HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes **Minutes**'
parks''anit Recreation Advisory Board
Tuesday,April 8,2003,at 7•(U p.m#
Parks and Recreation Department Conference Room
1000 Krenek Tap Road
College Station, Texas
Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation; Eric Ploeger, Assistant
Director (arrived during Item #7); Peter Vanecek, Senior Park Planner;
Ross Albrecht, Forestry Superintendent; Curtis Bingham, Parks Operations
Superintendent; Kristin Lehde, Staff Assistant.
Board Members Present: John Nichols, Chairman; Don Allison; Jodi Warner;
Larry Farnswroth; Bill Davis.
Board Members Absent: Glenn Schroeder; Glen Davis.
Guest:
Mike McClure, Engineer.
1. Call to order: Chairman John Nichols called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
2. Pardon — possible action concerning requests for absences of members from
meeting: Larry Farnsworth made a motion to accept the absences of Glenn Schroeder
and Glen Davis as excused. Jodi Warner seconded the motion. All were in favor,
and the motion passed unanimously.
3. Hear visitors: Steve Beachy stated that he had received an e-mail from Mr.
Jason Fikes, Chairman of the Alexandria Neighborhood Association, who had
addressed the Board at previous meetings concerning a request for the City to place a
playground on a greenway adjacent to the Alexandria Subdivision in Zone 10. Steve
stated that there is a tour of Zone 10 scheduled with the Board on April 22, 2003, and
that the greenway would be one of the sites visited.
4. Discussion, consideration, and possible approval of minutes from the Regular
Meeting on March 4, 2003, and the Joint Meeting between the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 6,
2003:
Bill Davis made a motion to approve the minutes from the regular meeting on March
4, 2003. Larry F. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed
unanimously.
Larry F. made a motion to approve the minutes from the joint meeting on March 6,
2003. Bill D. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed
unanimously.
Parks&Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,April 8,2003
Page I of 6
5. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning park land dedication
requests for the
❖ Gateway Subdivision, Phases 2-4 (Zone 2): Pete Vanecek pointed to a location
map of the proposed development. This proposed multi-family, 124-unit
development, is located on University Drive, West of Highway 6. Pete stated that
the land requirement would be approximately one (1) acre, which is too small to
build a neighborhood park on. Staff is recommending the acceptance of the
proposed cash dedication of $56,048 in lieu of land. Steve stated that there was
not a connecting greenway between the proposed development and the University
Park site. Steve suggested that the Board recommend to the Planning and Zoning
Commission that there be potential pedestrian access to the University Park site.
Bill D. is concerned with accessibility, and suggested looking into ways of
working with the City of Bryan to address that issue.
After some discussion, Bill D. made a motion to accept the fee in lieu of land for
the Gateway Subdivision, Phases 2-4, with a recommendation to the Planning and
Zoning Commission to review access issues. Don A. seconded the motion. All
were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
❖ Bearden Addition (Zone 15): This item was removed from the agenda because
the proposed development is outside the city limits.
•s Westfield Village, Phase 6 (Zone 10): Pete V. pointed to a location map of the
proposed development, which is located on Victoria Avenue and Mountain
Breeze Way. The land dedications for the Westfield Subdivision, totaling 4.299
acres, have already been met through prior park land dedications. The proposed
Phase 6 development includes 30 single-family dwelling units, and would add
three (3) parcels of land, totaling an additional .34 acres, to the existing park land
dedication. The developer would also be required to pay the Park Development
Fee, which is $10,740. Steve stated that the developer has aligned the streets to
provide significant access to the park site.
After some discussion, Bill D. made a motion to accept the three (3) proposed
parcels of land for Westfield Village, Phase 6, in addition to the Park
Development Fee. Don A. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion
passed unanimously.
6. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning the Urban Forest
Management Plan: Ross Albrecht said that an Urban Forest Management Plan was
presented to the City Council on September 26, 2002. The direction that staff
received at that time was to use Fiscal Year 2003 as a planning opportunity, and to
come back to the Council with recommendations for implementation of the plan.
