Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Comments July 6, 2006 Comments and Recommendations Related to Sebesta and Rock Prairie Land Use Proposals Submitted to College Station Planning and Zoning Commission by Don Hellriegel 8704 Appomattox Drive College Station,Texas 77845 Note: Minor editorial changes made in this document prior to submission to City Council. The purpose of this document is to present key comments and recommendations with respect to possible land use changes in the Sebesta and Rock Prairie area. From a transportation perspective and the nearby neighborhoods,this land mass represents one zone, not two. Brief Professional Profile Given the limited time for my presentation, it is not possible to include all of the concepts, models, and research that serve to buttress the validity of my comments and recommendations. Consistent with those who give testimony before various government bodies, it may be helpful to this commission and others to provide a brief professional profile on myself. Perhaps, this will temper some from simply discounting and ignoring my comments as that of a "disgruntled citizen in Emerald Forest". There is a shared perception that city staff personnel in Planning and Development Services simply discounted and ignored the inputs of Sebesta Mitigation Task Force, of which I was a member. Of course, this is consistent with how they have dealt with the profoundly professional insights by Bill Stockton and numerous other citizens. As a Professor of Management at TAMU since 1975, a thumbnail sketch of my professional profile follows: (1) I have served two terms as head of the nationally ranked Department of Management; (2) I served a five-year term as Executive Associate Dean of the nationally ranked Mays Business School, (3) I served on the Vision 2020 Planning Group and in numerous other University roles in which planning and decision making were key components; (4) I have taught strategic and operational planning and decision making at the undergraduate and graduate levels; (5) I have conducted executive development programs in these areas; (6) I have consulted with private and public sector organizations in these areas; (7) I have co-authored two management textbooks through a major publisher and which are in their 11th editions—they address, among other topics, strategic and operational planning and decision making; and (8) I was elected president of the 14,000 member Academy of Management, which is the leading scholarly association worldwide for management research and teaching. Skepticism When Jeanette Phariss called me to serve on the Sebesta Mitigation Task Force, my initial response was "no way, I have no interest in wasting my time. I have seen too many unnecessary blunders and disasters come out of Planning and Development Services related to 2 land use and planning." I cited one example nearby—namely, the multistory Marriott which sits back from the bypass and near Sebesta. I told Jeanette that it was disgraceful, disastrous, and unnecessary to have permitted this multistory structure to loom over the homes on the adjoining street. So, all involved in enabling that decision and location of the Marriott, shame on each of you. I consulted with three real estate experts who have law degrees in the Mays Business School. I was told this could have, indeed, been legally avoided. Of course, by requiring the developer to locate the hotel much closer to the bypass, it would have enabled only a great rate of return on the land, rather than the super-mega return by permitting extensive commercial development in front of the hotel property. Because of my respect and admiration for Jeanette Phariss, I conceded to serve on the task force. Depending upon the actions of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, I will know, as will hundreds of citizens, if my initial inclination was correct. Namely, will this have been a waste of time of thousands of hours by many hundreds of citizens? Sebesta Mitigation Task Force The intellectual capital, professionalism, depth of insights, and planning capabilities of the citizens on this task force were amazing. I know this has been the same situation for the various other citizen task forces that have contributed their many talents to our common quest. I have prayed about the need to make some of the remarks that will be forthcoming. I do not desire to hurt anyone and certainly do not suggest or imply that anyone be fired. Given the crisis point we are at and what is at stake for many citizens, I have concluded that I must be unequivocal and assertive. On a personal level, I like the personnel in Planning and Development Services with whom I am acquainted. Several meetings ago, I presented two mental models to this commission that seemed to dominate the many hours of our meetings with a city representative. In brief, the city representative's tunnel vision and silo-like perspective was dominated by: (1) a traditional after- the-fact "mitigation model," (2) reactive control, (3) delayed tactical action, (4) how to recover from damage, (5) optimize speed of traffic flow and driver convenience, (6) optimize driver and business goals, (7)how to recover from increased accidents and safety risks,and(8)so on. During our many hours of meetings, the citizen members presented a portfolio of proposals that were comprehensive, proactive, strategic, crisis preventive, preserved neighborhood integrity, maintained child and family safety, and recognized families are king— rather than autos. The mental model of the city member on the task force was closed and locked. This person demonstrated avoidance, noncommitment to explore citizens' expert proposals, changing the subject, and always maintaining a pleasant demeanor. From our very first meeting, the citizens, as one element of a number of initiatives, proposed the completion of the AMS road. It was noted by one of the citizen members that this road was funded in a previous bond issue which was approved by the voters. The money was reallocated to another transportation need. There was virtually no response by the city member— not even a statement like "I will explore this proposal with key members in Planning and Development Services." 