HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/09/2000 - Regular Agenda Packet - Parks Board CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
PA ' S & RECREATION BOA ' 1
Regular Meeting/Public Hearing
Tuesday, May 9, 2000
City Hall Council Chambers
7:00 PM
1. Call to order.
2. Hear visitors.
3. Pardon—Consider requests for absences of members from meeting.
4. Approval of minutes from Regular Meeting/Public Hearing of March 7, 2000.
5. Public hearing, discussion, and possible consideration of the Veterans Park and
Athletic Complex Master Plan.
6. Discussion, and possible consideration of a development by Hartzell Elkins.
7. Update, discussion, and possible consideration concerning the special venue tax
for sports facilities.
8. Update, discussion, and possible consideration concerning FY2001 Fees.
9. Discussion, and possible consideration of Lincoln Center Advisory Committee
officers:
O Chairman—Carolyn Williams
O Co-Chai an—Joe Dan Franklin
• Treasurer—Barbara Clemmons
o Secretary—Cathy Watson
10. Report on Brothers Pond Park playground replacement project.
11. Consent Items:
Capital Improvement Program Projects Report.
Discussion of next meeting date and agenda.
12. Adjourn.
The building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any
request for sign interpretive services must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To
make arrangements call (409) 764-3517 or(TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Agendas posted on
Internet Website http://www.ci.college-station.tx.us and Cable Access Channel 19.
10 E 1 *
R 0. Box 9960 - 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842
Tel: 409 764 3500
Met orandum
0: ,'arks and ecre:don oard Members
FROM: Kris Startzman, Board Secretary
DATE: May 5, 2010
CT. "cegular ee-fing/Pu- arinl uesday, May 9, 2T10
The next Parks and ' ecreation oar. Leeting is sche•uled for Tuesday, May 9, 2010 at
the City Hall Council Chambers (11' ,1 Texas Avenue). Please see attached agenda and
Board packet. Please note that the Boar, did not meet in April, therefore, the materials
from most of the items on this month's agenda were included in the April packets.
If you have any ',•,uestions or changes to the mutes from the previous meeting, •lease
co i tact me at 764-3414 prior to the ,eeting so that c ,anges can •e made andMassed out
for approvl during the meeting. Also, if you will not be able to attend the meeting,
lease fill out the attached Absentee For and fax it back to me at 764-3737 several days
in advance •f the meeting in order to insure quorum requirem,:nts. T iank you and hope
to see you there.
Attachments:
Home of Texas A& University
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
PARKS AND RECREATION
Absence Request Form
For Elected and Appointed Officers
Name
Request Subi 'tted on(date)
I will not be in attendance at the meeting of
for the reason(s) specified:
Signature
This request shall be submitted to the office of the committee/board secretary prior to the
meeting data
o:boardiabsenteeform.doe
PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD
REGULAR MEETING -- PUBLIC HEARING
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MAY 9, 2000 AT 7:00 PM t'
****PLEASE ''-v'*-1----"'H.----::-----I-----7• YOUR NAME LEG1BALLY***
NAME ADDRESS ' PHONE #