Ross referred to a memorandum that was included in the Board packets, which
included staff's recommendations for the plan's implementation. He said that staff
recommends implementation of the plan using an incremental approach, primarily
Parks&Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,April 8,2003
Page 2 of 6
0-'0
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1101 Texas Avenue
April 3, 2003
7:00 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Commissioners Floyd, Williams, McMath,
Shafer, White and Hall
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Trapani.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Maloney.
STAFF PRESENT: Assistant City Manager Brown, Development
Services Director Templin, City Planner Kee,
Development Manager Ruiz, Civil Engineers
Thompson and Cotter, Staff Planners Reeves
and Hitchcock, Transportation Planner Fogle,
Assistant City Attorney Nemcik, Economic
Development Director Foutz, Action Center
Representative Kelly, and Staff Assistant
Hazlett.
Chairman Floyd called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Hear Citizens.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Public Comment for the Record.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Public Comment on the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO).
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Consent Agenda.
4.1 Approved the Minutes for the Regular Meeting held on March 20, 2003.
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 1 of 6
4.2 Removed from the agenda the consideration, discussion, and possible action on
a Replat for Harvey Hillsides, Block 1, Lot 42, consisting of a 1.5 acre residential
lot and a 3.86 acre commercial lot. (02-233)
4.3 Approved a Preliminary Plat for West University Addition consisting of four lots
totaling 36.888 acres of land located on Raymond Stotzer Parkway in the City's
ETJ. (03-63)
Regular Agenda.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Consideration, discussion and possible action of
request(s)for absence from meetings.
Commissioner Williams motioned to approve the absence request. Commissioner
White seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, Hall, Shafer, White, Williams, and McMath.
AGAINST: None
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration, discussion, and possible action on items
removed from the Consent Agenda by Commission action.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action to
consider a Land Use Plan Amendment for properties labeled Mixed-Use on the
City's Land Use Plan. (03-23)
City Planner Kee presented the Staff Report, reiterating the items discussed at the
March 20, 2003 P&Z meeting. She explained that the Commission voted to accept the
Mixed-Use Report and its concepts for College Station but delayed consideration at that
time in order to ensure adequate time for citizen input. As Ms. Kee pointed out specifics
regarding each area within the land use plan, Chairman Floyd opened the public
hearing portion of the meeting to receive public input. No one spoke during any of
those times.
Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing.
Commissioner White motioned to approve the Mixed-Use report and its concepts for
College Station. Commissioner Williams seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a
Rezoning from A-0 Agricultural Open to R-1 Single Family for approximately 38.5
acres for Estates at Spring Creek, located at 2201 Barron Road (03-53)
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 2 of 6
Staff Planner Reeves presented the Staff Report. Ms. Reeves stated that Staff
recommends approval of the rezoning. She added that the subject property is shown
on both the Land Use Plan and on the recently approved Master Development Plan as
Single Family Residential. The subject property will also be bound on all sides with
thoroughfares. Ms. Reeves explained that the Parks Board accepted the three-acre
parkland dedication in conjunction with the acreage in the Spring Creek drainage way
with the condition that trails in the drainage way be part of the overall park development.
Staff recommends that the proposed townhome area be developed in such a way as to
not back lots up to the park and drainage way. In closing, Ms. Reeves stated that
during the platting state the subject property would again come before the Commission
allowing for other issues to be addressed at that time.
Chairman Floyd opened public hearing.
Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing.
Commissioner McMath motioned to approve the rezoning. Commissioner Williams
seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a
Residential Replat for the Carter's Grove, Second Installment located at the north
end of Shady Drive, and consideration, discussion and possible action on a
request for a variance to Section 18 of the Subdivision Ordinance. (03-54).
Graduate Civil Engineer Thompson presented the Staff Report, stating that Staff
recommends approval of both the variance and the final plat. He explained that the
applicant is seeking to subdivide the subject property, which consists of 12 acres and a
single residence, into three parcels, combining one of the parcels with another existing
lot and then constructing an additional home on the third lot. As a result, a variance is
required due to the resulting lot widths being less than the block average in this area.
Development Manager Ruiz pointed out the lots that were considered in defining the
block average used to calculate the frontage requirement. She added that an extension
or provision of any public infrastructure would not be required due to the usable
connections to Shady Drive and Lincoln Avenue and the existing utility infrastructure.