3 The citizen members were relentless in resurfacing this and other proposals at our future meetings. About midway through our third meeting, I had become so dismayed that I stopped the proceedings and said to the city member/employee: "Why are we here? Do you have marching orders from your superiors to minimize our inputs through avoidance, nonresponsiveness, and irrelevant replies?" The citizen employee claimed such was not the case. My reply to that was "Too bad. If that was the case, I could then understand your nonresponsiveness and obfuscating communications." It may have been our fifth meeting when the city employee member announced that they (Planning and Development Services) were exploring the completion of the AMS road. I am convinced that this never would have happened had we not been so relentless. Also,my skeptical side interpreted that certain city employees in Planning and Development Services thought this would be enough to get Emerald Forest citizens out of the picture. We are still here! TTI Professionals on Task Force The Sebesta Mitigation Task Force was blessed by having Bill Stockton, Associate Agency Director of the Texas Transportation Institute, and two other professionals from TTI as members. The intellectual capital, professional expertise, and depth of insight they provided were amazing. Having served on a number of committees for graduate students in the transportation area at TAMU, I knew firsthand of the outstanding professionals in TTI. "The mission of TTI is to solve transportation problems through research, to transfer technology, and to develop diverse human resources to meet the transportation challenges of tomorrow." With its 600 employees, TTI is the largest university-affiliated transportation research agency in the United States. More importantly, everyone needs to know that TTI is recognized as a premier and international renowned organization in the domain of its mission. Bill Stockton has presented to this commission the strategic elements of what a proactive comprehensive transportation plan should include for the one transportation zone from Sebesta past Rock Prairie Road. In public remarks and a number of written e-mails, Bill has insisted that a traffic and transportation infrastructure consulting firm be employed by the city to study all facets of the traffic issues and needs in this zone. Also, the consulting firm should be charged with developing transportation/highway options that will proactively protect the integrity of the adjacent residential neighborhoods. Given the logical and great planning insights by Bill and others, I have found it interesting, but sad,that certain personnel in Planning and Development Services have continued to ignore the professionals at TTI and other citizens. When there is some responsiveness, it appears to be reluctant and only because of the need to accommodate pressures—such as the AMS road extension. In other ways, I keep reading about various piecemeal initiatives or positions from city personnel. Too often, a number of these are ludicrous. As a Professor of Management, I can offer one set of possible explanations for the nonresponsiveness by certain personnel within Planning and Development Services. 1. This unit has become a mechanistic bureaucratic organization caught up in its own internal self-reinforcing logic. 2. Mechanistic organizations do not like strategic proposals suggested to them by external entities. The self-justifying internal logic of such units serves to discount and • 4 discard such proposals. The "circle the wagons" strategy takes over to protect the status quo. 3. A sense of defensiveness and resentment sets in,perhaps at a subconscious level, that how dare those interlopers from TTI try to tell us what to do. College Station Mission Statement and No. 1 Priority In the June 30, 2006 issue of the Eagle, I was reading with interest the story entitled "CS Council Retreat Focuses on Values." While reading this very interesting article, my mind was on the fiasco set of circumstances being experienced by the citizens and created by the muddling, reactive and incoherent decisions by certain personnel in Planning and Development Services. Then, I reached the paragraph that stated: Council members opted not to alter the city's mission statement, which reads, 'On behalf of the citizens of College Station, home of Texas A&M University, we will continue to promote and advance the community's quality of life. ' Initially, I was stunned by this statement, which I fmd to be terrific. In reading a couple of more paragraphs, I came across the following statement: Council members agreed that the health, safety and well being of the community is their No. 1 priority. In combination with the mission statement and No. 1 priority, my sense of being stunned soon turned to laughter as I reflected on the proposed decisions and actions by certain personnel in Planning and Development Services with respect to proposals for changes in land use from Sebesta past Rock Prairie Road. Again,this is one transportation zone,not two. My wife asked me why I was laughing. I told her that it appears certain personnel in Planning and Development Services have: 1. Never read the mission statement and the No. 1 priority expressed by City Council. 