The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About5 Greenway Easements, Aquisitions, StatusDevelopment Services Dedications No t e: These areas are in the greenway and may be parks , open space , greenbelt , detention or a combination. Steeplechase Subdivision -Owner: Brazos Triod Land Development Partnership . Dedication area is Public Pa r k, Stormwate r Detention and Open Space. Final Plat on Phase 1 of 4 on Master Plan . 8. 998 Acres South Fork tributary B, Bee Creek , Pr i ority 3 2.097 Acres in Phase 7, listed as public access easement , public utility easement and common area. Stormwater detention to be owned and ma i ntained by the HOA . ~ ~ s ~ClS-e lo D.0()(p a.ae pU€/Sto r~i--~ VV"-Cl tlV\..e_, Properties of Windham and Thurmond located off of Greens Prairie Rd, Spring Creek -Priority 2 Pebble Hills Subdivision -Owner: Jerry Windham and Frank Thurmond. Dedication areas are Public Park , Stormwater Detention and Greenbelt . Fi nal Plat on Phase 1 of Several on Master Plan. Renamed Woodland .Hills -Garrett Engineering Spring Creek , priority 2 13 . 91 acres of parkland dedication shown on the final plat. Parkland is part of and/or contiguous to the greenway. Includes 20' park and emergency access ROW dedication off Woodland Ridge Dr . Spring Branch Subdivision Final plats come in as Spring Meadows Subdivision Actual "greenbelt dedication" and/or "detention area" 0.54 acres , 0.17 acres Off of Greens Prairie Road -Spring Creek , Priority 2 Preliminary Plat shows unbuildable lots as "B" lots. Design engineers -MDG -Thurmond & Windham owners Properties of Edward Froehling, South Fork of Lick Creek, Priority 1 Alexandria Subdivision-Owner: Edward Froehling. Dedication area is Greenway and Stormwater Detention. Master Preliminary Plat of 5 Phases . McClure engineering. f South Fork of Lick Creek , Priority 1 16 acre proposed dedication , as of 9/6/03, the property has not been dedicated and remains under the ownership of the Froehling's. The plats read "proposed to be owned and maintained". The construction of Alexandria Avenue appears to be the reason there was no dedication with any of the final plats . The proposed greenway area does remain undeveloped and is in use for the stormwater detention of the subdivision . Cypress Meadows -Greenway owned and maintained by the HOA South Fork of Lick Creek , Priority 1 , contiguous to Alexandria Bridlegate -.6072 acres left undeveloped. Lick Creek , Priority 3. Properties of Gary Seaback on Spring Creek Priority 3 Estates of Spring Creek-Owner: Gary Seaback. Dedication area is Stormwater Drainage, Sanitary Sewer and Open Space Buffer. Park not determined yet . Master Preliminary Plat of Future Phases. Original submission by McClure. Spring Creek Master Development Plan dated 1124/03 13.09 acres "Drainage Way" Spring Creek , Priority 3 As of 9/8/03 -no action on this site . John Fedora presented another proposal (Spring Creek Development). The Master Development Plan shows 13.09 acres "Spring Creek Drainage Way". Ash & Browne design engineers. Properties of Crowley and/or Wallace Phillips, Spring Creek Priority 2 Crowley/Castlegate - Section 12: . 77 acres of greenway 7.79 acres of common area w I drainage easement 3/23/03 Master Preliminary Plat , Castlegate Sections 11 ,12 ,13 -10 .51 acres of greenway shown as "Common Area". 8 ' concrete path proposed. Spring Creek Townhomes -Final Plat submitted by TexCon 1 /2003 for Wallace Phillips, Manager, common area #3 0.419 acres Properties of Randy French located on South Fork of Lick Creek, Priority 1 Westfield Addition Phase I (Final Plat) Lick Creek , Priority 3 Designed by Riley Engineering 3.442 acres of flood area designated as Park Westfield Addition (BCS Development Company/Randy French) Designed by Mike McClure. Initial plans prepared by Riley Engineering Company South Fork of Lick Creek, Priority 1 Sebienowitz (Lick Creek Development) sold Phase 3 to Randy French Phase 1 -Parkland Dedication, Vol 3653, Pg. 246 Phase 2 -Drainage Control Structure in greenway (As per Morrisson Hydrology Engineering Report Dated June 2000) Phase 3 -Stormwater Detention and Greenway "Park and Greenbelt" 2. 77 acres shown on Preliminary Plat -(,-..ec """"':i /Oi/-01 ~ov-~ 2 .~S-Ac.. Westfield Village Phases 1 thru 5 Phase 6, recorded at Vol 4444, pg 283 -2.45 acres of greenway contiguous to parkland dedication. Misc. dedication of 0.039 acres parkland, 0.139 acres of greenway, 0.202 acres of greenway , and 0.029 acres of greenway \ Springbrook South Fork of Lick Creek, set aside with HOA Edelweiss Gartens City Park and Stormwater Detention facility 7.743 acres dedication recorded at Vol 5190 , page 161 Graham Corner Plaza Ted Whitmer Contiguous to Bridlegate (private) & Lick Creek Subdivision Phase I Lick Creek , priority 3 1.093 acres Villas of Harvey Presented to P&Z 9/11 /03 Designed by TexCon Owned by Not shown in the existing greenways master plan Tributary of Proposed acreage set asides: 4.25 acres of open space/drainage <::;.) A 7-1 .oS,. o'f -:: ;t\ 10/37 acres of detention/retention i . 1;,,11 1 1.0 3 _, .3~) 3. 4<./) z.sz =- 1. 39 acres of greenbelt/landscape .fSJ , 53 ~ 1, JS 5.86 acres of park s i,,q 1 ;2 7-.) ?:;-<;s op"ri srttce/parf<:. , l -} 1 1-, 00 J • v -t -:: 2. qq Shenandoah Subdivision Owner -Ed Froehling Design Engineer -Mike McClure Spring Creek tributary C, priority 3 10 . ~l Prelim~nary Plat phases 6 -10 , dated 6/01 shows 8.069 acre city park and storm water detention facility with another proposed 4.208 acre parkland dedication. Master Preliminary Plat dated 4/98 shows 12 .097 acres of City Park. 8.069 acres recorded at Vol 3533, pg. 174 . Master Development Plan dated 3/10/03 shows additional park tracts and stormwater detention 14.49 acres dedicated as City Park , a portion of which is in the 100 year flood plain. Aggieland Fitness Center 1 /15/03 submission North Fork of Lick Creek, Priority 3. .477 acres Ritchey The City has an outstanding offer to purchase 140.44 acres (approximately 85 acres in floodplain) out of the 341.60 acre tract. A Master Development Plan was submitted by John Fedora dated 1127103 showing 41.878 acres of "Common Area Lick Creek Drainage Way". Development Services staff did not support the plan as submitted. ~~cMltmk " -C.C (. 0LlW ;v1 -s.lnl\. .p,~:~cct-ToM S:iAll1vCf"'-J.ev1e-l 0 ra · tV\.~,k.L{ -f Mc.'.:5" .,_,lLf c\!(}VIC\ble widt h 5r-e e Y1v0~ JediCA1'VV-t~~>'lra_\ e~+ \j ~\.t(do f>C:jt,g3 lo+ (p -lot 5 t 20 cktel'\.t-~ punJ -:> (~o•M.'-'>cd-e ~) rv-i.va.'k- 2009 JANUARY S M T W T F S 2 3 4 s 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 29 30 31 FEBRUARY S M T W T F S 1234567 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 M ARCH S M T W T F S 2 3 4 s 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2 4 2S 26 27 28 29 30 31 APRIL SMTWTFS I 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 l S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 29 30 MAY S M T W T F S 1 2 4S6789 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 29 30 31 J UNE S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 s 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 29 30 J ULY S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 29 30 31 AUGUST SMTWTFS 1 2 3 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 17 18 19 20 2 1 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 29 30 31 S EPTEMBER S M T W T F S I 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 29 30 O CTOBER S M T W T F S 2 3 s 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 29 30 31 NOVEMBER S M T W T F S 1234S6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 17 18 19 20 21 !2 23 24 25 26 27 28 ?9 30 D ECEMBE R S M T W T F 5 1 2 3 4 s 7 8 9 10 11 12 l 3 14 lS 16 1 7 18 19 lO 21 22 23 24 2S 26 ~7 28 29 3 0 31 Newman Printing Company~ Inc. . Or.~ ~tU--tle L~ w/olA...+ 11.~~!. -"1 . - . Re.sm~~ 3, ZfaC, A M\te.. , . U.SlNl~ '1S. Ac.~ -h °""' v 1<n.I-(A...(. S-tlll 1,;i.~ '/-tS lio ~S.f\l( ~II\. At~l~ ves. ~ n.-e.....~ds. St.+ bPr():.. -p 11'~ •~ ,,.~ ~· ~ , ,, '. _. -__ J..J,...NJI-\ ,f ~ ~oo...Q. . ~)IV'\"-.. UAhl. .\ \S 01U-U. c.. fl OV\. -~.--..J ., ' '-0' -~ I I I -~l'(V\.~ I - fJutrn <..p.YL t7'\.:h~' ~ I '--...... tM'Jrl.I A1'l hAtfui. -_. I et.~ ... ~""JJ · v ~ " . "~ f*IAC> ~ ,..nJ,--'--I ' . ~ 5 cn-.vi'l..v. wlla -. .., r I I I - By: Callegari H.B. No. 751 A BILL TO BE ENTI TLED 1 AN ACT 2 relating to the liability of a pu bli c ut ilit y that allows 3 recreational use of land that the public u tility owns, occupies, or 4 leases. 5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF TH E STATE OF TEXAS: 6 SECTION 1 . Chapter 75 , Civil Practice and Remedies Code, is 7 amended by adding Section 75 . 0021 to read as follows : 8 Sec . 75 .0021. IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY OF A PUB LI C UTILITY. 9 (a) In th i s section : 10 ( 1) "Person " inc lud es an i ndividual as defined by 1 1 Section 71 .001 . 12 (2) "Publ i c utility " means: 13 (A) an electr i c utility as de fi ned by Sect i on 14 31 .002 , Utili t i es Code ; 15 (B) a telecomm unications p rovider as defined by 16 Section 51.002 , Utilities Code ; 17 (C) a cable service pr ovider or v ideo service 18 pr ov ider as defined by Section 66.002, Utili ties Code; 19 (D) a gas uti lity as def ined by Section 101.00 3 20 or 121. 00 1, Utilities Code ; or 2 1 (E) a water and sewer utility as defined by 22 Section 13 .002 , Water Code . 23 (b ) A public utility t hat, as the owner , occupant, or lessee 24 of land , gives per mission to a p erson to enter the premises f or 81R4 78 CAE -F 1 1 2 3 H.B. No. 751 recreation does not , by giving that permission : (1) ensure that the premises are safe for recreation; or 4 (2) assume responsibility or incur liability for any 5 bodily or other personal injury to , death of , o r damage to the 6 p roperty of , a person who enters the p remises for recreation or 7 accompanies another person entering the p remises for recreation , 8 including injury , death , or other damage arising from: 9 (A) an act of a third party that occurs on the 10 premises , regardless of whether the act i s intentional ; or 11 12 13 lines or fields. (B) contact of a person or p ro p erty with power exposure of a person or pro p erty to electromagnetic 14 ( c) A public utility that , as the owner , occupant , or 15 lessee of land , allows the use of the p remi ses for recreation shall 16 post and maintain a clearly readable s i gn in a clearly visible 17 location on or near the premises . The sign must contain the 18 followin g warning language: 19 UNDER TEXAS LAW (CHAPTER 75 , CIV I L PRACTICE AND REMEDIES 20 CODE) A PUBLIC UTILITY IS IMMUNE FROM LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES ARISING 21 FROM THE USE OF THIS PROPERTY FOR RECREAT I ONAL PURPOSES . 22 SECTION 2. This Act applies only to a cause of action that 23 accrues on or after the effective date of this Act. A cause o f 24 action that accrues before the effective date of this Act is 25 governed by the law in effect immediate l y before that date , and that 26 law is continued in effect for that purpose . 27 SECTION 3 . This Act takes effect i mmediate l y if it receives 2 H.B. No. 751 1 a vote of two -thirds o f all the members elected to each house , as 2 provided by Section 39 , Artic le III, Texa s Constitution. If this 3 Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this 4 Act takes effect Sept e mber 1 , 2009. 3 ' l • ' LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 81ST LEGISLATIVE R EGULAR SESSION March 4, 2009 TO: Honorable Burt R . Solomons , Chair, House Committee on State Affairs f'ROM: John S. O'Brien, Director, Le g islative Budget Board IN R E: HB751 by Callegari (Relating to the liability of a public utility that allows recreational use of land that the public utility owns , occupies , or leases.), As Introduced No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated. The bill would amend the Civil Practice and Remedies Code to provide immunity from liability to certain public utilities that, as the owner, occupant, or lessee of land, gives permission to a person to enter the premises for recreation. The public utility would be required to post a sign warning that the utility is immune from liability for damages arising from the use of the property for recreational purposes . The bill would affect certain river authorities and counties . Provisions of the bill would apply only to a cause of action that accrues on or after the effective date of the bill . The bill would talce effect immediately if it were to receive the required two-thirds vote in each house of the legislature ; otherwise , it would take effect September 1, 2009 . Local Govcrnmmt Impact Protection from liability could provide an unknown but possibly significant savings in the event damages were to occur for which the utility would otherwise be liable for the costs to mitigate those damages . Source Agencies: LBB Staff: JOB , KJG, DB S.B. No . 18 1 AN ACT 2 relating to the use of eminent domain authority. 3 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: 4 SECTION 1 . Subsection (a), Section 11 .155 , Education Code , 5 is amended to read as follows : 6 (a) An independent school district may , by the exercise of 7 the right of eminent domain , acquire the fee simple title to real 8 property [for the purpose of securing sites] on which to construct 9 s~hool buildings or for any other public use [purpose] necessary 10 for the district . 11 SECTION 2 . Chapter 2206 , Government Code, is amended to 12 read as follows: 13 CHAPTER 2206 . [ LIMITZ\TION£ ON U£E OF] EMINENT DOMAIN 14 SUB CHAPTER A . LIMITATIONS ON PURPOSE AND USE OF PROPERTY ACQUIRED 15 THROUGH EMINENT DOMAIN 16 Sec . 2206 .001 . LIMITATION ON EMINENT DOMAIN FOR PRIVATE PARTIES 17 OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES. (a) This section applies to the use 18 of eminent domain under the laws of this state , including a local or :]_9 special law, by any governmental or private entity, including: 20 (1) a state agency, including an institution of higher 21 education as defined by Section 61.003, Education Code ; 22 (2) a political subdivision of this state ; or 23 (3) a corporation created by a governmental entity to 24 a-ct on behalf of the entity. 1 1 (b) A governmental or private entity may not take private 2 property through the use of eminent domain if the taking: 3 (1) confers a private benefit on a particular private 4 party through the use of the property; 5 (2) is for a public use that is merely a pretext to 6 confer a private benefit on a particular private party; [~] 7 (3) is for economic development purposes, unless the 8 economic development is a secondary purpose resulting from 9 municipal community development or municipal urban renewal 10 activities to eliminate an existing affirmative harm on society 11 from slum or blighted areas under: 12 (A) Chapter 373 or 374, Local Government Code, 13 other than an activity described by Section 373.002(b) (5), Local 14 Government Code; or 15 16 17 (B) Section 311.005(a) (1) (I), Tax Code~ ( 4 ) is not for a pub 1 i c use . (c) This section does not affect the authority of an entity 18 authorized by law to take private property through the use of 19 eminent domain for: 20 (1) transportation projects, including, but not 21 limited to, railroads, airports, or public roads or highways; 22 (2) entities authorized under Section 59, Article XVI, 23 Texas Constitution, including: 24 25 26 (A) port authorities; (B) navigation districts; and ( C) any other conservation 27 districts that act as ports; 2 or reclamation U . D . l\jV • ..LO 1 (3) water supply , wastewater , flood control , and 2 drainage projects; 3 4 5 ( 4) public buildings, hos pi ta ls , and parks ; ( 5) the provision of utility services; (6) a sports and co mmuni ty venue project approved by 6 voters at an election held on or before December 1 , 2005 , unde r 7 Chapter 334 or 335 , Local Government Code ; 8 (7) the operations of : 9 (A) a common carrier pipeline [subject to Chapter 10 111, Natural Resources Code, and Section B(3) (b), Article 2 .01 7 11 Te1cas Business Corporation .7\,ct J ; or 12 (B) an energy transporter , as that term is 13 defined by Section 186 .051 , Utilities c,ode ; 14 (8) a purpose authorized · by Chapter 181 , Utilities 15 Code ; 16 (9) underground storage operations subject to Chapter 17 91 , Natural Resources Code; 18 ( 10) a waste disposal project ; or 19 (11) a library , museum , or r elated facility and any 20 infrastructure related to the faci lit y. 21 (d) This section does not affect the authority of a 22 governmental entity to condemn a leasehold estate on property owned 23 by the governmental entity . 24 (e) The determination by the governmental or private entity 25 proposing to take the property that the taking does not involve an 26 act or circumstance prohibited by Subsection (b) does not create a 27 presumption with respect to whether the taking involves that act or 3 1 circumstance . 2 Sec. 2206 . 002. LIMITATIONS ON EASEMENTS. (a) This section 3 applies only to an easement acquired by an entity for the purpose of 4 a pipeline to be used for oil or gas exploration or production 5 activities . 6 (b) A property owner whose property is acquired through the 7 use of eminent domain under Chapter 21, Property Code , for the 8 purpose of creating an easement through that owner 1 s property may 9 construct streets or roads, including gravel, asphalt, or concrete 10 streets or roads , at any locations above the easement that the 11 property owner chooses . 12 (c) The portion of a street or road constructed under this 13 section t h at is within the area covered by the easement: 14 _(_l_) __ m_u_s_t_c_r_o_s_s_t_h_e_e_a_s_e_m_e_n_t_a_t_o_r_n_e_a_r _9 _0_d_e_g~r_e_e_s ~;_a_n_d 15 ~(_2 ~)~_m_a~y~n_o_t_: 16 (A) exceed 40 feet in width; 17 (B) cause a violation of any applicable pipeline 18 regulation; or 19 ( c ) interfere with the operation and maintenance 20 of any pipeline. 21 (d) At least 30 days before the date on which construction 22 of an asphalt or concrete street or road that will be located wholly 23 or partly in an area covered by an easement used for a pipeline is 24 scheduled to begin, the property owner must submit plans for the 25 proposed construction to the owner of' the easement . 26 (e) Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, a 27 property owner and the owner of the easement may agree to terms 4 .:> • D • l\J U • .L Cl 1 other than those stated in Subsection ( c). 2 SUBCHAPTER B . PROCEDURES REQUIRED TO INITIATE 3 EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEE DINGS 4 Sec . 2206 . 051 . SHORT TITLE . This subchapter may be cited as 5 the Truth in Condemnation Procedures Act . 6 Sec . 2206 .052 . APPLICABILITY . The procedures in this 7 subchapter apply only to the use of eminent domain under the laws of 8 this state by a governmental entity . 9 Sec . 2206 . 053 . VOTE ON USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN . (a) Before a 10 governmental entity initiates a condemnation proceeding by filing a 11 petition under Section 21 . 012 , Property Code , the governmental 12 entity must: 13 (1) authorize the initiation of the condemnation 14 proceeding at a public meeting by a record vote ; and 15 16 required by (2) include Sub chapter in the notice for the public meeting as c , Chapter 55 1, in addition to other 17 information as required by that subchapter , the consideration of 18 the use of eminent domain to condemn property as an agenda item . 19 (b) A single ordinance , resolution , or order may be adopted 20 for all u nits of property to be condemned i f : 21 (1) the motion required by Subsection (e) indicates. 22 that the first record vote applies to all units of property to be 23 condemned ; and 24 ( 2) the minutes of the governmental entity ref le ct 25 that the first vote applies to all of those units . 26 (c) If more than one member of the governing body objects to 27 adopting a single ordinance , resolution , or order by a record vote 5 1 for all units of property for which condemnation proceedings are to 2 be initiated , a separate record vpte must be taken for each unit of 3 property . 4 (d) For the purposes of Subsections (a) and (c), if two or 5 more u nits of real property are owned by the same person , the 6 governmental entity may treat those units of property as one unit of 7 property. 8 (e) The motion to adopt an ordinance, resolution, or order 9 authorizing the initiation of condemnation proceedings under 10 Chapter 21 , Property Code , must be made in a form substantially 11 similar to the following: "I move that the (name of governmental 12 entity) authorize the use of the power of eminent domain to acquire 13 (describe the property) for (describe the public use)." The 14 description of the property required by this subsection is 15 sufficient if the description of the location of and interest in the 16 property that the governmental entity seeks to acquire is 17 substantially similar to the description that is or could properly 18 be used in a petition to condemn the property under Section 21.012, 19 Property Code. 20 21 22 (f) If a project for 2 2 0 6 . 0 0 1 ( c ) ( 3 ) w i 11 r e qui r e multiple tracts or units of a public use described by Section a governmental entity to acquire property to construct facilities 23 connecting one location to another location, the governing body of 24 the governmental entity may adopt a single ordinance , resolution, 25 or order by a record vote that delegates the authority to initiate 26 condemnation proceedings to the chief administrative official of 27 the governmental entity . 