HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/10/2013 - Workshop Agenda Packet - City CouncilTable of Contents
Agenda 2
Workshop No. 6 - College Station Economic Development
Master Plan Update - Phase II Report
Coversheet revised 6
Phase II Report 7
Phase II Business Survey 61
Workshop No. 7 - Green College Station Action Plan
Coversheet 113
1
CITY OF COllEGE STATION
Mayor Home o/Texas A&M University" Council members
Nancy Berry Blanche Brick
Mayor Pro Tern Jess Fields
Karl Mooney John Nichols
City Manager Julie Schultz
David Neeley James Benham
Agenda
College Station City Council
Workshop Meeting
Thursday, January 10,2013,5:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas
1. Call meeting to order.
2. Executive Session will be held in the Administrative Conference Room.
Consultation with Attorney {Gov't Code Section 551.071}; possible action. The City Council may seek
advice from its attorney regarding a pending or contemplated litigation subject or settlement offer or
attorney-client privileged information. Litigation is an ongoing process and questions may arise as to a
litigation tactic or settlement offer, which needs to be discussed with the City Council. Upon occasion
the City Council may need information from its attorney as to the status of a pending or contemplated
litigation subject or settlement offer or attorney-client privileged information. After executive session
discussion, any final action or vote taken will be in public. The following subject(s) may be discussed:
Litigation
a. City of Bryan's application with TCEQ for water & sewer permits in Westside/Highway 60 area,
near Brushy Water Supply Corporation to decertify City of College Station and certify City of
Bryan
b. Chavers v. Randall Hall et aI, Case No. 10 CV-3922; Thomas Chavers et al. v. Kalinec Towing
Company, Inc. et aI., Cause Number 201237978, In the 270 District Court of Harris County, Texas.
c. College Station v. Star Insurance Co., Civil Action No. 4:11-CV-02023
d. Shirley Maguire and Holly Maguire vs. City of College Station, Cause No. 11-002516-CV-272, In
the 272nd District Court of Brazos County, Texas
e. Patricia Kahlden, individ. and as rep. of the Estate of Lillie May Williams Bayless v. Laura Sue
Streigler, City of College Station and James Steven Elkins, No. 11-003172-CV -272, in the 272nd
District Court of Brazos County, Tx.
f. Claim and potential litigation related to a June 24, 2011 collision with a city vehicle.
g. State v. Carol Arnold, Cause Number 1l-02697-CRF-85, In the 85 th District Court, Brazos County,
Texas
Legal Advice
a. Legal advice regarding Contract No. 11-046 for use ofHUD funds
Page 12
City Council Workshop Meeting
Thursday, January 10,2013
Real Estate {Gov't Code Section 551.072}; possible action The City Council may deliberate the purchase,
exchange, lease or value of real property if deliberation in an open meeting would have a detrimental
effect on the position of the City in negotiations with a third person. After executive session discussion,
any final action or vote taken will be in public. The following subject(s) may be discussed:
a. Property located generally northwest of the intersection of First Street and Church Avenue in College
Station.
Personnel {Gov't Code Section 551.074}; possible action -The City Council may deliberate the
appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer.
After executive session discussion, any final action or vote taken will be in public. The following
public officer(s) may be discussed:
a. City Manager
Economic Incentive Negotiations {Gov't Code Section 551.087}; possible action The City Council may
deliberate on commercial or financial infonnation that the City Council has received from a business
prospect that the City Council seeks to have locate, stay or expand in or near the city with which-the City
Council in conducting economic development negotiations may deliberate on an offer of financial or other
incentives for a business prospect. After executive session discussion, any final action or vote taken will
be in public. The following subject(s) may be discussed:
a. Discuss economic development incentive negotiations with T AMUS
3. Take action, if any, on Executive Session.
6:00PM
4. Proclamation and Recognition of ASCE Centennial Anniversary.
5. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on items listed on the consent agenda.
6. Presentation and discussion regarding the College Station Economic Development Master Plan Phase II
Report.
7. Presentation and discussion regarding the Green College Station Action Plan.
8. Council Calendar
Jan. 11 Retirement Reception for David Neeley in Council Chambers at 3:30 p.m.
Jan. 16 RVP Board Meeting at RVP, 3:00 p.m.
Jan. 17 P&Z Workshop/Meeting, CSU Training Facilities, 6:00 p.m. (Karl Mooney, Liaison)
Jan. 21 City Offices Closed -HOLIDAY
Jan. 23 Economic Outlook Conference at CS Hilton, 8:00 a.m.
Jan. 24 Executive SessionlWorkshoplRegular Meeting at 5:00,6:00 & 7:00 p.m.
Jan. 28 & 29 Council Strategic Plan Retreat at MTF Assembly Room -1603 Graham Road, 8:00 a.m.
9. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on future agenda items and review of standing list of
Council generated agenda items: A Council Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has
not been given. A statement of specific factual infonnation or the recitation of existing policy may be
Page 13
City Council Workshop Meeting
Thursday, January 10,2013
given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a
subsequent meeting.
10. Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Animal Shelter Board, Arts
Council of the Brazos Valley, Arts Council Sub-committee, Audit Committee, Bicycle, Pedestrian, and
Greenways Advisory Board, Blinn College Brazos Valley Advisory Committee, Brazos County Health
Dept., Brazos Valley Council of Governments, Bryan/College Station Chamber of Commerce,
BVSWMA, BVWACS, Convention & Visitors Bureau, Design Review Board, Historic Preservation
Committee, Interfaith Dialogue Association, Intergovernmental Committee, Joint Neighborhood
Parking Taskforce, Joint Relief Funding Review Committee, Landmark Commission, Library Board,
Metropolitan Planning Organization, National League of Cities, Parks and Recreation Board, Planning
and Zoning Commission, Research Valley Partnership, Regional Transportation Committee for Council
of Governments, Sister City Association, TAMU Student Senate, Texas Municipal League, Twin City
Endowment, Youth Advisory Council, Zoning Board of Adjustments, (Notice of Agendas posted on
City Hall bulletin board).
11. Adjourn.
----+--APP.!!!----Y-¥-I.~,-------ulP{~-__y
City~ Y
Notice is hereby given that an Executive Session and Workshop Meeting of the City Council of the City of
College Station, Texas will be held on the 10th day of January, 2013 at 5:00 p.m. respectively in the City
Hall Council Chambers, llOI Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas. The following subjects will be
discussed, to wit: See Agenda
Posted this 4th day of January, 2013 at 5:00 pm
c~Jn~
I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of
College Station, Texas, is a true and correct copy of said Notice and that I posted a true and correct copy of
said notice on the bulletin board at City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, in College Station, Texas, and the City's
website, www.cstx.gov. The Agenda and Notice are readily accessible to the general public at all times.'
Said Notice and Agenda were posted on January 4, 2013 at 5:00 pm and remained so posted continuously
for at least 72 hours proceeding the scheduled time of said meeting.
This public notice was removed from the official board at the College Station City Hall on the following
date and time: by ____________
Dated this __day of ,2013.
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS By_____________
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the day of ,2013.
________Notary Public Brazos County, Texas My commission expires: ____
Page 14
City Council Workshop Meeting
Thursday, January 10,2013
This building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for sign interpretive service must be
made 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Agendas may be
viewed on Council meetings are broadcast live on Cable Access Channel 19.
January 10, 2013
Workshop Agenda Item No. 6
Economic Development Master Plan Update, Phase II
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Bob Cowell, AICP, CNU-A, Executive Director of Planning & Development Services
Agenda Caption: Presentation and discussion regarding an update on the College Station
Economic Development Master Plan including the results of the Phase II draft of the Plan
Relationship to Strategic Goals: Diverse Growing Economy
Recommendation: Staff recommends Council receive the presentation.
Summary: The City Council contracted with a Consultant Team to aid staff in the
development of an Economic Development Master Plan which, when adopted by Council will
be an amendment of the City of College Station Comprehensive Plan. The staff and
Consultant Team developed a multi-phase approach to the development of the Plan. Upon
the completion of each of the phases, the staff is briefing the Planning & Zoning Commission
and the Consultant Team is briefing the Council.
Council previously received the presentation on Phase I of the Plan, which focused primarily
on identification of existing conditions and trends and initial identification of opportunities,
challenges, and barriers to economic development in College Station. Phase II of the Plan
focuses further on evaluation of opportunities and constraints, includes a review of the
City’s current economic incentive program, review of best practices in communities similar
to College Station, a review of the City’s current economic development structure, a review
of the City’s current districts and redevelopment areas, and concludes with a series of
recommendations to consider in the development of Phase III of the Plan. Phase II also
includes an overview of the community and business surveys conducted by the Consultant
Team and an analysis of the same.
Staff will, in partnership with the Consultant Team, take the information developed in
Phases I and II of the Plan and craft Phase III, which will serve as the draft Economic
Development Master Plan and will include goals, strategies and actions recommended to
seize opportunities, and overcome challenges and barriers. It is anticipated that staff will
complete this work in the early part of 2013 with a draft plan ready for presentation to
Council in Spring of 2013.
Budget & Financial Summary: N/A
Reviewed and Approved by Legal: N/A
Attachments:
1. Phase II Draft Report
2. Phase II Draft Business Survey Report
6
December 2012
Economic Development Master Plan
Phase Two – Evaluation of Opportunities
and Constraints
College Station, Texas
Prepared for:
City of College Station
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas 77840
7
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
ii
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... ii
Executive Summary and General Points .................................................................................... 1
Industry Trends .......................................................................................................................................... 1
Public Input ................................................................................................................................................. 1
Economic Development Incentive Program ............................................................................................... 2
Economic Development Structure, Efforts, and Regional Partnerships .................................................... 2
Entertainment Districts .............................................................................................................................. 3
Redevelopment Areas ................................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 5
Summary of Phase One: Economic Base Analysis and Existing Conditions ............................................... 6
Opportunities and Advantages .............................................................................................................. 6
Challenges and Barriers ......................................................................................................................... 6
Area Economics and Demographics ....................................................................................................... 6
Market Trends by Sector ........................................................................................................................ 6
Industry Trends ......................................................................................................................... 8
Industry Clusters ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Public Input ............................................................................................................................ 11
Business Survey Results ............................................................................................................................ 11
Highlights from College Station Business Survey ................................................................................. 11
Interviews and Focus Groups ................................................................................................................... 14
The role of the City of College Station in regional economic development ......................................... 14
Opportunities for growth in the region and economic drivers ............................................................. 14
Competitive advantages in College Station ......................................................................................... 14
Limitations for future economic development in the region................................................................ 14
Workforce and talent ........................................................................................................................... 15
The state of entrepreneurship and innovation in the region ............................................................... 15
Ways the City of College Station could support business development .............................................. 16
Opportunities for improvement of city development .......................................................................... 17
City Council and Mayoral Discussion ........................................................................................................ 18
What do you hear from constituents regarding economic development? .......................................... 18
From your perspective, have you seen anything that is a barrier to attracting and growing industry?
............................................................................................................................................................ 18
What are your views on current economic development tools and incentives? .................................. 18
8
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
iii
What do you view as the role of the City in the region’s economic development? ............................. 19
What role does quality of life play in economic development? ........................................................... 19
What industries will drive economic development in the future? ....................................................... 19
Other Comments? ................................................................................................................................ 19
Economic Development Incentive Program ............................................................................ 20
Strengths .................................................................................................................................................. 20
Weaknesses .............................................................................................................................................. 21
Opportunities ........................................................................................................................................... 21
Threats ...................................................................................................................................................... 21
Best Practices ........................................................................................................................................... 22
Best Practice #1: Property Tax Phase‐In .............................................................................................. 22
Best Practice #2: Foreign Trade Zones ................................................................................................. 23
Best Practice #3: City Deal Closing Fund .............................................................................................. 23
Consulting Team Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 25
Recommendation #1: Maintain Flexible Incentive Options ................................................................. 25
Recommendation #2: Establish a Deal Closing Fund ........................................................................... 25
Recommendation #3: Seek to Establish a Foreign Trade Zone ............................................................ 25
Recommendation #4: Match Incentives to Target Industries .............................................................. 25
Recommendation #4: Highlight Available Programs for Workforce Development ............................. 25
Recommendation #5: Include a Focus on Retention and Expansion ................................................... 26
Recommendation #6: Maintain Expedited Permitting System ............................................................ 26
Recommendation #7: Develop a Scorecard for Evaluating Projects .................................................... 26
Recommendation #8: Explore ISD Participation in Tax Abatement ..................................................... 26
Recommendation #9: Create Research and Development Tax Credit ................................................. 26
Recommendation #10: Develop Entrepreneurship and Innovation Program ...................................... 27
Economic Development Structure, Efforts, and Regional Partnerships .................................... 28
Overview .................................................................................................................................................. 28
The Importance of Regionalism ........................................................................................................... 28
The Role of Cities in Regional Efforts ................................................................................................... 29
City Staffing when a Regional EDO is in Place ..................................................................................... 29
Funding the Regional EDO ................................................................................................................... 29
Working with Other Cities in a Region ................................................................................................. 29
Sample Structures and Regional Partnerships ......................................................................................... 31
Waco, Texas ......................................................................................................................................... 31
Lubbock, Texas ..................................................................................................................................... 31
San Marcos, Texas ............................................................................................................................... 32
9
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
iv
Gainesville, Florida ............................................................................................................................... 32
Research Valley and the City of College Station....................................................................................... 33
Entertainment Districts ........................................................................................................... 35
Existing Entertainment Districts ............................................................................................................... 35
Northgate ............................................................................................................................................. 35
Wolf Pen Creek ..................................................................................................................................... 37
University Drive East ............................................................................................................................ 38
Potential for Additional Entertainment Districts ..................................................................................... 39
Emerging and Planned Additional Entertainment Districts ................................................................. 39
Room for Additional Entertainment Districts? ..................................................................................... 39
Redevelopment Areas ............................................................................................................. 40
Intersection of George Bush Drive and FM 2154 ..................................................................................... 40
Market Opportunities .......................................................................................................................... 41
Market Challenges ............................................................................................................................... 41
Recommendations for Future Study .................................................................................................... 42
Conclusions Regarding Comprehensive Plan ....................................................................................... 42
Harvey Road ............................................................................................................................................. 42
Market Opportunities .......................................................................................................................... 43
Market Challenges ............................................................................................................................... 44
Recommendations for Future Study .................................................................................................... 44
Conclusions Regarding Comprehensive Plan ....................................................................................... 45
Texas Avenue/Eastgate ............................................................................................................................ 45
Market Opportunities .......................................................................................................................... 46
Market Challenges ............................................................................................................................... 46
Recommendations for Future Study .................................................................................................... 47
Conclusions Regarding Comprehensive Plan ....................................................................................... 47
Appendix I: List of Interviewees ............................................................................................. 48
Appendix II: Business Survey Report ....................................................................................... 49
10
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
1
Executive Summary and General Points
This second phase of the Economic Development master planning effort will focus on evaluating
opportunities and constraints related to economic development in College Station. More specifically,
this phase will focus on:
• Industry trends and major industries in College Station
• Results and key findings from the College Station Business Survey component of this project
• Results and key findings from interviews and focus groups held by the consultant team
• Strengths, weaknesses, threats, and opportunities of the current ED incentive program
• ED incentive programs best practices
• ED incentive program recommendations
• Structures, efforts, and regional partnerships for effective economic development
• Analysis of sample structures and regional partnerships including Research Valley and the City of
College Station as well as others in the state and nation
• Analysis of entertainment districts in College Station
• Analysis of redevelopment areas in College Station
Industry Trends
• Retail, healthcare, energy, agribusiness / food, and culture / entertainment are all industry
sectors that are strong and advancing in the College Station MSA.
• Professional services, engineering, back office, biomedical, industrial machinery, and software /
I.T. are all industries that are emerging in College Station and are candidates for economic
development assistance.
Public Input
• The project consultant team interviewed 16 individuals and surveyed 98 representatives from
local companies during the second phase of this initiative.
• An Internet based survey was developed targeted at business owners and high level managers.
The City publicized the survey with the assistance of Bryan College Station Chamber of
Commerce, Research Valley Partnership, Brazos Valley Small Business Development Center, and
Northgate District Association.
• Businesses surveyed tended to be smaller companies with less than 25 employees, and 39% of
businesses surveyed have a customer market beyond Texas.
• Most employers expect to maintain or grow employment, capital investment, and sales in the
next five years.
• Current businesses did not point to a high level of utilization of incentives, but did point feel that
incentives were an important tool to bring additional businesses to the region.
11
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
2
• Biosciences / life sciences, energy, and software / IT telecommunications were considered by
survey respondents to be the top preferred industries for expansion
• A strong majority of respondents (70%) favor proactive economic development by the City, but
30% do not favor city incentives
• In addition to the consultant team interviewed a variety of different business and industry
professionals in College Station as part of this phase of research
Economic Development Incentive Program
• The City’s current economic development incentive program was assessed to possess strengths
including utilizing target industries clearly defined by the Research Valley Partnership, having a
diversity of incentive options available, and offering cash grant incentives among others.
• The current incentive program had weaknesses including the lack of ISD abatements, lack of
awareness in the business community of City incentives available, and R&D tax credits not being
included among primary community incentives among others.
• Opportunities identified related to the current incentive program include tailoring incentives to
the needs of College Station / Research Valley target industries, ensuring that incentive
agreements include clawback provisions, and further marketing of relationship with Texas A&M
and related opportunities for businesses among others
• Threats identified include intercity competition between College Station and Bryan, resistance
to the use of cash incentives, and not integrating workforce development and training
incentives into the program among others.
• Best practices were identified including a Property Tax Phase In, Foreign Trade Zones,
establishment of a City Deal Closing Fund.
• A variety of recommendations were made based on the SWOT analysis and evaluation of best
practices.
Economic Development Structure, Efforts, and Regional Partnerships
• A regional approach to economic development is critical for several key reasons explored within
this analysis.
• Cities must play a supportive role in a larger regional economic development strategy.
• City ED staffing needs largely depend on the mission and structure of the regional economic
development organization but at a minimum should have a full time ED professional on staff.
• A City should expect to invest in a regional economic development organization if one is in place
• Cities are not alone in economic development. Intercity cooperation strengthens economic
development potential.
12
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
3
• The cities of Waco, Lubbock, and San Marcos in Texas as well as Gainesville, Florida were
identified as sample structures and regional partnerships for economic development. The
takeaways from these cities included that separate private / public regional organizations lead
ED marketing for these cities, city government representatives participate as board members of
the regional organizations, and that regional activities are driven by a unified regional vision and
strategy.
Entertainment Districts
• Existing entertainment districts were evaluated including Northgate, Wolf Pen Creek, and
University Drive east. All three presented both current challenges and opportunities. All three
were generally assessed to be healthy currently.