2. Read these statements, but are clueless as to how they should be used to guide their decisions and plans. 3. Read these statements and elected to develop their own de facto mission statement, which is, admittedly, based on my limited experience with this city unit and only in terms of the Sebesta through Rock Prairie area. Based on this experience, I think the de facto mission of Planning and Development Services might read as the following: "Our mission is to optimize the interests of commercial land developers, retailers, and other business interests while creating the illusion with the citizens that we are sincerely concerned with their interests by making tactical and marginal concessions to them, but only as required." Values,Vision, and Mission Councilman Ron Gay is quoted as saying in the same Eagle article: "Your values are more important than your vision or mission because it's the values that define you. How you behave—that's what those values define. Good values and good 5 ethics, you don't hear about that because that doesn't make for good TV. Enron makes for good TV " First, the mission statement of College Station is also a statement of values, namely "We will continue to promote and advance the community's quality of life." Second, the No. 1 priority expressed by council members is also a value statement, namely "Council members agreed that the health, safety, and well-being of the community is their No. 1 priority." Third, prior to its decline, Enron had an impressive vision,mission, and values statement. They also had a great ethics statement and code of ethics. Why do I make these points? Written statements of vision, mission, values, and ethics are not worth the paper they are written on unless they guide organizational members in the real decisions,behaviors,and plans relevant to their domains of authority and responsibility. Most CS Units have Internalized the Mission and No.1 Priority With the exception of certain personnel in Planning and Development Services and only with respect to their Sebesta/Rock Prairie behaviors and decisions, I am a strong believer, based on my experiences and what I have read, that the vast, vast majority of city employees strive to implement the College Station mission and No. 1 priority set forth by city council. I feel fortunate to live in a community with: (1) an impressive fire department and outstanding EMS; (2) a wonderful parks and recreation system; (3) a terrific police department; (4) an exemplary public works department, and(5)many other first-class city services. City Council Reorganizing Planning Services It is my understanding that city council is making several strategic and organizational changes in planning and development services. If I recall correctly (I misplaced the Eagle article), city council also indicated that this area has been severely understaffed. This situation provides an additional rationale for securing the services of an outside consulting firm to address on a more timely basis the myriad of issues related to land use and transportation requirements from the Sebesta through Rock Prairie zone, while preserving and maintaining the integrity and safety of the surrounding neighborhoods. Suggested Proposal from P&Z to City Council I do not intend to appear presumptuous toward the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission. I would like to offer a draft statement for your consideration for possible approval and submission to the City Council. It is my way to represent the bottom-line recommendations that I think are logical, strategic, proactive, and create the potential for win-win outcomes with respect to the interests of the neighborhoods and those who desire land use changes. The suggested recommendations by P&Z to City Council are as follows: 1. We recommend no changes at this time in land use for the common zone from Sebesta through Rock Prairie Road. The lack of any comprehensive plan and the steadily worsening traffic jams in the Rock Prairie area will be further exacerbated by land use changes that create more retail and commercial development prior to reengineering the transportation capabilities in this corridor. 6 2. We recommend the employment of an external consulting firm to study the myriad of transportation and related issues as a result of possible land use changes in the zone noted above. 3. We recommend that a consideration be given to obtaining the advice and counsel of the Texas Transportation Institute as to the consulting firms who would be particularly well-qualified for this type of project. 4. We recommend that the Planning and Development Services have no involvement in selecting such a firm, monitoring its work, or accepting the consultant's report. Hard positions have already been taken by certain personnel in Planning and Development Services and contrary positions have been taken by virtually all citizen groups from the surrounding neighborhoods. 