6 ~ • b • 1\J 0 • J_ b 1 (g) An ordinance , resolution , or order adopted under 2 Subsection (f) is not required to identify specific properties that 3 the governmental entity will acquire . The ordin ance , resolution , 4 or order must identify the general area to be covered by the project 5 or the general route that will be us ed by the governmental entity 6 for the project in a way that provides property owners in and around 7 t h e area or along the route reasonable notice that the owners ' 8 pr opert i es may be sub j ect to condemnatio n proceedings dur ing the 9 planning or construction of the project . 10 SUBCHAPTER C. EXPIRATION OF CERTAIN EMINENT DOMAIN AUTHORITY 11 Sec. 2206 .101. REPORT OF EMINENT DOMAIN AUTHORITY ; 12 EXPIRATION OF AUTHORITY . (a) This section does not apply to an 1 3 entity that was created or that acquired the power of eminent domai n 14 on or after December 31 , 2012 . 15 (b ) Not later than December 31 , 20 1 2 , an e nti ty , including a 16 pr ivate entity , authorized by the state by a general or special law 17 to exercise the power of eminent domain shall submit to the 18 comptroller a letter stating that the entity is authorized by the 19 state to exercise the power of eminent domain and identifying each 20 pro visio n of law that grants the e n tity t hat authority. The entity 21 must send the letter by certifi ed mail, return receipt requested . 22 (c) The authority of an entity to exercise the p ower of 23 eminent domain expires on September 1 , 2013 , unless the entit y 24 submits a letter in accordance with Subsection (b). 25 (d) Not lat er t han March 1, 20 13, the comptroller shall 26 submit to the governor , the lieutenant governor , the speaker of the 27 house of representatives , the presiding o ff icers of the appropriate 7 1 standing committees of the senate and the house of representatives, 2 and the Texas Legislative Council a report that contains: 3 (1) the name of each entity that submitted a letter in 4 accordance with this section ; and 5 (2) a corresponding list of the provisions granting 6 eminent domain authority as identified by each entity that 7 submitted a letter . 8 (e) The Texas Legislative Council shall prepare for 9 consideration by the 84th Legislature, Regular Session , a 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 nonsubstantive revision of the statutes of this state as necessary to reflec t the state of the law after the expiration of an entity's eminent domain authority effective under Subsection ( c) . SECTION 3 . Subsection (a), Section 251.001 , Local Government Code , is amended to read as follows: (a) When the governing body of a municipality considers it necessary, the municipality may exercise the right of eminent domain for a public use [purpose] to acquire public or private property , whether located inside or outside the municipality, for any of the following uses [purposes]: (1) the providing , enlarging , or municipally owned city hall ; police station; improving of jail or other a law enforcement detention facility; fire station ; library; school or other educational f ac ili ty ; academy ; auditorium; hospital; sanatorium; market house ; slaughterhouse ; warehouse; elevator; railroad termi n al ; airport; ferry; ferry landing ; pier ; wharf ; dock or other shipping facility ; loading or unloading facility; alley, street , or other roadway ; park , playground , or other recreational 8 U .LJ . l'IV • .LO 1 facility ; square ; water works system , including reservoirs , other 2 water supply sources , watersheds , and water storage , drainage , 3 treatment , distribution , transmission , and emptying facilities ; 4 sewage system including sewage collection , drainage , treatment , 5 disposal , and e mptying facilities ; electric or gas power system; 6 cemetery ; and crematory ; 7 (2) the determining of riparian rights relative to the 8 municipal water works ; 9 ( 3) the straightening or improving of the channel of 10 any stream, branch , or drain ; 11 (4) the straightening , widening , or extending of any 12 alley , street , or other roadway ; and 13 (5) [£.e..r] any other municipal public use [purpose] the 14 governing body considers advisable . 15 SE CT ION 4 . Subsection (a), Section 261.001 , Loca l 16 Government Code , is amended to read as follows : 17 (a) A county may exercise the right of eminent domain to 18 condemn and acquire land , an easement in land , or a right -of -way if 19 the acquisition is necessary for the construction of a jail , 20 courthouse, hospital , or librar y , or f or another public use 21 [purpose] authorized by law . 22 SECTION 5 . Subsection ( c), Section 263 . 201 , Loca l 2 3 Government Code , is amended to read as fol l ows : 24 ( c) The declaration of taking must contain : 25 (1) a declaration that the l and or interest in land 26 described in the original petition is taken for a public use 27 [p u rpose ] and for ultimate conveyance to the United States ; 9 1 ( 2) a description of the land sufficient for the 2 ident if icat ion of the land; 3 (3) a statement of the es tat e or interest in the land 4 being taken ; 5 6 land; 7 8 (4) a statement of the public use to be made of the (5) a plan showing the land being taken; and ( 6) a statement of the amount of damages awarded by the 9 special commissioners, or by the jury on appeal , for the taking of 10 the land . 11 SECTION 6 . Section 273 .002 , Local Government Code, is .12 amended to read as fallows : 13 Sec . 273 . 002. CONDEMNATION . Condemnation of property under 14 this chapter shall be in accordance with state law relating to 15 eminent domain , which may be Chapter 21 , Property Code , or any other 16 state law governing and relating to the condemnation of land for 17 public use [purposes] by a municipality . 18 SECTION 7. Section 21. 0111, Property Code , is amended to 19 read as follows: 20 Sec . 21 .0111. DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN INFORMATION REQUIREDL 21 INITIAL OFFER. (a) An [Z'. governmental] entity with eminent domain 22 authority that wants to acquire real property for a public use 23 shall , by certified mail, return receipt requested , disclose to the 24 property owner at the time an off er to purchase or lease the 25 property is made any and all [existing] appraisal reports produced 26 or acquired by the [governmental] entity relating specifically to 27 the owner's property and prepared in the 10 years preceding the date 10 u • LJ • 1\1 u • ..LO 1 of the [used in determining the final valu ation] off er . 2 (b) A property owner shall disclose to the [acquiring 3 governmental] entity seeking to acquire the property any and all 4 current and existing appraisal reports produced or acquired by the 5 property owner relating specifically to the owner's property and 6 used in determining the owner's opinion of value . Such disclosure 7 shall take place not later than the ear lier of : 8 ( 1) the 10th day aft er the date [ r.Jithin 10 days] of 9 receipt of an appraisal report ; or 10 ( 2) the third business day before the date of a specia l 11 commissioner 's hearing if an appraisal report is to be used at the 12 [reports but no later than 10 days prior to the special 13 commissioner's] hearing. 14 ( c) An entity seeking to acquire property that the entity is 15 authorized to o bt ain through the use of eminent domain may not 16 include a confidentiality provision in an offer or agreement to 17 acquire th e property . The entity shall inform the owner of the 18 property that the owner has the right to : 19 (1) discuss any offer or agreement regarding the 20 entity's acquisition of the property with others ; or 21 (2) keep the offer or agreement confidential , unless 22 the off er or agreement is subject to Chapter 552 , Government Code . 23 (d) A subsequent bona fide purchaser for value from the 24 acquiring [governmental] entity may conc l usively presume that the 25 requirement of this section has been met . This section does not 26 apply to acquisitions of rea l property for which an [a 27 governmental] entity does not have eminent domain authority . 11 1 SECTION 8 . Subchapter B, Chapter 21 , Property Code, is 2 amended by add in g Section 21. 0113 to read as follows: 3 Sec . 21. 0113. BONA FIDE OFFER REQUIRED. ( a ) An en t it y 4 with eminent domain authority that wants to acquire real property r-' 5 for a pub l ic use must make a bona fide offer to acquire the property 6 from the property owner voluntarily. 7 (b) An entity with eminent domain authority has made a bona 8 fide offer if: 9 (1) an initial offer is made in writing to a property 10 owner; 11 (2) a final offer is made in writing to the property 12 owner ; 13 (3) the final offer is made on or after the 30th day 14 after the date on which the entity makes a written initial offer to 15 the property ow n er ; 16 (4) before making a final offer, the entity obtains a 17 written appraisal from a certified appraiser of the value of the 18 property being acquired and the damages, if any, to any of the 19 property owner 's remaining property ; 20 (5) the final offer is equal to o r greater than the 2 1 amount of the written appraisal obtained by the entity; 22 (6) the following items are included with the final 23 offer or have been previously provided to the owner by the entity : 24 (A) a copy of the written appraisal; 25 (B) a copy of the deed, easement , or other 26 instrument conveying the property sought to be acquired; and 27 (C) the landowner's bill of rights statement 12 u • .D . L~V • .LO 1 prescribed by Section 21 .0112; and 2 ( 7) the entity provides the property owner with at 3 least 14 days to respond to the final off er and the property owner 4 does not agree to the terms of the final off er within that period . 5 SECTION 9 . Sect ion 21. 012, Property Code , is amended to 6 read as follows: 7 Sec. 21 .012 . CONDEMNATION PETITION . (a) If an entity [.:E-fi-e. 8 United States 1 this state 1 a political subdivision of this state 1 a 9 corporation] with eminent domain authority[, or an irrigation , 10 water improvement , or 'dater po',rnr contro l district created by law ] 11 wants to acquire real property for public u _se but is unable to agree 12 with the owner of the property on the amount of damages , the 13 [condemning] entity may begin a condemnation proceeding by filing a 14 petition in the proper court . 15 (b ) The petition must : 16 ( 1) describe the property to be condemned; 17 (2) state with specificity the public use [purpose] 18 for which the entity intends to acquire [~] the property; 19 (3) state the name of the owner of the property if the 20 owner is known ; 21 (4) state that the entity and the property owner are 22 unable to agree on the damages; [-aOO] 23 (5) if applicable , state that the entity provided the 24 property owner with the landowner's bill of rights statement in 2 5 accordance with Sect ion 2 1 . 0 112 ; and 26 (6) state that the entity made a bona fide offer to 27 acquire the property from the property owner voluntarily as 13 1 provided by Section 21. 0113. 2 (c) An entity that files a petition under this section must 3 provide a copy of the petition to the property owner by certified 4 mail , return receipt requested . 5 SECTION 1 0 . Subsection (a), Section 21 .0 1 4 , Property Code, 6 is amended to read as follows: 7 (a) The judge of a court in which a condemnation petition is 8 filed or to which an eminent domain case is assigned shall appoint 9 three disinterested real property owners [freeholders] who reside 10 in the county as special commissioners to assess the damages of the 11 owner of the property being condemned . The judge appointing the 12 specia l commissioners shall give preference to persons agreed on by 13 the parties. The judge shall provide each party a reasonable period 14 to strike one of the three commissioners appointed by the judge . If 15 a person f ails to serve as a commissioner or is struck by a party to 16 the suit , the judge shall [ffi-a¥] appoint a replacement. 17 SECTION 1 1. Subsection (a), Section 21 .015, Property Code, 18 is amended to read as follows : 19 (a) The special commissioners in an eminent domain . 20 proceedin g shall promptly schedule a hearing for the parties at the 21 earliest practical time but may not schedule a hearing to assess 22 damages before the 20th day after the date the special 23 commissioners were appointed . The special commissioners shall 24 schedule a hearing for the parties [a-B4 ] at a place that is as near 25 as practical to the property being condemned or at the county seat 26 of the county in which the proceeding is being held . 27 SECTION 1 2 . Subsection (b), Section 21.016 , Property Code , 14 0.D . l\JU • .LO 1 is amended to read as follows: 2 (b) Notice of the hearing must b e served on a party not later 3 than the 20th [~] day before the day set for the hearing . A 4 person competent to testify may serve the notice. 5 SECTION 13. Sect ion 21 . 02 3, Property Code, is amended to 6 read as follows : 7 Sec . 21 .023. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION REQUIRED AT TIME OF 8 ACQUISITION. An [A governmental] ent ity with emi n ent domain 9 authority shall disclose in writing to the property owner , at the 10 time of acquisition of the property through eminent domain , that: 11 (1) the owner or the owner 's heirs , successors, or 12 assigns may be [a-r-e-] entitled to _:_ 13 (A ) repurchase the property under Subchapter E 14 [if the public use for which the property was acquired through 15 eminent d omain is canceled before the 10th anniversary of the date 16 of acquisition]; or 17 (B) request from the entity certain information 18 relating to the use of the prop erty and any actual progress made 19 towq:rd that use; and 20 ( 2) th e repurchase pr ice is t h e pr ice paiq to the owner 21 by the entity at the time the entity acquired the property through 22 eminent domain [fair market value of the property at the time the I 23 public use was canceled]. 24 SECTION 14. Subchapter B, Chapter 21 , Property Code , is 25 amended by adding Section 2 1. 02 5 to read as follows : 26 Sec . 21 . 025 . PRODUCTION OF INFORMATION BY CERTAIN ENTITIES . 27 (a) Notwithstanding any other law , an entity that is not subject 15 1 to Chapter 552 , Government Code , and is authorized by law to acquire 2 private property through the use of eminent domain is required to 3 produce information as provided by this section if the information 4 is: 5 ( 1) requested by a person who owns property that is the 6 subject of a proposed or existing eminent domain proceeding; and 7 (2) related to the taking of the person's private 8 property by the entity through the use of eminent domain . 9 (b) An entity described by Subsection (a) is required under 10 this section only to produce information relating to the 11 condemnation of the specific property owned by the requestor as 12 described in the request'. A request under this section must contain 13 sufficient details to allow the entity to identify the specific 14 tract of land in relation to which the information is sought. 15 (c) The entity shall respond to a request in accordance with 16 the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure as if the request was made in a 17 matter pending before a state district court. 18 (d) Exceptions to disclosure provided by this chapter and 19 the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure apply to the disclosure of 20 information under this section . 21 (e) Jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of this section 22 resides in: 23 24 or 25 26 initiated: 27 (1) the court in which the condemnation was initiated; ( 2) if the condemnation proceeding has not been (A) a court that would have jurisdiction over a 16 0.D . l\JU • .LO 1 proceeding to condemn the requestor 's property; or 2 ( B) a court with eminent domain jurisdiction in 3 the county in which the entity has its principal place of business . 4 ( f) If the entity refuses to produce information requested 5 in accordance with this section a n d the court determines that the 6 refusal violates this section , the court may award the requestor 's 7 reasonable attorney's fees incurred to compel the production of the 8 information . 9 SECTION 15 . Subsection (d), Section 21 .042, Property Code , 1 0 is amended to read as fol l ows : 11 ( d) In estimating injury or benefit under Subsection (c), 12 the special commissioners shall consider an injury or benefit that 13 is peculiar to the property owner and that relates to the property 14 owner's ownership , use , or enjoyment of the particular parcel of 15 real property , including a material impai r ment of direct access on 16 o r off the remaining property that affects the market value of the 17 remaining property , but they may not consider an injury or benefit 18 that the property owner experiences in common with the general 19 community , including circuity of travel and diversion of traffic . 20 In this s u bsection , "direct access " means i ngress and egress on or 21 off a public road , street , or highway at a location where the 22 remaining property adjoins that road , street , or highway. 23 SECTION 16 . Subsections (a) and ( b) ' Section 2 1.046 , 24 Property Code , are amended to read as follows : 25 (a) A department , agency , instr um entality , or political 26 subdivision of this state shall [ffia.¥] prov i de a relocation advisory 27 service for an individual , a family , a business concern , a farming 17 1 or ranching operation, or a nonprofit organization that [if the 2 service] is compatible with the Federal Uniform Relocation 3 Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 4 [Advisory Program], 42 U.S .C .A . 4601 [23 U.S .C .lL 501], et seq . 5 (b) This state or a political subdivision of this state 6 shall [ffia¥], as a cost of acquiring real property ,. pay moving 7 expenses and rental supplements, make relocation payments , provide ' 8 financial assistance to acquire replacement housing , and 9 compensate for expenses incidental to the transfer of the property 10 if an individual, a family , the personal property of a business , a 11 farming or ranching operation, or a nonprofit organization is 12 displaced in connection with the acquisition . 13 SECTION 17. The heading to Section 21 .047 , Property Code , 14 is amended to read as follows : 15 Sec . 21. 047 . ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AND FEES . 16 SECTION 18 . Section 21.047 , Property Code , is amended by 17 adding Subsection ( d ) to read as follows : 18 (d) If a court hearing a suit under this chapter determines 19 that a condemnor did not make a bona fide offer to acquire the 20 property from the property owner voluntarily as required by Section 21 21.0113 , the court shall abate the suit , order the condemnor to make 22 a bona fide off er , and order the condemnor to pay : 23 (1) all costs as provided by Subsection (a); and 24 (2) any reasonable attorn e y's fees and other 25 professional fees incurred by the property owner that are directly 26 related to the violation . 27 SECTION 19. Subchapter E, Chapter 21 , Property Code , is 18 ;::i • Jj • l\J 0 • J_ t5 1 amended to read as follows: 2 SUBCHAPTER E. REPURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY FROM CONDEMNING 3 [GOVERNMENTAL] ENTITY 4 Sec . 21.101. RIGHT OF REPURCHASE [APPLICABILITY]. (a) A 5 person from whom [EJccept as provided in £ubsection (b) / this 6 subchapter applies only to] a real property interest is acquired by 7 an [a governmental] entity through eminent domain for a public use.L 8 or that per son ' s heir s , s u cc es so r s , or assigns , is en t it 1 e d to 9 repurchase the property as provided by this subchapter if: 1 0 (1) the public use for which the property was acquired 11 through eminent domain is [that was] canceled before the property 12 is used for that public use ; 13 (2) no actual progress is made toward the public use 14 for which the property was acquired between the date of acquisition 1 5 and the 10 th anniversary of that date ; or 16 (3) the property becomes unnecessary for the public 17 use for which the property was acquired, or a substantially similar 18 public use , before the 10th anniversary of the date of acquisition . 19 ( b) In this sect ion, 11 actual progress 11 means the comp let ion 20 of two or more of the following actions: 21 (1) the performance of a signi ficant amount of labor 22 to develop the property or other property acquired for the same 23 public use project for which the property owner 's property was 24 acquired ; 25 (2) the provision of a significant amount of materials 26 to develop the property or other property acquired for the same 27 public use project for which the property owner 's property was 19 1 acquired; 2 (3) the hiring of and performance of a significant 3 amount of work by an architect, engineer, or surveyor to prepare a 4 plan or plat that includes the property or other property acquired 5 for the same public use project for which the property owner's 6 property was acquired; 7 (4) application for state or federal funds to develop 8 the property or other property acquired for the same public use 9 project for which the property owner's property was acquired; 10 (5) application for a state or federal permit to 11 develop t h e property or other property acquired for the same public 12 use proje c t for which the property owner's property was acquired; 13 (6) the acquisition of a tract or parcel of real 14 property adjacent to the property for the same public use project 15 for which the owner's pr ope rty was acquired; or 16 (7) for a governmental entity, the adoption by a 17 majority of the entity's governing body at a public hearing of a 18 development plan for a public use project that indicates that the 19 entity will not complete more than one action described by 20 Subdivisions (1)-(6) before the 10th anniversary of the date of 21 acquisition of the property [This subchapter does not apply to a 22 right-of-r,,iay under the jurisdiction of: 23 24 25 [ ( 1) [ ( 2 ) [ ( 3 ) a county, a municipality; or the Te2fas Department of Transportation]. 