• Potential for additional entertainment districts both currently planned and otherwise was also
assessed. The quantity and quality of entertainment centers both current and imminently
planned was assessed to be sufficient and greater than what is typically associated with a city
the size of College Station.
Redevelopment Areas
• The potential redevelopment areas identified in the recently updated Comprehensive Plan (FM
2154 / George Bush Drive, Harvey Road from Texas Avenue to SH 6 Bypass, Texas Avenue
corridor between University Drive and Harvey Road) are in areas generally conducive to modern
student housing due to proximity to campus and existing student housing demand already
established. The Texas Avenue and Harvey Road corridors may have difficulty attracting non‐
student residential demand.
• Smaller parcels in the FM 2154 / George Bush Drive area and, to a lesser extent, the Texas
Avenue corridor present barriers to productive commercial and mixed‐use redevelopment.
• The FM 2154 / George Bush Drive area is not in a location well‐suited to extensive retail
development due to its location at the edge of the mass of the area’s population and potential
future access issues that may be caused by intersection reconstruction and capacity
improvements.
• More intensive and dense redevelopment, apart from student housing, may be limited by
achievable rents and absorption in all three areas. Structured parking may not be financially
feasible. The weak office market cannot be expected to drive redevelopment in any of these
areas.
• It is unclear without more market and financial analysis whether aging multifamily properties
are worth redevelopment into new residential or mixed‐use versus maintaining a lesser quality
status and receiving the associated cash flow with minimal capital reinvestment.
13
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
4
• The Campus Pointe and Plaza Hotel redevelopments may accommodate significant amounts of
mixed‐use demand in the short term, discouraging absorption elsewhere.
• Measures such as Tax Increment Reinvestment Zones (TIRZ) and Chapter 380 agreements may
be able to effectively accelerate redevelopment, particularly if extensive public infrastructure
investment is involved.
14
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
5
Introduction
This report evaluates opportunities for economic development in College Station, focusing on incentive
programs, organizational structures and relationships, and the potential for entertainment districts and
redevelopment of neighborhoods. In the Phase One this project, the consulting team looked at the base
conditions in College Station, using data and interviews to develop an understanding of the city’s
demographics and economy. In Phase Two, the consulting team builds on these findings with a survey,
more in‐depth interviews, and examination of best practices from benchmark cities. This assessment of
opportunities and constraints for economic development in College Station will help prepare for
identification of strategic goals and implementation measures in Phase Three.
This competitive evaluation of economic development opportunities is divided into five sections:
• Public Input: Presentation of survey results and summaries of interviews and focus groups
• Economic Development Incentive Program: Assessment of College Station’s past and existing
incentive programs, identification of best practices from benchmark communities, and
recommendations for incentive program improvements
• Economic Development Structure and Efforts and Regional Economic Development
Partnerships: Assessment of College Station and regional organizations economic development
structure and efforts, identification of best practices from benchmark communities, and
recommendations for increasing efficiency and effectiveness of programs
• Entertainment Districts: Current entertainment districts in College Station were assessed for
their relative health and contribution to general economic conditions in the City. Consideration
was also given of potential for additional entertainment districts and their collective
contribution to economic development initiatives in the City.
• Redevelopment Areas: The opportunities and challenges facing three potential redevelopment
areas identified in the recently updated Comprehensive Plan were examined and
recommendations for further actions outlined.
15
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
6
Summary of Phase One: Economic Base Analysis and Existing
Conditions
Phase One of the Master Plan study, as previously mentioned, provided an overview of the base
economic conditions in which College Station operates. It created a picture of both the general
metropolitan region around College Station and of the City itself, looking at population and household
trends, workforce characteristics, industry makeup, and the market conditions for various economic and
land use sectors. The following are key conclusions from the Phase One research:
Opportunities and Advantages
• Texas A&M and its graduates
• Good infrastructure and public services
• Good public K‐12 schools
• Moderate cost of living by national standards
• Good quality of life features for families and older residents
• Coordinated effort to attract knowledge‐based industries, especially biosciences
Challenges and Barriers
• Limited commercial air service
• Aging stock of multifamily units
• Small metro size and related limitations on career opportunities for young adults
• Tendency of energy companies to consolidate offices in Houston
• Dependence on public spending support for some growing industries
• No cost of living advantage compared to most Texas metros
• Orientation of economy and cultural activities toward Texas A&M University students instead of
adults
• Competition from Houston and Austin metros for retail and leisure spending attraction
• Perception of stringent / costly / difficult development standards and permitting process
Area Economics and Demographics
• Ongoing job growth in the metro area, with health care a major growth leader; nearly 100,000
non‐farm jobs
• Metro area strongly “eds and meds” oriented and high level of public sector employment
• Relatively low unemployment
• Rapid population growth within the City of College Station, with emphasis on students and
highly educated, affluent professional adults
Market Trends by Sector
• Retail / commercial
16
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
7
o Public data indicate low retail spending per capita, requires more nuanced
understanding of actual spending power in the area, potential “leakage” to suburban
Houston retail centers
o Retail opportunities broaden with growing adult population
o University Drive is the heart of the regional market area
• Office and industrial
o Office demand is soft with only small increases expected
o Manufacturing / industrial present in Bryan but a small part of overall jobs base
• Health and wellness
o Major and high‐growth part of area’s economy
o High levels of insurance coverage among College Station residents
o New medical facility investments, such as Scott & White Hospital
o Public investment in Health Science Center (HSC) in Bryan
o More growth expected in future due to increasing and aging population, plus HSC‐
related growth
• Technology
o Entrepreneurial, cutting‐edge tech firms are focus of economic development efforts;
some firms exist under the radar
o Fiber optic resources best accessed in Bryan
o Question of potential opportunities related to research and tech innovation for energy
companies
o Lack of air service a hindrance for tech executives
o Lack of metro appeal to educated young adults hurts recruitment
• Hospitality and entertainment
o Hotel revenues peaked in 2008, but less suffering in College Station area than in major
metros due to demand from Texas A&M University and cost‐conscious groups
o Only one full‐service hotel (Hilton)
o Optimism over SEC impacts but concern over temporary impacts from football stadium
renovation
o Mixed‐beverage sales continuing to trend upward
o Opportunities for dining and entertainment that caters to growing upscale adult
population
• Government and higher education
o Government agencies constitute 7 of 15 largest employers in the metro area
o Education / training / library occupations account for 18.5% of employed College Station
residents
o Texas A&M University System employment in area estimated at 26,200
• Construction and development
o Considerable construction and development activity in metro area, with annual total
permit values ranging from $200M to $500M
o Vacant land for certain types of development still available
• Annual construction‐related goods sales ranging from $60M to $110M in College Station
17
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
8
Industry Trends
Because economic development resources are limited, communities often focus their economic
development efforts on specific, high‐growth industries in which the community has competitive
advantages. This strategy helps maximize strategic resource development, while boosting the overall
economy and aligning the community on the same path for growth.
Economic development programs must therefore be considered in conjunction with target industries
and competitive assets. Phase One examined industry employment, occupations, and assets. To better
understand industry opportunities in College Station the project team prepared an industry cluster
bubble analysis of recent trends in College Station. This cluster analysis allows for better assessment of
College Station’s existing incentive programs and identification of best practices and recommendations
for improving efforts.
Industry Clusters
Location Quotients (LQs) give us a quick snapshot of which industries are concentrated in a region. LQs
show local industry employment concentration relative to the US average concentration. An LQ of 1.5
indicates that the local industry has 50% more jobs per capita than in the US. An LQ of 1.0 indicates the
same per capita employment concentration as the US, and an LQ of below 1 indicates a below‐average
concentration.
The bubble chart on the next page shows three variables for each College Station MSA industry: the LQ
(or concentration) on the vertical axis, the 5‐year % growth for industry employment in the metro on the
horizontal axis, and total jobs in the local industry indicated by the size of the bubble. The metropolitan
area was examined in order to understand the complete picture of regional industry dynamics, which
includes assets located outside the boundaries of the City of College Station.
The graph’s four quadrants each tell a different story for the industry sector. While sectors in the top‐
right quadrant are viewed as competitive and should be priorities for talent development, sectors in the
bottom‐right (which are growing but have below‐average concentrations) are emerging sectors for the
region. These sections typically require special attention such as entrepreneurial assistance or new
workforce training programs.
18
Phase Tw
The bubb
Valley Par
metro are
growth); I
Professio
Many of t
national a
and speci
College St
= 1.4); Re
These ind
Entertainm
1.0. High
expanding
Innovatio
Energy, a
fastest gro
wo – Economic
le chart of ma
rtnership, sur
e Software / I
Industrial Ma
nal Services (
this high grow
average, but t
alized in the r
tation include
tail (LQ = 1.2
ustry trends
ment, Retail,
growth and e
g Medical Dis
n.
commonly re
owing. Addit
c Developme
ajor industrie
rvey, and inte
Information T
achinery (33%
(23% growth)
wth industries
their high gro
region with ti
e Energy (LQ =
); Metalwork
show that tra
and Healthca
employment
strict plan and
ecognized gro
tionally, Agrib
ent Master Pl
es reinforces i
erviews. The
Technology (
% growth); En
); Biomedical
s currenly hav
owth rates ind
ime. Traditio
= 3.7); Cultur
king (LQ = 1.2
aditional indu
are employing
concentratio
d recent locat
owth sector, i
business & Fo
an
industry prior
fastest growi
62% growth f
nergy (33% gr
(13% growth
ve lower conc
dicate that th
onal industrie
re & Entertain
).
ustries remain
g a significant
ons in the Hea
tion decision
is the most co
ood remains a
rities identifie
ng industry c
from 2007‐20
rowth); Healt
h); and Resea
centrations in
ey are becom
s with existin
nment (LQ =
n strong in Co
t share of res
althcare secto
of the Depart
oncentrated i
an important
Coll
ed by the clie
clusters in the
012); Automo
hcare (23% g
arch (11% gro
n College Stat
ming increasin
g high locatio
1.4); Agribus
ollege Station,
sidents and ha
or are suppor
tment of Hea
ndustry local
cluster.
ege Station, T
nt, Research
e College Stat
otive (65%
rowth);
wth).
ation than th
ngly concentr
on quotients
iness & Food
, with Culture
aving LQs abo
ted by the
alth’s Center f
ly and one of
Texas
9
ion
he
ated
in
d (LQ
e &
ove
for
f the
19
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
10
Low‐concentration, high‐growth industry clusters often benefit most from economic development
policies and initiatives, and College Station is well positioned to assist the continued growth of these
local sectors. Software / Information Technology; Biomedical; Research; Professional Services; Industrial
Machinery; Healthcare; and Energy are all in position to benefit from the new strategy.
20
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
11
Public Input
In addition to data analysis, the project team interviewed and surveyed area business executives and
other community leaders about the future of economic development in College Station. In total, the
project team interviewed 16 individuals and surveyed 98 representatives from local companies.
Interview findings are highlighted in this section of this report.
Business Survey Results
The consultant team collaborated with the City to develop an Internet‐based survey questionnaire
targeted at high‐level management and owners of businesses in the College Station area. The City
publicized the survey with the assistance of several business and economic development organizations:
• Bryan College Station Chamber of Commerce
• Research Valley Partnership
• Brazos Valley Small Business Development Center
• Northgate District Association
The City also used its own email distribution lists and individual points of contact. Alternate publicity
methods included the scrolling graphic on the City’s main webpage, social media (Facebook, Twitter), a
press release, and incorporation into programming on the municipal cable channel. The survey was
open for responses from August 27 to September 10, 2012.
Highlights from College Station Business Survey
• A majority of surveyed businesses employed fewer than 25, highlighting the importance of
supporting small businesses (establishments with fewer than 20 employees comprise 84% of
Brazos County employers).
• 39% of survey respondents have a customer market beyond Texas, including the rest of the US
and international markets.
• Only 4% of respondents indicated that incentives were their reason for locating in the region,
indicating that College Station has many other attributes attracting businesses to the region but
also revealing that incentives may have high potential for increased utilization in bringing
additional business to the region.
• Only half of respondents recruit new employees from within the region and 30% from Texas
A&M university, showing that many employers must look outside the region to fill open
positions.
• Two fifths of employers expressed difficulty in hiring and/or retaining employees.
• Opportunities and amenities for young adults were cited as major reasons for difficulty in hiring
and retaining employees.
• The majority of respondents gave the College Station / Bryan’s economic performance a B grade
for the past five years.
21
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
12
• Most employers expect to grow or maintain employment, capital investment, and sales in the
next five years.
• Research & Development was considered the most attractive business operation type for the
region.
• Nearly half of respondents felt that local business leaders had a negative perception of College
Station as a place to do business.
• Respondents considered College Station’s top five competitive strengths:
o Colleges and universities (77%);
o Cost of living (41%);
o Growing local economy (32%);
o Regional geographic location (31%);
o And Lifestyle (28%).
• Respondents considered College Station’s top five competitive weaknesses:
o Transportation infrastructure (38%);
o Government / political leadership (36%);
o Career / job opportunities (32%);
o Business climate (27%);
o And Natural environment (20%).
• Respondents considered the top five preferred industries for expansion:
o Biosciences / life sciences (48%);
o Energy (44%);
o Software / IT / telecommunications (38%);
o Aviation / aerospace (35%);
o and Hospitality / tourism (33%).
• Respondents considered the top five retail businesses for expansion:
o Restaurants and nightspots (41%);
o Specialty grocery stores (38%);
o Full service hotel (35%);
o Museum and cultural centers (29%);
o And Arts, crafts, and antiques (23%).
• A strong majority (70%) of respondents favors proactive economic development by the city, but
30% do not favor city incentives.
• When selecting types of incentives, most respondents preferred Targeted recruitment and
marketing programs (70%) and Financial incentives (64%).
• A majority of respondents opposed incentives for retail development, preferring to “let the
market decide.”
• Respondents identified the following top five ways the City of College Station could become
more competitive for their business:
22
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
13
o Loosen development restrictions and requirements (48%);
o Speed up the development and permit process (32%);
o Improve transportation systems (20%);
o Improve digital / telecommunications infrastructure (20%);
o And Offer incentives to developers and/or businesses (20%).
23
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
14
Interviews and Focus Groups
The consulting team conducted a series of interviews and focus groups with employers, educators, and
organizations throughout the College Station region to better understand economic development
strengths, trends, and needs. Because some interviewees wanted to remain anonymous, the consulting
team has summarized the most relevant highlights from discussions around specific topic areas below.
The role of the City of College Station in regional economic development
• The Brazos Valley COG is the designated economic development district, with a 7‐County Region
and the RVP is the designated workforce entity.
o The COG usually works with the city through the RVP
• Many of the rural communities have 4A and 4B sales taxes for economic development, but
College Station and Bryan do not.
• Some interviewees didn’t even realize the City of College Station had an economic development
office.
Opportunities for growth in the region and economic drivers
• The Bio Corridor
• Everything feeds off of Texas A&M University.
• There is still a lot of agricultural production, including in Brazos County.
• Texas Triangle Park is the only site in Brazos County where UP would allow a rail spur
• Mining industry
• Energy Technology could be a strong target.
Competitive advantages in College Station
• Great place for families
• Low cost of living and small town feeling
• Highly educated population
• Greater feeder for the biotech industry
• Texas A&M University
Limitations for future economic development in the region
• Air service is limited. Businesses with export and travel needs must use Houston.
• Regional roads need improvement. There hasn’t been a traffic study completed in 40 years and
community is growing rapidly.
• Lack of commuter rail or bus providing strong connections to Austin and Houston.
• Underemployment is a major issue in the region. There is a well‐educated workforce but not
enough jobs for them or awareness of opportunities.
24
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
15
• The community is oriented to students and residents aged 30 and above, but lacking in a
lifestyle oriented towards 20‐somethings and young singles. This is a major perception issue that
affects workforce and recruitment.
• “The region is a 25‐45 year old graveyard.”
Workforce and talent
• Biomanufacturing and pharmaceutical manufacturing employment will grow rapidly in
upcoming years. There is a key need for technical staff (entry level technicians with 4‐year
degrees) and experienced managers (will need to be recruited from outside the region)
• Blinn College is looking into offering workforce training in addition to existing programs
• Many spouses/partners of Texas A&M University employees are unaware of employment
opportunities available in the region.
• Texas Workforce Commission grants administered through the RVP have allowed for employer
workforce training at Blinn College.
• Blinn College is preparing for workforce development for the Biomedical Initiative.
• Blinn College’s co‐located nursing program at the Texas Life Sciences complex is a unique facility
and major asset.
• No glaring gaps in the workforce pipeline.
• Texas A&M University, Blinn College and others are exploring opportunities for continued adult
education programs across all industries.
• There is a deep pool of talent centered around Texas A&M University, especially spouses, but
connecting with them can be challenging.
• The Career Placement Center is one of the best resources on campus, but it misses significant
opportunities to connect with local businesses by focusing on the broader Aggie network
outside of College Station. This makes it challenging for smaller, local businesses to recruit,
because they can’t get their foot in the door with graduating students.
The state of entrepreneurship and innovation in the region
• Texas A&M University has an Office to Technology Commercialization, but some expressed that
these efforts are fledgling and there isn’t much industry interaction locally.
• Sometimes difficult to keep homegrown businesses in College Station once they start growing.
• The incubator space at RVP is an asset
• There is a relatively thick pool of banks for traditional business, but a limited pool for funding
startups.
• Texas A&M University presents a rich opportunity for business startups
• College Station is light in folks with standard business experience that compliments the needs of
technology industry startups, primarily basic management of technology companies
25
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
16
• It can be challenging keeping companies in College Station. Consumer‐oriented services
businesses are usually more inclined to stay in College Station.
• Oil and gas services and manufacturing might be more likely to migrate to where their
customers are and where manufacturing is easier.
• Companies that stay often need to be big enough to support multiple locations, so they can
keep R&D or a HQ in College Station.
• When startups scale up, it is difficult to retain them locally. Proximity to consumers and
infrastructure are major reasons for larger companies to leave town.
• Approximately half of local startups are in Life Sciences and half are in General Tech.
• They are launching a student incubator at Texas A&M University which will help build the
entrepreneurial talent pool and keep startups and students in College Station.
Ways the City of College Station could support business development
• Engage in comprehensive marketing effort with the RVP, CVB, City, County, Texas A&M
University, and Chamber. Everyone needs to work together to create a comprehensive
marketing campaign aimed at business and talent.
• Leveraging of young adult community in Bryan.
• The city needs to keep the community better informed about all the assets in the area with
more roundtables, dialogues and media outreach.
• There needs to be a clearing house of information about spouses/partners and their
backgrounds that can be tied to jobs that are available. This system must integrate with Texas
A&M University.
• The Texas A&M job network is strong but only connects students to Aggies, and the city could
work more closely to help connect students with all potential employers in the region, including
non‐Aggies.
• Need to have all organizations in the region, including the school districts, understand the
benefits of economic development policy and be more supportive of spending on it.