5. The Call for Proposals to consulting firms should include statements such as the following,among others: A. The consulting firm, in developing its recommendations, should explicitly consider the meaning and implications of the city's mission, namely "On behalf of the citizens of College Station, home of Texas A&M University, we will continue to promote and advance the community's quality of life." B. The consulting firm, in developing its recommendations, should take into account the following statement: "Council members agreed that the health, safety and well being of the community is their No. 1 priority." C. The consulting firm should develop operational recommendations that serve to maintain and protect the integrity and safety of surrounding neighborhoods. D. The consulting firm should develop operational recommendations that will resolve the current Rock Prairie congestion and avoid its return with eventual commercial and retail development from Sebesta through Rock Prairie. E. The consulting firm should be given the proposals developed by Bill Stockton and his colleagues. F. The consulting firm should investigate the possibility of special multi-year assessments on the land that would be changed for commercial and retail development. This might be one means to help support the critical highway and related infrastructure enhancements needed to facilitate mobility. G. Obviously, a number of technical requirements related to the scope of work will need to be included in the Call for Proposals. 6. There should be no prior budget set forth related to the Call for Proposals from the consulting firms. Doing it right is essential,not doing it on the cheap. 7. There should be no further consideration for land use changes from the Sebesta through Rock Prairie zone until the accepted action recommendations have begun to be implemented. Any further development will worsen the growing chaos at the Rock Prairie area and will be contrary to the No. 1 priority of city council, which states "Council members agreed that the health, safety, and well being of the community is their No. 1 priority." 7 Concluding Comments I would like to provide several concluding comments related to the domain of this document. 1. The many hundreds of citizens who have been engaged in seeking positive solutions to protect the integrity of their neighborhoods, while enabling appropriate forms of commercial and retail development, are heroes and not villains in this saga. 2. The land owners who have been seeking changes in land use are victims and not villains in this saga. 3. The citizens and land owners are both victims of the ineffectiveness [and much more] of certain personnel in Planning and Development Services. 4. We are at tipping point in knowing if the College Station mission and the expressed No. 1 priority of City Council are real or not worth the paper they are written on. 5. The proposed outcome of this saga has the potential.for establishing a positive precedent and constructive guidelines in proposed future land use changes throughout the city that threaten the integrity of surrounding neighborhoods. 6. The proposed outcome creates, in the long run, the potential for win-win solutions between citizens and developers who seek changes in land use. Developers and city staff will understand from the get go that the integrity of neighborhoods takes priority and must be preserved proactively. Moreover, the after the disaster mitigation measures proposed by certain personnel in Planning and Development Services will not be tolerated or found to be acceptable. 7. There should be no reduction in the low tax rate of the City of College Station. If city council finds a surplus of$4 million or so after completion of the budget process, the appropriate city parties should immediately initiate a dialogue with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). This dialogue should focus on the fmancial resources that the city may be able to bring to the table to accelerate the critically needed highway infrastructure changes in the Rock Prairie zone and related access road area. I was told by one member of this commission that the state of Texas does not plan to do anything in the Rock Prairie zone until 2010. That is unacceptable and impossible. The city needs to negotiate with TxDOT by bringing resources to the table. It is the citizens, retailers, and commercial land developers who are increasingly suffering from this impossible situation. The city should seek a resolution with TxDOT so that actual construction might be completed by August 2008 or as soon thereafter as possible. i Fa U tl R 11.)) July 6, 2006 Comments and Recommendations Related to Sebesta and Rock Prairie Land Use Proposals Submitted to College Station Planning and Zoning Commission by Don Heliriegel 8704 Appomattox Drive College Station, Texas 77845 The purpose of this document is to present key comments and recommendations with respect to possible land use changes in the Sebesta and Rock Prairie area. From a transportation perspective and the nearby neighborhoods,this land mass represents one zone, not two. Brief Professional Profile Given the limited time for my presentation, it is not possible to include all of the concepts, models, and research that serve to buttress the validity of my comments and recommendations. Consistent with those who give testimony before various government bodies, it may be helpful to this commission and others to provide a brief professional profile on myself. Perhaps, this will temper some from simply discounting and ignoring my comments as that of a "disgruntled citizen in Emerald Forest". I do perceive certain city staff personnel in Planning and Development Services, for this part, as having simply discounted and ignored my inputs. Of course, this is consistent with how they have dealt with the profoundly professional insights by Bill Stockton and numerous other citizens. A thumbnail sketch of my professional profile follows: (1) I have served two terms as head of the nationally ranked Department of Management; (2) I served a five-year term as Executive Associate Dean of the nationally ranked Mays Business School, (3) I served on the Vision 2020 Planning Group and in numerous