26 (c ) A district court may determine all issues in any suit 27 regarding the repurchase of a real property interest acquired 20 U . l.J • l'\IU • ..LU 1 through eminent domain by the former property owner or the owner's 2 heirs, successors , or assigns . 3 Sec . 21 .102. NOTICE TO PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNER REQUIRED [A!±! 4 TIMB OF CANCELLATION OF PUBLIC USB]. Not later than the 180th day 5 after the date an entity that acquired a real property interest 6 through eminent domain determines that the former property owner is 7 entitled to repurchase the property under Section 21 .101 [of the 8 cancellation of the public use for ~.1 hich real property \,'as acquired 9 through eminent domain from a property owner under Subchapter B], 10 the [governmental] entity shall send by certified mail, return 11 receipt requested, to the property owner or the owner 's heirs, 12 successors , or assigns a notice containing : 13 (1) an identification , which is not required to be a 14 legal description , of the property that was acquired ; 15 (2) an identification of the public use for which the 16 property ha d been acquired and a statement that : 17 (A) the public use was [has been] canceled before 18 the property was used for the public use; 19 (B) no actual progress was made toward the public 20 use; or 21 (C) the property became unnecessary for the 22 public use , or a substantially similar public use , before the 10th 23 anniversary of the date of acquisition; and 24 ( 3) a description of the person's right under this 25 subchapter to r:epurchase the property . 26 Sec . 21 .1021 . REQUESTS FOR INFORMA T ION REGARDING CONDEMNED 27 PROPERTY . (a) On or after the 10th anniversary of the date on 21 1 which real property was acquired by an entity through eminent 2 domain , a property owner or the owner's heirs , successors , or 3 assigns may :i;-equest that the condemning entity make a determination 4 and provide a statement and other relevant information regarding : 5 (1) whether the public use for which the property was 6 acquired was canceled before the property was used for the public 7 use; 8 (2) whether any actual progr ess was made toward the 9 public use between the date of acquisition and the 10th anniversary 10 of that date , including an itemized description of the progress 11 made , if applicable ; and 1 2 (3) whether the property became unnecessary for the 13 public use , or a substantially similar p ublic use, before the 10th 14 anniversary of the date of acquisition . 15 (b) A request under this sect i on must contain sufficient 16 detail to allow the entity to identify the specific tract of land in 17 relat i on to which the information is sought . 18 ( c) Not later than the 90th day fallowing the date of 19 recei p t of the request for information, the entity shall send a 20 written respo n se by certified mail, return receipt requested , to 21 the reguestor . 22 Sec. 21 .1 022 . LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR REPURCHASE RIGHT . 23 Notwithstanding Sectio n 21 .1 03, the right to re pu rchase provided by 24 this subchapter is extinguished on the first anniversary of the . 25 expi rat ion of the period for an ent ity to provide notice under 26 Section 21.102 if the entity : 27 (1) is required to provide notice under Section 22 ;::; • .t\ • l\J 0 • J_ t) 1 21 .102; 2 (2) makes a good faith effort to locate and provide 3 notice to each person entitled to notice before the expiration of 4 the deadline for providing notice under that section ; and 5 ( 3) does not receive a response to any not ice provided 6 under that section in the period for response prescribed by Section 7 21.103 . 8 Sec. 21.103 . RESALE OF PROPERTY ; PRICE . (a) Not later 9 than the 180th day after the date of the postmark on ~ [~] notice 10 sent under Section 21 .102 or a response to a request made under 11 Section 21.1021 that indicates that the proper.ty owner , or the 12 13 owner's heirs, successors , the property interest in or assigns, is entitled to repurchase accordance with Section 21.101 , the 14 property owner or the owner's heirs , successors , or assigns must 15 notify the [governmental] entity of the person 's intent to 16 repurchase the property interest under this subchapter . 17 (b) As soon as practicable after receipt of a notice of 18 intent to repurchase [the notification] under Subsection (a), the 19 [governmental] entity shall offer to sell the property interest to 20 the person for the price paid to the owner by the entity at the time 21 the entity acquired the property through eminent domain [.f..a..i..r 22 market value of the property at the time the public use ~.'as 23 canceled ]. The person's right to repurchase the property expires 24 on the 90th day after the date on which the [governmental] entity 25 makes the off er . 26 SECTION 20 . Section 202 .021 , Transportation Code , is 27 amended by adding Subsection ( j) to read as follows : 23 1 (j) The standard for determination of the fair value of the 2 state 's interest in access rights to a highway right-of-way is the 3 same legal standard that is applied by the commission in the: 4 (1) acquisition of access rights under Subchapter D , 5 Chapter 203; and 6 (2) payment of damages in the exercise of the 7 authority, under Sub chapter C, Chapter 203 , for impairment of 8 highway access to or from real property where the real property 9 adjoins the highway. 10 SECTION 21 . Section 54 .209 , Water Code , is amended to read 11 12 13 14 as follows : Sec . 54 .209 . LIMITATION ON USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN . A district may not exercise the power of eminent domain outside the district boundaries to acquire: 15 (1) a site for a water treatment plant, water storage 16 facility, wastewater treatment plant , or wastewater disposal .17 plant; 18 (2) a site for a park , swimming pool, or other 19 recreational facility, as defined by Section 49 .462 [e2rnept a 20 trail] ; 21 ( 3 ) [a site for a trail on real property designated as 22 a homestead as defined by Section 41 . 002 / Property Code 1 or 23 [+4+] an exclusive easement through a county regional 24 parki.....2..!. 25 (4) a site or easement for a road project . 26 SECTION 22. Section 1, Chapter 178 (S.B. 289), Acts of the 27 56th Legislature, Regular Session , 1959 (Article 3183b-l, Vernon's 24 ;::,.!). l\JO . 1-~ 1 T exas Civil Statutes), is amended t o read as fallows : 2 Sec . 1 . Except as prov i ded by this sectio n, an d 3 notwithstanding any other law , any [~] nonprofit corporatio n 4 i ncorporated under the laws of this state for purely charitable 5 pu rposes and which is directly affiliated or associated with a 6 medical center having a medical sc h ool recognized by the Council o n 7 Medical Education and Hospitals of the Ame r ican Medical Associatio n 8 as an integral part of its establishment , and which has for a 9 purpose of its incorporation the provision or support of medica l 10 f acilit i es or se r vices for the use and benef~t of the public , an d 11 which is situated in any county of this state havi n g a population i n 12 excess of six hundred thousand (600 ,000) inhabitants according to 13 the most recent Federal Census shall have the power of eminent 14 domain and condemnation for the purposes set forth in Section 2 and 15 Section 3 of this Act . A charitabl e corpo r ation described by this 16 section may not exercise the power of emi n ent do main an d 17 condemnation to acquire a detached , single-family residential 18 property or a mu l tifamily residential pro p erty that contains ei g ht 19 or f ewer d wellin g units . 20 SEC T ION 23 . (a) Section 552 .0037 , Government Code , is 21 repealed . 22 (b) Sect i on 2 1.024 , Property Code , is repealed . 23 SECTION 24 . Section 11 .155 , Education Code , Chapter 2206 , 24 Governme n t Code , Sections 25 1.001 , 261 .00 1, 263 .201 , and 273 .002 , 25 L ocal Government Code , Chapter 2 1, Prope r ty Code , a n d Sec t ion 1 , 26 Chapter 178 ( S . B . 289) , Acts of the 56th Legislature , Regular 27 Session , 1 959 (Article 3183b -l , Vernon 's T exas Civil Statutes), as 25 1 amended by this Act, apply only to a condemnation proceeding in 2 which the petition is filed on or after the effective date of this 3 Act and to any property condemned through the proceeding. A 4 condemnation proceeding in which the petition is filed before the 5 effective date of this Act and any property condemned through the 6 proceeding are governed by the law in effect immediately before 7 that date, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose. 8 SECTION 25 . The change in law made by this Act to Section 9 202 .021, Transportation Code, applies only to a sale or transfer 10 under that section that occurs on or after the effective date of 11 this Act . A sale or transfer that occurs before the effective date 12 of this Act is governed by the law applicable to the sale or 13 transfer immediately before the effective date of this Act , and 14 that law is continued in effect for that purpose . 15 SECTION 26 . The changes in law made by this Act to Section 16 54 .209 , Water Code, apply only to a condemnation proceeding in 17 which the petition is filed on or after the effective date of this 18 Act . A condemnation proceeding in which the petition is filed 19 before the effective date of this Act is governed by the law in 20 effect on the date the petition was filed , and that law is continued 21 in effect for that purpose . 22 SECTION 27. This Act takes effect September 1, 2011. 26 • President of the Senate I hereby certify that February 9 , 2011, by the S.B. No. 18 Speaker of the House S .B . No . 18 passed the Senate on following vote : Yeas 31, Nays O ; April 19 , 2011 , Senate refused to concur in House amendments and requested appointment of Conference Committee ; April 28 , 2011 , House granted request of the Senate ; May 6 , 2011 , Senate adopted Conference Committee Report by the following vote: Yeas 30 , Nays 0. Secretary of the Senate I hereby certify that S .B . No . 18 passed the House, with a men dments , on April 14 , 2011 , by the following vote : Yeas 144, Nays 0, one present not voting; April 28 , 2011 , House granted request of the Senate for appointment of Conference Committee; May 5, 2011 , House adopted Conference Committee Report by the fallowing vote : Yeas 145, Nays 0 , two present not voting . Chief Clerk of the House Approved : Date Governor 27 The City of C ollege Station, Texas Embracing the Past, Ex ploring th e Future. P .O. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas A venue • Coll ege Station, TX 77842 • www .ci.coll ege-sta ti o n . tx. u s MEMORANDUM To: Glenn Brown, Assistant City Manager Roxanne Nemcik, Assistant City Attorney Mark Smith, Public Works Director From: Subject: Date: Kelly Templin, Development Services Director ~ne Kee, City Planner Sabine Kuenzel , Senior Planner Judy Downs, Greenways Program Manager OOJ Unified Development Ordinance 0 .,.._., Greenway Implementation Considerations March 12 , 2002 (979) 764-3500 Attached you will find a summary of greenway implementation consideratio~ as discussed at our December 17 meeting. The summary includes the most stringent exaction methodology, to our existing policy of accepting dedications . The second attachment is Ted Mayo's considerations that he provided before he left . Since our December meeting, I met with Roxanne to discuss the issues ; and provided her with the name of an attorney that was involved in these matters while employed by the City of Denton. Additionally, I have piles of studies and reference materials , most of which were referred to me by Bobby Hernandez with the EPA, but a lot of research was also completed by Jennifer Mixon before my employment with the City . I'm looking forward to meeting again so that we can put this matter to rest one way or the other, and thought that we might meet once more before the joint City Council/Commission meeting in April. Attachments H o m e of Texas A&M U ni versity Implementation of Greenways into the Unified Development Code Purpose : Specification of various methodologies to incorporate acquisition of greenway properties into the Unified Development Ordinance. Main points to relate : 1. Greenway issues should be separated from the parkland dedication ordinance and be viewed in the context of flood control , water quality and quality of life . 2. Greenways will relate to parkland in terms of linkages and connections. 3. The City of College Station has approximately 2200 acres in the FEMA 100-year flood plain , 800 acres of that are developable ; approximately 600 acres are undeveloped . 4 . The. City should be viewed under two separate conditions; the currently developed stream channels in the northern part of the community, and the mostly undeveloped southern part of the community . Future development areas would also include areas proposed for annexation or located in the ETJ. The City can acquire the greenway in several ways . The following listing details the methods from most stringent to our existing methodology . Most stringent -Watershed-wide Base Flood Elevation (BFE): 100-year floodplain - fully developed watershed land use. Zero Rise through emctions similar to the method used by the City of Allen, Texas and other municipalities within the Rowlett Creek watershed. The 100 year base flood elevation (BFE) and floodplain used for design, planning and acquisition is evaluated upon total storm water discharge characteristics that will , through continued urbanization, be generated from a fully developed watershed . The City of Allen has a floodplain dedication ordinance that requires the dedication of all the 100-year floodplain area of primary creeks throughout the city. Dedication is required at the time of final platting . The City views creekways as stormwater channels, that serve additional dual purposes of offering open space and trail use. They also require the developer to construct hike/bike trails along the full length of the greenways at no cost to the City. The developers have constructed approximately 10 miles of trails, and charge higher lot fees for all lots across from the trails system. The City believes this is a part of infrastructure development . Furthermore, if the fully developed flood conditions keep water within the banks of the creek, the City requires the developer to dedicate enough land outside the floodplain to accommodate the trail ; this provides a buffer from creek bank erosion. They also require, where possible, that only single loaded streets be constructed adjacent to greenways . This allows for unlimited access in times of floods , .·' and it opens this space up for all to enjoy . No floodplain filling is allowed on an y of the primary streams. Zero ri se throug h exactions can be less stringent than the methodology used by the City of Allen which exacts based on ultimate development. The City of College Station currently uses the FEMA l 00-year base floodplain and we could continue to use those to avoid the expense of mapping the entire City . Flood plain areas within the City that are currently unmapped would require the developer to provide the information if the development is greater than 5 acres or 50 lots . Moderately stringent control measures would utilize the previously proposed zero rise ordinance language and incorporate the proposed riparian buffer ordinance. This method of protecting the floodplain only allows reclamation if: 1. There is no rise in the 100-year base flood elevation 2 . There is no increased flooding to other property 3 . There is no increase in erosive water velocity . 4 . There is no alteration of undeveloped portions of primary stream channels A proposal and power point presentation were previously prepared and presented detailing this method of floodplain/greenway protection. The riparian (stream) buffer portion of this method would require developers to provide buffers adjacent to stream systems which could be as small as 100 feet or could encompass the entire 100-year floodplain . A proposed buffer ordinance is attached . The least stringent method to acquire and protect floodplains and greenways would be to continue as the City of College Station has. This involves volunteer greenway dedications as new developments are brought into development services for review, and/or the actual purchase of the 100-year floodplain with the use of greenway bond funds . This method could be improved by requiring that the dedication occur when the first plat is submitted rather than at the end , and through the enforcement of erosion and sedimentation control measures before and during construction. COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF FLOODPLAIN/GREENWAY EXACTIONS 1. The developer would realize savings in stormwater retention/detention structures as the preserved floodplain could accommodate much of this need . We understand that the stormwater detention facility on the Crowley development cost the developer approximately $500,000 . 2 . The City would realize savings in the operation and maintenance of drainage facilities . 3. The state and federal permitting process for the development community would be streamlined . 4 . The City's long term liability may be reduced (i .e. San Antonio example). 5. Implementation of the City's requirements under Phase II of the clean water act would begin through the establishment of riparian buffers (water quality setbacks). Jhere are many other cost/benefit factors that the community realizes through the protection of these natural resources ; they include neighborhood quality of life improvements, habitat protection , and improved water quality . Section I. Background City of College Station, Texas Stream Buffer Ordinance DRAFT Whereas, buffers adjacent to stream systems provide nwnerous environmental protection and resource management benefits which can include the following : a) restoring and maintaining the chemical , physical and biological integrity of the water resources b) removing pollutants delivered in urban stormwater c) reducing erosion and controlling sedimentation d) stabilizing stream banks e) providing infiltration of stonnwater runoff f) maintaining base flow of streams g) contributing the organic matter that is a source of food and energy for the aquatic ecosystem h) providing tree canopy to shade streams and promote desirable aquatic organisms i) providing riparian wildlife habitat j) furnishing scenic value and recreational opportunity It is the desire of the City of College Station to protect and maintain the native vegetation in riparian and wetland areas by implementing specifications for the establishment, protection and maintenance of vegetation along all stream systems within our jurisdictional authority . Section IL Intent The purpose of this ordinance is to establish minimal acceptable requirements for the design of buffers to protect the streams, wetlands and floodplains of the City of College Station, to protect the water quality of watercourses and significant water resources within the City of College Station, to protect the City of College Station's riparian and aquatic ecosystems ; and to provide for the environmentally sound use of the City of College Station's land resources. Section ill. Definitions Active Channel: The area of the stream that is subject to frequent flows (approximately once per one and a half years), and that includes the portion of the channel below where tl1e floodplain flattens . Best Management Practices (BMP's): Conservation practices or management measures which control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by nutrients, animal wastes, toxins, sedirnenl and runoff. Buffer: A vegetated area, including trees , shrubs and herbaceous vegetation, which exists or is established to protect a stream system, lake, or reservoir. Alteration of this natural area is strictly limited. Development: l) The improvement of property for any purpose involving building; 2) Subdivision, or division of a tract or parcel of land in to 2 or more parcels; 3) the combination of any two or more lots, tracts, or parcels of property for any purpose; 4) the preparation of land for any of the above purposes. Non-Tidal Wetland: Those areas not influenced by tidal fluctuations that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Non-point Source Pollution: Pollution which is generated by various land use activities rather than from an identifiable or discrete source, and is conveyed to waterways through natural processes, such as rainfall, storm runoff or ground water seepage rather than direct discharge. One Hundred Year Floodplain: The area of land adjacent to a stream that is subject to inundation during a storm event that has a recurrence interval of one hundred (100) years. Pollution: Any contamination or alteration of the physical, chemical, or biological properties of any waters that will render the waters harmful or detrimental to : public health, safety or welfare; domestic, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, or other legitimate beneficial uses; livestock, wild animals, or birds; fish or other aquatic life. Stream Channel: Part of a water course either naturally or artificially created which contains an intermittent or perennial base flow of groundwater origin. Base flows of groundwater origin can be distinguished by any of the following physical indicators : l) Hydrophytic vegetation, bydric soil or other hydrologic indicators in the area(s) where groundwater enters the stream channel, in the vicinity of the stream headwaters, channel bed or channel banks 2) Flowing water not directly related to a storm event 3) Historical records of a local high groundwater table, such as well and stream gauge records. Stream Order: A classification system for streams based on stream hierarchy. The smaller the stream, the lower its numerical classification. For example, a first order stream does not have tributaries and normally originates from springs and/or seeps. At the confluence of two first order streams, a second order stream begins, and so on. Stream System: A stream channel together with one or both of the following: l) 100-year floodplain and/or 2) Hydrologically-related non-tidal wetlands Streams: Perennial and intermittent watercourses identified through site inspection and USGS maps. Perennial streams are those which are depicted on a USGS map with a solid blue line. Intermittent streams are those which are depicted on a USGS map with a dotted blue line. Water Pollution Hazard: A land use or activity that causes a relatively high risk of potential water pollution. Section IV. Applications A) This ordinance shall apply to all proposed development except that development, which meets waiver or variance criteria as, outlined in Section IX of this regulation. B) This ordinance shall apply to all timber harvesting activities, except those timber harvesting operations which are implementing a forest management plan which has been deemed to be in compliance with the regulations of the buffer ordinance and has received approval from the Texas Conservation and Natural Resources Department. C) This ordinance shall apply to all surface mining operations except that the design standards shall not apply to active surface mining operations that are operating in compliance with an approved Texas Conservation and Natural Resources Department surface mining permit. D) The ordinance shall not apply to agricultural operations that are covered by an approved TCNR conservation plan that includes the application of best management practices . E) Except as provided in Section IX, this ordinance shall apply to all parcels of land, structures and activities which are causing or contributing to : 1) Pollution, including non-point pollution, of the waters of the City of College Station . 