-.-„•-::::..-•„4.4._:__.-4t.„......„.........,-.4..„,..4:..„...,..„...._:4„;„..4,-:;::.,„:.:.„„T:.....:__44..4,4._:.,..„_„...__„..4.,44.4.4..::.,:„._.,.„_„._____•4•_;........„_„4,-...4y,-:::::„.i.:;,,.„.,:.,#„.„_-„„..-4,--.-4•-•_•#:##„.:.•,-„,.•••#.-:,„#,•#::-:-...„:-.„•..,.#4.i.H.#:#,,_4,-#r.,4-:::.,-•:.:,,__--r,--,,,,,,,-:__,T',-_:--.--T,,,=-,-T:,-:--,-,,-:__:,-T4,4#.#;T,r:•-?-:,,,y#•:,#--:-,-:T:F•r-:--::::,---:------,--•••-••••-••-••••r•-•••••-•r-••-•••-••••••••••• •-••••- --•-
,.„....,44,#4.,,„„44.,„:„.„4,...,:„..,..4„,„„,„...„.....,_„.....„......„...........,,....„.........,..............„.. ..„„4.._ _.,......„4„.... .... ..4„. . #444,44_ . __ _____
• , g 4 1!, 1 pp; c, „cc., PP--„pc= — . c „.. P' „ y
'H.'77' i i '., ) I - t -_ i 7, ;--17,77'f •-,' 11'-',,,,, .P., „..- ,1 -,-.,3 -...,,,., ii7 _ :1'7, , (:,-,---,„ ; '''',_,, - .., I ...., / i,
, p k• '•••,,,, 99.,•9/ /
_ -
y ...„:‘, _ 1 , /1„)„,„,,,,,...., c„ 1 ..„...„- ''•,„) ‘,..,ii I ., t _ !.. _ ,,,,,,,,, ,
••,,L.„---—._ , , ,
'' ' '''''IN''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''' ..., :',.': 1,,1,, , ' ' ' t '' t ,,,, l f„,--,„... .._,i,:....- .,--# ----.,,.,;,„,...,,,,,,, •..,
, ,... ..„4., ,)c) ( „ ''•-„1-4 . 0.„,„,;? i ) ,,,,,-- i J'i.„„_,,,
1..---„,-- 1 i • - - ---
,
__„„,„..,
- . ... , - , „,„, .. i ( ,,,.„--„, 0 I 2_,11
I /11/ t if ' ''''''''1 --
,' , , ,-,, ,' thi,„ i ,,,,,,
5(„Q 95 ,,,„ ,:, :„ ,,, . ,,,,, ,....,..., ,,,,,, ....... ,.•, 9 •
,• 9.` / 9 ,
''''''''
't -I '7-c-----/\
, ,
' - ' -
PARKS AND RECREA,TiON BOARD
REGULAR MEETING -- PUBLIC HEA,R1NG
CiTY
MAY 9, 2000 AT 7:00 P.NA.
****PLEASE •^y x p YOUR NAME LEG1BALLY***
NAME ADDRESS PHONE *
.r _ _
w - - - - - _ _ _ „ _ _
_ „„-..„„),„
ill- ill' -----
City of College Station
Parks and Recreation Board
Regular Meeting/Public Hearing
City Hall Council Chambers
May 9, 2000
7.00 p.m.
Staff Present: Steve BeachY, Director of Parks and Recreation;Superintendent;
Eric Ploeger, Assistant
Director; CurtisBingham, Parks Operations David
Gerling, Special Facilities Superintendent; Lance Jackson, Lincoln Center
Supervisor; Linda Waltman, Recreation Superintendent; Pam Springfield,
Senior Secretary; Kris Startzman, Board Secretary.
Board Members Present: Chris Barzilla, Chair; George Dresser, Co-Chair; Glen Davis;
John Nichols; lien; Bill Davis; John Crompton,
Alternate.
Board Member Absent: Sarah Birkhold,
Visitors:
Glenn Schroeder, 1384 Autumn w 0,rit tation, Texas
Mike Littlejohn, 4413 Kingsdale6
,!.ry
Steve Pursley, 251 Merrimac, 61'..).: Staion, Texas
John Arnold, 34 Linda Lane, College on
Terry Hix, 1814 Hondo, College Statio , Texas
Bob Rudder, 9987 North Dowling Road, College Station, Texas
Jan McMurrey, 3400 Mustang, College Station, Texas
Stephen Salas, 3625 Wellborn, #1207, College Station, Texas
La
Larry Farnsworth, 4012 Hunter Creek, College Station, Texas
1. Call to order: The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m.
2. Hear Visitors: No visitors spoke at this time.
3. Pardon — Consider requests for absences of members from meeting: There
were no excused absences during the meeting.
4. Approval of minutes from Regular Meeting/Public Hearing of March
2000: John Crompton moved to approve the minutes with minor editorial
changes. Bill Davis seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion
passed 7-0.