Chairman Floyd opened the public hearing.
The following spoke in favor of the replat and variance request:
• Mr. and Mrs. Clifford Fry, 100 Shady Drive.
Mr. Fry stated that their objective is to preserve the rural nature of the tract and the
integrity of the neighborhood.
• Don House, 108 Shady Drive.
Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing.
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 3 of 6
Commissioner Williams motioned to approve the final plat and the variance request as
stated by Staff. Commissioner White seconded the motion.
Some discussion ensured regarding protecting the property from further development in
the future.
Chairman Floyd called the question. The motion to approve both the final plat and
variance request carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10: Public hearing, discussion, and possible action on a
Rezoning for Lots 1 and 2, Block 3 of the Pooh's Park Subdivision from WPC Wolf
Pen Creek Development Corridor to C-1 General Commercial. (03-60)
Staff Planner Hitchcock presented the Staff Report stating that Staff recommends
approval of the rezoning. Ms. Hitchcock explained that previous rezonings in the area
have isolated this small area, requiring much stricter standards when making any
changes to their sites. She added that the property owners of the subject property
support the rezoning. In closing, Ms. Hitchcock reported that The Design Review Board
recommended that the City pursue the rezoning at their March 6, 2003 meeting. On
March 20, 2003, The Commission instructed Staff to begin the rezoning process.
Chairman Floyd opened the public hearing.
Chairman Floyd closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Williams motioned to approve the rezoning and was seconded by
Commissioner Shafer. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11: Consideration, discussion and possible action on a
Preliminary Plat for Crescent Pointe Tract One located at 3300 University Drive
East consisting of 4 lots on 55.5 acres. (03-66)
Graduate Civil Engineer Thompson presented the Staff Report, recommending approval
of the Preliminary Plat with the condition that Staff Comments #2 be addressed. He
stated that additional infrastructure requirements including sewer and water are being
extended to the subject property at this time. There was some discussion regarding
private streets and public access. Sidewalks are proposed for Copperfield Parkway and
will be required on First American Blvd.
Commissioner Williams motioned to approve the Preliminary Plat and was seconded by
Commissioner Shafer. The motion carried 5-0-1.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
ABSTAINED:McMath
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 4 of 6
AGENDA ITEM NO. 12: Consideration, discussion and possible action on a
Master Development Plan for the Shenandoah Subdivision Phases 8-15,
consisting of 146.7 acres and located south and west of existing Shenandoah
subdivisions. (03-68)
Staff Planner Hitchcock presented the Staff Report, recommending approval of the
Master Development Plan with Staff Comments #2. She explained that the plan is a
continuation of the Shenandoah Subdivision and is in compliance with the Thoroughfare
Plan. Also, the proposal is for a predominantly single family development with parkland
and greenbelt, a small area of office, and the extension of three minor collectors and
one major collector. Ms. Hitchcock pointed out that the majority of the land is already
zoned for the uses proposed. Finally, she reported that the Parks Board voted to
support the parkland dedication at their February 11, 2003 meeting.
There was some discussion regarding the street alignments and access.
Mike McClure 9222 Brookwater Circle, engineer for the project, stated that the streets
are stubbed-out and will be extended and then linked to and through the large area
labeled as R-1. He added that a Master Preliminary Plat will be submitted that will show
the different phases of the project and that access issues will be worked out with TxDot.
In addition to that, Mr. McClure has met with the Parks Board, who is in favor of the plan
and is continuing to meet with them in developing the details of the park. He hopes to
build the park immediately and then develop the different phases of the project around
the park.
Commissioner McMath motioned to approve the Master Development Plan.
