techno-ag said:

---

I have not watched the entire thing but I do root for the students here. College Station has a well-deserved reputation as being anti-renter and anti-student even though 2/3 of the beds are rented in town. 70,000 people in the population are students. I do feel there has been unwarranted hostility toward them and the unrelated roommates rule is part of that.

---

Stucco said:

---

So, building enough student housing will remove the need for NMT4 in the first place? If so, how many single family houses suddenly open up once there is enough?

---

halibut sinclair said:

---

The bill mentions this new potential law applying to "university" towns. Does that mean only towns with state universities, or any school of higher education, such as Baylor in Waco or a junior college, like Blinn in Bryan/Brenham?

---

whoop1995 said:

---

What is the difference between a "family" house that has three generations living in it with 4-10 cars at any one time and one with more than four college kids in it? Cars, litter, unkept yard? I would bet you all have neighbors that do all of these and they are not students.

---

RafterAg223 said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

Stucco said:

---

So, building enough student housing will remove the need for NMT4 in the first place? If so, how many single family houses suddenly open up once there is enough?

---

We need housing across the board. All types, but in particular detached single family residential and purpose built student housing. We're rocking and rolling on student towers. We are not on single family. Is that responsive to your question?

Respectfully

Yancy '95

---

Because after dealing with Cocs, single family is a major PITA to get built, and much more expensive than the city on our Northern border. Until this changes, Bryan will keep lapping us.

---

scd88 said:

---

Students don't know how to take care of lawns and homes. Perhaps the selfish landlords should pitch in and be a bit more mindful of the yards and establish some boundaries on being respectful of the neighbors.

I live in a ROO neighborhood. That was put in place based upon the rules set forth by the city. We paid our money and got the ROO passed. I do not believe the state should have the authority to overturn that.

Lubbock and other cities have even more restrictive rules on occupancy. Why is is CS being singled out?

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

We need more housing developments. Badly.

---

dubi said:

---

scd88 said:

---

Students don't know how to take care of lawns and homes. Perhaps the selfish landlords should pitch in and be a bit more mindful of the yards and establish some boundaries on being respectful of the neighbors.

I live in a ROO neighborhood. That was put in place based upon the rules set forth by the city. We paid our money and got the ROO passed. I do not believe the state should have the authority to overturn that.

Lubbock and other cities have even more restrictive rules on occupancy. Why is is CS being singled out?

---

Before our zoning changed, I had students in my rent house. They had to park on the driveway and we made the yard work part of the lease so it always looked nice. I drive by many rental homes that just look awful; the landlord is collecting the rent and doing nothing to keep up the home or the yard. It is an embarrassment, but I'll be honest and say we have a few owner occupied homes who don't care either.

I also feel that the state should not overturn a decision that was made locally to allow overlays. We have a Texas wide housing shortage and have for many years; that problem is definitely NOT unique to College Station.

---

Brian Alg said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

We need more housing developments. Badly.

---

Key thing is the city needs to start allowing the kind of housing needed in the areas where it is needed. TAMU stuff near TAMU, etc. Creating a centrally planned student living district on the other side of the airport from campus is not a great way to fix the problems the city leadership has created.

The market is signaling that people (not just students) are desperate for more housing near campus, not miles away from campus. For students, luckily, that might mean a single bedroom. A lot of those can fit in a couple block perimeter around campus..

If city hall starts going that direction, it is going to ease a lot of the problems caused by pushing students further from campus. And it will also make it easier for people trying to get started post-college in town. Especially if the city also starts allowing university complimentary economic development, we can see an influx of good paying jobs with not-to-expensive housing for young professionals and young families. I pray that's how city leadership adjusts. We've got so much going for us.

It is frustrating that it takes the state legislature to force the change. But given city leadership's obstinance, I am glad to hear it is likely to pass.

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Brian Alg said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

We need more housing developments. Badly.

---

Key thing is the city needs to start allowing the kind of housing needed in the areas where it is needed. TAMU stuff near TAMU, etc. Creating a centrally planned student living district on the other side of the airport from campus is not a great way to fix the problems the city leadership has created.

The market is signaling that people (not just students) are desperate for more housing near campus, not miles away from campus. For students, luckily, that might mean a single bedroom. A lot of those can fit in a couple block perimeter around campus..

If city hall starts going that direction, it is going to ease a lot of the problems caused by pushing students further from campus. And it will also make it easier for people trying to get started post-college in town. Especially if the city also starts allowing university complimentary economic development, we can see an influx of good paying jobs with not-to-expensive housing for young professionals and young families. I pray that's how city leadership adjusts. We've got so much going for us.

It is frustrating that it takes the state legislature to force the change. But given city leadership's obstinance, I am glad to hear it is likely to pass.

---

Texas A&M owns so much land in College Station. They also are the reason for the ever growing demand on housing. Wouldn't it make the most logical sense for Texas A&M to build this housing option?

I think it is ridiculous how much A&M has grown without providing a similar increase in on campus housing. Basically the university has punted the problem to the city. It is probably much easier to get funding to build a new engineering building than a dorm, so I see why that would be the case.

The city council should have an obligation to serve its voting residents. Forcing families out of local neighborhoods so that businesses can come in buy up local houses and then rent out to students is not serving the voting base. It will likely lead to the gradual downhill condition of those neighborhoods as the owners and tenants aren't trying to establish long term sustainability.