2) Erosion or sedimentation of stream channels 3) Degradation of aquatic or riparian habitat Section V. Plan Requirements A) In accordance with section IV of this ordinance, a plan approved by the appropriate agency is required for all development, forest harvesting operations, surface mining operations, and agricultural operations. B) The plan shall set forth an informative, conceptual and schematic representation of the proposed activity by means of maps, graphs, charts, or other written or drawn documents so as to enable the City of College Station an opportunity to make a reasonably informed decision regarding the proposed activity . C) The plan shall contain the following information: 1) a location or vicinity map 2) Field delineated and surveyed streams, springs, seeps, bodies of water, and wetlands (include a minimum of two hundred (200) feet into adjacent properties;). 3) Field delineated and surveyed forest buffers 4) Limits of the ultimate one hundred year floodplain 5) Hydric soils mapped in accordance with the NRCS soil survey of the site area 6) Steep slopes greater than fifteen (15) percent for areas adjacent to and within two hundred (200) feet of streams, wetlands, or other waterbodies . 7) A narrative of the species and distribution of existing vegetation within the buffer D) The buffer plan shall be submitted in conjunction with the required grading plan for any development, and the forest buffer should be clearly delineated on the final grading plan. E) Permanent boundary markers, in the form of signage approved by the City of College Station, shall be installed prior to final approval of the required clearing and grading plan. Signs shall be placed at the edge of the Middle Zone (See Section Vl.E). Section VI Design Standards for Forest Buffers A) A forest buffer for a stream system shall consist of a forested strip of land extending along both sides of a stream and its adjacent wetlands, floodplains or slopes. The forest buffer width shall be adjusted to include contiguous sensitive areas, such as steep slopes or erodible soils, where development or disturbance may adversely affect water quality , streams, wetlands, or other waterbodies. B) 111e forest buffer shall begin at the edge of the stream bank of the active channel. C) The required width for all forest buffers (i .e ., the base width) shall be a minimum of one hundred feet , with the requirement to expand the buffer depending on : l) stream order; 2) percent slope ; 3) 100-year floodplain; 4) wetlands or critical areas. l) ln third order and higher streams , add twenty-five feet to the base width . 2) Forest buffer width shall be modified if there are steep slopes which are within a close proximity to the stream and drain into the stream system . In those cases, the forest buffer width can be adjusted . 3) Forest buffers shall be extended to encompass the entire 100-year floodplain and a zone with minimum width of 25 feet beyond the edge of the floodplain . 4) When wetland or critical areas extend beyond the edge of the required buffer width, the buffer shall be adjusted so that the buffer consists of the ex1ent of the wetland plus a 25-foot zone extending beyond the wetland edge . D) Water Pollution Hazards The following land uses and/or activities are designated as potential water pollution hazards, and must be set back from any stream or waterbody by the distance indicated below : 1) storage of hazardous substances (150 feet) 2) above or below ground petroleum storage facilities (150 feet) 3) drainfields from on-site sewage disposal and treatment systems (i .e ., septic systems -100 feet) 4) raised septic systems (250 feet) 5) solid waste landfills or junkyards (300 feet) 6) confined animals feedlot operations (250 feet) 7) subsurface discharges from a wastewater treatment plant (100 feet) 8) land application ofbiosolids (100 feet) For surface water supplies, the setbacks should be doubled E) The forest buffer shall be composed of three distinct zones , with each zone having its own set of allowable uses and vegetative targets as specified in the ordinance. 1) Zone 1 Streamside Zone a) The function of tl1e streamside zone is to protect the physical and ecological integrity of the stream ecosystem. b) 111e streamside zone will begin at the edge of the stream bank of the active channel and extend a minimum of 25 feet from the top of the bank c) Allowable uses within this zone are highly restricted to : i) flood control structures ii) utility rights of way iii) footpaths iv) road crossings , where pennitted d) The vegetative target for the streamside zone is undisturbed native vegetation. ·. 2) Zone 2 Middle Zone a) The function of the middle zone is to protect key components of the stream and to provide distance between upland development and the streamside zone . b) The middle zone will begin at t11e outer edge of the strcamside zone and extend a minimum of 50 feet plus any additional buffer width as specified in Section VI C . c) Allowable uses within the middle zone are restricted to: i) biking or hiking paths ii) stormwater management facilities with the approval of the City of College Station iii) recreational uses as approved by the City of College Station iv) limited tree clearing witll approval from tlle TCNR d) The vegetative target for the middle zone is mature native vegetation adapted to tlle region. 3) Zone 3 Outer Zone a) The function of the outer zone is to prevent encroaclunent into tlle forest buffer and to filter runoff from residential and commercial development. b) The outer zone will begin at tlle outward edge of the middle zone and provide a mininlum widtll of 25 feet between Zone 2 and tlle nearest permanent structure. c) There shall be no septic systems, permanent structures or impervious cover, with the exception of paths, within the outer zone . d) The vegetative target for the outer zone may vary, although the planting of native vegetation should be encouraged to increase the total width of the buffer. Section VIL Buffer Management and Maintenance A) The forest buffer, including wetlands and floodplains , shall be managed to enhance and maximize the unique value of these resources . Management includes specific limitations on alteration of the natural conditions of these resources . The following practices and activities are restricted within Zones 1 and 2 of the forest buffer, except with approval by theTCNR. 1) Clearing of existing vegetation. 2) Soil disturbance by grading, stripping, or other practices . 3) Filling or dumping 4) Drainage by ditching, underdrains , or other systems 5) Use, storage, or application of pesticides , except for the spot spraying of noxious weeds or non-native species consistent with recommendations of TCNR 6) Housing, grazing, or other maintenance of livestock. 7) Storage or operation of motorized vehicles, except for maintenance and emergency use approved by the City of College Station . B) The following structures, practices , and activities are permitted in the forest buffer, with specific design or maintenance features , subject to the review of the City of College Station : I) Roads, bridges, paths, and utilities : a) An analysis needs to be conducted to ensure that no economically feasible alternative is available. b) The right of way should be the minimum width needed to allow for maintenance access and installation c) The angle of the crossing shall be perpendicular to the stream or buffer in order to minimize clearing requirements. d) The minimum number of road crossings should be used within each subdivision, and no more than one fairway crossing is allowed for every 1,000 feet of buffer. 2) Stormwater management e) An analysis needs to be conducted to ensure that no economically feasible alternative is available, and that the project is either necessary for flood control, or significantly improves the water quality or habitat in the stream. f) In new developments, on-site and non-structural alternatives will be preferred over larger facilities within the stream buffer. g) When constructing stormwater management facilities (i.e ., BMP's), tl1e area cleared will be limited to the area required for construction, and adequate maintenance access, as outlined in the most recent edition of the City of College Station's Stormwater Management Plan. h) Material dredged or otherwise removed from a BMP shall be stored outside tile buffer. 3) Stream restoration projects, facilities and activities approved by TCNR are permitted within the forest buffer. 4) Water quality monitoring and stream gauging are permitted within tile forest buffer, as approved by the City of College Station. 5) Individual trees within the forest buffer may be removed which are in danger of falling, causing damage to dwellings or other structures, or causing blockage of the stream. 6) Other timber cutting techniques approved by the City of College Station may be undertaken within tile forest buffer under tile advice and guidance of tile City of College Station Urban Forester, if necessary to preserve tile forest from extensive pest infestation, disease infestation, or tllreat from fire . C) All plats prepared for recording and all right-of-way plats shall clearly : 1) Show tile extent of any forest buffer on tile subject property by metes and bounds 2) Label the forest buffer 3) Provide a note to reference any forest buffer stating : "There shall be no clearing, grading, construction or disturbance of vegetation except as permitted by the City of College Station. . . 4) Provide a note to reference any protective covenants governing all forest buffer areas stating : 11 Any forest buffer shown hereon is subject to protective covenants which may be found in the land records and which restrict disturbance and use of these areas. 11 D) All forest buffer areas shall be maintained through a declaration of protective covenant, which is required to be submitted for approval by the City of College Station Development Services Division . The covenant shall be recorded in the land records and shall run with the land and continue in perpetuity. E) All lease agreements must contain a notation regarding the presence and location of protective covenants for forest buffer areas, and which shall contain information on the management and maintenance requirements for the forest buffer for the new property owner. F) An offer of dedication of a forest buffer area to the City of College Station shall not be interpreted to mean that this automatically conveys to the general public the right of access to this area . G) The City of College Station Drainage Administrator shall inspect the buffer annually and inunediately following sever stonns for evidence of sediment deposition, erosion, or concentrated flow channels and detennine corrective actions to be taken to ensure the integrity and functions of the forest buffer. H) Forest buffer areas may be allowed to grow into their vegetative target state naturally, but methods to enhance the successional process such as active reforestation may be used when deemed necessary by the City of College Station Urban Forester to ensure the preservation and propagation of the buffer area . Forest buffer areas may also be enhanced through reforestation or other growth techniques as a form of mitigation for achieving buffer preservation requirements . Section VIIL Enforcement Procedures A) The Director of is authorized and empowered to enforce the requirements of this ordinance in accordance with the procedures of this section. B) If, upon inspection or investigation, the Director or his/her designee is of the opinion that any person has violated any provision of this ordinance, he/she shall with reasonable promptness issue a correction notice to the person. Each such notice shall be in writing and shall describe the nature of the violation, including a reference to the provision within this ordinance tliat llaS been violated . In addition, the notice shall set a reasonable time for the abatement and correction of the violation. C) If it is detennined that the violation or violations continue after the time fixed for abatement and correction has expired, the Director shall issue a citation by certified mail to the person who is in violation. Each such notice shall be in writing and shall describe the nature of the violation, including a reference to the provision within this ordinance which has been violated, and what penalty, if any, is proposed to be assessed . The person charged has thirty (30) days within which to contest the citation or proposed assessment of penalty and to file a request for a hearing with the Director or his designee. At the conclusion of this hearing, the Director or his designee will issue a final order, subject to appeal to the appropriate authority. If, within thirty (3)) days from the receipt of the citation issued by the Director, the person fails to contest the citation or proposed assessment of penalty, the citation or proposed assessment of penalty shall be deemed the final order of the Director. \ D) Any person who violates any provision of this ordinance may be liable for any cost or expense incurred as a result thereof by the City of College Station. E) · Penalties which may be assessed for those deemed to be in violation may include : 1) CONSIDERATION OF "0-RlSE" CRJTERIA CITY OF COLLEGE STATION CURRENT STATUS : • Drainage Ordinance Follows FEMA Flood Insurance Requirements Fill Allowed in Flood Fringe Up To 1' Rise in 100 Year Base Flood Elevation Based on Current Development Conditions No Increase in Peak Runoff Caused by Development-Detention normally Required Finished Floor Elevation Required to be l' Above the 100 Year Base Flood Elevation and up to 4' in Some Areas No Development Allowed in Floodway Unless no Increase in 100 Year Base Flood Elevation (Variance Required) Mapping and Modeling based on 2' Topographic Maps Prepared using 1970-1980 technology (Accuracy +/-15%) • 1997 Comprehensive Plan Estimates 2264 Acres ofFEMA 100 Year Floodplain Within the City Limits ; It is Estimated that 1/3 of This Area is Flood Fringe Which Can be Filled In Under the Current Drainage Ordinance • College Station Experienced a 100 Year+ Flood in October 1994 With Approximately 13" of Rainfall in a 24 Hour Period . The Area Upstream of Texas Avenue on Wolf Pen Creek Experienced the Worst Flooding. City Wide About 30 Occupied Dwellings Were Damaged by Rising Water up to a Maximum Depth of 2 .5'. PROPOSED Implement the Greenway Master Plan Criteria Adopted by the College Station City Council on May 27, 1999 • Urban Greenways-Reserve the Floodway Plus as Much Buffer Area as Can Reasonably be Obtained ; Detention Required For All New Development • Suburban Greenways-Reserve the Full 100 Year Floodplain ; No Detention Except for Localized Conditions on Secondary Streams • Rural Greenways-Reserve the Full 100 Year Floodplain Plus Buffer Areas on Each Side if Possible ; No Detention • No Channel Modifications without City Engineer's Approval ; Limit Maximum Velocities ; Require Compensation Storage • Remodel/Remap entire City with Latest Technology and Based on Ultimate Development Per Approved Land Use Plan. IMPACT • Estimate Remodeling Based on Ultimate Development Will Result in Approximately 1' Increase in 100 Year Base Flood Elevation . Estimate Change Due to Latest Mapping Technology to be+/-l '.Net Change Could be +2' to O'. • 1' Increase in 100 Year Base Floodplain Elevation Will Increase Total Floodplain Acreage in City by Approximately 375 Acres • Since the Urban Greenways Along Wolf Pen Creek and Bee Creek are Mostly Developed the Total Flood Fringe Area to be Reserved From Development is Approximately 900 Acres . Of This Amount About 200 Acres Has Voluntarily Been Reserved Along Lick Creek and Spring Creek by Recent and Ongoing Developments. • If the Current Criteria Remains in Effect We Can Expect Increases in the 100 Year Base Flood Elevation as Development of Pervious Open Space Occurs and Possible Flood Damage to Existing Structures That Have Not Experienced Flooding in the Past • Texas A&M University has Committed to Detention on Tributary C of Wolf Pen Creek. This Work Should be Completed in the Next Couple of Years and Will Reduce the Peak Flow Rate of Wolf Pen Creek Just Upstream of Texas Avenue by 20% Greatly Reducing the Flooding in This Area . Financial Impacts • Lost of Value ofDevelopable Acres in the 100 Year Floodplain • Savings to Developer of Cost to Fill And Compact Area in Floodplain-$20,000/Acre • Cost to City to Remap and Remodel-$1 ,000,000 • No Detention- • No Flood Insurance • Increased Value of Property Adjacent to Natural Floodplain First Draft--01/29/02-TDM /Venessa Garza From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Cheryl Wright Friday , June 14 , 201311 :18AM Courtney Kennedy ; Venessa Ga rz a Carol Thompson RE : Park Zone 15 Land Search Project I am comfortable with it. Cheyl From: Courtney Kennedy Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 11:17 AM To: Venessa Garza Cc: Carol Thompson; Cheryl Wright Subject: RE: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project I think that sounds reasonable . Cheryl -are you comfortable w ith it or should we run it by Bond Counsel? -CK From: Venessa Garza Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 7: 14 PM To: Courtney Kennedy Cc: Carol Thompson; Cheryl Wright Subject: RE: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project By definition , greenways typically include areas along creeks but can include any open space for preservation or recreation . Most of the properties we typically look at have already been studied by FEMA (at some level) and have been designated as special flood hazard areas but there are areas that have not been studied that would be valuable to protect and don't fall within that category . The bond language sa ys -"This proposition is intended to provide funding to acquire creek floodplain and floodway in our community for natural drainage, open space and recreation areas ." I think any areas along creeks are greenways so I would need to work with Alan Gibbs to estimate the boundary of the floodplain if hasn 't been studied by FEMA. Let me know what y'all think. Venessa From: Courtney Kennedy Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 10:30 AM To: Venessa Garza Cc: Carol Thompson; Cheryl Wright Subject: RE: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project I'll let Venessa field this one. And there was an important omission in my original emai l -corrected and highlighted below. -CK From: Cheryl Wr ight Sent: Thursday , June 13, 2013 10 :25 AM To: Courtney Kennedy Cc: Carol Thompson; Venessa Garza Subject: RE: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project Courtney, I am not familiar with what criteria constitutes land to be designated as "greenways " but as long as the land falls into that category the use of greenway funds would be appropriate. Is des ignating it as a floodplain the determining factor? Thanks , Cheryl From: Courtney Kennedy Sent: Wednesday, June 12 , 2013 4:20 PM To: Cheryl Wr ight Cc: Carol Thompson; Venessa Garza Subject: FW: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project Cheryl, We are considering purchasing some property for a regional park. The property contains a creek (see attached), but the area has NOT been studied by FEMA to be designated as floodplain. If stud ied by FEMA, it's likely that portions would be designated as floodp lain . Venessa's proposal is to determine an appropriate distance from the creek that would be designated as greenways and using greenways to purchase. Based on the way the proposition is written, I don't think it would be an issue , but want to run it by you as well for your opinion. Venessa's concern is that it isn't designated by FEMA as floodplain . Your thoughts? Thanks , Courtney From: Venessa Garza Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 2:24 PM To: Courtney Kennedy Subject: RE: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project Hey Courtney -Call me when you have second . I've attached a map with the stream that crosses the properties for the question I have . Venessa From: Courtney Kennedy Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 1:20 PM To: Venessa Gar za Cc: Carol Thompson Subject: FW: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project 2 The map is attached. Thanks , CK From: Amy At kins Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 1:00 PM To: Courtney Kennedy Subject: FW: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project Mark's email regarding parkland and greenways with maps attached. -Amy From: Mark McAuliffe Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 11:54 AM To: Chuck Gilman; David Schmitz; Alan Gibbs; Donald Harmon Cc: Ashley A. Dorsett; Peter Lamont; Amy Atkins; Venessa Garza Subject: RE: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project Greetings, The map I will use to navi gate this project is attached. Everyone but Ms . Hollimon (No. 11) seems interested in selling the property. Note that I added No . 