Commissioner Shafer seconded the motion, which carried with a vote of 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 13: Consideration, discussion and ;bible action on a
Preliminary Plat for the Gateway Subdivision Phases 2-4, located at 1401
University Drive East. (0349)
Graduate Civil Engineer Thompson presented the Staff Report. Mr. Thompson stated
that Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat with the condition that Staff
Review Comments #2 be addressed. The proposed plat consists of Phases 2-4,
consisting of 3 lots and is in an overlay district. He explained that a 60-ft. private access
easement on Phase 3 would extend access to Phases 2 and 4. However, the applicant
wants to reduce the easement to 40-ft. According to traffic study required by TxDot, the
pavement section can be reduced to a minor collector, which is 38-ft., to serve the multi-
family area to the rear of the subject property. Mr. Thompson also reported that Staff is
working with the applicant and all parties concerned to obtain a functional intersection
design for the site. Additionally, a LOMR is being reviewed by FEMA at this time to
establish the boundaries of the floodplain and floodway. Efforts are being coordinated
with the engineering company with keeping in compliance with FEMA requirements.
Further discussion regarding the 60 and 40-ft access private access easement ensued.
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 5 of 6
Mr. Thompson stated that the site plan is proceeding. Also, he stated that a CLOMR
was approved by FEMA to allow for a bridge structure crossing the creek to Phase 4
and channel improvements. He added that there are two entrances to Home Depot and
that there is talk of a gated emergency entrance to Home Depot from the apartments.
Development Manager Ruiz added that there is a Master Plan for the entire area and
that the overlay district extends 500 feet into the entire strip.
Because of the questionable access issues, the Commission discussed taking a closer
look at the entire area and coming up with a plan that better fits the master plan.
Commissioner White motioned to table the item until the April 17, 2003 Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting, to allow for further development of a plan. Commissioner
Shafer seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
Commissioners Shafer and Williams volunteered to work with Staff and the applicant on
better developing this plan. A new plan will be brought before the Commission on April
17, 2003 for consideration.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14: Discussion of future agenda items.
None.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15: Adjourn.
Commissioner Williams motioned to adjourn the meeting which was seconded by
Commissioner McMath. The motion carried 6-0.
FOR: Floyd, White, Hall, Shafer, McMath, and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
The meeting adjourned at 8:17 P.M.
APPROVED:
Chairman, Rick Floyd
ATTEST:
Staff Assistant, Susan Hazlett
P&Z Minutes April 3,2003 Page 6 of 6
MINUTES
Planning and Zoning Commission
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
April 17, 2003
10. Consideration, discussion, and possible action on a preliminary plat
for Gateway Subdivision Phases 2-4. This item was previously
tabled by the Commission on April 3, 2003. 1 `
Commissioner White motioned to remove the item from the table.
Commissioner Williams seconded the motion. The motion carried by a
vote of 5-1.
FOR: Floyd, Williams, Shafer, Hall and White.
AGAINST: None.
Assistant City Engineer McCully presented the Staff report. Mr. McCully
reiterated that additional information has been provided regarding
connectivity and traffic impacts. He stated that staff recommends
approval of the preliminary plat as it meets all of the minimum subdivision
requirements.
The Commissioners expressed concerns regarding traffic congestion and
a gridlock situation given the width of the ingress and egress of the main
thoroughfare to the project.
Chairman Floyd abstained from this item.
There was further discussion regarding issues that would be addressed
during the site plan review, including safety issues and fire and emergency
access concerns.
Chairman Floyd called the question.
Commissioner Hall motioned to approve the preliminary plat with the
comments to be addressed regarding fire access/emergency access
issues. Commissioner White seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-
0-1.
FOR: Hall, White, Shafer and Williams.
AGAINST: None.
ABSTAINED: Floyd
a3- 6)
5 s
A. i I 4 `6 1 ' B
J-Vf. al s �1 11°'4'
y I,B I I � FI!Z I I i 1 ' i i II "� ��"+
4.r1: 1:::.7r*Tblire,±TAU5R42V:1-114gAAfl*r
Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation; Eric Ploeger, Assistant
Director (arrived during Item #7); Peter Vanecek, Senior Park Planner;
Ross Albrecht, Forestry Superintendent; Curtis Bingham, Parks Operations
Superintendent; Kristin Lehde, Staff Assistant.
Board Members Present: John Nichols, Chairman; Don Allison; Jodi Warner;
Larry Farnswroth; Bill Davis.
Board Members Absent: Glenn Schroeder; Glen Davis.