Parks and Recreation Board
Regular Meeting/Public Hearing
Tuesday,May 9,2000
Page 1 of 6
5. Public hearing, discussion, and possible consideration of the Veterans Park
and Athletic Complex Master Plan: Eric Ploeger took the floor. He talked
about the history of the development of the Master Plan. He said that the Parks
and Recreation Board had elected a subcommittee of the Board to begin work on
the Plan in December 1999. The Parks and Recreation Board held a public
hearing on February 1, 2000, to present the Master Plan. Several alternate
versions of the Master Plan were created as a result of that meeting. Those
alternate plans were presented to the subcommitteeand representatives from the
soccer and softball communities who came up with the final proposed Master
Plan. Eric talked about some of the differences between the original and the
final proposed Master Plans. He said that the plan hasn't changed much from its
original version.
The Board briefly discussed several concerns:
* The archaeological study
0. Entrances at both Highway 30 and Highway 60
• Controlled access to the park
• Spill-over lighting from the park
Chris Barzilla opened the floor to the e:'
Steve Pursley — He hopes that by .yor, re softball fields, it will help to
eliminate some of the late night ga
Glenn Schroeder — Glenn jt
he thinks that the proposed Master Plan
shows a good balance bet en sliner-:nd softball and thanked the Board for their
work on the Plan. "
4,
Jan McMurrey—Ms. McMurry'stated that the College Station Soccer Club has
been involved in the project from the beginning. She said that the bond issue for
Veterans Park and Athletic Complex might not have passed, had it not been for
the interest of the soccer community. She also stated her concern that the number
of soccer fields has been decreased from the original version of the Master Plan
and would like more soccer fields.
Chris Barzilla reminded her that it was never the intention of the Board to make
Veterans Park and Athletic Complex a total soccer complex. He said that the
object of the Master Plan was to meet the needs of the entire community, and not
just of one sport.
Bill Davis moved to accept the proposed Veterans Park and Athletic Complex
Master Plan. John Nichols seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the
motion passed 7-0.
Parks and Recreation Board
Regular Meeting/Public Hearing
Tuesday,May 9,2000
Page 2 of 6
6. Discussion and possible consideration of a development by Hartzell Elkins:
Steve explained that a developer (Hartzell Elkins) has proposed a residential
development south of the Southwood Valley Athletic Complex. He has in mind
an approxime 300-resident development (200 are multi-family duplexes, and 100
of them are single family). Steve and Eric have reviewed the proposal and there
are two options that the Board could chose from. The first option would be to take
the park land dedication requirement of 2.5 acres with a development fee of
$77,500. The second would be to take a cash option of$114,700. Eric said that
staff recommends the second option because the proposed development is located
close to a number of other parks. Eric went on to say that the only property that
Mr. Elkins has really proposed dedicating is a detention and drainage area.
Therefore, staff recommends accepting the cash option instead of land. Eric went
on to say that if the Board decides to accept the cash option, those funds would be
used for enhancements in any of the parks in that park zone, as long as they are
neighborhood-type developments.
John N. inquired about the access from the back of Southwood Valley Athletic
Park into the new subdivision area and asked if the City could design a
pedestrian/bike trail into the park with, money accepted through the cash
option. Eric responded that the City co 1. c stated that the park is right across
a gravel road from the proposed devel en-:(-John N. asked if there were any
plans to develop the gravel road t t 611-.tcts to the park. Eric said that
Development Services would work o ssues, but doesn't know if it will be
a paved street.
John C. made a motion tP t second option. Glen Davis seconded the
motion. All were in fay, s thestion passed 7-0.
John N. suggested that the str- 't connecting to the park be finished so that the
City could make the south side of Southwood Valley Athletic Complex an
attractive neighborhood entrance. Steve noted John's concern and said that it
would be passed on to the Development Services Department. Glen inquired
about the Park Land Dedication Ordinance only being used for neighborhood park
purposes (Southwood Valley Athletic Park is an Athletic Complex). Steve
mentioned that in the past, park land dedication funds have been used in athletic
parks to serve the needs of neighborhoods and not the athletic fields. He used as
an example park land dedication funds that had been used to repair playground
structures at Bee Creek Park. The rational was that Bee Creek Park served
neighborhood park purposes. He reminded the members that discretion would
have to be used with park land dedication funds, and that they can only be used
for"true" neighborhood park purposes.
