Spring Break
City considers residence limits
Abstract:
Nonstudent residents of College Station are speaking up to place pressure on the College Station City Council to pass an ordinance that would allow only two unrelated individuals living in one residence....
- Displaying 1 - 6 of 6
Ronnie
posted 2/27/08 @ 2:25 PM CST
Originally posted byRyan '06
Why is it that the residents of College Station seem to have it out for the the students of Texas A&M?... They complain constantly about rowdy students partying, trash, and parking as thought they are suprised a small college town would have these issues... reminds me of those people who move into neighborhoods near large airports and then complain about the noise... this is not the first time the residents of College Station have shunned their Aggie neighbors (remember how we used to be able to drink out on the Patio?)... Callege Station exists because of Texas A&M and the student body; the city's economy is almost soley based on the jobs the University creates and the revenue attending students bring into the city, not to mention the thousands-on-thousands of Former Students who come to spend money and watch football games in the fall and basketball and basball games in the spring... the residents of College Station benefit immeasurably from the students of Texas A&M yet all they can do is complain about parties, trash, and parking and make plans to further restrict students' freedoms... if you want an economy based on tourism, you're gonna have to put with up huge hotels and people taking pictures all over the place; you want and economy based on oil, you're gonna have to put up with pollution and the occasional plant explosion; you want an economy based on livestock, you're gonna have to put up with bullshit; you want an economy based on a college population, you're gonna have to put up with parties, trash, and lousy parking...
It's not fair to ask that you're neighbors put up with your parties and overwhelming parking situation. You act like it is the duty of the city to harbor incidents as these? Instead of blaming the city for shunning the college students, why don't we, the students, stop acting like idiots. Let's park in driveways and on the right side of the street. Let's refrain from yelling outside at two in the morning because your buddy is dunking his ring. These things are what the residents of college station are complaining about.
With that being said, I can't agree with what the city is trying to do. I see the arguement, but I don't necessarily believe that resident limitations will quell the disturbed college station residents. I think the City of Bryan had the right idea to enforce resident limitations through the homeowner's association. In theory, this would allow older neighborhoods to stay rental districts with less restrictions, but also provide residents who live in better neighborhoods protected exposure from parties and parking issues. I believe it's too broad to limit the number of residents for the entire city. This is a college town, afterall.
Wes:
What sense does lowering rental property values make? Are you actually suggesting what I think you are? Diminishing the investments of many Aggie parents? That's ridiculous. The amount of Rent has little to do with the value of a house and is more related to the mortgage payment of a house. Interest rates directly effect loan payments and therefor should be the target of your arguement. Lower interest rates or allow refinancing at lower rates and you will see lower rent.
Ronnie
posted 2/27/08 @ 2:28 PM CST
Originally posted byRyan '06
Why is it that the residents of College Station seem to have it out for the the students of Texas A&M?... They complain constantly about rowdy students partying, trash, and parking as thought they are suprised a small college town would have these issues... reminds me of those people who move into neighborhoods near large airports and then complain about the noise... this is not the first time the residents of College Station have shunned their Aggie neighbors (remember how we used to be able to drink out on the Patio?)... Callege Station exists because of Texas A&M and the student body; the city's economy is almost soley based on the jobs the University creates and the revenue attending students bring into the city, not to mention the thousands-on-thousands of Former Students who come to spend money and watch football games in the fall and basketball and basball games in the spring... the residents of College Station benefit immeasurably from the students of Texas A&M yet all they can do is complain about parties, trash, and parking and make plans to further restrict students' freedoms... if you want an economy based on tourism, you're gonna have to put with up huge hotels and people taking pictures all over the place; you want and economy based on oil, you're gonna have to put up with pollution and the occasional plant explosion; you want an economy based on livestock, you're gonna have to put up with bullshit; you want an economy based on a college population, you're gonna have to put up with parties, trash, and lousy parking...
It's not fair to ask that you're neighbors put up with your parties and overwhelming parking situation. You act like it is the duty of the city to harbor incidents as these? Instead of blaming the city for shunning the college students, why don't we, the students, stop acting like idiots. Let's park in driveways and on the right side of the street. Let's refrain from yelling outside at two in the morning because your buddy is dunking his ring. These things are what the residents of college station are complaining about.
With that being said, I can't agree with what the city is trying to do. I see the arguement, but I don't necessarily believe that resident limitations will quell the disturbed college station residents. I think the City of Bryan had the right idea to enforce resident limitations through the homeowner's association. In theory, this would allow older neighborhoods to stay rental districts with less restrictions, but also provide residents who live in better neighborhoods protected exposure from parties and parking issues. I believe it's too broad to limit the number of residents for the entire city. This is a college town, afterall.