Guest:
Mike McClure, Engineer.
1. Call to order: Chairman John Nichols called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
2. Pardon — possible action concerning requests for absences of members from
meeting: Larry Farnsworth made a motion to accept the absences of Glenn Schroeder
and Glen Davis as excused. Jodi Warner seconded the motion. All were in favor,
and the motion passed unanimously.
3. Hear visitors: Steve Beachy stated that he had received an e-mail from Mr.
Jason Fikes, Chairman of the Alexandria Neighborhood Association, who had
addressed the Board at previous meetings concerning a request for the City to place a
playground on a greenway adjacent to the Alexandria Subdivision in Zone 10. Steve
stated that there is a tour of Zone 10 scheduled with the Board on April 22, 2003, and
that the greenway would be one of the sites visited.
4. Discussion, consideration, and possible approval of minutes from the Regular
Meeting on March 4, 2003, and the Joint Meeting between the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 6,
2003:
Bill Davis made a motion to approve the minutes from the regular meeting on March
4, 2003. Larry F. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed
unanimously.
Larry F. made a motion to approve the minutes from the joint meeting on March 6,
2003. Bill D. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed
unanimously.
Parks&Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,April 8,2003
Page 1 of 6
5. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning park land dedication
requests for the
:• Gateway Subdivision, Phases 2-4 (Zone 2): Pete Vanecek pointed to a location
map of the proposed development. This proposed multi-family, 124-unit
development, is located on University Drive, West of Highway 6. Pete stated that
the land requirement would be approximately one (1) acre, which is too small to
build a neighborhood park on. Staff is recommending the acceptance of the
proposed cash dedication of $56,048 in lieu of land. Steve stated that there was
not a connecting greenway between the proposed development and the University
Park site. Steve suggested that the Board recommend to the Planning and Zoning
Commission that there be potential pedestrian access to the University Park site.
Bill D. is concerned with accessibility, and suggested looking into ways of
working with the City of Bryan to address that issue.
After some discussion, Bill D. made a motion to accept the fee in lieu of land for
the Gateway Subdivision, Phases 2-4, with a recommendation to the Planning and
Zoning Commission to review access issues. Don A. seconded the motion. All
were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
Bearden Addition (Zone 15): This item was removed from the agenda because
the proposed development is outside the city limits.
:• Westfield Village, Phase 6 (Zone 10): Pete V. pointed to a location map of the
proposed development, which is located on Victoria Avenue and Mountain
Breeze Way. The land dedications for the Westfield Subdivision, totaling 4.299
acres, have already been met through prior park land dedications. The proposed
Phase 6 development includes 30 single-family dwelling units, and would add
three (3) parcels of land, totaling an additional .34 acres, to the existing park land
dedication. The developer would also be required to pay the Park Development
Fee, which is $10,740. Steve stated that the developer has aligned the streets to
provide significant access to the park site.
After some discussion, Bill D. made a motion to accept the three (3) proposed
parcels of land for Westfield Village, Phase 6, in addition to the Park
Development Fee. Don A. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion
passed unanimously.
6. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning the Urban Forest
Management Plan: Ross Albrecht said that an Urban Forest Management Plan was
presented to the City Council on September 26, 2002. The direction that staff
received at that time was to use Fiscal Year 2003 as a planning opportunity, and to
develop implementation recommendations.
Ross referred to a memorandum that was included in the Board packets (refer to
memorandum from Ross Albrecht dated April 2, 2003), which included staff's
recommendations for the initial steps to implement the plan. He said that the
implementation steps are incremental in nature, primarily because of budget
Parks&Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,April 8,2003
Page 2 of 6
constraints. The City currently has methods in place for tree preservation and
reforestation on multi-family and commercial projects, and is proactive in
reforestation efforts. Staffs recommendations for implementation are aimed at
addressing the current City inventory.
Ross discussed staff's recommendations, which are divided into policy related items
that could be implemented with little input, and action related items that would
require additional resources to address.
Policy Related Items
1. Development of a "Risk Management Program for Urban Trees" and
identification and removal of hazardous trees and hazards caused by trees along
street right-of-ways.
