In fact, the 2-unrelated ordinance will be very effective at what it is actually intended to do.
It's purpose is not to immediately retake any of the of subdivisions that have been overtaken by rentals. It's primarily to stop even more from being taken. What I think of as College Stations single family "student rental" area now includes most of the land east of the campus to Hwy 6. To the south it's a huge area bounded by Wellborn and Hwy 6, all the way down to Fitch. There are some small pockets of resistance in there, but about 70% of the city's single family acreage appears to belong to the students now.. The other day I heard someone say, "where do you think the students should live?". The answer is exactly where they are living right now. But the question now really is, where do you think starter families with children should live?
HIgh occupancy rentals (3-4) have two effects on young families, depending on where you are. One is that the high cash flow from 3 or 4 unrelated increases all property values in the neighborhood (what a willing buyer is will pay a willing seller) and that gets passed on to every single family as a higher purchase price, higher land evaluation and tax, or higher rent. That makes College station a more expensive place for entry level employees, entrepreneurships, or tech companies that depend on entry level tech workers. There was a young lady that spoke to city council last year just to tell then that she and her startup company were leaving. The rent her workers had to pay to live here was whatever four-unrelated would pay in the house next door.
Other areas are not being gentrified by students but are in decay simply due to age and prices are falling. This is the natural market for starter families in a normal city, and it is the mechanism by which old neighborhoods get renewed. But young families in College Station are not buying. They will not invest their life's savings because they will not chose to live on a street with a high density of students if they ever plan children. If you've ever had children you wouldn't either. This is a very big deal.
We have enough single family student housing for the foreseeable future, and there's nothing wrong with it. In fact, if a city plans to put students in single family houses instead of apartments (which is a stunningly inefficient use of land) you should hope for 3-4. What we are really coming to grips with is that students and young families want different things. Full stop. That probably means they belong in different zonings. Bryan recognized this 14 years ago and literally created a new zoning district appropriate for families (RN-C), not an overlay process. This CS ordinance essentially allows those subdivision who have streets with children and families to ensure they will continue to be good places for that and it's critical to the long term future of the city that we have places like that. We should all see the need for those neighborhoods It will not turn back the clock on the "student rental area".