8, which is 3 acre tract near the western property line . That was done to square -up the corner. Some "Greenways" properties toward the south were included. Although this is not part of the Park project, I thought it may be worth investigating if Planning is interested in greenways or regional detenti on . Will send a rep ort to you all ne xt week after I meet with Andy White . From: Chuck Gilman Sent: Tuesday, Ma y 21, 2013 8:33 AM To: David Schm itz; Alan Gibbs; Mark McAuliffe; Donald Harmon Cc: Ashley A. Dorsett Subject: RE: Pa rk Zone 15 Land Search Project David, I am sure Mark and Ashley will be happy to help . Would you like us to simply reach out to property owners to gauge their interest, or do you want to begin the process of actually acquiring the property? I ask because, staff is required to get a Needs Reso l ution approved by Council before acquiring property. Typically, we would have Parks submit the item to Council since Parks is familiar with the project, and can speak about the goals and objectives you want to achieve with a Park in this area . Once the NR is approved, we typically have a kickoff meeting with Legal, and then Mark and Ashley can take it from there. Please let me know how you want to proceed -simple phone calls or NR. Thanks, erg From: David Schmitz Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 2:03 PM To: Alan Gibbs; Chuck Gilman; Mark McAuliffe Subject: RE: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project 3 Chuck, I spoke with Kathy about the property (parcel #5} and the fact it wou ld not fit the needs for the reg ion al detention pond . I asked her about the other property we had identified (parcels #8a,c,d,f & #9a,b) and she said to go ahead and begin to contact the owners about purchase for Park property.« File : Zone 15 Inventory of Prospective Property -March 2013.pdf » «File : Zone 15 -26-Ma r ch-2013 .pdf » Obviou sly no firm commitments yet . Let me know if this can be started . Thanks . David Schmitz Director of Parks & Recreation City of College Station 979 -764 -3415 dsc hm itz @cs tx.gov From: Alan Gibbs Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 1:42 PM To: David Schmitz; Chuck Gilman Subject: RE: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project David, The 200 acre Ellington tract is unfortunately in a different watershed which breaks to south ward. The dividing ridge between these two watersheds is just south of Rock Prairie Rd. Alan From: David Schmitz Sent: Monday , April 15, 2013 10:40 AM To: Chuck Gilman; Alan Gibbs Subject: FW: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project Chuck and Alan , Fr ank asked that I get in touch with you about the possibility of utilizing land parcel #5, on Mark's property search map, for t he drainage/detention pond that has been discussed for that area. I am sti ll needing parkland and thi s m ay work if you can use it also . Kill a lot of birds with one stone concept. Thought s? David Schmitz Director of Parks & Recrea t ion City of College St ation 979 -764 -341 5 dschm itz @.cstx.gov From: Mark McAuliffe Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 9:46 AM To: Mark McAuliffe; David Schmitz; Ashley A. Dorsett; Peter Lamont; Amy Atkins Cc: Donald Harmon Subject: RE: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project 4 Corrected memo. «File : Zone 15 -26-March-2013 .pdf » «File: Inventory of Prospective Property -March 2013 .pdf » From: Mark McAuliffe Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 9:34 AM To: Mark McAuliffe; David Schmitz; Ashley A. Dorsett; Peter Lamont; Amy Atkins Cc: Donald Harmon Subject: RE: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project David , Plea se find a memo and map attached . «File: Inventory of Prospective Property -March 2013.pdf » «File : Zone 15 -26 -March-2013 .pdf » -----Original Appointment----- From: Mark McAuliffe Sent: Wedne sda y, March 20, 2013 11:14 AM To: Mark McAuliffe; David Schmitz; Ashley A. Dorsett; Peter Lamont; Amy Atkins Cc: Donald Harmon Subject: Park Zone 15 Land Search Project When: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 3:30 PM -4:30 PM (UTC-06:00) Central Time (US & Canada). Where: PARD World HQ Discuss findings of search for park land . 5 Criteria for Greenway Land Acquisition Strategy for identifying floodplain property to purchase is based on potential development altering the area's natural functions or the need for a proposed trail: (!)Top Priority -Has flooding problems that are affecting the immediate health and safety of citizens - HIGH RISK @ Level 1 -Platted and Zoned for development _ / '3 Level 2 -Not platted but zoned for develo ment vel 3 -not platted or zoned for development -LOW RISK Other criteria considered in determining the need to purchase property for the Greenways Program: Could also serve a parkland need Is adjacent to existing City property Could serve other City needs such as water, sewer, etc. f r City later (negati tial development in th e floo lain . I Venessa Garza From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Venessa, See notes below. Thanks, Ashley From: Venes sa Garza Sent: Friday , December 07, 2012 2:54 PM To: Ashley A. Dorsett Subject: Parcels to Pursue Hey -Here is a li st of Parcels to discuss before you send letters out ... Can you look to see if they're on the market and if ~\ Recently attempted to get dedication of easement on property, landowners not cooperative One landowner did suggest that City buy property however they will probably want quite a bit of money. R37891 : Triangle Oaks, LP .Mc.,· hv \ C -Listed for $172,000 {$2 .99/sf) since 04/24/2012 ~) '14 ' Four PACs since 2006, most recent in July, NAI study required, zone d GC R84672 and 84671 : Regency Parkway, Inc . \ • -Not listed ... good one to pursue \Ji.,., Include R89892 as well? >-( What about the Hwy 30 Partnership property to the SE? They suggested selling to City in 2009 when City was going to purchase an easement on t h e property. R349906 : Inland Western CS CI J.._ ~. Vi __ ._LL·· ~--Not listed "\°\I.I" (,6"" ~ v~v\~-- '-Zoned GC, just purchased last year ... probab ly would not pursue R45713 : TECO , Inc. t' Not listed Remember doing something with this property back in 2009, perha p s Mark remembers what ~» r~2~Ja ck W . Cumpton & Assoc . \ G ~ ~isted for $125,000 {$1.73/sf) si nce 05/02/2011 ti v-o~LIS'IS"~ l~)~· Two PACs since 2006, zoned 0 R44334 : Fi rst Baptist Ch urch of CS 1 I Vene ssa Not l isted Currently pursuing dedication of PUE upon this tract Zoned R4 , church has future plans to put additional park in g here but is not fami lia r with the requirements t his would take 2 G RE ENWAY ACQUISITION POLICY Defi n it ions a. The t erm "Greenways" re fers to an in terconnected networ k of off-road human transportation co r ridors. b. Types include: 1. Recreation Pat h s may be paved or g ra vel 2 . Primitive P ath: unpaved t ra i ls. minimal grad ing and improvements c . The standard Wil list on Greenway Ease m ent is a 20 ' easement grant in perpetu it y . Town of Wi ll iston is respons ible for signage and maintenance. Whi le t he landowne r is covered by Vermont's Landowner Lia b il ity laws, The town of Wi ll iston 's l iabil ity po l icy co v ers the specific trai l easement. 2 Po licy a . The W i!!~sto :1 ~onservatior: C:ommis ::.::c,n seeks Greenway Easements th3t meet th e fol lov.-:nc; conditions 1.There is a greenway designat io n o n the Open space map in the Town Comprehens ive Plan located on or i n the immed iate vic inity of t he property unde r consideration . 2.The Co nserv a tion Commission and/or st aff has do ne a s ite v isit confirming t he su itabi li ty of the proposed ease e nt fitting i n w ith the Wil lis ton greem".t:3 y network. 3.The Conservation Commission and/or staff have discussed the proposed s iting of t he easement wit h the owner or develo per. 4 . The W il l is ton Greenway Easement will be modeled a fter the Vermont Lsnd Trust Standa rd T rail Easemen t docume nt. 5. Fun di ng for Greenway Easeme nts will c o me fr om the Wi l liston Environme ntal Reserve Fund, w ith supp lemental leverag i ng f unds from other sources here available . b . Easements cail be obta in ed in several ways: 1 . Deve lopment process: The Conservat ion Comm ission ca n recommend the spec ific or genera l s iting of a greenway easement to be a condition of t he development's approval. T h is ea sement wo u ld be con v eyed to the town of W ill iston at no outright fee upon approval of the app lication \ I 2. Land Co nservat ion Process: As pa rt of the process of conserving Open Spac e in Willis t on, a specific trai l easement may be crea ed if a link of the p roposed Wil liston Greenway network passes on or near the p rotected land . 3 T r a il development p ro cess Specific sect io ns of the W il liston Greenway network may be p ri oritized as ke y li nks by the Conservat ion Comm iss io n. For these prope rties , the Commission w ou ld proactive ly seek out lan downers on or near t he critical l inks. In this case, Williston wou ld be willing to pay the landowner $1 /linear foot of Greenway Eas ement to offset t he potential red u ction in t he property's v alue as result of granti ng the eas emen t. For G reenway Easements less than 500 feet , the easement fee would be $500 pe r Ease m e nt. In addition, upon la nd o wner reques t, t he Conse rv a t i Commission would i nform to v·n iister o f easeme::: so t hat the ea se!nt.::1t 's effest can be inco rp 0 . atecl i n the to wn's t ax assessm :~m of nit~ prope rty 4 .Tr ali Eas(::r'~"-'" -::-'laiic.~s. '....;::::d o wne rs who have existing tr aris 111ay app roac h the tovm regard ing donatio n of the trai l ease me nt. Un less this tr ai l is v iewed as a "ke y link " as in case #3 above, th e to wn w ould only accept t he easement if it we re d on ated . T he Commission wo uld, upon lan downer req ues t, inform the town liste r of the ease men t so that the easeme n t can be i nco rp or ated in to the town 's tax assessment of t he prop erty Ji.pproved by the Will iston Conservatio n Co mmis s ion 11/18/9 8 I ;· r -r £..-.I t LJ •. ct o 'R ?01 Si R4433f J 443~ ~ lo ~1'1 fZ 13104 -BiJt'1""~ylj5~ R t:f3o<o'1 6.~ ".f-B~Pc'V\7 1340J ~~~~ g l3J ~l_e Joe_ FA.t;.:&1~0. -~~"'*IV'-~ 7_ Scoring System for Greenways Prioritization Matrix Criteria I Linkage: Existing (E) = 5 points Future (F) = 3 points None (N) = 0 points Criteria II Immediacy Of Development In Years: Ongoing = 4 points 1 to 5 Years = 3 points 5 to 10 Years= 2 points 1 O+ Years = 1 point Criteria III Amount Of Undeveloped Land: Substantial = 3 points Moderate = 2 points Minimal= 1 point Not Applicable = 0 points o :\group\admin\reports\greenways\ssgpm .doc Scale 1-5 Layer Zoning Soil Distance to Parks Distance to Schools Distance to Bike Paths Land use • · Mp Prti otiih~-h Ol'\ Layer Zoning Weighted Value Description 45 25 5 Closer to -more suitable 5 Closer to -more suitable 15 Closer to -more suitable 5 100 Weighted Value Description 45 Agricultu ral Open Heavy Industrial Multi-Family Light Industrial High Density Multi-Family Single Family Res ide ntial General Commercial Light Commercial Residential Northgate Core Northgate Transitional Northgate Commercial-Industrial Duple x Residential Administrative/Professional Planned Development District Townhouse Wolf Pen Creek Dev . Corridor Corridor Overlay Rural Residential Subdivision Research and Development College and University Krenek Tap Ove rlay Planned Mixed-Use Development RArlP\tPlnnmPnt nic::trir-t Restricted ~~ 1 - 4 1 --~5 4 2 5 5 2 2 2 4 4 @v ~ 4 Restricted 2 2 1 3 2 ©'v ') ... -.. APPLICATION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF GREENWAYS TRAILS AND OPEN SPACE File # __________ _ Date of Proposal ______ _ ameof Proj ect---------------------------------------- APPLICATION FOR ACCEPTANCE GREENW AYS, TRAILS, AND OPEN SPACE APPLICANT City: __________________ State: ____ Zip : _____ _ Teleph one:( __ ) ________ ---------- TYPE OF PROJECT: (Chec k all th at appl y) Tra il : ______ _ Acqui siti on: _______ _ Develo pment : ____ _ Park: ______ _ Acqui siti on: _______ _ Development : ____ _ Op en Space: ___ _ Acq ui siti on : _______ _ Owner: Is owner aw are o f thi s proposa l? ____ _ Na1n e: ___________________________________ _ Agency: ___________________________________ ~ Address: ___________________________________ ~ Ci ty : _______________ _ State: _____ Zip: ____ _ Teleph o ne :(_) _________________ _ LOCATION AN D DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF ACCEPTANCE: Address: ___________________________________ ~ Desc rip t ion ----------------------------------- Purpose of acquisition or acceptance: Proposed T y p e of Acq ui si tion or accept a nc e: Fe e Simpl e ____ _ Sa le ____ _ Trade _______ _ Conserv ati on Easement: ____ _ Donation : ____ _ Lease: ____ _ POD : _____ _ Other : ------------------------------------- Proposed Type of Development: APPLICATION FOR ACCEPTANCE GREENWAYS TRAILS AND OPEN SPACE Page Two Please explain why this proposal is appropriate for City of College Station acceptance: APPLICATION FOR ACCEPTANCE GREENWAYS, TRAILS, AND OPEN SPACE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION PROPERTY PROFILE/PRELIMINARY EVALUATION Prepared by Staff Fil e No.: ________ _ Date: _________ _ Na1neof Proj ec t : _______________________________________ _ Primary Criteria: (score a ll that apply : 1-10 points each) (maximum score= 80) Score: ________ _ __ Water resources (natural drain ages, strea ms, lakes , ponds, wetland s) __ Riparian co rridor (major strea m corridors, id entifi ed greenways) __ Open s pa ce linkages and trail conn ec ti ons __ Passiv e recreatio na l or educationa l o pportuniti es Wild li fe habitat/corrid or __ Scenjc qua li ty (v iews to and !To m, relat ive visibi lity, visual s ignifican ce) __ Ecosystem preservation; s pec ies di vers ity __ Eco nomic benefits to th e community Feasibility Criteria: (score a ll that appl y: 1-5 point s each) (maximum score= 30) Score: -------- __ Land/easement rights available Favorable terms a nd conditio ns __ Access ibl e to th e publi c __ Ability to combine acqu isition with other grant , mat chin g fund s or partn erships __ Maintenanc e and management mec hani sm __ Spatial d efin iti on and neighborh ood buffers Priority: (score a ll that appl y : 1-10 po ints eac h) (maximum score= 70) Score: _______ _ __ Id entifi ed for conservation in th e Green ways Master Pl an or oth er pl annin g docwnent __ Meets goa ls o f th e Greenways Ma ster Plan __ Serves multipl e purposes __ Accessible to th e public __ Lo ng term regional s ignificance __ Hi gh and immediate development potential __ Communi ty s upport/partnerships Total Score:----------(max imum sco re = 180) Select-p~ with·, h -hoocl p { a.i ~. e'I. ~lude ~~. th~t \S -coc,s -HO~ ~ed A-o. hl~h t.f tall~ on. -pcd"h e){~S-h,;j Of'-pJAhYled. ~ €.rvlo9Ra.p'-'tCS Yv'onth~ PoPu_~· OCCUf~-~ ~Wl-f/~ds -I 0f~sf1+(£) • {ioocl~s-~· @-l0>fctd.cd-a~lop~i#J i'-Ca~noS~ -~iildi"1q p~Y~ - e ne\-V cl!.-velop~ ~le • pul\l"~ Cu51.~ JH.Ae.s, ( P°'""f-l~e'-) \ oo \L l'.\.r fl.l i s . ------n Clf.P-P ~ ~ lllj...kth v-kat 1 --r ~ i stoo-V't\ L,AJ~tbt, * • wuJ:rvL~~s~ ~~bk~ -t ., ~~ , .. J~~ ~ ! J -~ ' ·...J !j-I ii\ < (\ ..! ....... ~ ..... .. ·, ..... ri • ' ... \ <-·.i.-, .... '~ •I' ... 1 - ( ·1 \ \J{ -., -· ~- ,..., ·-· ._,_;J~ v .. {~:;. ( ~ ~ ~s.- Greenways Prioritization Matrix (>~ .... ~ ?Jlt / CREEK SECTION LOCATION TYPE FLOODING EXISTING IMMEDIACY OF AM DESCRIPTION (approximate) PROBLEMS PLAN DEVELOPMENT UN I .... . - I . Wolf Pen Trib A Lincoln (start) to confluence with Main channel (Harvey) Suburban ,v N fl I ~. Wolf Pen Trib B Francis (start) to confluence with Main channel (Harvery) Suburban ,,. tJ i ~ .. Wolf Pen Trib C Campus (start) to confluence with Main channel 0/IJ. of Texas Ave) Suburban ,..1..-y fl ~. Wolf Pen Main Harvey Rd. to Highway 6 Bypass ~o~t-: t.:k> '..-~ ..... ~ L~-"'( Urban _L""L.j_j y --~ .. '1'1 Wolf Pen Main Highway 6 to confluence with Carters~Creek Suburban )·' N iJ Lo+ Bee Main Jersey (start) to confluence with Trib B (Southwood) Suburban ... v v J.J. ~. Bee Trib B - N Fork W of Wellborn (start) to confluence with Trib B and S Fork 0/IJelsh) 1Suburban v wN ...., .,,,,,_ to+ Bee Trib B -S Fork Wellborn (start) to confluence with Trib B and N Fork 0/IJelsh) Suburban L.-N kl t-2 Bee Trib B Welsh to confluence with Main channel, N and S Forks (Southwood) Suburban 1...-y y ~. Bee Main Confluence with Trib B (Southwood) to Texas Ave . Suburban L.-~ y "-~· Bee Main Texas Ave . to Highway 6 Bypass I Urban ~ ..... N N ~-5 Bee TribA Welsh (start) to confluence with Main channel (E of Hwy. 6) Suburban _,, v *--" N 6-1 Bee Ma i n Highway 6 Bypass to confluence with Carters Creek Suburban _,v v N ln+ Lick North Fork Btw. Graham & Rock Prairie (start) to confluence with Main Suburban _,,i..-N N ~I channel (E. of Hwy.6) ---.. Lick South Fork E of Wellborn (start) to confluence with Main channel (E of Hwy.6) 1Suburban N l-~ Lick Main Confluence of N and S Forks (E of Hwy 6) to confluence with Suburban ~ l~-t- Spring Creek (Greens Prairie Road) --Lick Main Confluence with Spring Creek (Greens Prairie) to confluence Suburban tJ OA-°>•i~ with Alum Creek <U ck Creek Park) v I --Lick Main Confluence with ~~._.~;""'reek (Lick Creek Park) to city limits Rural N MA Spring North Fork E of Wellborn (start) to confluence with S Fork and Main Suburban i....I 6 ... 1 channel (Crowley tract) -..... Spring South Fork W end of Crowley tract (start) to confluence with N Fork and Suburban f..t 'i-1 Main channel (Crowley tract) I " -- Spring Main Confluence with N and S Forks (Crowley tract) to Hwy. 6 Suburban f 2-'f Spring Main Hwy. 6 to confluence with Lick Creek (Greens Prairie Road) Suburban -,f\. I l-"Z. Alum Un-named Trib Hwy. 6 (start) to confluence with Lick Creek (Lick Creek Park) Rural .... to~ Alum Main Confluence with Un-named Trib (Lick Creek Park) to confluence Rural l rot' with Lick Creek (Lick Creek Park) -- Carters Mike Davis tract University to Harvey Rural l 1 \ I Dr(~ ~) ,,, .. Carters Harvey to confluence with Bee Creek Rura l ..... ? ~· Wt Carters Confluence with Bee Creek to confluence with Lick Creek Rural .. N f.1 1'.ll t- '> fYJrrc/ 'fi11Kn2..l~~ -J?PS~A'l ~ 5 "'~ YQ-)1'/\ · S\00'11.) " SP 05 I!' ~~ll"" Sd J1 vVs-e· _s ~ iru_+S '10 -i+ F~ J J? v<fl 1 rn '1J-I'! '{fJfOritf\/ru -~ GVvr-vW-~ • '4Ud}J--pc>0'd' c'OSY1r ·/ s ~!Uld -• \Al~ s /j'"UJdd ~ oS 01 ' '"r~O'l/J ~s 0 1.AS!---3 01a a -s '(JJ)?OO ~ ~v./j0 ~ ~ ~ +-s-\ ~as 0 ~,l -VW nq ( ~ '-f ~ / d y;o o lJ' ~' '1,.\J_ f'I\ /~ \!:/ date project -·-····----~I-------·----····-··----------····--··-····· .... ---··-··--------------·-···-··---··-· 2 ----------·-·---·-----····---... ···-----·-------------------------------------------------------------------------··-·-·-···-·· --··-- ---------------·-·----······-----·······------·----------------·-----------------------------------------------5 -·-·-·-··------------------------·-·--·-·---·------------------------------------------------------------------------------···---------- -------.