other University roles in which planning and decision making were key components; (4) I have taught strategic and operational planning and decision making at the undergraduate and graduate levels; (5) I have conducted executive development programs in these areas; (6) I have consulted with private and public sector organizations in these areas; (7) I have co-authored two management textbooks through a major publisher and which are in their 11th edition—they address, among other topics, strategic and 2 operational planning and decision making; and (8) I was elected president of the 14,000 member Academy of Management, which is the leading scholarly association worldwide for management research and teaching. Skepticism When Jeanette Phariss called me to serve on the Sebesta Citizens Advisory Committee, my initial response was "no way, I have no interest in wasting my time. I have seen too many unnecessary blunders and disasters come out of Planning and Development Services related to land use and planning." I cited one example nearby—namely, the multistory Marriott which sits back from the bypass and near Sebesta. I told Jeanette that it was disgraceful, disastrous, and unnecessary to have permitted this multistory structure to loom over the homes on the adjoining street. So, all involved in enabling that decision and location of the Marriott, shame on each of you. I consulted with three real estate experts who have law degrees in the Mays Business School. I was told this could have, indeed, been legally avoided. Of course, by requiring the developer to locate the hotel much closer to the bypass, it would have enabled only a great rate of return on the land, rather than the super-mega return by permitting extensive commercial development in front of the hotel property. Because of my respect and admiration for Jeanette Phariss, I conceded to serve on the advisory task force. Depending upon the actions of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, I will know, as well as hundreds of citizens, if my initial inclination was correct. Namely, will this have been a waste of time of thousands of hours by hundreds of citizens? Sebesta Advisory Task Force The intellectual capital, professionalism, depth of insights, and planning capabilities of the citizens on this task force were amazing. I know this has been the same situation for the various other citizen task forces that have contributed their many talents to our common quest. I have prayed about the need to make some of the remarks that will be forthcoming. I do not desire to hurt anyone and certainly not to suggest or imply that anyone be fired. Given the crisis point we are at and what is at stake for many citizens, I have concluded that I must be unequivocal and assertive. On a personal level, I like the personnel in Planning and Development Services with whom I am acquainted. Several meetings ago, I presented two mental models to this commission that seemed to dominate the many hours of our meetings with a city representative. In brief, the city 3 representative's tunnel vision and silo-like perspective seemed to be dominated by (based on my perceptions): (1) a traditional after-the-fact "mitigation model," (2) reactive control, (3) delayed tactical action, (4) how to recover from damage, (5) optimize speed of traffic flow and driver convenience, (6) optimize driver and business goals, (7)how to recover from increased accidents and safety risks, and(8) so on. During our many hours of meetings, the citizen members presented a portfolio of proposals that were comprehensive, proactive, strategic, crisis preventive, preserved neighborhood integrity, maintained child and family safety, and recognized families are king, rather than autos. The mental model of the city member on the task force was closed and locked. This person demonstrated avoidance, noncommitment to explore citizens' expert proposals, changing the subject, and always maintaining a pleasant demeanor. From our very first meeting, the citizens, as one element of a number of initiatives, proposed the compilation of the AMS road. It was noted by one of the citizen members that this road was funded in a previous bond issue which was approved by the voters. The money was reallocated to another transportation need. There was virtually no response by the city member— not even a statement like "I will explore this proposal with key members in Planning and Development Services." The citizen members were relentless in resurfacing this and other proposals at future meetings. About midway through our third meeting, I had become so dismayed that I stopped the proceedings and said to the city member/employee: "Why are we here? Do you have marching orders from your superiors to minimize our inputs through avoidance, nonresponsiveness, and irrelevant replies?" The citizen employee claimed such was not the case. My reply to that was "too bad. If that was the case, I could then understand your nonresponsiveness and obfuscating communications." It may have been our fifth meeting when the city employee member announced that they (Planning and Development Services) were exploring the completion of the AMS road. I am convinced that this never would have happened had we not been so relentless. Also, my skeptical side interpreted that certain city employees in Planning and Development Services thought this would be enough to get Emerald Forest citizens out of the picture. We are still here! 4 TTI Professionals on Task Force The citizens advisory task force was blessed by having Bill Stockton, Associate Agency Director of the Texas Transportation Institute,and two other professionals from TTI as members. The