• College Station will never be successful if they don’t bring Bryan with them. The cities cannot
compete over tax revenues, but must recognize the greater public good. Need to look at the
whole community.
• “There’s no advantage to being the best kept secret.” The region must do more to promote
assets beyond the university, including K‐12 schools, cost of living, position in the Texas Urban
Triangle (Dallas‐Fort Worth, Austin‐San Antonio, Houston).
• The city needs to acknowledge the importance of the technology startup community. Nurture,
acknowledge, and support research and commercialization. This will attract investment and
bring jobs, particularly for spouses and graduates who want to stay in town.
• Support catalyst resources at the Research Valley Innovation Center (RVIC) and Research Valley
International Gateway (RVIG)
26
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
17
• Support for basic service incubators which provide business advice and other services to small
companies at a relatively low cost but with significant benefit for startups.
• Research and development tax credits are less important for small startups but have great
significance down the line as companies grow and mature and make larger investments in
equipment.
Opportunities for improvement of city development
• City of Bryan has been successful improving downtown over the past 10 years, partially through
the TIRZ.
• Texas A&M University willing to work with private developers to rehab Campus Pointe. Hopeful
to develop mixed use and hotel.
• Opportunity for creating a conference/convention center, because the Expo center isn’t
adequate for local needs. A Hotel Conference Center was emphasized as a major need.
• The city’s plan for the research park must be connected with the RVP.
• The city needs to make sure there are sites available to house companies that will not fit in the
research park.
27
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
18
City Council and Mayoral Discussion
The consulting team also had an opportunity to interview two members of the College Station City
Council: Julie Schultz and Blanche Brick, and Mayor Nancy Berry. These interviews provided an
opportunity to hear City Council’s perspective on economic development and the concerns of
constituents throughout College Station. The following section will provide a brief summary of
responses to interview questions from the three leadership interviewees.
What do you hear from constituents regarding economic development?
• Many constituents want to streamline the planning and permitting processes and make it easier
for developers.
• The community is more concerned about infrastructure and quality of life issues than economic
development. They haven’t faced high unemployment rates, and thus residents are less focused
on job creation.
• The city is moving in the right direction.
From your perspective, have you seen anything that is a barrier to attracting
and growing industry?
• Need to lighten up regulations: restrictions on sidewalks, trees, and other measures that make
development overly expensive.
• The planning and development services group needs to be more customer service oriented:
focusing on flexibility and creativity.
• Last year, codes were reformed to make them less restrictive.
• Both Blinn College and Texas A&M University are facing continued funding cuts from the State
government, but they are not having trouble maintaining enrollment.
o College Station’s K‐12 system is excellent.
• The lack of an interstate is a big barrier to some types of companies, but College Station is close
to major population hubs.
• Limited air service is another concern.
What are your views on current economic development tools and incentives?
• The city needs a more formal incentives policy for justifying decisions about why they give
incentives to one company over another.
• Tax abatement is working and allowing them to direct investment in specific locations that are in
need of development.
• There are little to no incentives focused on existing business expansion.
• Growth needs to be in the right direction, not just counting numbers.
• Investment in education is a key driver. Businesses will follow great education programs.
28
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
19
• Totally opposed to tax incentives for retail establishments.
• Not comfortable with cash incentives for businesses coming from the City, but would be okay
with it if it comes via the State or Research Valley Partnership.
What do you view as the role of the City in the region’s economic development?
• The City is a big player in the Research Valley Partnership initiative.
• The City has certain sites and buildings that are distinct and serve a regional purpose.
• The City’s role is to attract businesses that reflect the vision of the community. Growth needs to
be complementary to College Station. Quality is key.
• The City has a role to play, not a leadership role necessarily, but they need to be at the table as
an active player.
• Impact fees have again come under consideration. Growth should bear some of the expenses,
not just citizens.
What role does quality of life play in economic development?
• It has been the focus for the past 20 years, and College Station offers quality of life amenities,
including a great parks program.
• Quality of life is critical to economic development prospects.
• The City wants clean tech, knowledge‐based industries – these employers seek out locations
with higher quality of life.
What industries will drive economic development in the future?
• Restaurants and hotels.
• Need a civic center.
• Fitness and wellness is a big part of the economy.
• Behavioral hospital is going into the Medical District.
Other Comments?
• Lower wage levels are a challenge.
• If we have the quality of life and strong education system, we will attract companies to College
Station.
• Developing a town center would be desirable.
• There are some areas that are ripe for redevelopment, including strip centers and the area
around the new fire station.
29
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
20
Economic Development Incentive Program
This section of the report examines the City of College Station’s current and past incentive programs,
evaluating their effectiveness and applicability for business needs within the community. The consulting
team follows this assessment with an identification of three best practices from benchmark
communities identified by the city, in this case Waco, TX; Lubbock, TX; and San Marcos, TX. Based on
this review of existing incentive programs and best practices from benchmarks and around the nation,
this section finishes with recommendations for improving the City of College Station’s incentive
program.
In the past, the City of College Station followed a set of economic development guidelines developed by
the Research Valley Partnership (RVP) for the City of Bryan, City of College Station, Brazos County, and
the RVP. These guidelines were first approved in 1994 with multiple revisions through 2005. However,
following the City of College Station’s 2009 strategic plan, the City no longer follows a formal incentives
program. The City will adopt formal incentives policies following the completion of this Economic
Development Master Plan.
Below, the project team highlights the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT)
presented by the past incentive program utilized by the City of College Station. The incentive program
was assessed based on the applicability for targeted businesses and land development, competiveness
with national best practices, and effectiveness. The consulting team based evaluations on economic
development work experience, public input through the survey and interviews, and familiarity with
industry and incentive trends.
Strengths
• The past incentives guidelines utilize target industries clearly defined by the Research Valley
Partnership and in line with College Station’s economic development objectives.
• The guidelines emphasize a regional approach, outlining roles played by the City of College
Station, City of Bryan, Brazos County, and the Research Valley Partnership.
• Incentives are transparent and set clear expectations of rewards, allowing businesses to make
confident location and expansion decisions.
• A diversity of incentive options is available, including tax abatement, land, financial assistance,
fee waivers, and expedited permitting. Because every business sector and operation has
different needs, maintaining a broad catalogue of incentive options allows the city to offer
flexibility in supporting business development.
• Cash grant incentives, an important option in a flexible business attraction and retention
program, are available through Chapter 380 from the City and Chapter 381 from Brazos County.
30
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
21
Weaknesses
• Targets listed for the City of College Station are focused solely on land development options and
do not include industries.
• The ISD does not offer tax abatements and the guidelines specifically state not to ask for them
to provide abatements.
• Many interviewed business leaders were unaware of the City’s role in providing economic
development incentives and only dealt either with the Research Valley Partnership or Texas
A&M University.
• Research and development tax credits are not included among primary community incentives.
• Incentives emphasized new business recruitment and relocation, but did not treat local business
expansion and new business startup with the same standards.
Opportunities
• Examine the potential to utilize HB 1800 in cooperation with the ISD on select projects.
• Tailor incentives to the needs of College Station / Research Valley target industries.
• Include incentives that target R&D and other operations that depend on costly technologies and
those depreciate at an accelerated pace.
• Guarantee that local business expansions and startups are equally eligible for City incentives if
they meet criteria required for newly recruited projects.
• Ensure incentive agreements include clawback provisions.
• Continue to closely coordinate incentives decisions with the Research Valley Partnership, Brazos
County, and Texas A&M University.
• Work together with the City of Bryan. Agree that the two communities will collaborate on
landing major economic development projects in the region and will not scout expansion
projects from one another’s territories.
• Increase marketing of relationship with Texas A&M University and related opportunities for
businesses.
• Ensure incentives are directed towards target industries, recognizing unique needs of various
industries and explicitly marketing towards these sectors.
• Incentivize workforce development and training in cooperation with Texas A&M University,
Blinn College, and other area learning institutions.
• More discussion of entrepreneurship and support for startups.
Threats
• Intercity competition between College Station and Bryan ups incentives to an unsustainable
level, decreases return on investment, and turns off prospects.
31
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
22
• Resistance to use of cash incentives for very high value projects jeopardizes College Station’s
competitiveness.
• Inequitable incentives offerings to local business expansions (versus new incoming projects)
risks loss of existing businesses.
• Not integrating workforce development and training incentives into the program misses an
opportunity and threatens College Station’s long‐term talent supply.
• Without supporting startup community explicitly, young companies will not see benefits of
remaining in community and will continue to move elsewhere.
Best Practices
In these tough times, cities around the nation are trying innovative approaches to economic
development incentives and systems. Responding to the changing needs of businesses and maximizing
the potential of local assets, many of these strategies focus on increasing the ease of business startup,
supporting entrepreneurship and innovation, and strengthening the local educational foundation.
For this study, the consulting team identified best practices from three Texas benchmark cities: Waco,
San Marcos, and Lubbock. Like College Station, these three cities are anchored by a large university, are
of similar population size, and share commonalities in their economic development position in Texas.
Although their industry strengths and political circumstances vary, the economic development tools
available to the city governments in all three cities are very similar.
The consulting team reviewed all economic development incentives and initiatives utilized in these
benchmark cities, examining their strengths, weaknesses, and applicability for the City of College
Station. This review eliminated incentives already utilized in College Station, those administered by
independent economic development organizations, similar to the RVP, and not the city, and initiatives
deemed unsuccessful. The following three best practices were identified based on their local
effectiveness, uniqueness, and potential for application in College Station.
Best Practice #1: Property Tax Phase‐In
The City of San Marcos
The City of San Marcos has a Property Tax Phase‐In program that offers tax phase‐ins for new or
expanding commercial and industrial construction and business personal property. Businesses can
participate in the program if they meet job‐creation requirements and are approved by the City Council.
The program requires a contract with the city. This program is an example of a flexible incentive design,
offering varied packages for job creation or retention, to small or large business, and for new or
established companies.
Companies with less than 100 employees must create or retain a minimum of five jobs, with at least 20%
meeting a salary minimum of $17 an hour. Capital investment by the business must equal or exceed
$250,000. These incentives are additionally available to start‐ups on a case‐by‐case basis.
32
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
23
Businesses with 100 or more employees must create or retain a minimum of 10 jobs with the same
salary requirements. Only full‐time, non‐temporary positions are counted. Capital investment must
equal or exceed $1,000,000.
In both circumstances, businesses already in San Marcos may apply but must provide financial
statements and a business plan. The program emphasizes due diligence and transparency.
Best Practice #2: Foreign Trade Zones
Exports are an important part of an economy. Any goods or services exported outside a community in
turn bring outside payments into the local economy, increasing local wealth and economic size. In
recent years, US exports have been on the rise, bolstered by increasingly effective methods of shipping
and other support programs, including Foreign Trade Zones.
The Foreign Trade Zone program was created by the federal government in 1934 to support foreign
commerce. Organizations can apply to have land adjacent (within 60 miles) to a US port of entry
designated as a Foreign Trade Zone. Goods manufactured or assembled on Foreign Trade Zone property
are exempted from US customs fees if they are re‐exported. If goods are kept domestically, they are
subject to regular taxes when they are brought into the US market from the Foreign Trade Zone. This
duty‐free exemption of Foreign Trade Zone goods provides significant savings to exporting companies.
Foreign Trade Zones additionally allow for Zone‐to‐Zone Transfer, Inventory Tax Exemptions, Duty
Deferral on imports, and other reduced fees and simplified structures.
College Station has a many exporting companies, as seen in interview discussions and the 39% of
business survey respondents who indicated they serve markets across the US and internationally. The
presence of exporters and the potential for attracting more are important reasons to consider the
possibility of applying for a Foreign Trade Zone location within Brazos County.
City of Lubbock
Foreign Trade Zone Number 260 was granted to the City of Lubbock in 2004. It covers 693 acres on the
Lubbock International Airport and 2,000 acres on the adjacent deactivated Reese USAF base.
City of Waco
Foreign Trade Zone Number 246 was granted to the City of Waco’s Economic Development Division.
The Waco Foreign Trade Zone contains 409 acres in three non‐contiguous sites:
• 70 acres in the Waco Regional Airport Industrial Park
• 139 acres in the Texas Central Park industrial park
• 200 acres in the Waco International Aviation Park.
Many of these sites in Waco additionally benefit from State Enterprise Zone designation and Double and
Triple Freeport exemptions.
Best Practice #3: City Deal Closing Fund
In the past, businesses looking to locate in College Station have been eligible for economic development
grants of various sorts, including performance‐based financial assistance, grants from the Brazos County
33
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
24
Incentive Fund, and Chapter 380 agreements. While these are all necessary pieces of flexible incentive
system, some communities have also established independent deal‐closing funds that offer extra
leverage for incentivizing projects that the community believes will have a significant impact. These
funds do not necessarily have to represent a large amount of money but often can demonstrate to a
company a city’s extra commitment to ensuring that a project goes through.
City of San Marcos
The City of San Marcos established an Economic Development Fund as a line item in their General Fund.
This fund is intended to act as a “war chest” for the city, allowing for the flexible application of funds to
highly desirable projects. To ensure that funds are not misallocated or exceedingly high, the size and
availability of funds are approved by the city council annually, and each project is considered on a case‐
by‐case basis.
34
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
25
Consulting Team Recommendations
Based on the review of industry cluster trends, past economic development incentives in College
Station, and best practices from benchmark cities, the consulting team has the following
recommendations for improvement of incentive programs in the College Station Economic Development
Master Plan.
Recommendation #1: Maintain Flexible Incentive Options
Every industry and business has different needs based on their stage of development, workforce
requirements, and product type. As a result, incentive options must be flexible, capable of offering
tangible benefits to businesses in all targeted industries and stages of development, from startup to
established.
Recommendation #2: Establish a Deal Closing Fund
A deal closing fund can make a significant difference in attracting a company to a community. When a
city makes a grant offer to a company, even if the monetary value is low, this demonstrates the city’s
commitment to the company and willingness to support their relocation. Any deal closing fund must
require due diligence and transparency in decision making processes to maintain the public trust.
Recommendation #3: Seek to Establish a Foreign Trade Zone
Foreign Trade Zones offer significant tax benefits to exporting businesses, helping support existing local
companies and attract new establishments. The City of College Station should explore the requirements
and potential for apply for a Foreign Trade Zone designation within the city.
Recommendation #4: Match Incentives to Target Industries
Incentive options should be specifically tailored to match the needs to targeted industries in the
community. By speaking with local industry leaders and noting the needs to prospects, incentives
should be flexible, with options available that match the needs to each targeted industry. These
incentive types can range from research and development credits to free land to workforce training to
infrastructure loans. By explicitly discussing each targeted industry in the incentive policy, the city
demonstrates that it understand the needs of those businesses and appears a better place to do
business.
Recommendation #4: Highlight Available Programs for Workforce Development
The state offers workforce development programs and the region is developing new training resources.
The city needs to make sure that all available workforce development programs, including the Skills
Development Fund, and workforce resource are highlighted in the incentive program. By clearly stating
available resources, existing and prospective companies will know that if they notice a labor shortage or
have workforce concerns, the city has a system in place to help the company deal with these issues.
Additionally, this will help highlight available programs for continued education and demonstrate the
city’s commitment to workforce development.
35
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
26
Recommendation #5: Include a Focus on Retention and Expansion
Ensure that the language in incentive documents and available programs includes explicit references to
business retention and expansion alongside attraction. The previous incentive program seemed
primarily geared towards business attraction efforts, but local businesses need to know that the city is
as committed to them and supportive through incentive programs as they are about bringing in new
businesses. Providing assistance to a local company considering laying off employees is as important as
attracting new jobs to the community.
Recommendation #6: Maintain Expedited Permitting System
Business cycles are fast‐paced in the modern economy, and once a company decides to relocate or
expand, they want to know that they can get started as soon as possible. Creating and maintaining a
streamlined, expedited permitting system will help assure a prospective company that the city is
committed to business and allow them to better plan for a possible location in College Station.
Recommendation #7: Develop a Scorecard for Evaluating Projects
By establishing a clear procedure and scorecard for evaluating the cost‐benefits of a project and
proposed incentive package, the city can better defend decision making to the public. The scoring
process must be transparent and look at a number of factors including fiscal impact, economic impact,
environmental impact, and target industry development. Will this project build a targeted cluster in a
strategic fashion and attract more businesses in the future? Incentive recipients must be properly
researched including past growth, company history, and other due diligence. A transparent scorecard
will help ensure that incentive decisions are not considered arbitrary and the public trust is maintained.
Recommendation #8: Explore ISD Participation in Tax Abatement
Texas Tax Code Chapter 313 allows for a value limitation agreement with the local school district.
School district property taxes are high for business, and a Chapter 313 agreement allows for an 8‐year
limitation on taxable property value in exchange for agreed upon property investment and job creation.
College Station’s previous incentive program specifically asked applicants not to discuss school district
taxes, but this can be a very important tool in attracting new businesses and investment to a
community. The city must work more closely with the school district to better understand the cost‐
benefits of a Chapter 313 agreement and demonstrate that the net benefits to the school district
through economic impacts can be positive.
Recommendation #9: Create Research and Development Tax Credit
Research and development is a major growth area for College Station, tied directly to Texas A&M
University and related startup and established companies. In order to help support this growing sector,
the city should consider research and development tax credits for investments in equipment and other
personal property. Although startup companies do not necessarily invest as heavily in equipment,
research and development can cost a significant amount for more established technology companies.
High‐technology equipment quickly becomes out of date and companies can save a significant amount
of money through tax abatement on personal property used for research and development.
36
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
27
Recommendation #10: Develop Entrepreneurship and Innovation Program
The city needs to ensure that there is a section of the incentive program focused on entrepreneurship
and innovation. This section can highlight existing incubators, commercialization programs, mentorship
programs, and funding organizations. Particularly with an asset such as Texas A&M University, the city
needs to make innovation a cornerstone of the community and explicitly list available programs.
37
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
28
Economic Development Structure, Efforts, and Regional
Partnerships
Alongside a formal economic development incentive policy, an economically successful community must
maintain strong relationships between all organizations involved in economic development, including
local workforce organizations, educational institutions, chambers of commerce, and city governments.
Collaboration requires everyone involved to speak in one voice regarding the community’s goals,
strengths, and strategy. It also requires clearly established roles for each organization within the
economic development system, as each one plays a unique role in moving the community forward.
In the following pages, the consulting team examines City of College Station’s current economic
development organizational structure, efforts, and relationship with regional partners. The consulting
team also identifies best practices in this subject from across the nation, looking in particular at strong
partnerships bolstering workforce development, research initiatives, and entrepreneurship. This
analysis leads to recommendations for improving the current economic development structure and
programs in College Station in partnership with other regional organizations.