---------------------------------------------------------------------·----------------------------.. -------6 -------------------------------------·-···-----------------------·-····----------------------------------------··-··· --------··· -----·--------------------------------------------------------. ---. ----------------------------···· 7 ·-··----··· ------------------------------------------· ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------.------------ 8 ·9--·------· --··--·---··-·-·-----··--·-·---------------····-·--·-·····-------------·--·-·--·-·----···-------------------···--·----------·-··-·-··-·--·--·--··-··-----------------------·----------------··-····------------------------------------------· ·10·-·--·--· ----···-····--··------------···-·-··--··--·---------------···--··---------·-----------·-·--·-·-··-·------·---------------------------------------------·-····--------------------------·-····-----------------------------------·-·----·----------- 11 ·1·2····-----------------·--------------------------------·-··· ...... --------------------------------·------------------·-···----------------------------·--------------------------·--------------------------------------------------·----------------- --------------------------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------·----------------------------------------------13 -·-····--------------------------------------------·------------------------------------------- ·14··-----------------------------------------------------------········-····-----------------------·-·--·----------·----------------------------------------··-----------------------------·------------------------------------------------------------- --------------· ------------------------------------------------------··------·---------------------------····-·· ···---------------··r---:--:-:-----------------~ task list: 15 13 17 r-r--i-T--111 ] . -,-.-r---~_J-1_ i I I i I I 1-11_1_T ____ I 1 I 1 ----~1· 1---r-11--- 1 ---r--: , , 1 , 1 1 I , , . , i1-1--1 , : :-lw1 , , l . 1 Li 1 ,__J 1 rrf--1 : 1 !--f--1 ; 1 ! 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 _J LLI I : I 1 1-1 j~_j_l __ !_I I I I ! I I 1 1 I I 1' I ! 1' I I ,--, I r--r-: I 1--i-~: li!J1 11111·t-!i !1·:l!rn'' L 1_Ll11111 l lH-1 : i I ! I j_J__j_J I I '. i I ! I I I I I I I i I I i__jj' r-+--:-! ! ! l_j_I I i ! ! ll ! I I I I j' i [ I I i I j-j-1 11Lllj1Jll_i_I -.-f--;··'·1 I Ill 1--:.-i -1 Lli I i i : r-[__'11 I ,1 H i ! 1· ! I ! ll_JI ! ! ,Lf_I I • ' I I I I J-i I I I I ' ' I 111 111-1·1-11 L1'1''-.. 1 _JI ii ~1 -l-1-LJ I _j i I I I I ~· I J I ' 1.·--i-1r-f--l. j I ! 1' 11~1 I I I I i-! .1 1-~1 . I 1 1 I Li~1l __ L_1f.--11 , I I I L' ,. I ·-1'-l ' !--I H . L_L! : I ! ' ,1 1 I '1 -,, I _j I I _LW l_J_j ±ii 1, 1 I I 'I I' I I I I I Ii ii I H i--t-+-+--+-+--!--l--H : I '-J 1 u_c i 1 h ; 1 I 1 -fl i----t--t--+-+--+-+--+--l-1_Jl_1 r-11 I 1' ! ! i_Jj ~PTl~_J=ttl I :-' j j : LL! ! LJ ' . . I L1 I 't_L' ~:',i1 1; ,,·;. ':-1=H11 11 ~~11 I!-~', 111111nr1 I 11 H-L''liil-1-l '' . I I I Ii Ii I I 11 I ! I : I ! I I I ! ' I I ! j 11--i ; -f--: : 1----t--l 111 ,=ftE.,,;.l---J_j_L_t__1 ! 1 1_111.-111 ~ LI I ,I I 1 1 1 I I ' I I ·;'I' 1 1 I 11 . 1 1 ,r-1 ~~1 -n, 111 I , _,, ! ' 1,. ,-11 1 111 1 1 m j : 1 1 . !--, f--f 1 1 1 1 1 r--,, 1 !=ff1 -1. 1 1 I i I I ' I I I r-r-· ' I I 11-u11•I 1,1 ,1:1-11 11 11 !-H ,:.-~:,I! !~~+LLL!i I Lii 1 1ii .1_J_LJ± j ! Ll11ll I ! .1_, ~!LI 11-1--1 I LLi_u f-i' ! L: L f-' I : -W 1 ~1!!111 11 11 1 111111111-ir-u 1 iLLr!1 . ! 11 r1 I' I ! I',' I '' u1 ' _, ' ! I ' i'. =t-r~I I u . ' ! 1_. 1 . r1 , , 1 .,. , · ! 1 L' i--,, ! 1 I I ' . . ,. I ' I I 1 1 I . '·. . I I i I .-1 r--1 . I r 1,1 HI I ~·'+ l ·,11 :·,,I . _Ji 11 I II . I H r-r I I f 1 I IL11 !i :~ i I . ' I ii .-ti--+1-+1 -1---+1---+1-r-,1 I, I I !:-11l ·.u111 ·1 ·r 1 1 1__q J_j_J_ .. ~L[lJ_J -·1 i i-· I : I~ +H I i ··1 I I i=]=J~j-1 I I 1.' I ri t_J , 1 l··nTILl 1 1 ,-1 1 1J I 1 I 1 .. -. ~W/ It?~~ 0 A pprwv'tLL tu N:JoTICl CL ~ l> 0 ev~r a J j 1 ~a~ .-~~tJL CQY\:flta0~ ID Sf1\h.c.t~ Q,{,,"Wfett c.t VV\60.-... So, oco ~ -h\-e.-, ~ J s~ )-httewctt.Jc) -w'v\.CA.1 to SlJhVV\,1 f--)t\h -cfal (L MA;Y\4..6JR'2- ~ i?~~ S~c:R_c,lv~'4" es~~a.u~ _ .su~B~C . -loc~ti 9-Mt!.~"1> -StN~ oil. -~c,\ t1tl1~.s -e~~t - \ ~ulC_ VLt h/lffifc.1 + -f__4./j0t~ Mo)ecJ ~JL-. . -,IZQU _(&'.)\(A.ti c o~W--llG~ -'l d"'1'5 ru c~ec} ~ 1~ ~Lu-( C -:5ubd_ I j._ ~ lci-h -c)v\~crc /Jl/'j~ _-. l f ~ I V:Xrb; V\J--1(11///C ffi:{\. fJ Pm G I b1r<I u\..Q_d l UJ..:hC°Y'.J e~fA.t~. UA'hf CGv-{1(JVVI ~ ~ tVJ..ru&, -f2<1:-UY7 i ~Y'---cl 0~{.,~ - ~ so -(;.(5lµVt0l / - ["(3!ffi/2008fVenessa Garza -Re: Greenway Land Acquisition From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Venessa, Carla Robinson Venessa Garza 3/14/2008 4:34 PM Re: Greenway Land Acquisition Angela Deluca; Harvey Cargill; Mary Ann Powell Any one of us will be glad to help you . If you haven't yet done so, you might start by looking at the rig ht-of-way and land acquisition process . You can find the document on the p: drive under 'administrative polices and procedures'. f ~stions regarding easements vs. purchase, I think we have typically purchased fee interest for the greenways acquisitions. If we purchase easement interests, the appraisal report will typically value the property with only a slight discount, so it makes some sense to buy all of the interest rather than just an easement. But we can explore the benefits of purchasing easement interests if you have some thoughts on the subject. ~~ ontlh ~· When negotiati g to purchase land we offer the appraised value. In certain ci rcum stances we may, only if necessary to avoid condemnation, offer up to the amount it might cost to go through a spec ial commissioners' hearing -currently estimated at $3,000 -$5,000. We have talked about updating this calculation but have yet to do so. Any one of the attorneys may assist you with future land acquisitions so if you would like to meet you can schedule a meeting and include Angela, Mary Ann and myself. It will be nice to meet you. Carla Carla A. Robinson First Assistant City Attorney City of College Station Phone: (979) 764-3507 Fax : (979) 764-3481 This e-mail and/or attachment is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and /or legally privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all electronic and paper copies of the original message and any attachments. Thank You. >>>Vene ssa Garza 3/14/2008 10 :5 5 AM >>> Hi, I'm the new Greenways Program Manager and was wondering if I cou ld sit down with one of you to talk about acquisition procedures/policies that I need to be made aware of from a legal standpoint as well as the role y'all play in acquisitions . I'll be taking on the land agent role as well as the project manager role and wha t ever other roles I'm not aware of yet :) so I would like to be prepared on how I should represent the City before I started meeting with landowners. Carla -I think you worked on the Resolution Determining Need for the Raintree properties with Mark M. and Bob Cow ell and didn't know if I shou ld be speaking with you directly. I'm currently working on th ese acquisitions with Gene B. A couple of questions I have so far include ... (I realize some of these may need to be directed to someone else) 1. At what point do you need to review the title commitment? 2.Where do we stand with conservation easements? I worked for the City of Raleigh, North Carolina and about half of the Greenway we had were easements. I'd really like to explore this opportunity. 3 . What's ou r liabilify on Greenway we purchase vs . easements? And the impl icatio ns for maintenance and emergency access points? 4. How much above the fair market value are we allowed to offer? The Land Agents have mentioned $3 -5 K. Thank you for your time and let me know who I should set up a meeting with . I look forward to meeting with y'all. Venessa Garza ~ Greenways Program Manager Planning & Development Services City of Colleg e Station Page 1 ~2008 j Venessa Garza -Re : Greenway Land Acquisition 979 -764 -3674 www .cstx.gov Page 2 I Greenway Acquisition Procedure PARCELS IDENTIFIED FOR STAFF ACQUISITION l PARCELS ARE PRIORITIZED FOR ACQUISITION l MAPS AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION PREPARED ON IDENTIFIED PARCELS Registrar of Deeds returns copy ;: or executed Deed/Easement Form • and /or Map to Greenway Staff ~~~ ::: \••• ....... ... ·············.···.··,··.•,·••,''• I GREENWAY STAFF UPDATES PROPERTY FILES, GREENWAY MASTER PLAN MAP, . GREENWAY CORRIDOR MAPS, AND UPDATES INFORMATION SENT TO REAL ESTATE OR Prioritized Listing and Maps/Background Information Sent to Real Est at e Status Report on Acquisition from Real Estate. Greenway Staff updates files containing maps/background information, sends to Real Estate. Greenway Staff lends other support to Real Estate on an "as-needed" basis. COUNTY REGISTRAR OF DEEDS RECORDS DEED OR MAP REAL ESTATE STAFF NEGOTIATE ACQUISITION OR EASEMENT Submit Property to Real Estate Committee for approval recommendation. ;.: =~ ... · .... -: ........ ·.;-:: Obtain an Appraisal for Tax Purposes if requested by the Owner. !•.· Send item to Council for acceptance (Real Estate Committee) Obtain executed Deed/Easement Form from owner/s. . ... : Send Deed/Easement Form to County Registrar of Deeds for recording • ~= %. ., ::: ... : ••,•••'•'•'•'••Y''"'•:-:~_;:.·.-..··': PARCELS IDENTIFIED THROUGH SUBDIVISION REVIEW PROCESS Greenway Staff identifies parce ls during subdivision Review Meetings No Easement Gra nt ed Ea se ment Granted I Item sent to Council for approval (Planning Board), Council action, obtain acceptance and note reservation period (Greenway St aff) For Easeme/i 1 J_ recorded by For Easement recorde d by Map Deed Map to be recorded tak en to County registrar of Deeds by Owner or his agent. .:.·:-·o:·.·:·:·····-:·:·:·:·:·:·!·!:: 7/31/87 w.s. City of College Station Greenway Program Property Purchase Encumberances Owner Appraisal Acreage Freeman (for Parks) $65 ,000 67 Craegor (ED parcel) $285 ,852 102 .9 Swoboda (trail) $210 ,000 54 .7 Schultz $40 ,000 Marsh Reeves $182 ,081 8 .36 OD Butler $340 ,000 17 .03 Ritchie Methodist Church 1.88 Thurmond (Fire Station) $69 ,696 1.6 City Center $800,000 1992629 Owner (Use) Craegor (greenway and ED) Craegor (ED ) Freeman Hartzell Elkins (greenway) Hartzell Elkins (greenway) Marsh Reeves (ED) McGill (greenway) Swoboda (greenway) K TH Kapchinski Kapchinski Rain tree Development Marsh Reeves (greenway) OD Butler Thurmond (Fire Dept) City of Coll ege Station Appraisal Su mmary Thursday, January 24 , 2002 Location Acres Value ($/acre) Thomas 234.81 $1 ,760 ,000 Caruthers $7 ,495 /acre League , Abstract 9 Robert 16.89 $350 ,000 Stevenson $20 ,722/acre League, Abstract 54 67 $8 ,507 /acre Lots 1-10 , 10 lots $104 ,611 Block 6 Sun ($10 ,46 1/lot) Meadows Robert .6479 $6 ,500 Stevenson $10 ,032 /acre League , Abstract 54 38 $21 ,780 Morgan 6.4 $207 ,589 Rector $32 ,284/acre Abstract 46 Morgan 54 .70 $210 ,000 Rector $3 ,838 .85/acre Abstract 46 8 .183 $20 ,000 49 $30,556 46 $11,440 7 .97 $40,000 $5 ,019/acre 8 .36 $1 82 ,081 $21 ,780/acre 17 .03 $34 0 ,000 $19 ,964/acre 1.6 $69,696 $43 ,560/acre City of College Station Greenway Program Property Encumberances summary .x is 612012002 [!,;!!!OY Downs -Re : Ap~ra1sa1s From: To: Date: Subject: Judy, Mark McAuliffe Downs, Judy 8/20/01 8:26AM Re: Appraisals the summary is a good idea. I would do the following ... Appraisal date is not pertinent to Council, I would delete it. Describe locations in layman terms (east side of SH 6 bypass, north of Raintree). Give a brief description of the current property use (grazing, future residential, etc). Give a brief description of the proposed use (bike trails, greenways, etc). If you are going to use it as a hand-out, then blow it up to at least 14 point type. Glenn has taught me that any handout needs to be very brief so the members will pay attention to you rather that reading a detailed sheet. >>>Judy Downs 08/16/01 01 :15PM >>> Mark, I am trying to develop a summary of appraisals as a comparison data base to show City Council. Mark thought that you would be the best one to provide information. Attached is a draft summary to let you know the type of information I wanted to provide . Can you help add to this? Judy Page 1 1 \ F .. . ·, ,. ., . . . ·. '. ',' I " •' ,. ., Owner Use I Type Size Appraised Negotiated Price/Acre Price/Acre Marsh I Comm. 38 ac $21, 780 $26,316 Reeves Freeman Resdn 67 ac $8,507 $8,731 KTH Resdn 8.183 out $20,000 of 18 ac Kapchinski Dry 49 ac $30,556 Kapchinski Flood 46 ac $11,440 I --2s> 2-dO i..---i 3 lJ4Dooo ... \ 5<6~S (pg ' ~~-"".A 2.·., 7iiC ~-.,.,... ' '-"-=- . 1 300 ouu 1 50 432. ( -. I ~_Mil'{,) ~ I 7 :J.gs, ~ sz z \ I 2.K 5 4°1/ i \3 7 .3 lt1 4 0000 ... d.. IS &ft'lp<1 i 4 \ 7J~¥.,., I . _i.-r 1~3 ,~'61o---; "---, ~ I . . I I City of College Station Greenway Program Property Encumberances Owner Acreage Comments Appraisal Cost I Acre Purchased $ 286,852 54 .7 7 .59 Purchased $ 40 ,000 8.36 Purchased $ 211 ,213 17.03 $ 2.15 $ 150 Funding Agreement received 4/14/ $ 441.52 $ 1 ,875 ,887 $ 8 ,873 acquisition sta tus 04 15 2003 5/16 /2008 City of College Stat ion Greenway Progra m Property Enc u mberances Owner Acreage Comments Appraisal Cost I Acre Freeman (for Parks) 67 Purchased $ 69 ,126 $ 1,032 / Craegor (ED parcel) 102.9 Purchased $ 285 852 $ 2 ,778 ~ Researching easement b Swoboda (trail) 54.7 prescription $ 35 ,000 $ 640 Schultz 7.59 urchased 40 ,000 $ 5 ,270 Jim West said they are waiting to receive ED arsh Reeves 8 .36 payment $ 182 ,081 $ 21 ,780 OD Butler attorney $ $ 19,965 Survey ordered $ $ 8 ,658 $ 43 ,560 7 ., $ 11 ,905 $ 150 $ 330 ,000 $ 2 ,200 441 .52 $ 2,766 ,555 $ 13 ,393 acq uisition statu s 05 02 2002 5/16/2008 ~--;---------------+------+------G_r,.e_en_w~ay.___:s'---"--S -'-'-um'-'-"-'m_,a'-'--1ry1_ ____ +------l-------------·-·-1_11_~.?_Q0 4 !9_:4_0 ~=~===========================:==:A~c~t-=u-a~l~=~~=~~A~ct~u=a-=1:-_-_-+-t-_-_--=-=-...,..A~ct~u:a .....,1:-_-_-~:-_-_-=-A=c:tu=a=l===:====A;:ct=u:_;;a'--1-_-_--=:1=--_P_r_o_j_ec-t-ed _ __,_ __ P_r--oj--_e-ct-ed __ _ FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 rB_e~g_in_ni_n~gB_a _la_nc_e ________ --t-_$ ___ -_~$ __ 5_0_1~,2_43-+_$ __ 5_3_1 ~,7_0_3 +-$ __ 7_6_5~,2_6_2+-$ __ 1~,4_6_0~,7~6~8_1_$.:..._-=-2 ,~2~64~,~93.:....:.7_ ,_J. __ 1 ,§J~~?..Q_ 1=-~--------------+------+------+-------+-------+--------1---·------1·-------------Revenues 9,900 1-....,-,,--------------+------+-,.....-----+-------+-------+-------i--------l----------·-Greenways Bond Funds $ 500,000 $ -$ 500 ,000 $ 785 ,000 $ 1,000 ,000 $ 855,000 $ 1--1---~-----------1---~--t------+-'-----~--t-'------'--+----'----'--l-'---~--+----------- lnterest Income 5,760 30 ,460 42 ,300 35,960 36 ,540 31,840 Revenue Total $ 505,760 $ 30 ,460 $ 542 ,300 $ 820 ,960 $ 1,036,540 $ 886 ,840 $ 9 ,900 1 _T_o~ta_l _F _un_d_s_A_v_a _ila_b_le _______ --+~$ __ 5_0_5 ~,7_60-1--~$ __ 5_3_1 ~,7_03-1--~$ __ 1~,0_7_4~,0_0_3 -+-$ __ 1~,5_8_6~,2_2_2 -+-$ __ 2~,4_9_7~,3_0_8-+-$'----'-3,~1 ~S _1~,~7_7'-'1~~----~~?5 .~?._0~ l--'--·--------------+------+------l-------+------+-------1------------------·-Expend itures Business Park II -Craegor Purchase $ - $ 285 ,852 $ 1--t---------~-----~-----t------+----· 1 _--+--B_u _si_ne_s_s_P_a_r_k _ll _-_M_a_rs_h_R_ee_v_e_s_P_u_~_h_a~se ____ _, ____ -_+-----------+--------+----2_1_1~,2_8_5-+----- 1_-1-C_o_m_m_u_n_ity,__P_ar_k_-_F_re_e_m_a_n_P _ur_c_ha_s_e_-+-------+-----·---+---------1-------+----------69,126 --=--=--~~~~~ 'l . -r--Fire Station #5 ------3,204 ________ _:: ____ _ 1_-+-C_it,_y _C_e_nt_e_r _-_K__,ap'-c_h_in_s_k_i P_u_r_ch_a_s_e __ -1--------11--------+----------+-------+---------·--~~~.077 ______________ -. 1 I - $ $ -·-$----·--~--- 1--+-R_a_in_t_r_e _e _D_e_ve_l_op'-m_en_t_J_o_in_t _V_en_t_u_re_--+-------11--------+----------+--___ 40 _ _,,_09_9-1---------1-----·-------_ ---··----·-: .. __ Conceptual Greenways Study ---55,957 1--t---~----~--~----+------+-------+---·----t-------+----·------+---·--·--"--·-··----------·-·----·--·-· Miscellaneous Greenways ~enditures --4, 150 747 ----r------+------1----::--:,.-,:-~----:-:-:,....,--,--1-------1--------1---------·-·----------Survey Expenditures --6 ,600 14 ,500 1 --t--~-~----------+------+-------+----~-,-,--t----~-+--------11--------------···---------·- Appraisal Expenditures --3 ,900 5,500 3,200 1 --1-~----'------------+------+---------+----~--1----~-+--------'----1-----------------------Environmental Expendit ires --3, 110 3,251 5 ,600 1--1------~--------t------+------+----~--1----~-t------'----l-------t------···--·--- Bond lssuanceCo~s -----,---·1---4~,_5 _17-+-------~----5~,_12_8-+-____ 5~,4_0_0 -+-____ 1 _1~,~~ 10 ,000 -·-- Future Greenways Purchases and Expen -----200 ,000 1,685 ,270 522 ,_=r __ x.._.e_n_d_it_ur_e_T_o_ta_l __________ -1 $ 4 ,517 $ -$ 308,740 $ 125,454 $ 232 ,371 $ 1,4-76--,4-0--7-+ ___ $_-··------~~~~-2~7_0_ Ending Balance $ 501 ,243 $ 531 ,7 03 $ 765 ,262 $ 1,460 ,768 $ 2,264 ,937 $ 1,675,370 __ ~-----·-··· .: .. --- ----r-··--------------------1-------1--------l-------+-------+--------l-------·-+--·-----·· 1----i--·-·---------------+------11--------t---------1------+-------->-----------···--· .. ---- Greenways Summary 8/1212004 14 :52 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Projected Projected FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 Beginning Balance $ -' $ 501 ,243 $ 531,703 $ 765,262 $ 1,460,768 $ 2,264 ,937 $ 1,675,370 Revenues Greenways Bond Funds $ 500 ,000 $ -$ 500 ,000 $ 785,000 $ 1,000 ,000 $ 855 ,000 $ - Interest Income 5 ,760 30,460 42 ,300 35,960 36 ,540 31,840 9,900 Revenue Total $ 505 ,760 $ 30,460 $ 542 ,300 $ 820,960 $ 1 ,036 ,540 $ 886 ,840 $ 9 ,900 Total Funds Available $ 505 ,760 $ 531 ,703 $ 1,074 ,003 $ 1,586,222 $ 2,497,308 $ 3, 151 ,777 $ 1,685,270 Expenditures Business Park II -Craegor Purchase $ -$ -$ 285 ,852 $ -$ -$ -$ - Business Park II -Marsh Reeves Purchase ---211 ,285 -- Community Park -Freeman Purchase -----69 ,12-6 - Fire Station #5 ------r 3 ,204... / - City Center -Kapchinski Purchase -- ---1, 194,077 - Raintree Development Joint Venture ---40,099 --- Conceptual Greenways Study , ---55,957 --- Miscellaneous Greenways Expenditures --4 ,150 747 522 -- Survey Expenditures --6 ,600 14,500 --- Appraisal Expenditures --3 ,900 5,500 3,200 -- Environmental Expenditires --3 ,110 3,251 5,600 -- Bond Issuance Costs 4 ,517 -5,128 5,400 11 ,764 10,000 - Future Greenways Purchases and Expen -----200 ,000 1,685 ,270 Expenditure Total $ 4 ,517 $ -$ 308 ,740 $ 125,454 $ 232,371 $ 1,476 ,407 $ 1,685 ,270 Ending Balance $ 501 ,243 $ 531 ,703 $ 765 ,262 $ 1,460,768 $ 2 ,264 ,937 $ 1,675 ,370 $ - Greenways Status 11/29/04 Tract Acreage Type Purchase Price Cost/Acre Pebble Creek 258.21 Private Dedication Craegor 102.9 Purchase $ 285 ,852 .00 $ 2 ,7 ?7 .~ Freeman 67 Purchase $ 69 , 126.00 $ 1,031 .73 - C ity Center 42 Purchase $ 1, 194,077 .00 $ 28,430.40 Springbrook HOA 18.22 Private Dedication ---- Castlegate 11.237 Private Dedication -- Woodland Hills 10.7 Public Dedication Marsh-Reeves 8 .36 Purchase $ 211 ,285 .00 $ 25_L2 ~l:_ 33 __ Sun Meadows 7.8 Private Dedication Schulz 7 .59 Purchase $ 40 ,099 .Q_Q_ $ 5 ,281:__'!_!_ Head Lake 7 .05 Donation ·------··- Westfield Addition 2.45 Public Dedication -~·------- North Forest 2.434 Public Dedication -Fire Station #5 1.6 Purchase $ 3 ,204.00 $ 2 ,002 .50 Graham Corner 1.093 Public Dedication ··--- Spring Meadows 0 .71 Public Dedication --·----- Bridlegate 0 .6072 Private Dedication ----- T .C.C. 0 .5 Public Dedication Aggieland Fitness Center 0.477 Public Dedication Spring Creek 0.419 Private Dedication --··- Westfield Village 0 .37 Public Dedication -- Ag_gieland Subdivision 0.23 Public Dedication TOTAL 551.9572 $ 1,803,643.00 Misc. Expenses $ 143,847.00 - EXPENDITURES $ 1,947,490.00 BALANCE AVAILABLE $ 1,685,270.00 -- Private Dedication Total 296.4932 Public Dedication Total 18 .964 -- Donation Total 7 .05 ··--------·----- Purchase Total 229.45 -TOTAL 551.9572 +----------- ·- - - - ·- Pending ------ Tract Acreage Type Ritchey 76 Purchase Animate Habitat 75 Purchase Crowley 70.587 Public or Private Dedication ·---- Alexandria 16 Public Dedication Shenandoah 9.4 Purchase -- Academy 4.4 Public Dedication Townwell 1.464 Purchase ·---------· TOTAL 252.851 G reenways e 1ca ions an D d" f dA cq1 Greenway Ded icat ions Subd ivision Public (total acres) Private (total acres) Pending (total acres) IC North Forest (Schultz) 2.445 B T .C .C . (Canyon Creek) 0.5 B Steeplechase B Pebble Creek (golf course) 258.21 LI Bridlegate 0.6072 Li Aggieland Subdivision 0 .23 Li Sun Meadows 7.8 Li Aggieland Fitness Center 0.477 L i Graham Corner Plaza 1.093 Li Springbrook HOA (Hidden Hollow, Cypress Meadows , Oakgrove) 18.22 L Alexandria 16 Li Westfield Additon (Phase 1) II Westfield Add iton (Phase 3) 2.45 D Westfield Village (Phase 6) 0 .37 Li Edelweiss Gartens Li Woodland Hills 10.7 ~ Spring Meadows (formerly Spring Bran ch ) 0 .71 S1 Reatta Meadows (Se a back) S1 Shenandoah S i Spring Creek Townhomes 0.419 S1 Castlegate 11.237 S1 Villas of Harvey ur total 16.53 296.4932 18.445 Greenway Acquisitions Subdivision/Owner Public (total acres) Pending (total acres) Rejected (total acres) c Alum Creek (Paul Clarke) 245 A Kapchinski 42 .J B . Head Lake 7 tit.dlr AA11V" B Swoboda 54.7 B1 OD Butler 17.03 Bi . Freeman 67 v Li Ritchey , 140.44 Li Craegor 103 V Sr Thurmond 2 s~ Marsh Reeves 8V Sr Cashion 12.39 Wi Schultz 8 IW total 237 385.44 84.12 updated January 28 , 2004 Greenways Dedications and Acql) Parks Subdivision Public (total acres) Private (total acres) Pending (total acres) C1 North Forest (Schultz) B~ T .C .C . (Canyon Creek) Bl Steeplechase 8.998 Bt Pebble Creek lii Bridlegate Lii Aggieland Subd ivis ion Li l Sun Meadows Lii Aggieland Fitness Center Lii Graham Corner Plaza Li Springbrook HOA (Hidden Hollow, Cypress Meadows, Oakgrove ) Li Alexandria Li Westfield Add iton (Phase 1) 4.299 Li Westfield Additon (Phase 3) Li Westfield Village (phase 1) Li 1 Edelweiss Gartens 7 .743 Li Woodland Hills 3.21 SI Spring Branch , aka Spring Meadows S1 Castlegate S1 Reatta Meadows (Seaback) 3 S1 Shenandoah 8 .069 6.4 S1 Villas of Harvey* 11 .82 ur total 32 .3 19 2 1.22 *classified as park/open space I updated October 31 , 2003 constructfon , Texas Parks and WUdlife interpretation , Safe Routes to School , Active Living By Design, and US Fish and Wildlife Recovery Land funding. Only the Recovery Land funds were granted ($200 ,000). • TPWD grants are being targeted this fall . We are participating in public hearings as changes are being proposed to their grant programs this fall . + Develop Guideline Incentives • Guideline incentives are part of the Oty's UDO. Several sections relating to greenway or flood plain dedication are yet to be addressed. Some connectivity issues were addressed as part of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan update. Currently, the City's transportation planner is developing Pedestrian Access policies and criteria. • A search of other cities ' incentive programs was done and is provided in this binder. Strategy #2: Regulation + Amend the Regulations • The UDO has not yet been amended to include a section on greenway development. • In 2003, draft guidelines for acceptance of greenways and a draft riparian buffer ordinance were developed. + Monitor the parkland dedication ordinance • Parks staff and the Parks Board continue to struggle with accepting greenways and to also meet their park needs. In some areas, parks adjacent to greenways are being accepted. This discussion is ongoing. Our analysis shows that the Parks department has accepted 54. 