Wes:
What sense does lowering rental property values make? Are you actually suggesting what I think you are? Diminishing the investments of many Aggie parents? That's ridiculous. The amount of Rent has little to do with the value of a house and is more related to the mortgage payment of a house. Interest rates directly effect loan payments and therefor should be the target of your arguement. Lower interest rates or allow refinancing at lower rates and you will see lower rent.
Wes
posted 2/27/08 @ 11:44 AM CST
It is illogical to think that partying, trash and parking problems would be solved by reducing unrelated renters to two. In addition, an unintended consequence would be to reduce the value of many rental houses, due to reduced rent, thus lowering taxable value which would reduce city property taxes. The best solution would be to enforce city codes. College Station has exorbitant fines, (such as $95 for parking in wrong direction) and this additional income would more than likely pay for additional enforcement.
Carl '04
posted 2/27/08 @ 3:20 PM CST
As an alum that used to share a house with 4 other roommates to have 250 bucks rent per month, it went a long way to help pay for college by saving. We respected our neighbors, and warned them in advance on when we would have a party and the size.
In a totally unrelated issue (or maybe so), is this strictly for homes or does it include apartments.
Sounds like if it does NOT include apartments, they are forcing all college kids to apartments, which is why so many are being built lately (past 10 years)... must be the COCS plans all along...
In a totally unrelated issue (or maybe so), is this strictly for homes or does it include apartments.
Sounds like if it does NOT include apartments, they are forcing all college kids to apartments, which is why so many are being built lately (past 10 years)... must be the COCS plans all along...
Drew Gardner
posted 2/27/08 @ 6:14 PM CST
Repost from an article on Monday:
It never ceases to amaze me how the residents of this city continuously show disdain for their own lifeblood. Students make up nearly half of this city's population (source-http://collegestation.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm & TAMU enrollment figures) yet continually get spit on by the local residents. A large percentage of the "homeowners" in this community are landlords for student housing who have no intention of living here themselves. If the "two-unrelated" resolution passes, who will be living in all those houses, paying rent to landlords who in-turn pay property taxes which fund the city? The nation has already seen what happens when residents cannot pay their mortgages, what does the city propose to do when all these investment-homeowners suddenly have no tennants?
I understand that a certain percentage of students engage in reckless activities, loud parties, and other inappropriate behavior. However, the city already has laws pertaining to these situations without the need for a senseless, across-the-board ban on unrelated student cohabitation. The vast majority of students are content in their homes to work, study, and live normal lives; all these aspects will be disrupted if the city passes this measure.
One of the primary benefits of living with multiple roommates is the decrease in per capita rent. By passing this regulation, the city will lower the purchasing power of students by limiting the pool of funds available to purchase housing. This will reduce the standard of living for these students in the short-term as well as likely lead to a trend of lower cost, lower quality housing in the future.
It never ceases to amaze me how the residents of this city continuously show disdain for their own lifeblood. Students make up nearly half of this city's population (source-http://collegestation.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm & TAMU enrollment figures) yet continually get spit on by the local residents. A large percentage of the "homeowners" in this community are landlords for student housing who have no intention of living here themselves. If the "two-unrelated" resolution passes, who will be living in all those houses, paying rent to landlords who in-turn pay property taxes which fund the city? The nation has already seen what happens when residents cannot pay their mortgages, what does the city propose to do when all these investment-homeowners suddenly have no tennants?
I understand that a certain percentage of students engage in reckless activities, loud parties, and other inappropriate behavior. However, the city already has laws pertaining to these situations without the need for a senseless, across-the-board ban on unrelated student cohabitation. The vast majority of students are content in their homes to work, study, and live normal lives; all these aspects will be disrupted if the city passes this measure.
One of the primary benefits of living with multiple roommates is the decrease in per capita rent. By passing this regulation, the city will lower the purchasing power of students by limiting the pool of funds available to purchase housing. This will reduce the standard of living for these students in the short-term as well as likely lead to a trend of lower cost, lower quality housing in the future.
- Displaying 1 - 6 of 6
Post Your Comment
Remembering 2:42
News
Volleyball back in win column
Sports
'Riverdance' comes to OPAS on farewell tour
Features
A sweet deal
Features
Turning up my nose up to 'taste'
Opinion
Aggies are we
Opinion
Ryan '06
posted 2/27/08 @ 10:33 AM CST