2. Review existing ordinances to identify and strengthen requirements that affect the
urban forest.
3. Increase public education efforts.
Action Related Items
1. Develop a street tree inventory for hazardous trees, and hazards caused by trees.
2. Implement park land, municipal facility, and greenways tree management.
Ross stated that a key to successful proactive management would be an annual review
process.
Steve stated that implementation of the plan would be a multi-year, long-term
process. Bill D. asked if staff could seek out grants to help fund the implementation
of the plan. Ross responded that there are recommendations for the plan's
implementation that are eligible for grants (i.e. developing a Risk Management
Policy, conducting a street tree inventory, and hiring an Urban Forester). The
Department had applied for, and received, a $10,000 grant from the Texas Forest
Service to hire a consultant to assist the Department in the development of the Urban
Forest Management Plan. Bill encouraged staff to continue to seek grant opportunities
for the implementation of the plan.
John N. asked if legal review would be required of a risk management policy before
the Department could begin the steps to implement street tree management. Ross
responded that he would recommend that the Department ask for funds in the Fiscal
Year 2004 budget process to hire a consultant to develop the policy and conduct a
street tree inventory.
After some discussion, Don A. made a motion to endorse staff's recommendations as
a working plan for the implementation of the Urban Forest Management Plan, and to
support staff in their efforts to obtain funding for implementation. Jodi W. seconded
the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
7. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning a draft policy
statement for potential school/neighborhood park development: This item is a
follow up from the March 4, 2003, meeting, at which the Board requested staff to
Parks&Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,April 8,2003
Page 3 of 6
come up with a conceptual policy statement that could be presented to the City
Council during the joint meeting between the Council and the Board on
April 24, 2003, and could govern potential requests for joint school and neighborhood
park projects with the City (refer to "Partnership in Parks Grant Funding and
Technical Assistance Program" guidelines and "Project Application" that were
included in the Board packets). The guidelines were derived from those used by the
Lower Colorado River Authority.
The Board discussed the conceptual policy statement and was in consensus on 1)
changing the wording on one of the bulleted items under "Eligibility Criteria" from
"The applicant must have a 1:1 value match of City funds" to "The applicant must
have a minimum of a 1:1 value match of City funds", 2) changing the wording in the
statement under "Objectives" from "The partnerships in the parks grant program
have three (3) major objectives..." to "The partnerships in the parks grant program
are intended to meet one or more of the following three (3) objectives...", and 3)
changing the wording on one of the bulleted items under "Application" from
"Funding for grants will be limited to a maximum of $25,000..." to "Funding for
grants will be generally limited to a maximum of$25,000."
Steve stated that the proposed process would be set up to include the following
provisions: 1) if an entity requested a joint project with the City of College Station,
then that entity would be required to fill out the grant application prior to April 1st, 2)
there would also be a standard interlocal agreement attached to the grant application
that would have to be signed by the entity before the grant application would be
accepted, and 3) after receiving the grant application and the signed interlocal
agreement, the Department would then develop a budget request for the proposed
project to be included in the annual budget process.
After some discussion, Don A. made a motion to approve the policy statement with
the wording changes discussed by the Board. Bill D. seconded the motion. All were
in favor, and the motion passed unanimously. The conceptual policy will be included
in the list of the Board's issues and concerns that will be presented to the City
Council during the joint meeting between the Board and the Council on April 24,
2003.
S. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning the Shenandoah Park
Development Process: Steve stated that the Board has been presented with the
dedication of the Shenandoah Park site over the past year. The process now is to
begin the actual design and development of that park. He added that the developer is
interested in doing a development project in which he will actually build the park,
similar to the process that was used in the development of Castlegate Park. For this
project, staff would need to 1) develop a site plan for the park, 2) conduct public
hearings to solicit input from residents living in Zone 10, and 3) determine the
approximate development fee that would be required to build the park. Steve added
that there are also park land dedication funds available within Zone 10 that were
generated by phases of Shenandoah as well as by surrounding residential
neighborhoods, and that these funds can be spent anywhere within that zone.