intellectual capital, professional expertise, and depth of insight they provided were amazing. Having served on a number of committees for graduate students in the transportation area, I knew firsthand of the outstanding professionals in TTI. "The mission of TTI is to solve transportation problems through research, to transfer technology, and to develop diverse human resources to meet the transportation challenges of tomorrow." With its 600 employees, TTI is the largest university-affiliated transportation research agency in the United States. More importantly, everyone needs to know that TTI is recognized as a premier and international renowned organization in the domain of its mission. Bill Stockton has presented to this commission the strategic elements of what a proactive comprehensive transportation plan should include for the one transportation zone from Sebesta past Rock Prairie Road. In public remarks and a number of written e-mails, Bill has insisted that a traffic and transportation infrastructure consulting firm be employed by the city to study all facets of the traffic issues and needs in this zone. Also, the consulting firm should be charged with developing transportation/highway options that will proactively protect the integrity of the adjacent residential neighborhoods. Given the logical and great planning insights by Bill and others, I have found it interesting, but sad, that certain personnel in Planning and Development Services have continued to ignore the professionals at TTI and other citizens. When there is some responsiveness, it appears to be reluctant and only because of the need to accommodate pressures—such as the AMS road extension. In other ways, I keep reading about various piecemeal initiatives or positions from city personnel. Too often, a number of these are ludicrous. As a Professor of Management, I can offer one set of possible explanations for the nonresponsiveness by certain personnel within Planning and Development Services. 1. This unit has become a mechanistic bureaucratic organization caught up in its own internal self-reinforcing logic. 2. Mechanistic organizations do not like strategic proposals suggested to them by external entities. The self-justifying internal logic of such units serves to discount and 5 discard such proposals. The "circle the wagons" strategy takes over to protect the status quo. 3. A sense of defensiveness and resentment sets in, perhaps at a subconscious level, that how dare those interlopers from TTI try to tell us what to do. College Station Mission Statement and No. 1 Priority In the June 30, 2006 issue of the Eagle, I was reading with interest the story entitled"CS Council Retreat Focuses on Values." While reading this very interesting article, my mind was on the fiasco set of circumstances being experienced by the citizens and created by the muddling, reactive and incoherent decisions by certain personnel in Planning and Development Services. Then, I reached the paragraph that stated: Council members opted not to alter the city's mission statement, which reads, 'On behalf of the citizens of College Station, home of Texas A&M University, we will continue to promote and advance the community's quality of life. ' Initially, I was stunned by this statement, which I find to be terrific. In reading a couple of more paragraphs, I came across the following statement: Council members agreed that the health, safety and well being of the community is their No. 1 priority. In combination with the mission statement, my sense of being stunned soon turned to laughter as I reflected on the proposed decisions and actions by certain personnel in Planning and Development Services with respect to proposals for changes in land use from Sebesta past Rock Prairie Road, again this is one zone and not two. My wife asked me why I was laughing. I told her that it appears certain personnel in Planning and Development Services have: 1. Never read the mission statement and the No. 1 priority expressed by City Council; 2. Read these statements, but are clueless as to how they should be used to guide their decisions and plans; 3. Read these statements and elected to develop their own de facto mission statement, which is, admittedly, based on my limited experience with this city unit and only in terms of the Sebesta through Rock Prairie area. Based on this experience, I think the de facto mission of Planning and Development Services might read as the following: "Our mission is to optimize the interests of commercial land developers, retailers, and 6 other business interests while creating the illusion with the citizens that we are sincerely concerned with their interests by making tactical and marginal concessions to them,but only as required." Values,Vision, and Mission Councilman Ron Gay is quoted as saying in the same Eagle article: "Your values are more important than your vision or mission because it's the values that define you. How you behave—that's what those values define. Good values and good ethics, you don't hear about that because that doesn't make for good TV. Enron makes for good TV. " First, the mission statement of College Station is also a statement of values, namely "We will continue to promote and advance the community's quality of life." Second, the No. 1 priority expressed by council members is also a value statement, namely "Council members agreed that the health, safety, and well-being of the community is their No. 1 priority." Third, prior to its decline, Enron had an impressive vision,mission, and values statement. They also had a great ethics statement and code of ethics. Why do I make these points? Written statements of vision, mission, values, and