5 acres of park that are also greenways. This analysis suggests that the development community would rather dedicate greenways as parks since it contributes to their parkland dedication requirement. However, the Parks Department may not receive adequate space for the development of traditional recreational facilities. + Amend the City's drainage ordinance • The Director of Public Works drafted Drainage ordinance amendments . These changes are pending inclusion in the UDO. + Investigate overlay zones • Development Services staff does not recommend the rezoning of greenways (which are generally zoned AO) to a higher zoning classification. Leaving the greenway AO precludes intensive development. + Amend the Zoning Ordinance • This will be a function of the revised UDO. • Future annexations should require greenway dedication • This strategy is outstanding. The City's legal department does not believe we can require this. Strategy #3: Construction, Maintenance, and Operations • Acquire funding for greenway development . • $1 mHlion in Capital Improvement Plan funding to buHd hike and bike traHs was passed in 2003 in the City bond election. • Design and Construct trails • The bond funds should be leveraged with other monies. • Public traHs that have been constructed meet the plan guidelines, subdivision ordinance guidelines and AASHTO standards. • Develop a program for long term maintenance • Outstanding implementation strategy. It is proposed that an operations and maintenance plan be included in the master plan update. • Incorporate maintenance costs into future budgets • Outstanding implementation strategy. It is proposed this would be addressed along with the above goal of developing an operations and maintenance plan. • Design greenways in floodplains to handle flood water • Kristan Clann and Laura Harris attended a stream and riparian r~storation workshop in 2004. • As we negotiate for greenways, we have a goal of ensuring the floodway and floodplain are left undeveloped and in their natural state. Section #4: Coordination/Promotion + Funding a staff position • Strategy implemented with the hiring of a Greenways Program Manager. + Coordinate with other agencies • Staff has developed liaisons with TxDOT, the Army Corps of Engineers, US Fish and WHdlife Service, TAMU and others for program implementation . • Monitor and Advocate a Greenways System • Implementation continues through the Brazos Greenways Council. + Engage Neighborhood Associations • Meetjngs have occurred wjth several HOA 's. • Kristan js presenting at the September Nejghborhood Semjnar Supper. + Develop and maintain a detailed inventory • A student jntern worked on thjs project. The detaHed jnventory js also proposed as part of the Master Plan update and should be an ongojng project. + Provide for access to greenways • Ongojng, jn collaboration wjth the Parks Dept. + Develop and Maintain Public Information • Ongojng. 11,000 copjes of the greenways and traHs pamphlet have been djstributed and advertjsements were placed in the City calendar. • Through the task force recommendations, we wW update the greenways brochure to reflect the update. • Krjstan js workjng wjth BGC and (jty of Bryan to develop a comprehensive brochure of traHs in Bf CS and TAMU. Neighborhood Connectivity Survey Results Q : How do your children get to school? Walk 9% Bike 10% School Bus 17% Parent drop-off 55% Carpool 2% Other 7% Q : Which neighborhood would you chose? IA= 60% Is= 40% Neighborhood A: is developed around a well connected street system with many ways to get in and out of the neighborhood. Traffic is dispersed evenly throughout all neighborhood streets. There is minimal congestion when entering or leaving the neighborhood . Residents are often seen walking and biking on trips to the park and school , on light shopping trips, or for dinner at a nearby restaurant. Every resident in the area lives within 1/4 mile of a transit sto rovidin service to em lo ment, retail , and most residential areas within the ci . Neighborhood B: has two ways to get in and out of the neighborhood . Traffic congestion exists at these two access points during the morning and evening peak hours. Other than these locations , traffic volumes on local streets and the many cul-de-sacs in the neighborhood are low. Residents are often seen walking within the neighborhood for recreation and exercise. For trips outside of the neighborhood, driving is the preferred transportation mode. Q : When buying a home , which characteristics are most important? Location on cul-de-sac 34% Access to sidewalk 38% Access to hike/bike trail 31% Access to on street 19% bicycle facility Access to major roads 43% None of the above 21% Q : Which locations are important to be able to bike/walk from home? School 55% Park 71% Shopping 21% Restaurant 18% Work 23% Recreation 63% None of the above 9% Q : Regarding sidewalks on major roadways , which do you prefer? A sidewalk on one side of the street 7% Sidewalk on both sides of the street 81% Indifferent 12% Q : Regarding sidewalks on residential streets , which do you prefer A sidewalk on one side of the street 27% Sidewalk on both sides of the street 58% Indifferent 15% Q : Regarding sidewalk placement on major roadways, which do you prefer? A sidewalk adjacent to the curb 10% A sidewa lk set back away from the curb 83% Indifferent 7% Q : Regarding sidewalk placement on residential streets , which do you prefer? A sidewa lk adjacent to the curb 44% A sidewa lk set back away from the curb 44% Indifferent 12% Q : Would you like a walking/biking trail adjacent to your home? Yes 60% No 23% Indifferent 17% PROJECT: GREENWAYS PROJECTS PROJECT#: SD9903 FUND: 912 PROJECT BUDGET: $3,640 ,000 PROJECT FUNDING MANAGER: KRISTAN WEAVER SOURCES: 98 CIP Bond PROJECT DESCRIPTION/STATUS Thi s proj ect serves to hold funds fo r new greenways projects . Orig inal budget was $3 ,64 0 ,000 . I PROJECT CALENDAR OF EXPENDITURES BY FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR LAND ENG . CONSTR. MISC . PROJECT TOTAL Prior Years $537,236 $101 ,618 0 $5 ,4 19 $64 4,273 2004-05 $1 ,266,427 $1 ,266,427 2005-06 $ 223 ,800 $ 5 ,000 .00 $228 ,800 2006-07 $ 300 ,100 $300 ,100 2007-08 $ 300 ,100 $300 ,100 2008-09 $ 300 ,100 $300 ,100 2009 -1 0 $ 300 ,100 $300 ,100 2010 -11 $ 300 , 100 $300 ,100 TOTAL $3 ,527 ,963 $101 ,618 $0 $10 ,41 9 $0 $3 ,640 ,000 OPE RATI NG COSTS First Fis ca l Year A nnua lly To ta l Personnel $0 Sup plies $0 Serv ice $0 Capital $0 T OT AL $0 $0 $0 REQUEST FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BUDGET TRANSFER DATE: June 22, 2005 FROM: PROJECT NAME & NUMBER ACCOUNT NUMBER Greens Prairie Road/Arrington Road 139-9111-971 .30-20 RealiQnment ST-0304 REASON FOR AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: Funds are available from the project to mitigate for impacts to endangered species. TO: PROJECT NAME & NUMBER ACCOUNT NUMBER Greenway Land Acquisition 912-9111-975.10-00 SD-9903 JUSTIFICATION OF NEED FOR TRANSFER: AMOUNT $1500.00 AMOUNT $1500 .00 The funds will be used to mitigate for impacts to Navasota ladies '-tresses from project construction . This transfer of funds meets US Fish & Wildlife Service conservation measures for the species. Navasota ladies '- tresses habitat will be purchased usinQ these funds as part of a larQer Qreenway tract acquisition. Requested by: Craig Jordan. P .E . x3816 Project Manager Approved: Department Head Council Approved: __________ _ Budget Review: Budget Officer Approved: ------------~ C ity Manager REQUEST FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BUDGET TRANSFER DATE: March 21, 2005 FROM: PROJECT NAME & NUMBER ACCOUNT NUMBER Hike & Bike Trails 139-9111-971 .30-20 ST-0521 REASON FOR AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: General Funding source for Hike & Bike Trails Projects . TO: PROJECT NAME & NUMBER ACCOUNT NUMBERS Brison Park Bike & Ped Path 139-9111-971 .30-10 ST-0524 139-9111-971.30-20 139-9111-971.30-90 JUSTIFICATION OF NEED FOR TRANSFER: AMOUNT $75,000.00 AMOUNT $14 ,000 .00 $60,00 0 .00 $ 1,000.00 Specification of Funding for a Specific Project -the highest ranked project by the Bike & Hike Taskforce per the November 23, 2004 Council Meeting . Requested by: Laura Y.H. Harris x6248 Project Manager Approved: ------------- Department Head Council Approved: _________ _ Budget Review: ----------- Approved: ------------- Budget Officer Approved: ------------- City Manager SD9903 -Greenways GOB GOB99 GOB 01 GOB02 GOB03 GOB04 Issue Issue Issue Issue Issue Expense 500000 500000 785000 1000000 855000 3640000 SD9903 2001 17 ,760 2002 120 ,054 2003 220 ,607 200 4 2 ,900 2005 138 ,679 219 ,117 2006 18 ,4 07 2007 1,60 4 DE0001 200 1 285 ,852 GG0002 200 4 214 ,148 785 ,000 194 ,977 GG0201 200 4 3 ,20 4 PK9948 200 4 69 ,126 ~--~_5_o_o ,_oo_o~l_5_oo_,_oo_o~l _7 _85_,o_o_o~I _50_6_,4_3_5 ~1 ___ o~I 2 ,291 ,435 1,348 ,565 5/20 /2 008 Greenways Conservation Master Plan Update Strategic Implementation Actions Status November 29, 2004 Strategy #1: Acquisition + Accept Dedications • 315.45 acres of greenway have been dedicated. • In the past, there has been an issue with the quality of the property proposed for dedication. Since the City receives these properties when the final plat is filed, there can be damage from construction, siltation, erosion, etc. • Properties may be represented as "future greenway dedication" at the time of a rezoning request. The exact nature of the "dedication" is not firm. Sometimes it may be an actual dedication and other times, the landowner may negotiate for city acquisition . Sometimes those negotiations fail and the "future greenway dedication" never actually becomes a dedication. + Encourage Voluntary conservation, preservation and dedication of greenways by landowners • Developer educational packets have been sent out 3 times. • Kristan Clann Et Mark Smith have been stressing the value of greenways to neighborhood and homeowners. If voluntary dedications of -floodplain land can be worked out at time of platting, the developer is able to market those greenways as open space and can provide adequate drainage for the development through a natural means. + Develop a program for acquisition ' !Yu '\ • fhe City. has acquired229.4£acr s of greenway through fee simple acquisition. - • 239 acres of greenway negotiations failed for a variety of reasons (primarily appraised value). • These acquisitions did not necessarily follow the priority listing in the greenway master plan . • The City has acquired 7.05 acres through straight donation. + Acquire land acquisition services • The City hired a land agent in 2001. The greenway program manager generally handles greenway land acquisition negotiations unless they are part of another City project. + Pursue external funding sources • Grant applications were submitted in 2003 and prior for TEA-21 trail Greenway Bond Fund Expenditure Summary Bond funds approved : $3 ,640 ,000 Bond funds issued : 1999 500 ,000 200 1 500 ,000 2002 785 ,000 2003 1,000 ,000 Total issued 2 ,785 ,000 Remaining to be issued : Expenditures to date : gor Freeman Fire Station #5 C ity Center (pending) $855 ,000 Total committed to date Funds Ava ilable Pending Proj ects : $299 ,507 285 ,825 69 ,126 lL.:$;..;.;1 ,~7 4 __ 4 __ \ ~ 1,200 ,000 $1 ,856 ,202 $1 ,783 ,798 Alum Cree k 24 5 acres for $611 ,320 ($200 ,000 grant) Greenway Bond Fund Expenditure Summary Bond funds approved: $ 3,640 ,000 Bond funds issued: 1999 $ 500 ,000 2001 $ 500 ,000 2002 $ 785 ,000 2003 $ 1,000 ,000 Total issued $ 2,785,000 Remaining to be issued: $ Expenditures to date: AS400 Project to date (8/22/03 ) Craegor Freeman Fire Statio n #5 City Center (pendi ng ) 855 ,000 Total committed to date Funds Av ailable Pending Projects: Alum Creek Shenandoah SIZE (ac) Appraised Value 245 $ 611 ,320 -6 $ 299 ,507 $ 285 ,825 $ 69 ,126 $ 1,744 $ 1,200 ,000 $ 1,856 ,202 $ 1,783 ,798 City of College Station Greenway Program Property Purchase Encumberances Owner Appraisal Acreage Freeman (for Parks) $65 ,000 67 Craegor (ED parcel) $285 ,852 102.9 Swoboda (trail) $210 ,000 54 .7 Schultz $40 ,000 Marsh Reeves $182 ,081 8.36 OD Butler $340 ,000 17.03 Ritchie Method ist Church 1.88 Thurmond (Fire Station) $69 ,696 1 .6 City Center $800 ,000 1992629 Owner (Use) Craegor (greenway and ED) Craegor (ED) Freeman Hartzell Elkins (greenway) Hartzell Elkins (greenway) Marsh Reeves (ED) McGill (greenway) Swoboda (greenway) KTH Kapchinski Kapchinski Rain tree Development Marsh Reeves (greenway) OD Butler Thurmond (Fire Dept) City of College Station Appraisal Summary Thursday, January 24, 2002 Location Acres Value ($/acre) Thomas 234.81 $1,760,000 Caruthers $7 ,495/acre League, Abstract 9 Robert 16 .89 $350,000 Stevenson $20, 722/acre League, Abstract 54 67 $8,507 /acre Lots 1-10, 10 lots $104,611 Block 6 Sun ($10,461/lot) Meadows Robert .6479 $6,500 Stevenson $10, 0 3 2/ acre League, Abstract 54 38 $21,780 Morgan 6.4 $207,589 Rector $32,284/acre .'l4 Abstract 46 Morgan 54.70 $210,000 Rector $3,838.85/acre Abstract 46 8.183 $20,000 49 $30,556 46 $11,440 7.97 $40,000 \\.<~ $5,019/acre 8 .36 $182,081 $21,780/acre 17.03 $340,000 $19 ,964/acre 1.6 $69,696 $43,560/acre \ .oo PROJECT: FUND: PROJECT MANAGER: PROJECT CLIENT: GREENWAYS PROJECTS PROJECT#: SD9903 912 -DRAINAGE UTILITY FUND PROJECT BUDGET: $3,640,000 FUNDING Venessa Garza SOURCES: General Obligation Bonds Planning & Development Services PROJECT DESCRIPTION/STATUS This proj ect serves to hold funds for new greenways projects . Original budget was $3 ,640 ,000 . $1 , 194 , 124 of Greenways funds were spent on the City Center land purchase . PROJECT CALENDAR OF EXPENDITURES BY FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR LAND ENG . CONSTR. MISC . PROJECT TOTAL Pr ior Years $2 ,264 ,656 $55 ,957 0 $2 ,237 $2,322 ,850 2007-08 $0 2008-09 $0 2009-10 $0 2010-11 $0 2011-12 $0 2012-13 $0 2013 -14 $0 TOTAL $2 ,264 ,656 $55 ,957 $0 $2 ,23 $2 ,322 ,850 First Fiscal Year Personnel $0 Suppl ies $0 Serv ice $0 Capital $0 TOTAL $0 $0 C)T AVA ILA BLE Development Services Dedications N ote: These areas are in the greenway and may be parks, open space, greenbelt , detention or a combination. 1. Steeplechase Subdivision-Owner: Brazos Triod Land Development Partnership . Dedication area is Public Park, Storm water Detention and .~" A oJ.:le""-it O'h Open Space . Final Plat on Phase 1 of 4 on Master Plan. S~ vJ()AV'-f\. · [ -hA "'? p::. $ft.epfe.~~' -titll (,J 2 . Pebble Hills Subdivision-Owner: Jerry Windham and Frank Thurmond. Dedication areas are Public Park, Stormwater Detention and Greenbelt. Final Plat on Phase 1 of Several on Master Plan. 3 . Alexandria Subdivision-Owner : Edward Froehling . Dedication area is Greenway and Stormwater Detention . Master Preli;t:~ Plat of 5 (11 ( C0nri Phases . no rrnw'b4."1>-rt--~~~':V ~rf 4 . Estates of Spring Creek-Owner : Gary Seaback. Dedication area is · Stormwater Drainage, Sanitary Sewer and Open Space Buffer. Park no determined yet. Master Preliminary Plat of Future Phases. . . . f . • • · .. . ·' . .. - - . ; ~2e hhfib 'o/11(Y}~~ fTJ . ~rnun1~ JJL f'Or;, ~rw.~~t ~r>~ wV1111 f IAi i . rUP ~I ~~~ Wl!J ',IJ!p'JlJ~ ·s; J ~~ JI ~ ~ni~rrt ~oJr~F ~ 'V'l~~rJw1~v~ ,9;; ,,111J); ~ ~" c 1,1 W71<Ylf2 1 ~ 1<; · n I ~1 1 -e1 1 11 ~ ~~~~D P70J uJiw~~ ~~ zof ~J0 I ~n} £tt.w:tr;a1E 1{J J~ t(~Llf) ~~ l j V~L8 'fh+ ~i ~ kt\)~W ~Q l!i ~/1 'I~ LW1(J I) '1)t1iA bo ·01 ~ wf!J ~~ \We ·~~UA-00 /h ~/i 5J2fJV L h I ~ tt iQ ~~ ){ll1J1J~$ ~I :(JJ~ . ~ ~!) ~ut±t ~uvo{~ ~0191/1 1 ~JfD ~lfJ~ Trail Brison Park Connection Lick Creek Trail West Bee Creek Trail -East Bee Creek Bridge WPC Upper Trails II Bee Creek Trail -West Bike and Hike Task Force High Priority Trails Information 10.25.2004 Specifications ROW Ownership Construction Cost 0 .15 mile -8' asphalt trail co cs $39 ,000 0.25 mile - 8' concrete trail co cs Ex isting 0.5 mile - 8 ' concrete trail Private $150,000 Lick Creek foot bridge Private $100,000 footpath upgrade Spring Meadows HOA $175,000 drainage improvements $75,000 Total -$550 000 0.18 mile -10' concrete trail TxDOT $25,000 0 .70 mile -10' concrete trail co cs $260,000 0.51 mile -10' concrete trail Pr ivate $165,000 dra i nage improvements $150,000 Total -$600,000 0.10 mile -10 ' tra il cocs $50,000 Bee Creek footbridge cocs $100,000 Total -$150,000 0 .30 mile -12 ' tra il Private $420,000 South : 0.45 mile -10' conc rete trail TxDOT / COCS $170,000 low water crossing cocs $55 ,000 0.5 mile -10' concret e t rail Pr ivate $185,000 Total -$410 ,000 North : 0.44 m il e -10' conc ret e trail TxDOT $160,000 Bee Creek foot bridge TxDOT $75 ,000 0.36 m ile -gravel trail co cs existing (Christine) 1.00 m ile -10' concrete trail COCS / Pr ivate $375 ,000 low water crossing (2) $50 ,000 Total -$660,000 Notes -Co uld include only improvement of creek crossing rather than trail. -Spring Meadows HOA may be amenable to making floodpla in public. -Connection to City Centre contingent on City Centre project development. -SH 6 crossing at FM 2818. -Contingent on traffic improvements at FM 2818 / Longm ire Drive.\ -Connection to Longmire drive would require easement (owner amenable). -Trail includes lighting and water features . -ROW must be dedicated upon development. -May be able to use Bee Creek bo x culvert crossing to cross FM 2818. -Converting Christine Lane to trail minimizes trail and ROW costs . Ranking Creek Reach 1 Lick Suburban 2 WPC Urban 2 WPC Urban 2 WPC Urban GREENWAYS PRIO RITY RANKING Acq u isition /D edi ction Section Location Owners S. Fork E . of Well born Old Landfill CS I SD Springbrook HOA Froehling Randy French Parkland Dedication Westfield Sub . Steve Arden - Main Texas Ave. E SCC Co ll ege Station ,,, to Trib. B csc \lAJtl l. Lacour Invest. Arbors of WPC Taco Bell ~v Richard Smith WC Lube Tire & Auto Wash. Chap . Main Trib. B -Trib Taco Bell A Sec Co lle ge Station Partners v' Ltd . csc SW Equity ,/ Real Alchemy Y Watford , Ken & Roy Lewis Captec Franchise Capital Main Trib A East to ? Holleman/ Munro, W. Bart~rustee Dartmouth Real Alchemy ' csc Lff t/or Acquisition/ Dedication Priority Dedications accepted by the City with final plats • Richard Smith planning developme nt at Texas Ave nu e . • WPC Overlay Part ofWPC Master Plan preliminary trail sys tem de sign presented to over sight committee Part ofWPC Master Plan 2 WPC Main Holleman/ Kahan, Simon Part ofWPC Urban Dartmouth csc Master Plan Intersection to Camp Hwy 6 Bypass Holdings Ltd. Current Trail Real Alchemy V' construction University Commons Organized Capital Inc I"' Agua Rica Ltd v JPJ ... Investments ./ 2 Bee Main Texas Ave. to LJR Properties Proposed site of Urban Highway 6 Kapchinski, City Center under Bypass Hattie development by Cruse , Ronald the City Manager Trustee and Management Ford, James & Team. $150,000 - Margaret $225,000 holding Clancy, Dan & for Kapchinski Susan purchase Townsend, Ollie & Hazel Kapchinski, Henry 2 Spring S. Fork W . end of Crowley Under Suburban Crowley tract development. to confluence Preliminary Plan w/N. Fork& received 3/02 Main channel showing conservation easements (not public) 2 Spring Main Confluence Crowley Open space/trail Suburban w/N&S Forks dedications shown (Crowley tract) on preliminary to Hwy 6 master plan (not public) 2 Spring Main Hwy6 to Thurmond Suburban confluence BVSMA • Green ways w/Lick Creek secure in the (Green Prairie Business Road) Park. • Woodland Hills • Thurmond prop . Under consideration for Fire Station • Offer made to Marsh Reeves , Jim West said they are waiting to be paid from ED piece . 