7. Update, discussion, and possible consideration concerning the special venue
tax for sports facilities: This item (whether the City should increase the ad
valorem tax rate by 2% to help fund Veterans Park and Athletic Complex) has
been discussed during previous meetings. Steve said that he had asked Parks staff
Parks and Recreation Board
Regular Meeting/Public Hearing
Tuesday,May 9,2000
Page 3 of 6
to prepare cost estimates for development of the softball facilities and to prepare
estimates for the operation and maintenance of those facilities as well. Steve said
that the Fiscal Services Department had also prepared an estimate for the potential
amount of money that would be generated by the tax increase. Steve said that
when the numbers were added up, it appeared that there would not be sufficient
funds to fully support the development and operation of the softball complex
through this taxing source. Note: In order to use the special venue tax, it has to
be selfsupporting without the aid of ad valorem taxes.
Steve mentioned that a meeting had been set up with John C., Glenn Brown
(Assistant City Manager), and himself to discuss the venue tax and other
possibilities for funding. Steve said that if ad valorem taxes could not be used,
there was a possibility that other taxes may be potential sources to assist in the
funding effort.
Steve asked the Board to delay taking any action on this item until City staff
could provide a full range of options.
Update, discussion, and possible cocts'd.ration concerning FY2001 Fees:
Steve explained that this item was for tie aIal review of Park's fees. He stated
that a subcommittee of the Board hact'\:%en ed to review the fees. Steve
mentioned that the Department was noof any drastic changes this year, but
he feels that it would be worthwhibroii, *-w the Fees Policy sometime before
the next fiscal year.
,t4
Linda Waltman presented.; e prttsi FY2001 fees for the Recreation Division
and for pavilion rentals -44a sa, that the Department is proposing a $10 per
person increase in Youth Ba..qt due to the fact that it is now hiring coaches
for the program. This yea , Youth Basketball will go over budget by
approximately $8,000 and the proposed increase will help recover the loss. She
went on to say that survey results revealed that most parents were in favor of
hiring coaches. Bill asked if the survey had indicated that the fees would
increase. Linda responded that it had not. Steve suggested holding off on making
any changes to Youth Basketball fees to allow Linda time to prepare some
proposals for the program for FY2001.
David Gerling presented the proposed FY2001 fees for Special Facilities. Steve
said that all fees will be submitted with the Department's overall budget process.
Glen Davis made a motion to approve the FY2001 proposed fees, without
changing the Youth Basketball fees. Bill Davis seconded the motion. All were in
favor, and the motion passed 7-0.
Parks and Recreation Board
Regular Meeting/Public Hearing
Tuesday,May 9,2000
Page 4 of 6
9. Discussion and possible consideration of Lincoln Center Advisory Committee
officers: Steve said that this item pertained to the officers that the Lincoln Center
Advisory Committee has recommended. John N. made a motion to appoint the
following members:
• Chairman—Carolyn Williams
• Co-Chairman—Joe Dan Franklin
• Treasurer—Barbara Clemmons
• Secretary—Cathy Watson
Susan Allen seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed 7-0.
10. Report on Brothers Pond Park playground replacement project: Steve said
that this item was related to the 1998 bond issue, in which money was approved
for neighborhood park improvements. The improvements to take place are
mainly due to safety issues. He mentioned that before the Parks and Recreation
Department makes any changes in neighborhood parks, public meetings will be
held to hear any issues or concerns that residents may have.
„
Eric said that the Department held a pu, ting on May 2, 2000. The purpose
of the meeting had been to present en 1P2 ons to replace the playground
structure at Brothers Pond Park to co,k, a1 h new safety standards. Notices
were sent out to residents around the59a111 posted in the newspaper, and signs
were posted in the park. Two :'.y,t5T nd design options were presented to
residents and one was selecteo
-4;
Also, several concerns fo-m; re c nges to the park were voiced:
• Area lighting
• Pond cleanup
• Benches
This was an info ational item and no motion was made.
