Neighbors block proposal to rezone 237‑acre Windham tract after traffic, drainage and density objections

A rezoning request to convert about 237.65 acres east of Greens Prairie Road from Rural to General Suburban failed at the Nov. 13 College Station City Council meeting after a sustained outpouring of neighborhood opposition.

The request, filed by D.R. Horton and presented by Adam Curts, would have allowed the developer to build a master‑planned single‑family community. Curts told council the firm would cap the development at 880 single‑family lots — a gross density of about 3.7 lots per acre — and offered two mitigation packages: a 20‑foot residential buffer at adjacent property lines plus RS zoning along the edges, or a 50‑foot linear park plus larger perimeter lots. Curts also proposed masonry requirements for perimeter homes and said the developer will perform the traffic and drainage studies required before platting.

Neighbors strongly disputed the rezoning, calling out two central concerns: traffic and stormwater. Residents from Sweetwater, Greens Prairie Reserve and nearby subdivisions said local roads such as Whipperwill Drive and Old Oaks are narrow, unlit county roads not designed to handle the additional cut‑through traffic an 800‑plus‑lot community would bring. Multiple speakers described daily bottlenecks at Greens Prairie Road and Arrington and urged the city to require a more conservative zoning designation (Restricted Suburban) to preserve lot sizes and neighborhood character. Several residents also cited increased runoff and recent sedimentation and algae problems in local lakes and urged fuller drainage analysis before any rezoning.

The Planning & Zoning Commission had voted unanimously to recommend denial at its September hearing; members cited compatibility and incomplete transportation analysis. Curts said the commission had not seen the subsequent two public meetings the applicant held and defended the proposal with references to the city’s 2024 Housing Action Plan, which projects a shortage of several thousand housing units by 2030 and recommends allowing increased density in appropriate locations.

Council members debated the tradeoffs between housing supply and neighborhood fit. Supporters of the project emphasized need for additional housing stock and the developer’s commitment to a lot cap and perimeter mitigation; opponents pointed to the unanimous commission denial and urged taking more time or using a PDD (planned‑development district) process that can embed specific requirements. A motion to approve the request with a step‑down to Restricted Suburban at the parcel edges was brought to a vote and failed 5–2.

What happens next: Because council rejected the application as presented, the applicant may revise the proposal and return in a future cycle; state and local procedures set time limits and requirements for re‑application. The developer said it would consider further refinement, including potential PDD options. Council members said they remain supportive of adding housing but signaled they want proposals that demonstrably protect adjacent neighborhoods’ infrastructure and character.

Speakers quoted: “For the first time when I looked at my bill, the city of College Station was indeed the largest contributor to the bill,” said visitor Elizabeth Kuna during public comment, illustrating broader concerns about municipal budgeting and growth. A neighborhood resident said of local streets: “It’s pitch black out there,” pressing safety as a key concern.

Next steps: The City will require the standard traffic‑impact and drainage studies at future platting. Council members asked staff to communicate how a revised application could address P&Z compatibility concerns and whether a PDD approach could lock in perimeter protections.