Overview
The Importance of Regionalism
A regional approach is critical to economic development. When companies and site consultants
consider locations for investment, they begin at a regional level. Political boundaries between states,
counties, and cities are not considered in the initial phases of a site search. In general, projects begin by
looking at geographic territories that, depending on the type of business, make sense logistically,
contain solid foundations of suppliers and talents, and are cost competitive. Territories considered
might be large geographic regions such as the Southeast US or more specific such as sites within three
hours driving time to an OEM.
After a geographic territory is established, more specific criteria come into play, allowing the company
or site consultant to filter prospective locations. Which city or county a project locates in is determined
later in the selection process when considering specific real estate and incentives.
Regionalism is important for several reasons. First, packaging assets at a regional level helps a
community stand out in the site selection process, especially in the early stages when prospects are
developing their initial list of large geographic territories to consider. Second, a regional approach
allows communities to pool resources to build brand awareness and market. It elevates efficiency and
effectiveness of economic development campaigns, especially in today’s noisy and hyper competitive
business climate. Finally, it shows prospects that communities can set aside differences to serve the
needs of their customers. This gives businesses confidence that the community will work together to
take care of their investment and their people.
38
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
29
The Role of Cities in Regional Efforts
Cities have a valuable part to play in regional economic development. To begin, cities must understand
the larger regional strategy and their role in supporting the strategy. Cities have responsibility for many
factors that affect a region’s ability to attract and expand businesses, including, for example,
infrastructure and land use, quality of life, regulatory climate, and business costs. Aligning local
decisions about investments and policies with the regional vision improves a city’s long‐term
competitiveness.
All cities within a region should actively participate in and support the regional economic development
organization. The regional EDO must be aware of each city’s assets so that it can promote those
strengths to prospects. Cities should trust the regional EDO to conduct external marketing, facilitate
local partners in discussions about improvements to area assets, and fulfill other mission functions.
Trust is vitally important. Prospects feel turned off when too many representatives from a region
participate in meetings. Allow the regional EDO to pursue leads and be the primary interface until the
point the prospect is ready to review city‐specific topics.
City Staffing when a Regional EDO is in Place
City economic development staff needs largely depend on the mission and structure of the regional
economic development organization. At a minimum, a city should have a full‐time economic
development professional to support the regional group, fulfill prospect requests, and coordinate
activities as needed across other city departments. In many smaller communities, this individual serves
in the city’s planning department. In larger communities, this individual may report directly to the city
manager and mayor’s office. In Texas 4A / 4B sales tax cities, the economic development director may
be employed by the city but operate externally and report to an independent board of directors.
In addition to a full‐time economic development director, a city may employ support staff. Support staff
may include an assistant economic development manager, a research manager, an ombudsman to
navigate businesses through city processes, and an executive assistant.
Funding the Regional EDO
A city should expect to invest in the regional economic development organization. The level of
investment depends on the regional EDO’s structure and funding. In some cases, all cities invest an
equal amount in the EDO. In others, funding formulas are based on the city’s population size and/or
geographic distance to the EDO’s headquarters.
Working with Other Cities in a Region
Intercity cooperation strengthens economic development potential. As stated earlier, companies do not
look at political boundaries when determining where to locate. In most cases, a company’s job creation
will positively impact the economies of cities located within a 45‐60 minute drive from the business.
However, it is natural for communities to struggle to celebrate a project that locates in a neighboring
city, especially when residents pressure public officials about the missed opportunity.
39
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
30
Once again, a regional mindset is helpful. Focusing on the good of the region and the long‐term regional
strategy puts city‐to‐city competition into healthy perspective. In the country’s top performing
economic development initiatives, cities know which regional target industries are best suited for their
assets. They may even claim ownership of niche target industries. For example, City A is the best
location in the region for bioscience research and development, while City B is the best location for
medical device manufacturing. This approach helps the regional economic development organization
direct prospect leads to local partners and helps cities justify why some projects land in neighboring
towns while others locate within their city limits.
Increasingly we see situations in which two municipalities or counties co‐invest in infrastructure that is
critical to economic development success. For example, several communities in the Southeastern US
have shared the cost of preparing mega sites for business. Often these large properties straddle
multiple political jurisdictions and improvements depend on cooperation among area governing entities.
Cities and counties are also co‐investing in shared regional infrastructure projects as well, such as water
treatment facilities.
For a regional economic development organization, it is important that cities are treated as equitably as
possible. Defining city and county level targets is smart way to distribute prospects and build confidence
that smaller cities and counties will have a fair shake at opportunities. Although cities may invest in the
regional organization at different levels (depending on funding formulas), they deserve equal seating on
the EDO’s board of directors or advisory committee (depending on structure).
40
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
31
Sample Structures and Regional Partnerships
Waco, Texas
Economic Development in Waco is led by the Greater Waco Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber’s
initiative encompasses the Waco MSA and the 18 cities within the MSA. The Chamber’s economic
development initiative focuses on six target industries: Aerospace and Defense, Advanced
Manufacturing, Supply Chain Management, Health Care and Professional and Financial Services.
Organizationally, Greater Waco’s economic development team is housed at the Greater Waco Chamber.
Six staff members comprise the team: Senior Vice President Economic Development, Director of
Business Expansion and Retention, Director of Urban Development, Project Manager, Marketing and
Research Manager, and an Economic Development Coordinator. The Senior Vice President oversees the
team and reports to the Chamber’s President.
Also managed by the Chamber is the Waco Industrial Foundation that manages 2,000 acres of property
within the Texas Central Park and the Waco International Aviation Park. A 24‐member board
representing 40 area businesses guides the Foundation’s activities. The Foundation handles site
improvements, infrastructure, and financial packages for sites within the parks.
The Foundation works closely with the Waco / McLennan County Economic Development Corporation
(WMCEDC), a partnership between the City of Waco and McLennan County. The City and County each
contribute $1.25 million per year to an Economic Incentive Fund, which is dedicated to helping new
companies locate in the county and existing target industry companies expand.
One of the City of Waco’s seven “strategic intents” is “aggressively competitive economic and
community development.” The City’s economic development functions fall within an Assistant City
Manager and the City Manager’s purview, who work with the Chamber to facilitate a business prospects
needs across multiple City departments, including Engineering Services Planning Services, Fire Services,
Health Services (via McLennan County), Inspection Services, Legal Services, Public Works, Traffic
Services, Parks and Recreation Services, and Police Services.
Waco’s City Manager represents the City on the Chamber’s 100‐member Board of Advisors. The City
does not serve on the Chamber’s 18‐member Board of Directors (which consists of private sector and
non‐profit organizations only), or five‐member Executive Committee.
Lubbock, Texas
Lubbock’s economic development is managed by the Lubbock Economic Development Alliance (LEDA), a
non‐profit organization whose mission is to create jobs, attract capital investment, retail and expand
new companies, and improve Lubbock’s quality of life. LEDA is part of the City and its territory includes
the city limits. It has 15 staff people and serves four primary functions: business recruitment, business
retention, marketing, and workforce development.
Established in 1995, Market Lubbock was originally formed as a non‐profit corporation contracted by
the City of Lubbock to perform economic development activities. LEDA and Market Lubbock (which
includes a Foreign Trade Zone and Visit Lubbock) are housed under the same roof and share a CEO.
41
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
32
LEDA has a seven‐member board of directors that are appointed by the City of Lubbock. Board
members come from the private sector and from Texas Tech University. LEDA’s 2012‐2013 budget
totals approximately $7.5 million. Sales tax funding, interest income, a grant from Market Lubbock Inc.
and lease income contribute to total funding. Of this, over $1.7 million is allocated for special projects
and incentives. $1.46 million is allocated to marketing and sales activities.
In addition to LEDA, other City departments assist with economic development activities on an as‐
needed basis. The Business Development Department within the City is dedicated to providing support
such as economic and demographic information and serving as a liaison between municipal government
and the business community on topics related to permitting, incentives, and regulations.
San Marcos, Texas
The Greater San Marco Partnership (GSMP) is the lead economic development organization for a two‐
county region the includes the cities of San Marcos, Kyle, Buda, Dripping Springs, Lockhart, Luling, and
Wimberly. With a population of 46,700, San Marcos is the largest city in the region.
The GSMP, officially organized in July 2010, is a 501(c)6 corporation dedicated to directing future growth
and positioning the region for a “wider diversity of quality jobs and higher wages.” In 2011, the GSMP
achieved its goal of raising $4 million from 75 public and private organizations in the region to
implement its strategic economic development plan. The GSMP has five full‐time staff members.
Three City of San Marcos representatives serve on the 21‐member GSMP board of directors – the
Mayor, City Manager, and a City Councilor. The City does not have a full time economic development
manager. Several departments support economic development, working with the GSMP and local
companies to facilitate job growth in the city: Engineering & Capital Improvement, Environmental
Health, Fire, Main Street, Parks & Recreation, Planning & Development Services, Water / Wastewater,
and Transportation.
Gainesville, Florida
The Gainesville Florida Area is an example of a successful economic development region that is home to
a strong university, the University of Florida. This is an aspirational example of a successful approach
that is not located in the state of Texas.
Economic development in Gainesville is led by the Council for Economic Outreach (CEO) that is housed
in the Gainesville Area Chamber of Commerce. CEO’s mission is to help grow Alachua County’s economy
through business attraction and expansion.
In addition to CEO, the Gainesville Area Chamber also created Innovation Gainesville (iG) which focuses
on fostering a local environment that encourages innovation in health and green technologies.
The Chamber’s President and Chief Executive Officer leads the Chamber, CEO, and IG’s activities. The
Chamber has 12 staff dedicated to administration, events, small business, investor relations, public
policy, and membership. In addition, CEO has three full time staff members – a Vice President of
Economic Development, a Business Opportunities Manager, and a Communications & Research
Manager.
42
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
33
The City of Gainesville supports economic development through a cross‐departmental initiative. Staff in
the Community Redevelopment Agency, Planning & Development Services, and Building and Inspection
Department coordinates efforts to support companies interested in expanding and locating in
Gainesville. Gainesville’s City Manager serves on the Gainesville Area Chamber’s board of directors,
together with 58 other representatives from the private, public, and nonprofit sectors.
Research Valley and the City of College Station
The City of College Station currently operates within a regional structure involving Brazos County, the
City of Bryan, the Bryan‐College Station Chamber of Commerce, and the Research Valley Partnership.
The Research Valley Partnership is the primary regional economic development organization,
responsible for business attraction, retention, and workforce development while the other organizations
provide supporting roles.
The City of College Station’s role in economic development has traditionally been working with
developers and businesses in identifying and preparing sites for operations. Additionally, the City has
had a strong role in supporting improvements to quality of life and business climate. Both College
Station’s Mayor and one City Councilor serve on the Research Valley Partnership’s 18‐member board of
directors. The City of Bryan’s mayor and one city councilor also serve on the board. Both cities and the
County have three appointees to the board.
This is similarly structured as the examples provided above, although the all four of the regional
organizations profiled have significantly larger boards of directors. The Research Valley Partnership’s
structure and approach is efficient and effective. Its organization reflects best practices from not only
within the state of Texas but also nationally.
Our assessment of the City of College Station’s economic development efforts is based input received
from the community through interviews and surveys. Structurally, its involvement with the Research
Valley Partnership is on par with the relationships other similarly‐sized cities have with their regional
economic development initiatives. Today, the City is seen has having a healthy, progressive attitude
Case Study Takeaways
• Separate private/public regional organizations lead economic development
marketing for the example regions.
• The activities of the regional organization are driven by a regional vision and
strategy.
• Representatives from city governments participate in the regional organization as
board members and advisors. Typically this individual(s) is the mayor, city manager,
or economic development manager.
• City governments have a full time staff person dedicated to supporting economic
development, ensuring that the city is responsive and that multiple city departments
coordinate activities to meet prospect needs.
43
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
34
toward economic development and is a collaborative team player. Most of the concern regarding the
City’s current competitive position relates to its past approach.
Due in part to the lack of prioritization of economic development in the past, the City now faces
challenges related to neglected long‐term investments. The City has historically opted out of industrial
development. As a result, today it is challenged the availability of development‐ready industrial land as
well as what many perceive to be a shortage of lifestyle amenities, which ultimately impact College
Station’s capacity for growing its tax base. One reason for this economic development strategy is to
help prioritize future investments.
Establishing the platforms for industrial growth (and associated taxes that it will generate) is important,
but it should not be the City’s only focus. Catching up in economic development will also require a leap
forward beyond a traditional approach. Technology commercialization and R&D activities should be an
equal focus and are already happening within city limits. Although these do not represent an immediate
large‐scale boost to the City’s tax base, they will create high‐wage, high‐skill jobs whose impacts are far
longer‐term and will fuel the region’s vision of being a world‐class destination that attracts innovation
and a thriving sustainable economy.
As the consulting team and the City move into the third phase of this project, crafting an economic
development strategy, there are a few key takeaways from this review that should be considered:
• The City of College Station should formalize a full‐time economic development manager position
that coordinates efforts across multiple departments as needed by expanding and relocating
companies.
• The economic development manager should work with the City Manager and the Research
Valley Partnership to respond quickly to opportunities. Regularly schedule meetings between
the manager and directors of other city departments, such as the City Manager’s Office,
Planning & Development Services, College Station Utilities, and Public Works to share
information and coordinate efforts.
• The City should continue its proactive approach to economic development, prioritizing initiatives
that enhance College Station’s quality of life to attract and retain talent. Ensure that the city has
available, developable real estate for business expansion and attraction. The needs of the
Research Valley’s target audiences should drive decisions regarding infrastructure and site
investment.
• Encouraging commercialization and R&D activities should also become a focus of the City. This
will require closer collaboration with Texas A&M University and the Research Valley Partnership.
Work with Texas A&M University on projects that improve the potential for graduate retention,
spinoff of university research, and entrepreneurship. Explore opportunities to co‐invest with
Texas A&M University in select projects that will catalyze economic development.
44
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
35
Entertainment Districts
The goal of this analysis is to evaluate the health and impact of existing entertainment districts such as
Northgate, particularly for the non‐student population. The potential for diversifying existing districts
and developing new districts to address unsatisfied demand and growth opportunities will be also
examined. The analysis will highlight district components that could attract tourism or enhance the
attractiveness of College Station for business relocation or retention.
Existing Entertainment Districts
Northgate
The Northgate District has historically been considered the
“downtown” of College Station, and lies on the northern
boundary of the Texas A&M Campus. This was the first location
of retail and restaurants of any kind in the nascent College
Station community that began to grow around Agricultural and
Mechanical College of Texas after it opened up for instruction in
1876.
Today Northgate is a primary nightlife destination in College
Station. The “core” Northgate area extends along University Drive generally between Tauber Street and
the Wellborn Road interchange. The area contains a variety of bars, restaurants, retail stores, and
nightclubs. The City of College Station has made investment in Northgate’s infrastructure a strategic
priority over the last decade plus investing over $25 million in street, utility / drainage improvements,
streetscape, public parking garages, sidewalks, period lighting, and pedestrian promenades.
Generally, the consultant team found Northgate to be a relatively healthy entertainment district.
However, it does face some challenges and offer some untapped opportunities.
Challenges
The tenant mix in Northgate has historically included retail establishments, restaurants with day and
early evening operations, and bars and nightclubs. However, in recent years, the tenant mix has
become significantly weighted towards bars and nightclubs. This has resulted in the hours of
profitability for businesses in Northgate being effectively compressed to Thursday through Saturday
from 11pm to 2am. Retail stores are reportedly moving to locations in the area with the perception of
easier free parking. Texas A&M is also developing retail and restaurants on campus which compete with
those on Northgate for student pedestrian traffic. Currently it is estimated that 90% of the market
patronizing Northgate businesses are college students. However, certain bars such as O’Bannon’s are
achieving success in attracting the post collegiate “adult” market by offering more sophisticated
promotions like specialty tastings and earlier happy hour time operations.
It was reported to the consultant team that the increased volume of bars and nightclubs on Northgate
has begun to cause a level of saturation in the market.
45
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
36
Another challenge to Northgate is the age of the facilities. These older buildings are very expensive to
bring up to current code and can be more costly to maintain than other newer facilities elsewhere in
College Station.
Opportunities
The consultant team has identified several key opportunities related to the Northgate entertainment
district.
Promotion and Branding – The City of College Station could coordinate
with the Convention and Visitors Bureau to promote Northgate as an
entertainment district to both business and pleasure visitors to the area.
The CVB’s website and marketing collateral currently mentions
Downtown Bryan but makes no mention of Northgate. The City could
also coordinate and possibly assist an entity such as the Northgate
District Association to develop a brand and district specific marketing for
Northgate. Norman, Oklahoma provides an example of how this can be
achieved. The Campus Corner neighborhood adjacent to University of Oklahoma is similar in size and
scope to Northgate. Campus Corner Merchants Association maintains a website promoting the area’s
history and current merchants. The Norman Convention and Visitors Bureau then further promotes this
message and branding on their website and in their marketing collateral.
The City of College Station could play a role of facilitation and / or potential funding in such a scenario
related to Northgate. Such promotion could feature the offerings of Northgate beyond the core hours of
Thursday through Saturday late nights and could facilitate greater utilization by non students of
restaurants and bars that serve meals earlier in the evening. This could allow for a greater number of
profitable operating hours for Northgate businesses. Professionals interviewed pointed out an
opportunity for Northgate to attract more convention visitors if these visitors had a better quick
understanding of what Northgate offers. The results of such an education process could benefit both
Northgate businesses and convention planners who would have another entertainment option to offer.
Development Process Clarity – It was reported to the consultant team that those wishing to redevelop
existing buildings or build new commercial construction in Northgate have been challenged by a level of
inflexibility and code clarity within the NG‐1 District. The City of College Station should consider hosting
a meeting with Northgate area property owners and developers to better understand the issues that
they have experienced with development and redevelopment of their facilities. This could potentially
result in policy refinements that could facilitate greater redevelopment and investment in Northgate.
Traffic Management – The consultant team observed and was told that the effective and posted speed
limit along University Drive was higher than would be ideal to facilitate a quality pedestrian environment
in Northgate. The City of College Station could coordinate with TXDOT to reduce speed and optimize
traffic signalization patterns to slow traffic down in Northgate.
46
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
37
Wolf Pen Creek
The Wolf Pen Creek District is a key urban park
and entertainment district in central College
Station. Generally, the Wolf Pen Creek District
extends along Dartmouth Drive between Harvey
Road and Colgate Drive, and along Holleman Drive
from George Bush to the Bypass. The district
contains a variety of components including a
restaurant district fronting on Harvey Road, The
Arctic Wolf Ice Center, an extensive park and trail
system running throughout, the P. David Romei Art Center, and the area’s focal point the Wolf Pen
Creek Amphitheater.
The consultant team’s general impression of Wolf Pen Creek was that the District was an underutilized
asset. The area benefits from an excellent location near the center of College Station / Bryan and very
good access.