11. Consent Items:
Capital Improvement Program Project Report: John N. asked about the
progress of the cemetery site acquisition. Steve responded that the title had been
was completed on the project, but that the property owner declined to sell the
property. The City is now looking at potential acquisition of other land in the
same area. This item will be placed on a future agenda once more information is
obtained.
Chris asked about the progress of the proposed interlocal agreement between the
College Station Independent School District and the City of College Station to
construct tennis courts on the Willow Branch campus. Steve replied that the
project was put out to bid by the School District, but it had only received one bid.
The project will be re-bid and the Board updated at a later date.
Parks and Recreation Board
Regular Meeting/Public Hearing
Tuesday,May 9,2000
Page 5 of 6
Discussion of next meeting date and agenda: John C. would like to discuss
the possibility of initiating an urban forestry plan. He would also like to discuss
the feasibility for creating a skateboard park.
12. Adjourn: The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
47-
lta
Parks and Recreation Board
Regular Meeting/Public Hearing
Tuesday,May 9,2000
Page 6 of 6
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
PROJECT STATUS REPORT
May, 2000
1. VETERANS PARK&ATHLETIC COMPLEX MASTER PLAN
Project Number: PK9941
Budget: $2,038, 000
Contract Amount: $168,200 (O'Malley Engineers)
Project Manager: Eric Ploeger
Project Design: O'Malley Engineers
Comments/Status:City Council approved O'Malley Engineers for the design of Phase I. The Veterans
Park and Athletic Complex Subcommittee has approved a preliminary Master Plan. This Master Plan is
scheduled to be presented to the City Council in May 25, 2000.
Task—Project Design:
Advertisement&Award:
Completion:
2 ADAMSON POOL RENOVATION
Project Number: PK9936
Budget: $ 751,000
Design Contract Amount: $747,600
Project Manager: Eric Ploeger
Project Design: Waterscape Consultants
Comments/Status: Progressive Chemical was the low bidder. The renovation began on November 1,
1999.
Task— Project Design: January-June 1999
Advertisement&Award: August-October 1999
Construction Completion: May 2000
3. WEST DISTRICT MAINTENANCE SHOP
Project Number: PK9927
Budget: $501,600
Design Contract Amount: $30,280
Project Manager: Eric Ploeger
Project Design: Holster and Associates
Comments/Status: Bids will be open May 16, 2000.
Task— Project Design: March— February 2000
Advertisement&Award: April—June 2000
Completion: January 2001
CIP Report
o:board/cip/cip.doc
5-May-00 Page 1 of 3
4. COMMUNITY PARK AND CEMETERY SITE ACQUISITION
Project Number: N/A
Budget: $500,000 - Park
$275,000 - Cemetery
Contract Amount: N/A
Project Manager: Eric Ploeger
5. BRAZOS BEAUTIFUL CRAPEMYRTLE PROJECT
Project Number: MI-9902
Budget: $282,000
Contract Amount: $165,662 (Installation & maintenance), $107,290 (for crepe myrtles)
Project Manager: Eric Ploeger/Pete Vanecek
Comments/Status: This project is in the construction phase.
Task-Project Design: September 1999
Advertisement&Award: October- November 1999
Completion: May 15, 2000
6. HALLARAN POOL INPROVEMENTS
Project Number: PK0072
Budget: $27,000
Contract Amount: $23,150 (slide, crane rental $600- plumbing and concrete work, $1,500)
Project Manager: Pete Vanecek, Senior Parks Planner
Comments/Status: Project is to provide a small slide for the shallow area of the pool. Bids were opened
on December 28, 2000and City Council approval will be requested on January 27,
2000. Slide delivery is expected in April 2000.
Completion: May 2000.