Parks&Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,April 8,2003
Page 4 of 6
Steve suggested that the Board hold a public hearing on Tuesday, May 6, 2003. He
further suggested that this item be placed on the Regular Meeting agenda on Tuesday,
May 13, 2003, for discussion, and on the June 10, 2003, agenda for possible Board
approval of the conceptual design of the park.
After some discussion, Don A. made a motion for the Board to hold a public hearing
to solicit input from residents of Zone 10 concerning the design and development of
Shenandoah Park. Bill D. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion
passed unanimously.
9. Presentation, discussion, and possible action concerning the Second Quarter
Maintenance Standards Report for Fiscal Year 2003: Curtis Bingham updated the
Board on the status of the Parks Maintenance Standards. He stated that at the end of
Fiscal Year 2002, the Department had met 81% of its stated maintenance standards.
The Department met 84% of its standards in the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2003, and
is currently meeting 85% in the second quarter. However, he added that the 1%
increase between the first and second quarters is somewhat misleading because the
second quarter was conducted by another staff member. Curtis estimated that the
actual second quarter percentage of standards met should be around 84%.
Curtis anticipates an increase in standards being met on playgrounds, tennis courts,
and basketball courts in the third and fourth quarters, that would be attributed to the
upcoming projects:
•a The Hensel Park playground replacement;
:• The installation of a rubber cushion surfacing on the two (2) playground units at
Jack and Dorothy Miller Park;
The resurfacing of the tennis courts at Bee Creek and Central Parks; and
•a The resurfacing of the basketball courts at Oaks Park.
Curtis stated that the Department is having trouble meeting overall standards met set
for the pond category, primarily due to the pond at Wolf Pen Creek.
Bill D. asked if the Department has enough staff to reach the desired maintenance
level (which is to meet 90% of standards set, by the year 2006). Steve responded that
as facilities are added to the park inventory, the Department will bring on resources to
maintain them. This will be done through contracts or requests for additional
personnel.
John N. asked if a column could be added to the report that would reflect the previous
fiscal year's quarters of overall standards met, to compare to the current fiscal year.
Curtis said that he would add a column to the report.
This item was a report only, and no motion was made.
Parks&Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,April 8,2003
Page 5 of 6
10. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning a memorandum from
the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to the City Council listing the Board's
issues and concerns in preparation for the Joint Meeting between the Board and
Council on April 24, 2003: A draft of the memorandum from the Advisory Board to
the City Council that lists the Board's issues and concerns for the Joint Meeting on
June 24, 2003, was included in the Board packets for review. After some discussion,
the Board was in consensus on accepting the memorandum. The memorandum will
be forwarded to the City Council for the meeting.
This item was intended for discussion only, and no motion was made.
11. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning the future Capital
Improvement Program: Eric Ploeger had attended the Citizen's Advisory
Committee's project ranking meeting earlier this evening (April 8, 2003), and handed
out the 2003 Citizen Advisory Committee Capital Project Ranking sheet for the
proposed projects for the upcoming bond election (see attached). He stated that the
cut-off point was at $31,633,000, with the proposed Northgate Street Rehabilitation
project included. Eric added that the Committee felt as though the cut-off represented
the amount for which projects could be completed within the next five (5) years
without having to raise taxes.
The ranked list of proposed projects will be presented to the Planning and Zoning
Commission, and then to the City Council for consideration, prior to being presented
to the voters.
This item was a report only, and no motion was made.
12. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning the current Capital
Improvement Program: Steve discussed the current capital improvement projects.
This item was a report only, and no motion was made.
13. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning Board and Departmental
Goals an Objectives, and City Council Strategies: There was no discussion on this
item.
14. Discussion of next meeting dates and possible agenda items: Refer to attached
Board calendars for meeting dates.
The following items are scheduled for the May 13, 2003, Regular Board Meeting:
• Report on Shenandoah Public Hearing.
:• Approval of the Parks and Recreation Department CY04 User Fees.
Update on the Greenways Program. (Note: This item has been moved to the June
agenda.)
15. Adjourn: Bill D. made a motion to adjourn. Larry F. seconded the motion. All
were in favor, and the meeting adjourned at 9:11 p.m.
Parks&Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,April 8,2003
Page 6 of 6