Challenges
The primary challenge observed with the Wolf Pen Creek area was how to achieve more utilization of
the existing built assets and how to further promote the area as an entertainment destination.
Opportunities
Music Heritage – The Convention and Visitors Bureau of Stillwater, Oklahoma promotes Stillwater as
“The Original Home of Red Dirt Music.” College Station could easily lay claim to a similar distinction for
Texas country music. Artists including Robert Earl Keen and Lyle Lovett got their start in Northgate.
Texas A&M and College Station have been the starting points for other younger popular artists since
then as well. The City of College Station could coordinate crafting and implementing such a marketing
message. Recruiting and facilitating concerts and music festivals would be an integral part of further
leveraging College Station’s musical heritage, and Wolf Pen Creek Amphitheater is an ideal location for
such events. These events could lead to higher utilization of the Amphitheater. College Station’s
location close to Houston, Austin, and Waco makes it a central location for regional level music events.
Events and Festivals – Multiple people interviewed by the consultant team expressed concern that
there was lost opportunity because College Station (and the City) did not proactively seek out holding
events such as festivals and fun runs that would attract participants from outside the region. The Texas
Reds Festival in Bryan was presented as an example of what could be done. The Wolf Pen Creek District
could be an ideal site to hold such events. Additional events and festivals could bring tourist dollars
from throughout the region and beyond to College while allowing for greater utilization of Wolf Pen
Creek. Because these festivals would increase tourism and likely benefit area hotels, the City could
reasonably evaluate the potential use of Hotel Occupancy Tax proceeds for such initiatives.
47
Phase Tw
Univers
The area a
the SH 6 B
and dining
corridor h
this has o
brought t
This area
that all at
This corrid
the area’s
Hilton has
are under
hotel.
The consu
healthy en
market fo
contributi
require Ci
Challeng
The consu
Vacant Sp
The City c
space wit
destinatio
suggestin
space; on
as well as
Opportu
Marketing
generally
enough to
succeed.
targeted d
tourism in
and conve
district an
other ave
wo – Economic
sity Drive E
along Univers
Bypass was al
g district in C
has emerged a
nly increased
o the market
is home to a
least partiall
dor is also ho
s only full serv
s just undergo
rway to poten
ultant team p
ntertainment
orces and a ve
ing to the hea
ity interventio
ges
ultant team g
pace – The co
could utilize e
h quality tena
on. Since the
g the City use
ly promotion
real estate o
nities
g and Promo
healthy busin
o require outs
However, sin
dining option
nto the area.
entions. The
nd then coord
nues.
c Developme
East
sity Drive eas
lso identified
ollege Station
as a restaura
d as significan
over the last
concentratio
y target the l
ome to the Co
vice hotel wit
one a $5 milli
ntially add an
perceived the
t and dining d
ery central loc
alth of this di
on were appa
enerally obse
onsultant team
economic dev
ants that wou
se spaces wo
e significant e
and coordina
owned by the
otion – Restau
nesses house
sized capital i
nce this corrid
s, increased m
This is partic
City of Colleg
dinate market
ent Master Pl
t of Texas Av
as a primary
n. Since the 1
nt row for Co
nt new develo
t decade.
n of more up
ocal post coll
ollege Station
th conference
ion dollar ren
additional 20
University Dr
district. Gene
cation in the
strict. Few ch
arent in this c
erved few cha
m did observe
velopment pro
uld further so
ould likely be
economic dev
ation. This r
private secto
urants and ot
d in facilities
investments.
dor contains a
marketing an
cularly true w
ge Station cou
ting this distr
an
enue and we
entertainme
1990’s this
ollege Station
opments were
pscale restaur
legiate marke
Hilton which
e facilities. Th
novation and
00 rooms to t
rive East to b
erally, positive
region are
hallenges tha
corridor.
allenges facin
e some signif
omotion mec
olidify the are
used by retai
velopment fun
ecommendat
or.
her establish
that are eith
These busin
a significant p
d promotion
when competi
uld focus on b
ict through th
st
ent
and
e
rants
et.
h is
he
plans
the
e a
e
at
ng this enterta
icant vacant r
chanisms to p
a as an enter
l or dining us
nding agreem
tion applies to
ments in this
er recent con
esses do not
portion of the
of this corrid
ng with other
branding the
he Conventio
Coll
ainment corri
retail space a
promote the b
rtainment and
ers, this analy
ments to attra
o real estate
corridor are
nstruction or
likely need C
e area’s adult
dor could attr
r metros for g
area as a nam
n and Visitor
ege Station, T
idor.
along the corr
backfilling of t
d dining
ysis is not
act users to th
owned by the
currently
are not old
City assistance
(i.e. post col
act additiona
group confere
med special
s Bureau and
Texas
38
ridor.
this
he
e City
e to
lege)
al
ences
48
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
39
Potential for Additional Entertainment Districts
The final question to be assessed regarding entertainment districts in College Station is whether or not
there is currently potential for additional entertainment districts beyond Northgate, Wolf Pen Creek,
and University Drive East.
Emerging and Planned Additional Entertainment Districts
The market is beginning to answer that question in the affirmative as a dining destination has begun to
develop along the SH 6 Bypass in the Post Oak Mall parking lot. Both BJ’s Brewhouse and Chuy’s have
located in this spot recently. The market will begin to answer that question to a further degree once the
Campus Pointe development by Midway Companies is brought on line. This large scale mixed use
development is to be similar in scope to City Centre in west Houston and will be located between the
core of the Northgate district to the west and the University Drive East district to the east. It is
anticipated that this development will feature dining and entertainment venues that will target the
currently underserved adult, young professional, and post collegiate markets.
Room for Additional Entertainment Districts?
Throughout this analysis process, individuals who spoke with the consultant team brought up the
question of whether fast growing south College Station is ready to be the location of a greater
concentration of dining and entertainment options. Neighborhood level centers and big box retail
developments at the intersections of the Bypass at Rock Prairie Road and at William D. Fitch Parkway
have experienced success. However, developers and real estate professionals that spoke with the
consultant team expressed that for the near term, at least, significant dining and entertainment users
were not pursuing space in South College Station. Instead, they were continuing to cluster in the
entertainment districts discussed in this report or elsewhere in the core of College Station along Texas
Avenue, University Drive, Harvey Road, or the SH 6 Bypass. One developer pointed to the slow
absorption of the new retail developments in Bryan along the SH 6 Bypass as a cautionary example of
how the College Station Bryan market is not yet large enough to justify second locations of
entertainment, dining, or retail businesses (other than grocery, discount, fast food, or drug stores)
beyond the current core locations on Texas Avenue, University Drive, or Harvey Road. Other real estate
professionals interviewed anticipate small scale “adult level” dining and entertainment to eventually be
built in South College Station. It is anticipated by these professionals that these will likely be locally
owned businesses as chains cluster further into the core of College Station.
In conclusion, this research has indicated to the consultant team that College Station is fortunate to
have a greater than typical volume of entertainment districts relative to its size. From an Economic
Development standpoint, the City would be well served to focus on current existing and planned
entertainment districts addressing challenges each may face (as suggested in this report) and increased
marketing and promotion of these assets. Ultimately, having quality entertainment districts adds to the
quality of life and will aid the City and the region in attracting and retaining businesses and sought after
employees.
49
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
40
Redevelopment Areas
The City of College Station, based on its recently updated Comprehensive Plan, has identified four areas
to examine for potential redevelopment efforts. These areas include:
• The intersection of George Bush Drive and FM 2154 (Wellborn Road)
• The Harvey Road corridor from Texas Avenue to SH 6
• Texas Avenue / Eastgate – University Avenue to Harvey Road
• Northgate
Northgate was examined as an entertainment district in the previous section and is therefore not
covered by a conceptual redevelopment analysis in this section. The “Future Land Use and Character”
map in the Comprehensive Plan identifies the specific locations of the potential redevelopment areas.
Two general concerns surfaced during research that apply to City‐backed redevelopment efforts:
• There is concern that creating incentives for specific areas of the City might create an unequal
playing field that favors redevelopment area property owners over property owners and
developers in other areas.
• While most in the development and construction businesses stated that College Station’s
planning and permitting processes have improved in recent years (and are relatively tolerable
compared to a place such as Austin), they still find room for further progress. The perception of
the City’s difficult development process was confirmed in the survey of businesses described
elsewhere in this report. Furthermore, architectural and landscape requirements are seen by
many as unnecessary and, due to added costs, deleterious to project feasibility. In
redevelopment, which is already generally more difficult and costly than greenfield
development, these added costs may have even greater negative impact.
Intersection of George Bush Drive and FM 2154
This potential redevelopment area is located directly across George Bush Drive from the Texas A&M
University campus. This location has excellent access to the main campus east of FM 2154, the west
campus, and prime destination athletic facilities such as Kyle Field and Reed Arena. This access, plus its
regional accessibility via FM 2154 and George Bush Drive, provides a main value driver for this area.
However, development intensity is limited: there is one significant multifamily property, a few small
commercial properties principally along George Bush Drive, a church, and single family homes taking up
most of the remainder.
Most single family properties in this area are reportedly rented to students, and are of varying ages and
states of condition. The existing retail is also heavily oriented toward students. There are two food
service establishments, one of which is fast food. Two gas station / convenience stores take advantage
of drive‐by traffic.
City staff reports that the intersection of George Bush Drive and FM 2154 will become grade‐separated
and also receive other capacity enhancements. While grade separations usually improve some aspects
of regional mobility, they can have negative impacts on mobility and access at the level of the
immediately adjacent uses. The impact for some types of retail uses can be particularly damaging, as
50
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
41
the vehicular traffic they once counted on for exposure and competitive advantage now effectively
bypasses them.
The prospect of major changes in transportation access and the aging, relatively low‐value nature of the
existing commercial properties make this a logical location for potential redevelopment into uses that
can take better economic advantage of their location and context. Initial consideration on the future of
this redevelopment area was made during the process that created the Southside Area Neighborhood
Plan (adopted September 2012). The redevelopment concept envisions an intensification of land use,
including denser residential, game‐day residential, mixed‐use and neighborhood commercial, and
hotels.
Market Opportunities
The proximity to the heart of the Texas A&M University campus, even walking distance for some
destinations, makes the location attractive to anyone who does not want to have to deal with the traffic
congestion and costly parking which are part of weekday automobile commuting.
• The area is within walking distance of the primary athletic performance facilities, making it
appealing as a place for visitors to stay on game days.
• The two major thoroughfares bordering the area provide good transportation access from the
overall region, and it is a central location for the overall metropolitan area.
• A highly desirable residential area of single family homes is nearby to the northeast.
• A dense concentration of student residential population lies immediately to the south across FM
2154.
• The low‐intensity and small‐scale nature of the existing structures makes the prospect of
demolition relatively low‐cost.
• Uses that are more destinations unto themselves and do not require casual, drive‐by visibility
and access, and that would desire a location close to the Texas A&M University campus, could
find this an appropriate location.
Market Challenges
• The changes to the bordering thoroughfares, including both grade separation and access
management will likely decrease visibility and automobile accessibility to the commercial
properties fronting George Bush Drive and FM 2154. This will make those sites less viable for
convenience and some other types of retail uses that depend on a market area greater than the
immediate neighborhood.
• Due to general street patterns on campus and to the west (plus the railroad corridor), even
potential retail customers very close by but across George Bush Drive (daytime campus
population) or FM 2154 (student residents) could find the commercial properties inconvenient
depending on how much the improvements impact both vehicular and pedestrian access.
• Impairment to walking or biking access by the thoroughfare improvements would diminish the
appeal for student housing and / or game day transient residential, with particular appeal to
those who wish to walk or bike onto campus.
51
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
42
• Relatively small parcels make redevelopment into any uses of greater scale than what exists
now difficult. Property assembly would be required for many uses, such as a multifamily
student housing complex.
• Despite a being a central location for the overall region’s population, it is actually at the “fringe”
for “community”‐level retail uses – uses that require a middle‐class population more than
10,000 but less than 50,000. The residential population density to the west is very low.
University Avenue between the campus and SH 6 and Texas Avenue through College Station are
located much more centrally to a large adjacent mass of middle class households and hence
have become anchor corridors for retail. The George Bush Drive – FM 2154 intersection would
be somewhat “pioneering,” i.e., risky, for significant retail investment.
• Some potential home buyers may find a neighborhood dominated by student rentals as
undesirable, limiting the potential single family residential investment market in terms of total
demand and price levels.
Recommendations for Future Study
The City should examine the following issues to reasonably address challenges and maximize economic
opportunities for redevelopment in the George Bush Drive – FM 2154 area:
• Examine how altering the second‐level street grid near the planned grade separation could
improve access for commercial businesses and improve the chances of retaining a neighborhood
retail area. Internal through streets with connections to FM 2154 and George Bush Drive,
allowing left turns from those thoroughfares, might offer more appealing access.
• Consider how applying existing building codes for single family residential can mitigate the
negative impacts that student renters might have on neighborhood condition, so that the pool
of home buyers looking for an owner‐occupied home can be widened.
• Consider the extent to which the City would be willing to incentivize redevelopment in this area.
The land assembly issue is the main barrier to many types of potentially intensified
development, and municipal action to assemble larger parcels may be necessary if
redevelopment beyond individual single family homes is desired. Implementing a TIRZ or
Chapter 380 policy for this area, particularly the thoroughfare frontages, might accelerate
development interest and encourage more intensive uses.
Conclusions Regarding Comprehensive Plan
Student housing and game‐day residential uses should be viable in this redevelopment area, though
assistance with land assembly may be required to provide those uses at a more intensive level. Ensuring
good pedestrian, bicycle, and transit access to the campus after the intersection improvements will aid
in the marketability of those uses. Other commercial uses, especially those dependent upon drive‐by
traffic and access, will likely be less viable unless other street grid adjustments are made.
Harvey Road
The potential redevelopment area along the Harvey Road corridor includes one of the major gateways
into the heart of College Station from the SH 6 bypass (Earl Rudder freeway). It is marked by a mix of
retail and multifamily uses. The Post Oak Mall, the City’s largest sales tax generator, is in this corridor at
52
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
43
the intersection with SH 6. Most of the City’s designated potential redevelopment area is on the north
side of Harvey, with the exception of the mall.
It is the north side of Harvey Road that accommodates the bulk of the multifamily complexes, stretching
a long block length north to the parallel street of University Oaks. Generally these complexes date as far
back as the late 1960s and early 1970s, when enrollment was surging at Texas A&M. Since then they
have focused on housing students. These properties are usually a maximum of two stories.
The Post Oak Mall dates from the early 1980s and is undergoing upgrades for the first time in its history.
It has suffered challenges of anchor stores which have vacated due to their occupant going out of
business, but it not doing badly. Adding dining establishments on pad sites near SH 6 have had the
effect of adding new anchors which draw business to the property.
Smaller aging commercial properties are also scattered along the north side of Harvey Road. Some are
purely convenience‐oriented. A large retail structure that formerly housed Circuit City has been re‐
occupied with a Guitar Center. A larger community‐level shopping center at the corner of Harvey Road
and Texas Avenue is anchored by a Kohl’s department store. The center has undergone physical
updates and significant re‐tenanting in the last decade; it was formerly a grocery‐anchored center.
Some commercial properties represent physical and site designs that are no longer current. The center
at the southwest corner of Munson Avenue and Harvey Road contains office space fronted by retail
space. Other retail properties are less‐than‐optimally oriented to adjacent streets, leading to tenant
fronts that can be difficult to see.
The comprehensive plan envisions this area as redeveloping to a more urban, vertical mixed‐use
character.
Market Opportunities
• Harvey Road is an established commercial corridor in the central part of the metro region
surrounded by a large population that can support commercial activity. It has a retail anchor in
the mall.
• Retail properties with obsolescent or poorly configured designs may have difficulty competing
for standard tenants. In addition, as they deteriorate physically due to age, property owners
may not find re‐investment in these structures to be worthwhile. Therefore, such properties
could be appealing for redevelopment.
• The rapid growth of newer student‐oriented multifamily developments in College Station and
Bryan means that older properties such as those along Harvey Road may become less appealing.
Declining demand may lead property owners to consider redevelopment.
• Redevelopment into new student housing is a possibility, as this area is already accepted in such
use.
• Many properties are on larger parcels, which are more flexible for redevelopment and more
attractive to potential developers.
• The corridor contains one park (Oaks Park), is close to other neighborhood parks, and is situated
adjacent to the Wolf Pen Creek community park with its entertainment facilities.
53
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
44
Market Challenges
• The Harvey Road corridor is student‐dominated. Fraternity and sorority houses are present just
to the north. Even single family and duplex neighborhoods adjacent to the north are heavily
dominated by student rentals, especially the older and smaller homes. This limits the ability of
redevelopment in the corridor to re‐orient itself toward adult residents and consumers.
• While student demand for the multifamily units may decrease as those properties lose
competitiveness, property owners may turn to other sources of demand, such as lower income
permanent residents of the area. It is possible that the cash flow from this type of demand
strategy may be sufficient to generate satisfactory returns for existing or potential property
owners, though it may not be enough to justify re‐investment in the physical structures, which
risks accelerating deterioration.
• Retail activity has shifted to University Drive and Texas Avenue since the 1980s, and there is
already a great deal of retail space inventory close by (if not on Harvey Road itself). There may
not be sufficient support for mixed‐use redevelopment that was driven by retail uses.
• The mall, plus other retail centers with significant soft‐goods and comparison‐goods
components, is at long‐run risk from changing retail models and the Internet in particular. If for
whatever reason the mall declined to the point where repositioning was required, it could be
difficult to find a large enough user or set of users to take over the site. A similar statement can
be made for any large‐format retail space.
• The existing public street pattern is not conducive to a fine‐grained urban mixed‐use experience.
Redevelopment toward this goal could entail significant investments in the creation of an
improved street network.
Recommendations for Future Study
Analyze the potential market demand for the existing multifamily in light of the increasing supply of
newer student‐oriented housing and the overall growing population of low and moderate income levels
in the metro area. Compare to the potential market support for redevelopment into new multifamily
residential or other residential product types that could appeal to a wider range of consumers.
• After examining market demand, perform a financial analysis to determine the potential returns
from leaving the multifamily stock as‐is versus redevelopment into new residential use (at either
lower or higher densities, oriented to students or oriented to other adult residents).
• Examine the retail demand and retail inventory in the corridor to determine if demand is
sufficient to support existing supply and what should be the preferred types of retail space users
in the corridor.
• If the previous two analyses show potential for significant changes and repositioning, perform a
conceptual planning exercise to envision what public infrastructure changes, such as a densified
street grid, could be necessary to accomplish a redevelopment into urban mixed‐use. The
investments in public infrastructure may lead to consideration of the use of a TIRZ or Chapter
380 agreements in order to encourage developers to be the parties that actually pay for the
infrastructure, to be reimbursed later.