7. Willow Branch Tennis Courts
Project Number: PK0074
Budget: $125,000 (Park Land Dedication Fund, Zone 6)
Contract Amount: N/A
Project Manager: Eric Ploeger, Asst. Director
Project Design:
Ad and award:
Completion:
Comments/Status: Bids were opened April 25, 2000. Ony one bid was received and the project will be re-
bid.
CIP Report
o:board/cip/cip.doc
5-May-00 Page 2 of 3
E . G . CARLS
May 1,2000
Mr.Steve Beachy,Director
Department of Recreation and Parks
City of College Station
P.O.Box 9960
College Station,TX 77842
Dear Mr.Beachy.'
Another commitment prevents me from attending the May 2nd Brothers Pond Park meeting, but I
understand that it has to do with replacing the playground equipment.
All of us in this neighborhood want a well equipped and well maintained park, but none of us want a
recurrence of the situation in 1995 when,contrary to your assessment,functional exercise equipment that was
used by many of us every day was replaced with unneeded,impractical, and expensive new equipment.That
equipment and the way that matter was handled is still a matter of conversation and ridicule in and around the
park. Several items of that new equipment were completely impractical for their intended purpose, and they
remain essentially,if not completely,unused. Furthermore,it took a call to the mayor and a visit with the city
manager to have replacement items of some equipment installed,namely a chinning bar and a sit up bench.
I'm sorry to say that the impression that we carried away from that experience is of a profligate city
department that is out of touch with the needs of the community.
That issue and several other items of concern (e.g.,park lighting,natural resource protection,pond water
quality,and a gross overpopulation of ducks) regarding the management of Brothers Pond Park were brought
up in aJollow:up public meeting at Southwood Valley Elementary School. At that meeting, the Parks and
Recreation Board voted unanimously to prepare a comprehensive resource management plan for the park that
would address neighborhood concerns in the overall context of sound park management. It wasn't until I
inquired about the status of that plan some time later that you wrote to say that your department had reversed
the board's decision, arbitrarily I thought, and that a management plan would not be prepared. Not only do
many of the concerns raised in that meeting remain unresolved today, many of us now wonder about the
value,authority,and purpose of the Parks and Recreation Board.
I am told that at least one member of the Parks and Recreation Department believes that the reason for
the May 2nd meeting is that some people in the neighborhood are never satisfied with what your department
does with Brothers Pond Park„ If true,that is a sadly self-serving and most regrettable attitude. In selecting
new playgro d equipment for the pa*, I would encourage you to spend more tine observing and visiting
with the mothers,dads,and dren who use the playground area now and less time studying the catalogs of
•
playground equipment manufacturers. Please also reconsider the preparation of a good park management
plan. That would go a long way toward building confidence and good will in the neighborhood and possibly
reduce the need for these special meetings.
Sincerely,
Xc:, Lynn,lylcIlhaney,sMayon - :-
Tom
Brymer,City Manager . „
Dr.John Crompton - ,
301-2'JENNIFER DRIVE a COLLEGE STATION, TX a 77845
PHONE: 409-606-2369 a E-MAIL.: EGC@TCA.NET
May 4, 2000
Mr. Glenn Carls
3012 Jennifer Drive
College Station, TX 77845
Dear Mr. Carls:
Thank you for your concerns regarding Brothers Pond Park. The City Council and staff
depend on input we receive from our citizens for all city services, including park
development. Any suggestions or comments that you have for improvements to this
park are welcomed. If you have not already given them to Mr. Beachy, I encourage you
to do so.
I agree with you that the Parks Department staff needs feedback from all the users of
Brothers Pond Park. If sufficient feedback was not received at the May 2 meeting I will
ask the City Manager to solicit that input through the Parks Department staff. I will also
ask the City Manager to evaluate a Park Management Plan.
I am sure you will agree with me, College Station has a wonderful Parks system that we
are all be very proud, and I believe our Parks and Recreation staff do a very good job
maintaining all of the facilitates.