Also note how this law wouldn't impact neighborhoods that have HOAs. So one unintended consequence you will see are more HOAs. Further because HOAs are exempted; this law is essentially targeted to impact low and middle class neighborhoods. So this will drive up the housing costs of young families as "starter homes" will be gobbled up for rentals.

Ultimately the idea that the state, sufficiently removed and very slow moving, should seek to interject itself in truly local issues should be rejected on that premise alone.

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Brian Alg said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

We need more housing developments. Badly.

---

Key thing is the city needs to start allowing the kind of housing needed in the areas where it is needed. TAMU stuff near TAMU, etc. Creating a centrally planned student living district on the other side of the airport from campus is not a great way to fix the problems the city leadership has created.

The market is signaling that people (not just students) are desperate for more housing near campus, not miles away from campus. For students, luckily, that might mean a single bedroom. A lot of those can fit in a couple block perimeter around campus..

If city hall starts going that direction, it is going to ease a lot of the problems caused by pushing students further from campus. And it will also make it easier for people trying to get started post-college in town. Especially if the city also starts allowing university complimentary economic development, we can see an influx of good paying jobs with not-to-expensive housing for young professionals and young families. I pray that's how city leadership adjusts. We've got so much going for us.

It is frustrating that it takes the state legislature to force the change. But given city leadership's obstinance, I am glad to hear it is likely to pass.

---

Texas A&M owns so much land in College Station. They also are the reason for the ever growing demand on housing. Wouldn't it make the most logical sense for Texas A&M to build this housing option?

I think it is ridiculous how much A&M has grown without providing a similar increase in on campus housing. Basically the university has punted the problem to the city. It is probably much easier to get funding to build a new engineering building than a dorm, so I see why that would be the case.

The city council should have an obligation to serve its voting residents. Forcing families out of local neighborhoods so that businesses can come in buy up local houses and then rent out to students is not serving the voting base. It will likely lead to the gradual downhill condition of those neighborhoods as the owners and tenants aren't trying to establish long term sustainability.

Also note how this law wouldn't impact neighborhoods that have HOAs. So one unintended consequence you will see are more HOAs. Further because HOAs are exempted; this law is essentially targeted to impact low and middle class neighborhoods. So this will drive up the housing costs of young families as "starter homes" will be gobbled up for rentals.

Ultimately the idea that the state, sufficiently removed and very slow moving, should seek to interject itself in truly local issues should be rejected on that premise alone.

---

We have a housing shortage which is elevating everyone's property taxes. 69% of the people working in College Station don't live here. Housing prices have skyrocketed 75% since 2015.

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Brian Alg said:

---

Bob Yancy said:

---

We need more housing developments. Badly.

---

Key thing is the city needs to start allowing the kind of housing needed in the areas where it is needed. TAMU stuff near TAMU, etc. Creating a centrally planned student living district on the other side of the airport from campus is not a great way to fix the problems the city leadership has created.

The market is signaling that people (not just students) are desperate for more housing near campus, not miles away from campus. For students, luckily, that might mean a single bedroom. A lot of those can fit in a couple block perimeter around campus..

If city hall starts going that direction, it is going to ease a lot of the problems caused by pushing students further from campus. And it will also make it easier for people trying to get started post-college in town. Especially if the city also starts allowing university complimentary economic development, we can see an influx of good paying jobs with not-to-expensive housing for young professionals and young families. I pray that's how city leadership adjusts. We've got so much going for us.

It is frustrating that it takes the state legislature to force the change. But given city leadership's obstinance, I am glad to hear it is likely to pass.

---

Texas A&M owns so much land in College Station. They also are the reason for the ever growing demand on housing. Wouldn't it make the most logical sense for Texas A&M to build this housing option?

I think it is ridiculous how much A&M has grown without providing a similar increase in on campus housing. Basically the university has punted the problem to the city. It is probably much easier to get funding to build a new engineering building than a dorm, so I see why that would be the case.

The city council should have an obligation to serve its voting residents. Forcing families out of local neighborhoods so that businesses can come in buy up local houses and then rent out to students is not serving the voting base. It will likely lead to the gradual downhill condition of those neighborhoods as the owners and tenants aren't trying to establish long term sustainability.

Also note how this law wouldn't impact neighborhoods that have HOAs. So one unintended consequence you will see are more HOAs. Further because HOAs are exempted; this law is essentially targeted to impact low and middle class neighborhoods. So this will drive up the housing costs of young families as "starter homes" will be gobbled up for rentals.

Ultimately the idea that the state, sufficiently removed and very slow moving, should seek to interject itself in truly local issues should be rejected on that premise alone.

---

We have a housing shortage which is elevating everyone's property taxes. 69% of the people working in College Station don't live here. Housing prices have skyrocketed 75% since 2015.

---

And how will this solve that problem? It isn't making it cheaper nor easier to build more housing. It is only increasing the potential demand for the SAME housing. So prices will only go up. How can a new family pay the same rent as 4 college kids who are taking out loans or using their parents money?

If the problem is SUPPLY then the solution should be fixing the supply. This will just drive families out of the city even more.

---

texagbeliever said:

---

In 2015 Texas A&M had 58k enrollment. In 2023 they had 77k. Did Texas A&M build 20k new housing accommodations? No, if anything they likely decreased on campus housing. If you add 20k people, let's say that is another 10k in living accommodations. Has College Station been able to build that quickly? No.

Again this is a supply problem and the culprit, Texas A&M, is being let off the hook and lower and middle income housing are taking the brunt.

---