54
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
45
Conclusions Regarding Comprehensive Plan
Redevelopment of existing multifamily and lower‐value commercial properties will only happen if it
appears financially rewarding to property owners, developers and investors. Such redevelopment is
likely to be based on residential uses, not commercial, as adding large‐scale commercial uses to this area
would be unwise given competition from existing retail properties and lack of office demand. A
redevelopment incentive program, especially to trend the area in a direction of more urban physical
form, may be necessary to spur such investment. More intensive market and financial study is
particularly needed in this area to determine if redevelopment is realistic.
Texas Avenue/Eastgate
The third potential redevelopment area stretches along the Texas Avenue from the intersection with
Harvey Road to the intersection with University Drive (SH 60). Most of the area under consideration is
on the east side of Texas Avenue except for areas around the intersections of Harvey Road and
University Drive. This is largely because the Texas A&M University campus occupies the entirety of the
property on the west frontage between George Bush Drive and University Drive.
Various types of retail and commercial uses dominate the potential redevelopment area, although some
multifamily and single family structures are also present. The College Station municipal buildings occupy
a site directly across from the Texas A&M University Golf Course, though they do not utilize their entire
property. The redevelopment area in the central section of the corridor, including the municipal
buildings, consists of a relatively narrow strip which buffers Texas Avenue from an adjacent single family
neighborhood. At the intersection with Walton Drive is an area known as Eastgate with curving strips of
commercial properties facing a primary entrance to the heart of the Texas A&M University campus.
The commercial properties are of widely ranging age. Older structures housing mostly independent
businesses and non‐upscale services sit among newer buildings, generally configured as strip centers
and pad sites with national retail chains. Interspersed among and behind the retail structures are small
office / professional buildings primarily from the 1970s and 1980s plus a few value‐oriented hotels.
Interestingly, the large retail centers around the Harvey Road intersection have experienced
reinvestment in their physical facilities; in the case of Redmond Terrace, this actually constituted full‐
scale redevelopment although the base retail use did not change (new tenants were national chains as
opposed to the previous local independent businesses).
The residential uses are not high‐end; older apartment complexes and low‐value single family detached
structures dominate.
The northwest corner of Texas Avenue and University Drive is notable for as the site of the former Plaza
Hotel high‐rise, now demolished. Future use of the site is uncertain. Immediately adjacent to the west
of the Plaza site are two notable redevelopment projects:
• The Texas A&M University international student housing area, owned by the University, is set
for redevelopment through a partnership with Midway Companies of Houston called Campus
Pointe. Midway envisions a major mixed‐use project themed similarly to the massive City
Centre development in West Houston, including a first class hotel, retail, office, and multifamily
residential, though the exact land use mix is still being determined. It could include a public use
component as well. Midway expects Campus Pointe to fill a role akin to City Centre in that it will
55
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
46
be a destination unto itself that appeal to a wide demographic, not just students. The company
hopes to bring specialty retail and dining to Campus Pointe that is not yet present in the College
Station ‐ Bryan market. Midway reports that development of the non‐University components of
the project should begin within the next two to three years.
• The Culpepper Plaza retail center at the corner of College Avenue and University Drive is
redeveloping portions of the retail center and vacant land into a multi‐story student housing
complex named The Stack.
Market Opportunities
• The intersection of Texas Avenue and University Drive is the “Main and Main” corner of the
entire metro area, with high traffic counts and an easy‐to‐get‐to location. Although one corner
is inactive due to being part of the Texas A&M University campus, the other three corners have
commercial and mixed‐use development potential that is almost completely unrealized at
present.
• The two ends of this portion of Texas Avenue are connected to thoroughfare segments
(University Drive east and Texas Avenue south) where commercial development, particularly
retail, is established and successful. Thus this area would not be seen as “pioneering” but
merely an extension of the preferred commercial districts.
• Some properties are sizable enough to attract the attention of a wide range of commercial
developers. This is important given that commercial rents in College Station may not be
sufficient to justify structured parking, necessitating surface parking fields which take up more
land. The City of College Station’s property of over 6 acres could be an attractive site if the City
chose to relocate its offices.
• The proximity to the Texas A&M University campus makes this area attractive for student
housing.
Market Challenges
• Many properties are small‐ to medium‐sized, limiting their redevelopment potential without a
burdensome land assembly effort. Redevelopment at this scale could result in a series of
isolated retail or commercial buildings surrounded by parking.
• The office market in the College Station area is weak, so building new office space is not likely to
be an attractive investment except for a single tenant project (build to suit).
• The access management measures (medians) in place on Texas Avenue can discourage some
retail users who prefer left turn access into their project.
• The redevelopment activity at Campus Pointe, while potentially drawing traffic and interest to
the area over the long run, may soak up a large share of potential redevelopment demand in the
near term, especially for more intensive uses.
• As with Harvey Road, this area will tend to be student‐dominated in terms of residential uses.
Non‐student residents may prefer locations with a broader demographic base or the more
thoroughly planned environment that is likely to occur at Campus Pointe. Furthermore,
although attractive homes for middle class residents are present to a limited extent in
neighborhoods to the northeast, the single family homes in immediately adjacent residential
56
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
47
streets are not of the distinctive upscale character that can be found in the Southside
neighborhood, potentially drawing interest in tear‐downs.
Recommendations for Future Study
• Once plans for Campus Pointe and the Plaza Hotel site become more firm, analyze and project
the impact that these projects are likely to have on the surrounding area, particularly the extent
to which they will absorb demand that could have been used to spur redevelopment along
Texas Avenue.
• Investigate the potential for the City of College Station to relocate its municipal offices to
another site that better leverages its activity‐generating role and could open up the existing
property as a reasonably‐sized redevelopment opportunity.
• If more intensive and attractive mixed‐use redevelopment along Texas Avenue is desired by the
City, examine concepts which could facilitate a more cohesive urban district that can coexist
with the access management measures and avoid excessive and intrusive surface parking lots.
This may require modifications to parking codes and a collective or public effort to create a
consolidated parking concept. This could also facilitate development of the smaller parcels if
they are not required to accommodate all parking on site.
Conclusions Regarding Comprehensive Plan
As with the other two redevelopment areas, redevelopment into more intensive uses of an urban nature
would likely focus on residential, especially student housing. Similarly to the FM 2154 and George Bush
Drive area, City assistance with land assembly may be needed to make more intensive projects doable.
The nearby Campus Pointe project will be a strong competitor in the near term for urban mixed‐use
investment, which would likely delay more upscale commercial uses along Texas Avenue. An alternative
parking strategy may be needed to facilitate more intensive development, especially in areas of smaller
property parcels.
57
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
48
Appendix I: List of Interviewees
The following persons were interviewed for this Phase Two report, in addition to those interviewed during
the Phase I research.
• Wade Barkman – The Republic 1836
• Bobby Bisor – Texas A&M University
• Jim Casey – Trammell Crow Houston
• Barron Hobbs – Hilton College Station
• Jason Jennings – Scott & White
• James Lancaster – RVF
• Jenny Ligon – Texas A&M University
• Shon Link – Midway Companies
• Ben Morpurgo – TIGM
• Michael Parks – Brazos Valley Council of Governments
• Judge Duane Peters – Brazos County
• Ted Raspiller – Blinn College
• Jamie Rhodes – Texas Angel Network
• David Scamardo – DWS Development
• Chris Scotti – Northgate District Association
• Bill Vaughan – Vaughan Construction
• Andy Weiner – Weiner Development
• Tom Wilkinson – Brazos Valley Council of Governments
58
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
49
Appendix II: Business Survey Report
(Attached in a separate report)
59
Phase Two – Economic Development Master Plan College Station, Texas
50
CDS | Spillette
1001 South Dairy Ashford Suite 450
Houston, Texas 77077
713‐ 465‐8866
www.cdsspillette.com
Avalanche Consulting
101 West 6th Street, Suite 612
Austin, Texas 78701
512‐472‐1555
www.avalancheconsulting.com
60
October 2012 Appendix I: Business Survey Report September 2012 College Station, Texas 61
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas i Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................................................... i Table of Exhibits................................................................................................................................................................................... iii Survey Responses ................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Q1–Qualification for the Survey .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Q2–Position in the Company ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Q3–Organization Description .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Q4–Where is the Business or Institution? ............................................................................................................................................................ 3 Q5–How Long in College Station Area? ............................................................................................................................................................... 4 Q6–What industry Sector? .................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Q7–Q9- Size of Business ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Q10–Market Area Covered? ................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Q11–Reasons for Location in College Station? ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 Q12–How many new employees ......................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Q13–Where do you recruit workers? .................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Q14–How Difficult to Hire and Retain Employees? .............................................................................................................................................. 9 Q15–Reasons for Difficulty in Hiring and Retaining? ............................................................................................................................................ 9 Q16–Skills That Need Improvement? .................................................................................................................................................................10 Q17–Grading Economic Performance? ...............................................................................................................................................................12 Q18–Expectations of Growth? ...........................................................................................................................................................................12 Q19–Attracting Businesses? ...............................................................................................................................................................................13 Q20–Transportation Infrastructure? ..................................................................................................................................................................14 Q21–How is City Perceived as a Place for Business? ...........................................................................................................................................15 62
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas ii Q22, Q23–What are the Community’s Greatest Strengths and Weaknesses? .....................................................................................................16 Q24, Q25–Preferred Industry and Retail Sectors for Expansion?.........................................................................................................................17 Q26–Should City be Proactive in Attracting Commercial/Industrial Development? .............................................................................................18 Q27–How Should the City be Proactive in Attracting Commercial/Industrial Development? ...............................................................................19 Q28 –Should the City be Proactive in Attracting Retail Development? ................................................................................................................20 Q29–How Should the City be Proactive in Attracting Retail Development? .........................................................................................................21 Q30–Are you Planning to Expand in College Station? .........................................................................................................................................22 Q31–Why are You not Expanding College Station? .............................................................................................................................................22 Q31–Verbatim “Other” Reponses ......................................................................................................................................................................23 Q32–What can College Station do to Become More Competitive? .....................................................................................................................24 Q33–What is the Top Reason for a Business to Locate in College Station? ..........................................................................................................25 Q34–What Should be the Economic Development Goals for College Station? ....................................................................................................27 Q35–What is the Most Important Marketing Effort for the City of College Station? ............................................................................................31 Q36-What One Word Should be Used for Marketing College Station? ................................................................................................................32 Survey Questionnaire ......................................................................................................................................................................... 33 63
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas iii Table of Exhibits Qualifying Question .............................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Position in the Company ....................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Headquarters and Other Location ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Location in College Station/Bryan Area ................................................................................................................................................ 3 Tenure in College Station Area ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Industry Sector of Respondents ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 Business Revenue ................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Number of Employees .......................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Geographic Market Area ....................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Reasons for Location in College Station/Bryan Area............................................................................................................................. 7 Recent Employees Hired ....................................................................................................................................................................... 8 From Where are Staff Recruited ........................................................................................................................................................... 8 Hiring and Retaining Employees ........................................................................................................................................................... 9 Reasons for Difficulty in Hiring and Retaining Employees .................................................................................................................... 9 Top Skills That Employees Need to Improve ....................................................................................................................................... 10 Grading Economic Performance ......................................................................................................................................................... 12 Expectations of Growth ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Attracting Business Operations .......................................................................................................................................................... 13 Adequacy of Transportation Facilities ................................................................................................................................................ 14 64
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas iv Perception of Place to Do Business ..................................................................................................................................................... 15 College Station’s Greatest Strengths................................................................................................................................................... 16 College Station’s Greatest Weaknesses .............................................................................................................................................. 16 Preferred Industry Sector for Expansion ............................................................................................................................................. 17 Preferred Retail Business for Expansion ............................................................................................................................................. 17 Proactive Incentives for Commercial/Industrial Development ........................................................................................................... 18 Preferred Incentives for Commercial/Industrial Development ........................................................................................................... 19 Proactive Incentives for Retail Development...................................................................................................................................... 20 Preferred Incentives for Retail Development ..................................................................................................................................... 21 Planning Expansion ............................................................................................................................................................................. 22 Reasons for Location in College Station/Bryan Area........................................................................................................................... 22 Preferred City Efforts for Business Competitiveness .......................................................................................................................... 24 Preferred City Marketing Efforts ......................................................................................................................................................... 31 65
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 2 Qualifying Question Yes, 78.5%No, 21.5%Do you own or serve in an upper management Do you own or serve in an upper management Do you own or serve in an upper management Do you own or serve in an upper management capacity at a business or institution in the capacity at a business or institution in the capacity at a business or institution in the capacity at a business or institution in the College Station / Bryan area?College Station / Bryan area?College Station / Bryan area?College Station / Bryan area?Position in the Company Business owner / Chairman / CEO, 61.2%CEO, not owner, 4.1%Chief Financial Officer (CFO), 1.0%Top manager 19.4%Other upper management14.3%What is your position in the organization?What is your position in the organization?What is your position in the organization?What is your position in the organization?Survey Responses Q1–Qualification for the Survey The focus of this survey was to gauge the attitudes and preferences of the top business decision-makers in the College Station area. Therefore the first question asked them to declare that they were the owner or top manager of a business or institution. • A total of 135 persons began the survey • 21.5% (29) of the respondents were not owners or top managers and were not surveyed further. • 78.5% (106) were owners or top managers and continued the survey Q2–Position in the Company In Question 2, the respondents were asked their position within the company or institution. • Almost two-thirds of the respondents were owners or Chief Executive Officers (CEO); • 20% were top managers; and • 14.3% had other upper management positions. 66
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 3 Headquarters and Other Location Headquarters location with offices in other locations, 19.4%Headquarters location, No offices in other locations, 60.2%Our headquarters is located elsewhere, 20.4%Describe your organizationDescribe your organizationDescribe your organizationDescribe your organizationLocation in College Station/Bryan Area Within the City of College Station only, 44.9%Locations within and outside of College Station, 32.7%In Brazos County outside the City of College Station only, 21.4%In another county outside of Brazos County only, 1.0%Where are your local operations located?Where are your local operations located?Where are your local operations located?Where are your local operations located?Q3–Organization Description In Question 3, the respondents were asked about the nature of their local operation. • Almost 80% of the respondents stated that their local office was the headquarters location for the business or institution and • 60.2% of those had no other locations. Q4–Where is the Business or Institution? In Question 4, the respondents were asked about the location of their local operation. • More than three out of four respondents’ businesses were located in College Station (77.6%); • The bulk of the remainder (21.4%) were located within Brazos County, outside of College Station and • Only 1% were outside of Brazos County. 67
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 4 Tenure in College Station Area Fewer than 2 years, 9.5%2 - 5 years, 19.0%6 - 10 years, 14.3%11 - 25 years, 31.0%More than 25 years, 25.0%Don't know/no answer, 1.2%How long has your organization been located in the How long has your organization been located in the How long has your organization been located in the How long has your organization been located in the College Station / Bryan area?College Station / Bryan area?College Station / Bryan area?College Station / Bryan area?Q5–How Long in College Station Area? In Question 5, the respondents were asked about the length of time that the business has been located in the area. • The respondents represented a good mix of tenure; • Over half (56%)of the respondents’ businesses have been located in the area 10 years or more; • One-fourth have been operating in the area for more than 25 years; and • 9.5% are new to the area (less than 2 years). 68
