Reserve, I suppose. Otherwise, Yancy & Co. would have surely folded and given them whatever they wanted

Bob Yancy said:

---

D_Wag97 said:

---

ATXAGGS12 said:

---

@Yancy- May I respectfully ask what the thought process was on the Windham Tract Rezoning approval from the council? Why was it declined previously but approved this time?

I'm shocked at the attention Pebble Creek has received in this thread, yet no one has mentioned the DR Horton proposal and likely devaluation of property values in Greens Prairie and Castlegate.

---

The checks must have gone through. Seriously, though, how can that be justified with how busy Greens Prairie already is combined with what the current home values and densities are in the area?

---

I'm onto reviewing the Tourism Strategic Plan draft, but let me take a moment and address Windham Ranch.

This is a private property in Texas. It'll develop into something inarguably. The owner and DR Horton are under contract for 222 acres of proposed residential single family homes. Notably, we're 4200 shy of a balanced housing market. Final density will likely be about 650~ homes on this tract, once accounting for land required for open space, parks, streets, easements et al.

They originally were rejected because the prior rezoning ask was deemed incompatible with surrounding neighborhoods. So they responded to that decision by coming back and asking for the matching zone, Restricted Suburban.

To allay concerns about them building an entire Build to Rent community, they committed in writing to putting a purely voluntary, private party negotiated deed restriction that effectively disallows a BTR project.

Citizens also had concerns about traffic. That wasn't before us last night- but I called TxDot who reports the troublesome intersection of Arrington and Fitch is currently in design for a major upgrade. Citizens had concerns about sewer capacity, also not before us- but I checked and Alum Creek wastewater line is a funded capital project in design to address that. Citizens also had concerns about drainage and its effects on the county, et al. Commissioner Nettles and I spoke and after consultation with the County and at my suggestion, he came and spoke eloquently which I believe will result in close coordination between the city and county when staff are working on the plan to come. Folks had issues with school capacity- different government and not before us last night, but mayor addressed the fact that CSISD is losing students, not growing.

Bottom line was a resolution was in process on every concern by my analysis. We can't vote something down because we might not like the developer.

I would've absolutely voted against if they hadn't addressed the BTR issue. We are among the highest upside down cities in the entire nation with more rental units than owned. As one member of council, I believe that's been given rise to, or exacerbated by, a regulatory and fee regime that constrains housing artificially and unnecessarily toward deeper pocketed investors that can afford to build and want the ROI rentals afford- like student tower developers, Agshack investors and major national homebuilders that, by virtue of scale, can more readily afford to build here. I fight that, so far a losing battle, from a policy perspective constantly.

We have work to do in housing. Last night had those issues embedded but largely unspoken.

Bottom line: the same headache inducing research went into this councilman's decision that went into Pebble Creek. Both sets of constituents are my bosses, and voting against their wishes felt like cutting off a right arm, but an objective read of the variables demanded the vote I made. When BTR was addressed in writing, it tipped the scales.

Hoping that's fair, and respectfully yours

Yancy '95 Place 5

---

But one set has more money

Just another example that voting is a farce.

Quote:

---

Folks had issues with school capacity- different government and not before us last night, but mayor addressed the fact that CSISD is losing students, not growing.

---

But where is CSISD losing students, not growing? It doesn't seem to be along Greens Prairie Road.

A tunnel?

Would this address the intersections in Northgate where 90% of the lights are red. The lane with a green light has zero traffic. 3 to 4 minutes of just sitting.

They don't care.

After sitting through a number of council meetings this past year, I intend to join them. I may not agree with all of Yancy's positions, but I at least respect his research and decision making process. The mayor and members up for re-election are my target. I have a deep philosophical difference with the mayor on just about every issue that seems to come up, and probably a real personality conflict if I knew him personally. He just rubs me wrong.