ethics are not worth the paper they are written on unless they guide organizational members in the real decisions, behaviors, and plans relevant to their domains of authority and responsibility. Most CS Units have Internalized the Mission and No.! Priority With the exception of certain personnel in Planning and Development Services and only with respect to their Sebesta/Rock Prairie behaviors and decisions, I am a strong believer, based on my experiences and what I have read, that the vast, vast majority of city employees strive to implement the College Station mission and No. 1 priority set forth by city council. I feel fortunate to live in a community with: (1) an impressive fire department and outstanding EMS; (2) a wonderful parks and recreation system; (3) a terrific police department; (4) an exemplary public works department, and(5)many other first-class city services. City Council Reorganizing Planning Services It is my understanding that city council is making several strategic and organizational changes in planning and development services. If I recall correctly (I misplaced the Eagle article), city council also indicated that this area has been severely understaffed. 7 This situation provides an additional rationale for securing the services of an outside consulting firm to address on a more timely basis the myriad of issues related to land use and transportation requirements from the Sebesta through Rock Prairie zone, while preserving and maintaining the integrity and safety of the surrounding neighborhoods. Suggested Proposal from P&Z to City Council I do not intend to appear presumptuous toward the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission. I would like to offer a draft statement for your consideration for possible approval and submission to the City Council. It is my way to represent the bottom-line recommendations that I think are logical, strategic, proactive, and create the potential for win-win outcomes with respect to the interests of the neighborhoods and those who desire land use changes. The suggested recommendations by P&Z to City Council are as follows: 1. We recommend no changes at this time in land use for the common zone from Sebesta through Rock Prairie Road. The lack of any comprehensive plan and the steadily worsening traffic jams in the Rock Prairie area will be further exacerbated by land use changes that created more retail and commercial development prior to reengineering this corridor. 2. We recommend the employment of an external consulting firm to study the myriad of transportation and related issues as a result of possible land use changes in the zone noted above. 3. We recommend that a consideration be given to obtaining the advice and counsel of the Texas Transportation Institute as to the consulting firms who would be particularly well-qualified for this type of project. 4. We recommend that the Planning and Development Services have no involvement in selecting such a firm, monitoring its work, or accepting the consultant's report. Hard positions have already been taken by certain personnel in Planning and Development Services and contrary positions have been taken by virtually all citizen groups from the surrounding neighborhoods. 5. The Call for Proposals to consulting firms should include statements such as the following, among others: 8 A. The consulting firm, in developing its recommendations, should explicitly consider the meaning and implications of the city's mission, namely "On behalf of the citizens of College Station, home of Texas A&M University, we will continue to promote and advance the community's quality of life." B. The consulting firm, in developing its recommendations, should take into account the following statement: "Council members agreed that the health, safety and well being of the community is their No. 1 priority." C. The consulting firm should develop operational recommendations that serve to maintain and protect the integrity and safety of surrounding neighborhoods. D. The consulting firm should develop operational recommendations that will resolve the current Rock Prairie congestion and avoid its return with eventual commercial and retail development from Sebesta through Rock Prairie. E. The consulting firm should be given the proposals developed by Bill Stockton and his colleagues. F. The consulting firm should investigate the possibility of special multi-year assessments on the land that would be changed for commercial and retail development. This might be one means to help support the critical highway and related infrastructure enhancements needed to facilitate mobility. G. Obviously, a number of technical requirements related to the scope of work will need to be included in the Call for Proposals. 6. There should be no prior budget set forth related to the Call for Proposals from the consulting firms. Doing it right is essential, not doing it on the cheap. 7. There should be no further consideration for land use changes from the Sebesta through Rock Prairie zone until the accepted action recommendations have begun to be implemented. Any further development will worsen the growing chaos at the Rock Prairie area and will be contrary to the No. 1 priority of city council, which states "Council members agreed that the health, safety, and well being of the community is their No. 1 priority." 10 increasingly suffering from this impossible situation. The city should seek a resolution with TxDOT so that actual construction might be completed by August 2008 or as soon thereafter as possible. Note: The reproduction costs for all copies of this document were paid for from the personal funds of Don Hellriegel.