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 5 Industry Sector of Respondents % of survey responses compared with Brazos County establishments from County Business Patterns 2010 County %. Survey % Mining, logging, and construction 11.4% 3.6% Manufacturing 2.5% 2.4% Wholesale trade 3.6% 1.2% Retail trade 16.7% 10.7% Transportation, warehousing, and utilities 2.0% 1.2% Information (journalism, media and entertainment, telecommunications) 1.8% 6.0% Financial activities 12.0% 9.5% Professional and business services 16.5% 17.9% Educational and health services 12.1% 3.6% Leisure and hospitality 11.6% 8.3% Other services 9.2% 6.0% Government n/a 1.2% Nonprofits and charities (not included above) n/a 4.8% Other (please specify) n/a 23.8% Q6–What industry Sector? In Question 6, the respondents were asked “In what industry is your organization? [Please select the one sector that most closely fits your business].” The respondents represent a broad cross section of the business sectors in the area: • When compared to the actual 2010 count of Brazos County establishments from the Census, only “Education and Health Services”, “Retail Trade” and “Mining, logging and construction” seem to be underrepresented. • The “Other” category was selected by 23/8% of the respondents who could not select one of the categories above for their business. Following is a list of the descriptions those respondents used in the “Other” category to describe their business. Real Estate & Multifamily, Real Estate Brokerage and Development (4) Oil Industry Service Company & Laboratory Computer software Business Technology Integration (3) Hair salon Insurance agency (2) Pet services Restaurant (2) Property Management Builder Supply Title insurance agency Daycare Center Tourism/Hotel Engineering / Manufacturing 69
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 6 Business Revenue 0 - $500K, 26.2%$500K - $1 million, 9.5%$1 million - $5 million, 19.0%$5 million -$20 million, 13.1%$20 million -$50 million, 6.0%More than $50 million, 6.0%Confidential / no answer, 20.2%What is your approximate annual gross revenue?What is your approximate annual gross revenue?What is your approximate annual gross revenue?What is your approximate annual gross revenue?Number of Employees Question 8Question 8Question 8Question 8 Question 9Question 9Question 9Question 9 Number of Employees Inside the U.S. In CS/B Area Fewer than 25 54.8% 56.0% 25 to 99 14.3% 13.1% 100 to 499 13.1% 17.9% 500 to 999 1.2% 10.7% 1,000 or more 14.3% 1.2% No answer / don't know 2.4% 1.2% Q7–Q9- Size of Business In Question 7, the respondents were asked their annual gross revenue. • The respondents represent a broad cross section of the business sizes from very small (less than $500,000 annual gross revenue) to the large (more than $20 million annually). In Question 8, the respondents were asked “How many people are employed by your organization inside the U.S.? “ In Question 9, the respondents were asked “How many people are employed by your organization in the College Station / Bryan area?” The results for those two questions are show in the box on the bottom right • More than half of the respondents reported that they represented small operations within the College Station/Bryan area • Within Brazos County, according to the U.S. Census, County Business Patterns, 83.8% of the establishments had 19 or fewer employees; • Therefore the respondents to this survey, while significantly including small operations, represented a higher proportion of large businesses than would be expected in Brazos County. 70
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 7 Geographic Market Area The neighborhood immediately around the organization location, 16.7%Most or all of the College Station / Bryan urban area, 26.2%All of Brazos County (urban and rural), 23.8%Brazos County and surrounding counties, 47.6%All of Texas, 16.7%The U.S. beyond Texas, 14.3%U.S. and International, 25.0%Over how wide a market area does your organization in the College Over how wide a market area does your organization in the College Over how wide a market area does your organization in the College Over how wide a market area does your organization in the College Station / Bryan area serve customers or clients? Pick all that apply.Station / Bryan area serve customers or clients? Pick all that apply.Station / Bryan area serve customers or clients? Pick all that apply.Station / Bryan area serve customers or clients? Pick all that apply.Reasons for Location in College Station/Bryan Area Premier location for my industry, 31.5%Proximity to customers, 47.9%Low business costs, 17.8%Available tax incentives, 4.1%Lifestyle & amenities, 41.1%Historical location, 21.9%Available workforce, 19.2%Proximity to research, 6.8%Proximity to vendors / suppliers, 2.7%Please choose the top three reasons that your organization is Please choose the top three reasons that your organization is Please choose the top three reasons that your organization is Please choose the top three reasons that your organization is located in the College Station / Bryan area?located in the College Station / Bryan area?located in the College Station / Bryan area?located in the College Station / Bryan area?Q10–Market Area Covered? In Question 10, the respondents were asked “Over how wide a market area does your organization in the College Station / Bryan area serve customers or clients?” They were allowed to select more than one geographic market. • Almost half were focused primarily on the College Station/Bryan region • Fewer than half of the respondents indicated they serve customers outside Texas Q11–Reasons for Location in College Station? In Question 11, the respondents were asked the top reasons why they are located in the College Station area. • The most often mentioned reason was “Proximity to Customers” with almost one half of the mentions; • “Lifestyle and Amenities” was second most mentioned reason – suggesting that College Station has positive lifestyle attributes attractive to business; and • Incentives were the least mentioned reason for being in College Station. • Firms with a location within the City of College Station differed from the overall sample in that they more frequently cited “Premier location for my industry” (38.9%) and “Proximity to customers” (55.6%). They were less likely to cite “Low business costs” (13.0%). • Respondents whose businesses serve customers outside Texas were more likely to cite “Lifestyle and Amenities” (58.3%). 71
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 8 Recent Employees Hired None, 15.5%1 to 9, 61.9%10 to 25, 11.9%26 to 50, 7.1%No answer / don't know, 3.6%How many employees did you hire in in the last 12 months in How many employees did you hire in in the last 12 months in How many employees did you hire in in the last 12 months in How many employees did you hire in in the last 12 months in the College Station / Bryan area?the College Station / Bryan area?the College Station / Bryan area?the College Station / Bryan area?From Where are Staff Recruited Executive and Upper Management Staff Middle Management and General Staff Enrolled college students living in College Station and Bryan 6.3% 18.8% Newly graduated college students in College Station and Bryan 5.1% 10.0% Permanent residents of College Station and Bryan 59.5% 55.0% Residents of rural areas and other towns near College Station and Bryan 3.8% 3.8% Other areas of Texas 19.0% 5.0% Rest of U.S. outside of Texas 3.8% 5.0% Outside the U.S. 2.5% 2.5% Q12–How many new employees In Question 12, the respondents were asked , “How many employees did you hire in the last 12 months in the College Station/Bryan Area?” • A surprising 80% of those who responded to this question hired employees in the past year; • 18% hired more than 9 employees; Q13–Where do you recruit workers? In Question 13, the respondents were asked “From where do you obtain the bulk of your executive and upper management staff?” The question asked for the recruitment location of both Executive and Upper Management as well as Middle Management and General Staff. • In both cases over one half of the total responding businesses rely on local permanent residents for new employees; the figure is lower for businesses with locations in College Station (48.4%). • For Executive and Upper Management, one in four companies recruits outside of the College Station/Bryan area. • For Middle Management and General staff, almost 30% of the companies recruit from Texas A&M. 72
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 9 Hiring and Retaining Employees NO, 58.3%YES, 41.7%From your experience, is it difficult to either: (a) attract From your experience, is it difficult to either: (a) attract From your experience, is it difficult to either: (a) attract From your experience, is it difficult to either: (a) attract desiredmployees to the College Station / Bryan area, desiredmployees to the College Station / Bryan area, desiredmployees to the College Station / Bryan area, desiredmployees to the College Station / Bryan area, or (b) retain existing employees in the College Station / or (b) retain existing employees in the College Station / or (b) retain existing employees in the College Station / or (b) retain existing employees in the College Station / Bryan area? Bryan area? Bryan area? Bryan area? Reasons for Difficulty in Hiring and Retaining Employees Answer OptionsAnswer OptionsAnswer OptionsAnswer Options Response Response Response Response PercentPercentPercentPercent The College Station / Bryan area does not offer enough social and recreational activities for young adults. 44.1% Employees want more local career advancement opportunities for themselves than what College Station / Bryan offers. 38.2% The College Station / Bryan area is too oriented toward college students. 38.2% My company or organization does not offer pay levels competitive with similar jobs in other metropolitan areas. 26.5% The spouses of employees want more local career advancement opportunities for themselves than what College Station/Bryan offers. 26.5% College Station / Bryan does not offer adequate commercial air service to other places. 23.5% Employees and their families prefer the shopping, services, and amenities of a larger metropolitan area. 17.6% College Station / Bryan does not offer the right kinds of housing types or neighborhood environments. 8.8% Q14–How Difficult to Hire and Retain Employees? In Question 14, the respondents were asked, “From your experience, is it difficult to either: (a) attract desired employees to the College Station / Bryan area, or (b) retain existing employees in the College Station / Bryan area? In other words, do you find the existing or potential employees are more likely to prefer living and working in other metropolitan areas?” • A majority of the firms expressed no problem in attracting employees and • However, more than two out of five respondents did express difficulty in hiring or retaining employees. Over half of respondents whose businesses sold to customers outside Texas (53.6%) gave this answer. Q15–Reasons for Difficulty in Hiring and Retaining? In Question 15, the respondents who answered Question 14 as YES were asked the top reasons why they are having difficulty hiring and 73
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 10 retaining employees. The table below presents the responses to the offered reasons. Respondents with business locations inside the City of College Station differed from the overall totals in some respects. They were more likely to cite lower pay levels (32.0%) and career advancement opportunities (44.0%) and less likely to cite career opportunities for spouses (16.0%). Five respondents listed “Other” reasons. They were: • No housing for young professionals • Employees complain the area is oriented too much toward families with children • Burn out because they went to school here. Also, the oppressive summer and fall heat • Too many small businesses. A&M does not outsource work that would attract businesses to serve A&M and CS • Our market does not pay the same as larger markets for the services we provide so employees have to make a lifestyle choice to take a job here. Less money for a better quality of life. Q16–Skills That Need Improvement? In Question 16, the respondents were asked what skills should be improved through the education and training of their employees in order to better serve their businesses. They were asked to list a “Top” needed skill, as well as a second “Next” needed skill and a third “Other” needed skill if they so chose. The answers given are listed in the table below: Top Skills That Employees Need to Improve Top Next Other Accounting/finance skills (2) Accounting bookkeeping better jobs attention to detail cash handling business acumen Availability to work at night Communication (4) Business Management bookkeeping Computer (2) cdl drivers Communication skills (2) critical thinking/ability to be open minded Chemists computer skills (7) Easily trained Clerical Credit skills English Language Communication (5) Critical thinking Ethical Computer skills (6) Customer Service (2) Financial Customer Service (4) desire for advancement Food Prep Driving/Driver's License desire to be a team player (2) General professional development Engineering focused in telecommunications Entrepreneurship Leadership Financial Analysis (3) Fallow orders Marketing skills general math Hospitality motivated general work skills for young adults Independent problem solving N/A (8) 74
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 11 Top Next Other honesty and integrity (2) Leadership (2) Network Administration Hospitality Machine Operation other technology skills how to work Management (4) Patience Industry specific training Marketing and communications (2) People skills leadership Maturity Physical Management Mental Positive attitude and willingness to be loyal and work hard Managerial Skills N/A (8) project management math skills office etiquette Respect Mechanical People skills Risk Management Medical Classes Sales presentation and speaking skills Sales skills more knowledge of insurance sales/marketing Skilled labor (2) N/A (12) social skills spanish language skills need to find associates to clean rooms and wash dishes Stamina willingness to put forth a diligent work effort (2) networking Techical Service (4) Work ethic (2) Not sure I understand this question? Weapons Handling Classes Outside Sales Web-based marketing People Skills Writing and interpersonal skills (2) Project management punctuality (2) resourcefulness Responsibility salesmanship Selling ability Social technical writing Texas Real Estate License To put up the phone and work Work ethic (3) writing (2) 75
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 12 Expectations of Growth Answer Options Increase Maintain Decrease Don't Know or Doesn't Apply Employment 51.4% 43.2% 2.7% 2.7% Capital investments in equipment or systems 41.1% 46.6% 1.4% 11.0% Office / manufacturing / research space occupied 29.6% 42.3% 1.4% 26.8% Sales volume 75.0% 20.8% 1.4% 2.8% Selling and/or inventory space occupied 31.5% 39.7% 1.4% 27.4% Grading Economic Performance A, 10.8%B, 59.5%C, 24.3%D, 5.4%Using the familiar grading system from school, how would you Using the familiar grading system from school, how would you Using the familiar grading system from school, how would you Using the familiar grading system from school, how would you grade the College Station / Bryan area's economic performance grade the College Station / Bryan area's economic performance grade the College Station / Bryan area's economic performance grade the College Station / Bryan area's economic performance over the past five years?over the past five years?over the past five years?over the past five years?Q17–Grading Economic Performance? In Question 17, the respondents were asked, “Using the familiar grading system from school, how would you grade the College Station / Bryan area's economic performance over the past five years?” • A significant majority graded the area’s economic performance over the past five years as a B, a grade that is often regarded as fair to above average. • Nearly one quarter of responding firms graded the area’s economic performance as a C, average or slightly below. • There were no F grades given out by any respondent. Q18–Expectations of Growth? In Question 18, the respondents were asked, “What are your expectations for growth of your organization in the College Station / Bryan area over the next five years?” • Very few respondents expect their businesses to shrink in the next five years. In 2 of the categories, a majority expect increases. 76
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 13 Attracting Business Operations Answer Options Highly suitable Suitable Neutral Unsuitable Highly unsuitable Corporate / US / regional HQ 12.3% 30.1% 26.0% 23.3% 8.2% Warehousing / distribution / logistics 14.9% 33.8% 31.1% 14.9% 5.4% Research & development 65.8% 23.3% 8.2% 1.4% 1.4% Manufacturing / assembly 10.8% 39.2% 31.1% 9.5% 9.5% Professional services 21.6% 48.6% 21.6% 6.8% 1.4% Sales / customer support / administrative support 24.7% 45.2% 24.7% 5.5% 0.0% Q19–Attracting Businesses? In Question 19, the respondents were asked, “In your opinion, how suitable is the College Station / Bryan area for attracting the following types of business operations? [Check one box for each row]” • Few respondents believe that the area is unsuitable for any type of business; • The lowest ranking of suitability was for a corporate headquarters; • Almost all of the respondents (89.1%) believe that the area is highly suitable for Research & Development operations; and • Majorities believe that the College Station / Bryan area is suitable or highly suitable for all answer options except for Corporate / US / regional HQ 77
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 14 Adequacy of Transportation Facilities Answer Options Very inadequate Inadequate Adequate More than adequate Don't know Commercial air travel 25.7% 41.9% 25.7% 2.7% 4.1% Private / general aviation 4.1% 12.2% 51.4% 9.5% 23.0% Freight rail 13.5% 8.1% 41.9% 12.2% 24.3% Regional highways 6.8% 24.3% 51.4% 16.2% 1.4% Local streets 5.4% 18.9% 51.4% 23.0% 1.4% Sidewalks and bikeways 12.2% 17.6% 29.7% 36.5% 4.1% Q20–Transportation Infrastructure? In Question 20, the respondents were asked, “What do you think of the College Station / Bryan area's various transportation system components with regard to the needs of businesses? Please rate the adequacy of each component's facilities and services. • Two out of three respondents (67.6%) believe that the area’s access to “Commercial Air Travel” is inadequate; • Similar majorities believe that most of the other transportation systems are adequate or more than adequate: o Private / general aviation – 60.9% o Regional highways – 67.6% o Local streets – 64.4% o Sidewalks and bikeways – 64.2% • Freight Rail managed to have a small majority (54.1%) who felt the systems were adequate with a large group 24.3% not having an opinion. • Respondents with business locations in the City of College Station were more likely to find sidewalk and bikeway infrastructure more than adequate (42.9%). • Respondents whose businesses serve customers outside Texas were more likely than others to report that the area’s regional highways are more than adequate (36.4%). 78
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 15 Perception of Place to Do Business Positively, 27.5%Neutral, 24.6%Negatively, 46.4%No Opinion/No Answer, 1.4%In your opinion, how is the City of College Station perceived In your opinion, how is the City of College Station perceived In your opinion, how is the City of College Station perceived In your opinion, how is the City of College Station perceived as a place to do business by local business leaders?as a place to do business by local business leaders?as a place to do business by local business leaders?as a place to do business by local business leaders? Q21–How is City Perceived as a Place for Business? In Question 21, the respondents were asked, “In your opinion, how is the City of College Station perceived as a place to do business by local business leaders? • Almost one-half (46.4%) of the respondents felt that local business leaders had a negative perception of College Station and • Only one in four (27.5%) considered the local business perception as positive. • These answers did not differ substantially based on whether the respondent had a business location within the City of College Station. 79
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 16 College Station’s Greatest Strengths 76.5%41.2%32.4%30.9%27.9%27.9%8.8%7.4%5.9%4.4%2.9%2.9%2.9%1.5%1.5%1.5%0.0%Colleges and universitiesCost of livingGrowing local economyRegional geographic locationLifestyle"Pre k" to12 schoolsWorkforce / talentSuitable and affordable commercial …Entrepreneurship mindsetBusiness climateDiversity of residentsCareeer / job opportunitiesNo answer / no opinionNatural environmentTransportation InfrastructureGovernment / political leadershipInternational presenceWhat do you consider the GREATEST COMPETITIVE STRENGTHS of the City of College Station? College Station’s Greatest Weaknesses 37.9%36.4%31.8%27.3%19.7%19.7%13.6%13.6%12.1%10.6%10.6%9.1%7.6%4.5%4.5%3.0%1.5%Transportation InfrastructureGovernment / political leadershipCareeer / job opportunitiesBusiness climateNatural environmentSuitable and affordable commercial …Regional geographic locationEntrepreneurship mindsetDiversity of residentsCost of livingNo answer / no opinionWorkforce / talentInternational presenceLifestyle"Pre k" to12 schoolsGrowing local economyColleges and universitiesWhat do you consider the GREATEST COMPETITIVE WEAKNESSES of the City of College Station? Q22, Q23–What are the Community’s Greatest Strengths and Weaknesses? In Question 22, the respondents were asked, “What do you consider the GREATEST COMPETITIVE STRENGTHS of the City of College Station? They were asked to check the top three strengths of the city. • Respondents with businesses serving customers outside Texas were more likely to cite “Cost of Living” (63.5%) and less likely to cite “Growing local economy” (9.1%). In Question 23, the respondents were asked, “What do you consider the GREATEST COMPETITIVE WEAKNESSES of the City of College Station?” They were asked to check the top three weaknesses. 80
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 17 Preferred Industry Sector for Expansion 47.8%43.5%37.7%34.8%33.3%30.4%27.5%24.6%24.6%21.7%21.7%15.9%14.5%14.5%10.1%10.1%7.2%7.2%4.3%Biosciences / life sciencesEnergySoftware / IT / telecommunicationsAviation / aerospaceHospitality / tourismProfessional servicesFilm & entertainmentHealthcare / hospitalSecurity / defense & militaryCreative / designDistribution & logisticsAgricultureFinancial servicesNonprofit / social servicesEducationGovernmentAutomotiveNo answer / no opinionPublic administration / governmentWhat industries would you like to see expand in the City of College Station? Preferred Retail Business for Expansion 40.6%37.7%34.8%29.0%23.2%21.7%21.7%15.9%13.0%10.1%7.2%1.4%Restaurants and nightspotsSpecialty grocery storesFull service hotelMuseum and cultural centersArts, crafts, and antiquesHigh end clothing and accessory …I have no preferenceBoutique apparel shopsFitness and physical recreationFurniture and appliancesDiscount general merchandise storesCopy, office supplies, and computersWhat retail businesses would you like to see expand in College Station? Q24, Q25–Preferred Industry and Retail Sectors for Expansion? In Question 24, the respondents were asked, “What industries would you like to see expand in the City of College Station?” They could select all industry sectors that they would like to see expand. Respondents with businesses in College Station were less likely to choose Biosciences / life sciences (41.2%) than the overall sample. In Question 25, the respondents were asked, “What retail businesses would you like to see expand in the City of College Station?” They could select all any retail business types that they would like to see expand. • Respondents with businesses serving customers outside Texas cited “Specialty Grocery Stores” (59.1%) more often. 81
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 18 Proactive Incentives for Commercial/Industrial Development Yes, actively work to encourage development, 42.0%Yes, but only high-paying jobs, 15.9%Yes, as long but only high-paying job and not heavy industry11.6%No, let the market decide, 29.0%No, limit development, 1.4%Should the City of College Station be proactive in Should the City of College Station be proactive in Should the City of College Station be proactive in Should the City of College Station be proactive in attracting office, research, and industrial attracting office, research, and industrial attracting office, research, and industrial attracting office, research, and industrial development?development?development?development?Q26–Should City be Proactive in Attracting Commercial/Industrial Development? In Question 26, the respondents were asked, “Should the City of College Station be proactive (via incentives, land use designations, special infrastructure investments, targeted marketing programs, etc.) in attracting office, research, and industrial development?” • A strong majority (69.5%) of the respondents favor proactive economic development by the City, and this response was even stronger (74.4%) for respondents with business locations within the City; • Of that positive group, 26.5% prefer that there be restrictions: o Only for high paying jobs (26.5%) o Excluding heavy manufacturing and warehousing (11.6%); • 30.4% of the respondents do not favor city incentives with the bulk of those (29.0%) preferring to let the market determine expansion (from Question 26). • Businesses serving customers outside Texas were both more likely to support incentives for all business types (59.1%) and less likely to prefer to let the market determine expansion (9.1%). • Only 1.4% of the business respondents want to limit new development. Full Text of Answer Options Yes, the City should actively work to encourage all types of office, research, and industrial development 42.0% Yes, as long as the uses offer primarily high-paying jobs 15.9% Yes, as long as the uses offer primarily high-paying jobs AND do not include "heavy" manufacturing or warehousing 11.6% No, the City should let the market decide 29.0% No, the City should work to limit office, research, and industrial development 1.4% 82