2 Carter Mike Davis University to Mike Davis Recommenda- Rural Tract Harvey through tions made to vanous Mike Davis early contracts 2002 . ACE has no record on file (spoke to Cal Horton 4/1 /02) 3 Bee Trib B -S. Wellborn E dsel G. Jon es Conservation Suburban Fork (start) to I" Baptist easement for trail confluence Church system suggested. w/Tri b B & N. Fork (Welsh) 3 Lick North Fork Btw. Graham • Wyll is • Met with Suburban & Rock Prairie Ritchey Wyllis to confluence • MD Ritchey to w/Main (E. of Wheeler discuss Hwy6) • Bridlegate options. He • Lick Creek is asking Ltd. (Craig $822,500 for Brown) 95 acres of • Myrtle greenway and Tolson 44 acres of • Texcon upland. (S&S David Mayo Investors) completing • PUD survey work. FM • Bridglegate • Arnold never • Ali Saffe accepted. Sun • Some • Meadows dedication coming in on Final Plats 3 Spring North Fork E . of Wellborn • Froehl ing • Letters Suburban to confluence • Se aback written to w/S. Fork & • CS I SD Seaback and Ma in channe l • Dunlap Dunlap . (Crowley tract) • Met w/CSISD 4 Bee Trib . B-W.of • OD Butler • Offer made to Suburban . Fork Wellborn to • City Park Butler family confluence 1· Kenneth I • Pursuing w/Trib . B & S. Schick linkage to Fork (Welsh) • Palomares Lincoln Const. Center and • Cherokee application of Ltd. Safe Routes • Mohawk to Schools Ltd . Grant • City Park • Appraisal for • WHG First United Treehouse Methodist L.P. church underway 4 Lick Main Confluence of • BHVSMA BVSMA needs to Suburban N & S Forks • City Park submit LOMAR (E. of Hwy 6) (Freeman) to correct the to confluence FEMA map to w/Spring reflect accurate Creek green way? 4 Alum Un-Names Hwy 6 to • Current Met with Davis Rural Trib confluence Business Young to discus s w/Lick Creek Park green way (Lick Creek • Pebble dedications . Park) Creek Pursuing linkages to Lick Creek Park with A&M landscape architects. 4 Alum Main Confluence Thousand Oaks Sent letter of Rural w/un-names Development interest. Met with Trib to Joint Venture USF&W/ TPW to confluence discuss future w/Lick Creek mitigation possibilities for BVSMA. 5 WPC Main Hwy 6 to • Davis • Declined Suburban confluence McGill purchase of w/Carter Creek • Lydia McGill Boriskie • Met • Burt w/Herrnann to Hermann discuss . Site • CB Jones of new • Shelly Academy Cashion sports • LJ & Kitti • Purchased Ruffino Rain tree Development Joint Venture -future connection with recreational trail 5 Lick Main Confluence Pebble Creek Propose that Suburban w /Spring Golf Course connections occur Creek to through the ROW confluence w / Alum Creek 6 Bee Main Confluence Bee Creek Arboretum needs Suburban w /Trib. B Demo Project attention. Waiting (Southwood) to for ACE permit Texas Ave . for Bee Creek project 6 Bee Trib A-2 Texas Ave . to • Oscar Trailer Park to Suburban SH 6 Bypass Parulian Crystal Plaza • Joe Fazzino • CA Bertrand • C Park Inc • Karbrooke Inc • Brethren Church 6 Bee Main Hwy 6 Bypass Swoboda Dedication Suburban to confluence overflow /purchase part w /Carter Creek of ROW Head Lake connections. conceptual plan Appraisal completed (follow up for easement by prescription). Legal preparing title work to accept Head Lake . 6 Lick Main Confluence City of College Lick Creek Suburban w/Alum Creek Station Park (Lick Creek Park) to city limits 6 Carter Confluence Brazos County Conservation w/Bee Creek to Annexation easement Confluence w/ Priority #1 possibility Lick Creek Reconsider Priority ranking 7 WPC Trib A Lincoln (start) Oaks Park Current to confluence Jack Burch location of w/Main Numerous Conceptual channel private yards Design by (Harvey) A&M landscape architects for Kiwanas Trail 7 Bee Trib A-1 Rio Grande to • Private • Current Texas Ave . yards location • Southwood of Elementary drainage • Brothers project Pond improve • Longmire men ts Park • Possible future trail connec- ti on 7 Carter Harvey to • Richard • Metw/ confluence Smith • Richard w/Bee Creek • HP Dansby Smith • Sandra • Letters Melville out to • CB Jones Martell, • Katherine Guseman Smith and • Martell Wolters Children • Part of • Guseman proposed Family recrea- • City tional • Freddie trail that Wolters was not • Brazos funded. County Will Owners proceed (1996) with Martell • Steven Davis & (R28608) Guseman • Walker Family (R13163) 8 Bee Main Jersey (start) to Brison Park to Location of confluence Lemontree Park. Lemontree to w/Trib . B . Numerous Bee C reek (Southwood) private yards recreation (Jersey is now trail George Bush) 9 WPC Trib. B-1 Francis (start) • Thomas Mostly to confluence Park developed w/Main • Gables Apt channel • Kensington (Harvey) Place • Mary Lake Realty • CFPILP 9 WPC Trib. B-2 Dominik to • Mostly Harvey dev e loped 9 WPC Trib . C Campus (start) • Campus • Campus to confluence Golf complet- w/Main Course ing channel (W . of • Texas Ave . drainage Texas Ave .) Crossing improv . • Allianz • Possible Prop redevol. • Wolf At plaza Creek • Location Partners of City • Park Plaza lien Partners property Widening of Texas Ave. impacts • Staff met 3/02 to discuss project in relation to Redmond Plaza . Decided against stream re storation 9 B ee Trib . B-2 2818to • City Current confluence owned lo cation of w/Main drainage drainag e channel leads into improvement Bee Creek project Park and Arboretum White • Todd Canyon Creek Sullivan Apartment D edication Alum Hwy 6 to • Thousand Letter of confluenc e Oaks interest out. w/unnamed Develop-Talking to trib . ment Corp. USFW &TPW Joint as pos sible Venture Ladie s Tress es miti gation site . Bee Trib . B North SW Parkway to • A&M Purchase Fork Lincoln Center Church of consideration Christ to acquire properties for A&M Consolidated Hig h School to Lincoln Center. Safe Routes to . - School grant opportunity . • 30/60 corridor study and connections to Veterans Park and the City of Bryan . \ College Station Greenways Program Annual Report Information -2002 Property Acquisitions + Schultz (Rain tree) -Wolf Pen Creek, priority 6 , 7 .5 acres + Marsh Reeves -Spring Creek , priority 2 , 8.3 acres + Purchased 67 acres on Lick Creek in conjunction with a Parks Department acquisition . Total Greenway property acquisition in 2002 -82 acres Negotiated for an additional 30 acres on Bee Creek and Wolf Pen Creek that did not materialize. Offered to purchase 55 acres on Bee Creek, Priority 6, acq uisition pending. Offered to purchase 140 acres on Lick Creek, Priority 1, acquisition pending. Total Greenway property acquisition offers pending-195 acres Developer Dedications CY Ckc;;r ltrJcP Z)J1~ /]islr :»r/ Waiting for acreage amount from Development Services. 1 ~6 t C ·NaJ. t2ir){(;{ -ti-~ @T.f,([rbcPi{Sfh ~{ ~ r[tfn JrJ ji<''1 L.(_,.q Ot t Creek Cleanups li%\i~ GWI< _ !1oj ~ . ~ @IJM(;E}J f)JJ,~;61-Prru JI[ + April 6, 2002 -Participated in the Texas Trash Off to c ean trash along Bee Creek. d, t./5" /(( Assistance provided by the City Attorney's office, Development Services staff, \fl H~ recycling coordinator and Brazos Greenways Council. Ol lcK ftftt_ '.} + September 13, 2002 -removed 4 tons of woody debris for composting from the Arboretum, with the assistance of 60 young men from the social service organization One Army of Texas A&M University and Public Works streets Department staff. + November 23, 2002 -removed 3 tons of trash and debris from Head Lake with the assistance of the Brazos Greenways Council, Emerald Forest HOA, American Water Resources Association and 60 A&M Freshman from Fish Club. Grant Applications Submitted/Received Submitted a funding request to the US Fish and Wildlife Service through the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department for the purchase of 150 acres of riparian and endangered species habitat on Alum Creek. Received $200,000 in grant funds . Submitted a funding request to the Texas Department of Transportation through their Safe Routes to School program . Requested $168,700 toward a $232 ,700 project. Submitted a grant application to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department for interpretive signage along the Wolf Pen Creek Trails , funding request denied . Conceptual Design Four conceptual design proposals prepared and presented to City Council by the A&M Department of Landscape Architecture . The four conceptual designs include Head Lake, College Hills Elementary, Pebble Creek to Lick Creek connectivity and Rock Prairie Road to Castlegate connectivity. Entered into a contract with HDR Engineering, Inc. for the development of a conceptual design plan for Wolf Pen Creek, Texas Avenue to George Bush (Redmond Terrace Area). Public Education & Awareness + Presented the College Station Greenways Program at the TRAPS conference in Abilene, Texas (March). + Presented to the Brazos Audubon Society (April). + Presented greenway conceptual designs to P&Z, Parks Board and City Council. + Participated in the Planet Earth Celebration on April 20, booth staffing assistance provided by the Brazos Greenways Council. + Participated and presented the City 's greenways program to citizens at the Southside Block Party, April 23 , 2002 . + Prepared greenway educational materials for inclusion on the City 's Internet site. + Participated and presented the City 's greenway program at the Neighborhood conference, September 14, 2002. + Presented the City 's greenways program to the Emerald Forest HOA, October 8 , 2002 . + Presented the City 's greenway program to the Brazos Valley Business Club, October 9 , 2002 . Proj ect Bridle Gate Estates-Mike Hester (693-1100) (rqst 9/28 /99 with map) Creagor Property-Marion Creagor (690-3788) (rqst 211 100) (map delivered 2/8/00) Spring Creek (Crowley Development)-Chuck Ellison (696-9889)/Tim Crowley (2 /22 /00 with man) McGill /Grein Development-Darryl Grein (Jane/Sabine) (rqst 2/18 /00 with maps) Westfiel d Addition-John Szabuniewicz (268-1008) (rqst 2/18 /00 w/small partial map delivered) Randy French/Steve Arden Spring Brook Subdivision GREENWA Y S D IVISION PROJECTS FY-2000 Des cr ipt io n .754 acres on N Fork of Lick Creek -priority 3 66 .5 acres on Spring Creek Main-priority 2 and 21.5 acres on Lick Creek Main- prior ity 4 @ 34 acres on Main and S Fork of Spring Creek- priority 2 6.44 acres on Bee Creek Main at entrance to Raintree -priority 5 1.5-2 acres on S Fork of Lick Creek-priority 1 Statu s & C omments MS response to delay 9/28 /99 Hamilton and Legal review 1100 KF formal offer response 1/28 /00 MS to meet w/Creagor week of 3120100 ; Creagor dropped off three more maps ; needs proposal ED office to complete survey (by Dave Mayo) and dedicate to Greenways before transfer to private owner. MS waiting on request until developer is ready . Plat with dedication fil ed . D avis McGill referred city to talk to D arryl Grein as McGill is j u st trustee of land and wants the developer to deal with greenways 3116100 . D ev.Srv and MS want to drop from acqu isition as greenway will be part of parks dedication and drainage only 3/7/00 . Springbrook subdivision w/H OA. French and Arden will dedicate remainder with final plat Alexandria Subdivision 1-2 acres on N Fork of Lick Elkins doesn 't know use of Hartzell Elkin s (774 -4090)-Creek-priority 3 the greenway area; sewer Residential Dev. off line and drainage proposed , Graham Road across from park dedication not Cypress Grove. Pre -dev determined yet 3/8/00 . Mtg 3/8/00 Final plat for Alexandria filed w/ dedication. A&M Church of Christ 7 .05 Acres in B ee Deep po nd on property Creek floodpla in -question of liability by priority 6 Parks D ept. who has researched the site. Church wants to transfer. Pond create d by drainage easements or borrow pit. R equested legal description from John Duncum representing A&MChurch. R equested legal description from the church. Hermann, Burt 4 1.28 acres on W olf R eceived call from Pen Creek -priori ty 5 Development Services . Mr. Hermann has resubmitted a Master Devel opment P lan. He proposes t o pay fees in lieu of park de d ication. Need to follow up w ith development services for history and status. Waiting for McGill/Grein appraisal t o follow up on propose d ac quisition. Mike D avis/Sowell Carter Creek -priority Mark Smith informed 2 GWM th at th is property owner agreed to dedicate the property after two days of mediation. The payment per acre Davis proposed was very high. Meanwhile the 404 permit with the ACE has expired. Ted Mayo to call a meeting to determine how Davis proposes to complete improvements on Hwy 30 partnership property. Springbrook Plat P rio rity 1 -South Developers have agreed Alexandria Plat branch of Lick Creek to dedicate the Bridal Gate Plat Green ways. Arden/French proposed Alexandria Subdivision development dedication area is greenway and stormwater detention. City of College Station Prio rity 2 -Wolf Pen Steve Beachy has maps. Creek Development Engineers and Master Plan surveyors are working on. Part of a Parks/Drainage project. Funds are ready to go - will secure greenway. Pebble Creek P ri o rity 4 -Main Developers set Subdivision section of Lick Creek greenways aside in final Windham/Thurmond plats. Majority of this section is the Pebble Creek golf course. Pebble Hills Prio rity 2 -Spring Master Development Windham/Thurmond Creek Main Hwy 6 to plan submitted 7 /98. confluence w/Lick Greenbelt shown as Creek public park, stormwater detention and open space . Steeplechase Priority 3 -tributary B, Dedication area is Subdivision -Brazos South Fork of Bee public park , Stormwater Triod Land Creek. Wellbome Detention and Open Development (start) to confluence w/ Space . Final Plat on Partnersh ip Trib. B&N. Fork P hase I of 4 on Master (Welsh) Pl an. McKe ll om, Luthell Priori ty 9 -tributary C GPM would like to Wolf Cr eek Partners II purchase to develop Ltd. connector between TAMU and Greentree Subdivision . Propose to submit a grant application for a flood protection and stream restoration project. Pursue greenway easements on private property. !Ranking -CreeK Section 1 -Lick Creek South Fork 2 -Wolf Pen Creek Main 2 -Wolf Pen Creek Main 2 -Wolf Pen Creek Main 2 -Wolf Pen Creek Main 2-Bee Creek Main 2 -Spring Creek South Fork GREENWAYS PRIORITIZATION MATRIX PROJECT SUMMARY 2/5/01 Location Ownership E . of Wellborn (start) to Carroll , Westfield Schoor, confluence with Main cnannel (E Froehling, College Station, MD of Hwy 6) Wheeler Ltd ., Ritchey , Thurmond- Windham , Craeger, BVSM Te xas Ave . east to Trib B Richard Smith , Tire & Auto Holdings Inc., Washington Chappel Baptist, Wolf Creek Lube, Taco Bell , College Station , SCC Partners Limited, Captecl Franchise , Munro , Real Alchemy , McHill , ' Review ownership Tributary B to Tributary A Pri vate homeowners (see Priority 2 file), Wolf Creek Partners Ltd ., Park Plaza Partnership , Lojon Prooertv, Colleoe Station Tributary east to Hollem an/Dartmouth intersection Holleman/Dartmouth intersection College Station , Organi zed to Hwy 6 Bypass Capital , Kahan , Sears, University Commons , Agua Rica Ltd ., JPJ, Camp Holdings Ltd ., Real Alchemy Review ownership Texas A ven ue . To Hwy 6 Bypass College Station, LJR Properties Ltd ., Kapchinski , Hattie , Kapchinski , Henry, Solomon, Cruse , Ford , James & Margaret, Townsend , Clancy West end of Crowley tract to McDougal , Crowley 'Status & Comments Westfield -greenways to be part of parks dediction and drainage only. Springbrook -w/HOA (French & Arden will dedicate remainder w/final plat.) Alexandria -ded ication Brida l Ga te -dedication Part of WPC Development Master Plan. Engineers and Surveyors are working on as part of a parks/drainage project. Funds are ready to go -will secure greenway. Richard Smith property at Texas and Harvey listed for sale . WPC Dvpt Master Plan WPC Dvpt Master Plan Site of proposed City Plaza. Plan s available in the City Managers Offi ce . Spring Creek (Crowley confluence w/N Fork & Main Development) Plat with channel Review ownershio dedication filed . 2 -Spring Creek Main Confluence w/N & S Forks (Crowley tract) to Hwy 6 2 -Spring Creek Main Hwy 6 to confluence w/Lick Creek Dvpt Plan to be reviewed by (Greens Pariaire Road) Parks Bd 2/01 2 -Carters Creek Mike Davis tract University to Harvey Jim Sowell Construction Co Inc., Mediation occurred on this Regency Parkway , MD Wheeler proposed development. Ltd ., Lamar, Delmar, Wolfe Developer agreed to dedicate Investments , Talk, MJ , Hwy 30 new channel plus 100 yards on Partnership each side . City to pay for extra 200 yards. Sowell has withdrawn from proposal, 404 permit has expired . Davis does not have TexDOT permission to use bridge as planned. Purchase price proposed by developer high. The Davis proposal may be unrealistic. Davis has filled areas in the flood fringe . Met with Davis in December, he is reevaluating his proposal. Requested that he work with the BGC to develop conceptual plans . 3-Bee Creek Tributary B -South Fork Wellborn (start) to confluence CSISD , 1s1 Baptist, Jones, City of Much of this is in public w/Tributary B & N Fork (Welsh) Bryan , several private ownership . Should we approach homeowners the church about designating qreenwavs and open space? 3 -Lick Creek North Fork Between Graham & Rock Prairie Sun Meadows HOA to confluence w/Main (E. of Hwy Bridlegate (small dedication) 6) Future Lonamire extension 3 -Spring Creek North Fork E . of Wellborn to confluence w/S Several homeowners, Dunlap , Should we pursue Dunlap Fork & Main channel (Crowley CSISD Parcel? It abuts CSISD . Seabeck tract) did prelim plat. Check ownership 4-Bee Creek Tributary B - N. Fork W . of Wellborn to confluence College Station, Mohawk Ltd., Private yards. w/tributary B & S fork (Welsh) Chreokee Ltd ., Palomares Construction 4 -Lick Creek Main Confluence of N & S Forks (E of MD Wheeler, College Station , Economic Development Hwy 6) to confluence w/Spring Ritchy , Willis, BVSM , Craegor, Department to purchase and Creek Marion , Craegor, JC Family Trust complete survey (by Dave Mayo), to dedicate Greenways before transfer to private owner. Greenways bond issue to pay for greenways in business park at $3500 oer acre . Estimated acreage approx . 177 .5 acres ($621 ,250) 4 -Alum Creek Un-named tributary Hwy 6 to confluence w/Lick Creek CSISD , College Station , VPI , (Lick Creek Park) Universal Computer, Stata Corp , Thousand Oaks Development Co. 4 -Alum Creek Main Confluence w/ unnamed tributary Thousand Oaks De velopment Majority of property in Lick Creek to confluence w/ Lick Creek Co ., Colleoe Station Park. No development proposed 5-Wolf Pen Main Hwy 6 to confluence w/Carter McGill , Boriskie , Hermann , Kolbe , McGill is trustee of land , Creek Cash ion, Jones , Ruffino . Sm ith, development services dealing Martell Childrens Trust , with Darryl Gre in. Grein drained Guseman Family Trust , Raintree some property. Development Joint Venture Hermann -some property in flood fringe has been filled . Additional property should be pursued as possible conservation easement for tax purposes. Future Academy development. Raintree Development -should be pursued for acquisition . Pursuing prelim plans for T -21 trail app. 5 -Lick Creek Main Confluence w/Spring Cree k to Craegor , BVSW , Pebble Creek Majority of property secure . confluence w/Alum Creek Country Club Pebble Creek Country Club golf course located here, and the Pebble Creek Homeowners Association leads to College Station owned Lick Creek Park. 6-Bee Creek Ma in Confluence w/Tributary B College Station , Parkway Baptist Majority of this property is (Southwood) to Texas Avenue Church , Coll eqe Station , CSISD public/quasi public ownership 6-Bee Creek Tributary A-2 Texas Avenue to SH 6 Bypass Fazzino , Paru lian, Bertrand , Karbrooke Inc., Cpark Inc ., Brethern Church , Clancy , Swoboda 6-Bee Creek Ma in Hwy. 6 Bypass to confluence w/ Swobada , AM Church of Christ, Pursuing acquisition of A&M Carter Cree k Cole , Kapchinski, Wolters , Church property. The church College Station , Emerald Forest would like to transfer the property Community Inc. to the City. Requested legal description from the church , will then order an appraisal. 6 -Lick Creek Main Confluence w/Alum Creek (Lick College Station The entire section of this priority Creek Park) to City limits is in Lick Creek Park, owned and managed by the City of College Station. 6 -Carter Creek Confluence w/Bee Creek to This section is outside the city confluence with Lick Creek limits of Colleqe Station . Own er information was unavailable on the City's GIS . 7 -Wolf Pen Creek Tributary A Lincoln (start) to confluence Approximately 30 private property w /Main channel (Harvey) owners . Larger parcels owned by Burch , Jack M , and an unknown between the highways 7 -Bee Creek Tributary A-1 Rio Grande to Texas Avenue 7 -Carter Creek Harvey to confluence w/Bee Richard A Sm ith , CB Jones, LK & BGC and Chamber of Commerce Creek Kitti Ruffino, Kathryn Smith , to hold meeting with Carter C reek Martell Childrens Trust, Guseman property owners 12/13/00 Family Trust, CoCS , Freddie Wolters , Garland J Watson 8 -Bee Creek Main Jersey (start) to confluence Many small private parcels w/Tributary B (Southwood} 9 -Wolf Pen Creek Tributary B-1 Francis (start) to confluence CoCS , Terry Raines , church , Large sections owned by CoCS w/Main channel (Harvey) Gables Apts , Kensington Place , Mary Lake Realty , Bellaire Capital Partnership 9 -Wolf Pen Creek Tributary B-2 Dominik to Harvey (combined w/WPC B-1 above) 9 -Wolf Pen Creek Tributary C Campus (start) to confluence Several private homeowners, T AMU currently undertaking w/main channel (west of Texas larger ownerships include : TAMU , stormwater improvements to Avenue) Alliance Properties , WPC reduce discharge Partners II Ltd , Luthell McKellom , WPC Partners Ltd, Park Plaza Partners , JJ Ruffino 9 -Bee Creek Tributary B-2 FM 2818 to confluence w/Main Many private property owners. Current site of Bee Creek flood channel CoCS owns a large drainage channelization project easement thru· this site