College Station revises zoning language to comply with new Texas law limiting occupancy rules

The City of College Station on Sept. 11 voted to amend portions of the Unified Development Ordinance to comply with Senate Bill 1567, the new Texas law that forbids municipalities from regulating occupancy limits or treating households differently based on relationship, familial, or occupational status.

Planning staff told the council that SB 1567 took effect Sept. 1 and required municipalities with large universities to eliminate any zoning regulations that impose occupancy restrictions tied to familial or relationship status. Heather Wade, the city’s principal planner, and Anthony Armstrong, director of planning and development services, explained that the changes before council were narrow and focused on zoning language: removing restricted-occupancy and high-occupancy overlay provisions in the UDO and replacing the zoning definition of “family” with a neutral, zoning-only phrasing — "any number of persons occupying a single dwelling unit" — so the UDO no longer referenced relationship status for occupancy enforcement.

Several public commenters, including Fred DuPreece, urged the council to preserve a more traditional family definition (for example, people related by blood, adoption, guardianship or marriage) because the word 'family' appears many times in the UDO and is used for more than occupancy rules. Staff and the city attorney explained that SB 1567 limits municipal zoning to avoid using relationship status as a regulatory lever and that other legal definitions used for federal programs (for example, community development block grant eligibility) remain unaffected.

Councilmembers agreed to adopt the staff-recommended zoning changes that evening to ensure immediate compliance with state law and to direct staff to return with a workshop to revisit the family definition and review any cross-code implications. That follow-up will give the council and staff an opportunity to identify where the word ‘family’ appears across the code and to consider whether alternative language — such as a distinct term for federal program eligibility or a definition tailored to non-zoning code sections — would be appropriate.

The ordinance amendments adopt the technical changes required for SB 1567 compliance and remove existing restricted-occupancy overlays from the UDO; council members also requested a public workshop and timeline from staff for reexamining the family definition used in non-zoning contexts.

Why it matters: The modifications ensure the city avoids enforceable occupancy rules that could violate state law while giving the council a chance to consider the code’s many other references to family language, including program eligibility and planning documents. Council directed staff to schedule a dedicated workshop and to compare approaches used by other Texas cities that face the same legal constraints.

Sources: Planning staff presentation and council discussion at the Sept. 11 City Council meeting.