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 19 Preferred Incentives for Commercial/Industrial Development 70.2%63.8%61.7%57.4%17.0%Targeted recruitment and marketing programsFinancial incentivesSpecial infrastructure investmentsSpecial land use designations and planning areasCity-developed commercial real estate sitesIn what ways should the City be proactive?? Q27–How Should the City be Proactive in Attracting Commercial/Industrial Development? In Question 27, the respondents who were in favor of the City proactively involved in incentive to attract new commercial and industrial development were asked, “In what ways should the City be proactive?” They could choose any that they thought the City should use to attract commercial and industrial development. • The most popular City proactive initiative is “Targeted recruitment and marketing programs” with more than two out of the three respondents selecting this approach; • Strong support was evidenced for “Financial incentives,” “Special infrastructure investments,” and “Special land use designations and planning areas; • There is little support for “City developed commercial and real estate sites.” 83
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 20 Proactive Incentives for Retail Development Yes, actively encourage all types of retail, 35.3%Yes, but only for upscale retail stores, 11.8%No, let the market decide, 52.9%Should the City of College Station be proactive in Should the City of College Station be proactive in Should the City of College Station be proactive in Should the City of College Station be proactive in attracting additional retail development?attracting additional retail development?attracting additional retail development?attracting additional retail development?Q28 –Should the City be Proactive in Attracting Retail Development? In Question 28, the respondents who were in favor of the City proactively involved in incentive to attract new development were asked, “In what ways should the City be proactive?” They could choose any that they thought the City should use. • A majority of the respondents opposed incentives for retail development preferring to” let the market decide;” • 47.1% were in favor of incentive for new retail development and 11.8% of those were only in favor on the condition that it would be used only for upscale and “destination” retail; • None of the respondents expressed the opinion that the City has enough retail and incentive should not be used. FulFulFulFull Text of Answer Optionsl Text of Answer Optionsl Text of Answer Optionsl Text of Answer Options Yes, the City should actively encourage all types of retail development 35.3% Yes, but only for upscale or “destination” retail stores 11.8% No, the City should let the market decide 52.9% No, the City has enough retail space and should work to limit additional development 0.0% 84
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 21 Preferred Incentives for Retail Development 75.0%59.4%59.4%56.3%21.9%Targeted recruitment and marketing programsFinancial incentivesSpecial infrastructure investmentsSpecial land use designations and planning areasCity-developed commercial real estate sitesIn what ways should the City be proactive?? Q29–How Should the City be Proactive in Attracting Retail Development? In Question 29, the respondents the respondents who were in favor of the City proactively involved in incentive to attract new retail development were asked, “In what ways should the City be proactive?” They could choose any that they thought the City should use. • As with the commercial and industrial promotion, the most popular City proactive retail initiative is “Targeted recruitment and marketing programs” with more than two out of the three respondents selecting this approach; • Strong support was evidenced for “Financial incentives,” “Special infrastructure investments,” and “Special land use designations and planning areas; • There is little support for “City developed commercial and real estate sites.” 85
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 22 Planning Expansion Yes, 41.2%No, 58.8%Are you considering relocating to, expanding, or Are you considering relocating to, expanding, or Are you considering relocating to, expanding, or Are you considering relocating to, expanding, or opening a business location in College Station in opening a business location in College Station in opening a business location in College Station in opening a business location in College Station in the next 5 years?the next 5 years?the next 5 years?the next 5 years?Reasons for Location in College Station/Bryan Area conditions don't permit it, 30.0%Expansion/ relocation is not necessary 47.5%Other Reason, 22.5%Why would you not consider expanding or locating Why would you not consider expanding or locating Why would you not consider expanding or locating Why would you not consider expanding or locating in the City of College Station?in the City of College Station?in the City of College Station?in the City of College Station?Q30–Are you Planning to Expand in College Station? In Question 30, the respondents were asked “Are you considering relocating to, expanding, or opening a business location in College Station in the next 5 years?” • A significant number of the respondents (41.7%) were planning to expand – which is indicative of a strong local economy. Q31–Why are You not Expanding College Station? In Question 31, the respondent who answered Question 30 that they were not considering expansion of their business in College Station were asked: “Why would you not consider expanding or locating in the City of College Station? • The most often mentioned reason (47.5%) was that “Expansion or relocation is not necessary or beneficial for the organization;” • 30% of the respondents felt that “General business or financial conditions don't permit expansion;” • Fewer than one in four respondents, however, mentioned, “One or more reasons specific to the City of College Station” Those verbatim responses are included on the following page. 86
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 23 Q31–Verbatim “Other” Reponses “Why are you not considering expanding or locating in the City of College Station?” • We already have large office in Bryan • We already have a location in College Station. • Building codes and inspections delay development, increase costs, and lack common sense. Rules are too rigid. Many businesses decide not to come here, once they see all the bureaucracy. Building approvals take longer than the actual building time. Inspectors made us tear down a counter because it was 1" too high (for disabled people) but never bothered to check the heating, which was not installed/connected , along with a bathroom sink. Too many rules on bike racks. Nobody in our area of CS rides a bike--traffic is too heavy. Nevertheless, we had to have a bike rack, which has never been used. If I expand my business, it will NOT be in CS. Because of CS, I spent $10,000 I should not have had to spend, just because of building codes and inspectors who threaten you if you ask "why" they demand something be changed. The landscape requirement is fine, but CS does not require that the landscape be watered. As a result, we are a city of dead shrubery. I tell anyone I meet who is thinking about building here to go somewhere else. • Onerous regulation of business activity. Permits required for too many things. Signage/building colors/landscape requirements, etc. down to "shrub police" looking for dead/ dying/ misshapen plants. • The zoning issues relating to B/CS are terrible and while the appearance of our community is important, we don't all have to have the same with color palates and design schemes for the buildings. Individuality is necessary to recruit new business instead of inhibiting their moving into the community. The political environment is adversarial and not given to a "team" mentality. • I am concerned about our very low ranking in per capita retail spending vs other municipalites in the state. (see TAMU Real Estate Center's Report) • Too many city regulations • The growing number of college students, the congestion they generate, and their behavioral problems are beginning to make the city an undesirable place in which to live. For example, gun restrictions should be put into place, as well as additional communications generated to educate these young people about the city laws and consequences of breaking them. 87
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 24 Preferred City Efforts for Business Competitiveness 47.7%32.3%20.0%20.0%20.0%15.4%7.7%7.7%4.6%4.6%3.1%1.5%Loosen development restrictions and requirementsSpeed up the development and permit processImprove transportation systemsImprove digital / telecommunications infrastructureOffer incentives to developers and/or businessesRedevelop older areasDevelop a new mixed-use town centerNo specific efforts are neededImprove underground utilities and drainageAdd more parks, trails, and other amenitiesDevelop a convention or conference centerImprove public safety and emergency servicesWhat can the City do to Become More Competitive?Q32–What can College Station do to Become More Competitive? In Question 32, the respondents were asked “What two efforts could the City of College Station undertake to make the city a more competitive location for your business or organization?” • The most often mentioned effort was for the City to “Loosen development restrictions and requirements” followed by a similar regulatory change, “Speed up the development and permit process” • “Improve transportation systems,” “Improve digital / telecommunications infrastructure,” and “Offer incentives to developers and/or businesses” were each mentioned by 20% of the respondents; • A significant 7.7% of the respondents suggested that, “No specific efforts are needed.” • These responses did not differ significantly based on whether the respondent had a business operation within the City of College Station or not. • For businesses that serve customers outside Texas, however, the top choice was “Improve digital / telecommunications infrastructure” (36.4%) while “Loosen development restrictions and requirements” was just 31.8%. 88
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 25 Q33–What is the Top Reason for a Business to Locate in College Station? In Question 33, the respondents were asked “What is the top reason that a company should choose to locate in the City of College Station?” The verbatim open-ended responses are listed below • A lot of our residents are under employeed jobs. • A top reason to locate in College Station is our schools, we have great schools. • Abundant highly educated workforce • Access to Houston and Austin. • access to talent from A&M graduates • Access to tamu (resources, highly trained workforce) • Best place in the country to live. Con-restrictions the City of CS puts on businesses. • Business environment complements the high quality of living • Central location in state and TAMU (2 mentions) • Clean industry. Texas A&M and the TAMU System. Blinn College • Cost of Living (3 mentions) • Economic growth (2 mentions) • Educated workforce, top flight universities, great geographical location, cost of living • Education of workforce • Family orientated atmospheres, texas a&m university • Geographic location sitting between major metros • Go to some other city • Good environment, excellent workforce • Great community, great people, nice town. • Great place to start a business and raise a family • Growing economy with a good talent base • Hard to say; city needs more community feel and less color & architectural restrictions. • Highly educated workforce • I don't think they should until we have a whole new city council, mayor and manager • If government would get out of the way! • Incentives from the city county to devdelop and build and hire • It is likely that the business they want to open is not already here (for larger companies only) • It's a great place to live (except for August) • Labor • Lifestyle - small town but offers a lot. Low cost of living. Good education and community. • Lifestyle and workforce • Location • Location to other large metro cities. • Loosen development restrictions and requirements • Opportunities • Potential profitability & business envioronment • Projected growth for the area/region. • proximity to Austin, Houston, Dallas • proximity to houston and austin • Proximity to Houston and Austin • Proximity to Houston, San Antonio, Dallas, Austin, and Texas A&M. • Proximity to Texas A&M 89
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 26 • Proximity to Texas A&M University and its research and development centers • Quaility of living • Quality of life for my employees • School systems and it's a family oriented town. • Size and location of College Station • Strong consumer base • TAMU and 60,000 students • Texas A&M • The City allocates resources supporting a good quality of life (incl. schools, parks, safety, etc.) • The positive sense of community and high character of its members. • The quality of life is the best tool in my box to attract employees. • To be a part of the new medical corridor • To turn a profit • Two highlights: cost-of-living for employees and tax environment for companies in Texas. • Very friendly city centrally located in Texas 90
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 27 Q34–What Should be the Economic Development Goals for College Station? In Question 34, the respondents were asked “What should be the top three economic development goals for the City of College Station? The respondent were offered examples: "Attract more high-tech research businesses," "Improve the range and quality of lodging establishments," "Increase commercial air service." [Write in your answers in the boxes provided - 100 character maximum length]?” The verbatim responses to this question are below: 1st Mentioned Goal • Attract "soft" or light industry - - high tech, etc. • Attract and expand more high-tech businesses, both in bio (already in progress) and not in bio. • attract business which benefit from a major university nearby • attract high-tech businesses • attract more bioscience entities • attract more business and grow the bio-tech coridoor • attract more businesses- not limited to high tech • Attract more businesses to relocate • Attract more high end business's • Attract more high paying jobs • Attract more high tech research businesses (5 mentions) • Attractive industry with high tax base • Be easier to work with. Developers find it extremely difficult to work with the City of CS. • Be more diverse in the types of businesses allowed to develop in College Station, it takes all pay levels and business types to make a "City" run. • Become business friendly • Better environment for businesses • Better paying jobs • Better Transportation • Business / Industrial park(s) • Business friendly development for tax paying businesses • Continue to bring in research • Diversify economic base of the City • Encourage small business -- the large chains are taking over and choking out the smaller business operators • First, do no harm. do not compete with the private sector or provide an advantage to some but not all. • Fx transportation • Fully support independently governed bio-corridor & related A&M efforts • Give local businesses the same considerations you are giving national chains • High tech infrastructure • Improve commercial air service (8 mentions) • Improve regional and local public GROUND transportation (Austin, Houston, Waco, San Antonio & Dallas. • Improve sense of community. • Increase family friendly businesses 91
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 28 • Increase the number of entertainment venues geared toward older adults (35-50 age range) • investigate regional light rail • Less intterference with business and restrictions • Make doing business w/the CIty of College Station easier for businesses/developers • More High Paying Jobs • Offer incentives for new and small business, such as a tax rebate or credit • Provide greater service to the populace by doing LESS. • Quit trying to be like Austen and dalles • recruit another full service hotel with meeting space • Stay ahead of infrastructure needs for growth (streets, water, sewer, electric) • Stimulate commercial taxi service and enforce metered fares • Stop micromanaging planning and construction • To gain one more industry that would help support the city • X number of jobs created 2nd Mentioned Goal • A major airline carrier, such as Southwest Airlines or JetBlue would be the best thing to happen to CS & surrounding areas. • Add specialty grocery stores (e.g Market Street or Whole Foods) • Allow all restaurants and retail businesses the same opportunity • Allow developers and/or landowners to use their property as they see fit. • Attact more nice family type restaurants • Attract additional entertainment facilities such as a large water park • Attract high tech and "clean" manufacturing • Attract high tech manufacturing • Attract more high-tech research businesses • attract more high-tech research businesses (especially lifesciences & energy) • Attract more light and heavy manufacturing • Attract more young profesionals to bridge gap from students to extablished profesionals • Better environment for young adults (former grads) • Better incentives for development • Create more opportunities for tourism related businesses - fields, convention center, etc • Deregulate utilities • Destination name hotel with full service restraunt, bar • Develop regional distribution, although the region may be limited • Eliminate many building requirements, such as "shades" over windows • Encourage higher-end retail/dining to appeal to the kinds of employees who would work for the above-mentioned businesses. • Focus on partnership with TAMU • Get government regulation out of the way 92
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 29 • Get passenger rail service • improve air service with more options (5 mentions) • Improve the quality of traveling performing arts shows • improve transportation flow and mobility • Increase Commercial Air Service • Increase number of food chain locations throughout the city • Increase the number of FULL SERVICE hotels. • Loosen color and architectural restrictions. • Loosen development restrictions • Lower taxes • Lower taxes for high tech startups • make it easier from a regulatory perspective to build • make older areas nicer • More high paying jobs • more housing for young professionals • Promote a business friendly climate • Quit trying to Apess the university • Relax development requirements so that it is advantageous for businesses to develop in College Station and not in the County or other Cities. • Retain tech companies • Safer streets- fund police and fire • Solicite basic industry • Speed permits and approvals for development • Strive to have city employees make purchases from College Station retailers when possible • That government is best that governs least. • Transportation issues • upgrade air service • Work cooperatively with the City of Bryan - foster a united community - not divided by city limits • X new hotels built 3rd mentioned Goal • Assure top notch health care facilities • Attract businesses that produce goods and add to the tax base. • Attract more businesses on a national level • Attract more highly skilled/trade industries to increase the overall income rate for individuals who are not students • Attract more international businesses like Gunler • Attract more retail businesses and get Blinn to put their second campus in College Station • Attract non retail businesses • Be easier to do business with • Better retail to attract business during TAMU games • Build up, not out. • Change all city leaders • Coordinated and integrated approach to attracting high tech businesses • Create jobs for all economic levels 93
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 30 • Create more friendly environment from law enforcement in northgate • Decrease regulations on new construction -- signage requirements, etc. Can be restrictive to business. • Decrease the size of government • Deregulate college station utilities • Encourage collaboration • Favorable tax policies • Find good ways to promote light industrial development • Foster development of research coming from t a&m into business ventures • Get more agressive in attracting high end business's • Improve city's image of being a developer friendly city and not one that is difficult to develop in or that acts very adversarial towards developers. • Improve commercial air service and public transportation • Improve mass transit services • Incentivise based on potential tax income • Increase air to atlanta, austn more flights to dfw, iah • Increase commercial air service (perhaps delta) • Increase mass transportation options (freeway, high speed rail and/or air) • Invest in public broadband internet access. • Keep college graduates here • More business development in south college station • More entertainment • Open for business mentality • Provide residents more options for dsl service • Public safety • Realize that the city planners are having a negative effect • Recruit companies/industries that will provide opportunities for all levels of pay low to high end. • Reduce mobile home sites • Stay out of the way of highest and best use market forces for new development • Stop annexing area of other communities that the city can't immediately provide services. • Term limits for all elected officials. • Town center • Utility rates are much higher in cs than they are in bryan and surrounding areas. • X new flights per day 94
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 31 Preferred City Marketing Efforts Market to industry executives to get them to locate a business to the area, 51.6%Market to entrepreneurs to get them to start up a new business in the area, 19.4%Market to local businesses to get them to expand in the area, 29.0%When it comes to marketing the City of College Station to potential When it comes to marketing the City of College Station to potential When it comes to marketing the City of College Station to potential When it comes to marketing the City of College Station to potential businesses, which of the following is most important to you? businesses, which of the following is most important to you? businesses, which of the following is most important to you? businesses, which of the following is most important to you? Q35–What is the Most Important Marketing Effort for the City of College Station? In Question 35, the respondents were asked “When it comes to marketing the City of College Station to potential businesses, which of the following is most important to you?” They were asked to select the statement that most closely matches your view of most important. • A majority of the respondents preferred to “Market to industry executives to get them to locate a business to the area” 95
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 32 Q36-What One Word Should be Used for Marketing College Station? In Question 36, the respondents were asked “What one word would you use to market the City of College Station to potential businesses?” Following is a list of the one word marketing pitch. The number in parenthesis is the number of mentions of that word.: o Braintrust o Central o Challenging o Clean o Community o Different o Diverse o Dynamic o Emerging o Fat o Friendly (2) o Fun o Great o Growing or Growth (5) o Ideal o Inconsistent o Inexpensive o Intrusive o Invest o Lifestyle o Livability o Livable o Location (3) o Nice o Progressive (2) o Proximity o Quality o Regional o Restrictive o Synergy o Texas A&M (5) o Thriving o Underemployed o University 96
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 33 Survey Questionnaire 97
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 34 98
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 35 99
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 36 100
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 37 101
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 38 102
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 39 103
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 40 104
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 41 105
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 42 106
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 43 107
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 44 108
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 45 109
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 46 110
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 47 111
Business Survey Report College Station, Texas 48 CDS |Spillette Alliance 1001 S. Dairy Ashford, Suite 450 Houston, TX 77079 713- 465-8866 (Phone) 281-497-3637 (Fax) www.cdsspillette.com 112
January 10, 2013
Workshop Agenda Item No. 7
Green College Station Action Plan
To: David Neeley, City Manager
From: Jason Stuebe, Assistant to the City Manager
Agenda Caption: Presentation, and discussion regarding the Green College Station Action
Plan.
Relationship to Strategic Goals: VI: Sustainable City
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council receive the Action Plan but that
no action be taken at this time.
Summary: At the January 2012 City Council Strategic Planning Retreat, the Council made
a significant amendment to the “Green Policy Statement” asking staff to focus its efforts on
programs and initiatives that are both environmentally conscious and fiscally responsible.
Since that time, staff has developed the Green College Station Action Plan, which is now
ready for presentation to the Council. The Council will receive a brief overview of the plan
at the meeting but will not be taking any action. It is staff’s intention to discuss the Action
Plan and garner the Council’s feedback and further direction or possible action at the
January 28th-29th
Strategic Planning Retreat. The Council is encouraged to review the plan
prior to the retreat.
Budget & Financial Summary: None
Reviewed and Approved by Legal: N/A
Attachments: The Draft Green Action Plan will be provided to the Council at the meeting.
113