Sincerely,
Lynn Mcllhaney
Mayor
CC:
Tom Brymer, City Manager
Glenn Brown, Assistant City Manager
Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation
Jeir - L. McDowell
1105 P- h C . k
Coll .- Station Te
936-825-2737
March 24, 2000
Ms. Geri Marsh
Assistant Athletic Supervisor
City of College Station
1000 Krenek Tap Road
College Station,Texas 77840
RE: 2000 Basketball Season
Dear Ms. Marsh:
I thought you might like some input from a happy parent and coach. I applaud your efforts to
balance out the City Basketball Program.
For the past 3 years, myself and Craig Hogan have coached a team. Our two boys are above
average players, but with both on the court at the same time, they are not a noticeable threat.
Therefore, stacking a team has not revolved around them. We have been subject to huge losses
during the regular season in previous seasons, and I would like to think that it was not because of the
coaching that Craig and I performed. These losses were disheartening to the team when they were
outgunned with 5 all star players on the court at a given time. In one instance, it even provoked one of
our players to confront members of the other team after the game,which we later found out about.
This year was different. Craig and I were able to coach the kids, your hired coaches established
even teams and the season was a fun season. Many of our kids showed noticeable improvement
throughout the season and I do believe that they enjoyed the games. The largest margin of defeat was
8 points and our largest margin of win was 8 points. That tells me that the teams were very equal in
ability.
I would encourage you to implement this program again next year and if there is a way to apply it to
the football season as well, please do so. There is a group of parents that seem to be intent upon
winning, at all costs. I,too have the desire to win, but on the basis of maximum use of the ability of the
kids, not the stacking of talent. This comes from a person that manages and coaches in baseball,
football and basketball.
Again, I applaud your efforts, it made for a very enjoyable season.
Sincerely,
JellgjreyL. McDowell
'OLF PEN CREEK OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
REGULAR MEETING
NOON, JANUARY 311 2000
COLLEGE STATION CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Members Present: James Massey; Dennis Maloney; Kay Henryson; Sharon Colson; Marsha Sanford,
Alternate; Sarah Birkhold; George Dresser, Alternate; Phillip Kelby, Alternate; Judith
Warren, Alternate.
Members Absent: Wayne Rife
Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Pete Vanecek, Afsaneh Yazdani, David Wood - Parks & Recreation;
Frank Simoneaux, Mark Smith, Bob Mosley - Public Works; Kelly Chapman - Public
Relations; Kim Foutz - Economic Development; Charles Cryan, Fiscal Services; Pamela
Springfield, Committee Secretary
Visitors: Mike McClure, Kent Laza, McClure Engineering; Charles Ellison, Attorney at Law; Paul
Clarke, Clarke & Wyndham, Inc.; Rachel Mach, TAMU Student; Johanna Henry, KBTX-
TV
Regular Meeting
Call To Order: James Massey called the meeting to order with a quorum present, at 12:11 p.m.
1® Approval of Minutes of November 8, 1999: Sharon Colson made a motion to approve the minutes
as written. Judy Warren seconded. The members voted and the minutes were unanimously approved.
George Dresser and Sarah Birkhold were not present to vote.
2. Approval of Member Requests For Absences: James said that Wayne Rife was the only member
absent due to business reasons, however the Planning and Zoning Board was represented.
3. Discussion and Possible Action Concerning The Permit A, dications Pending With The US
Arm Cor, Of En.ineers USACE : Mark Smith stated that the City had a signed permit from the
United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) for the project involving what was once part of the lake
area. The USACE letter of approval and a map showing the project area, were passed out (attached)
Mark described the project. Areas that are covered with debris and mud would be smoothed out, and
grass planted. A wetland area will be retained, with the vegetation and ecosystem that goes along with
that. Mark explained that the alignment of the creek was arrived at naturally by allowing the stream to
seek its own path, and will remain as it is now. This project falls under a USACE nationwide permit for
riparian restoration, which allows restoration of the area to its natural state before development
occurred. A picture was passed around (attached)which showed a current photograph of the area,
and a computer visualization showing what the area will look like after everything is done. Mark stated
that The Arkitex Studio had done the computer visualization. Trees will be planted that do well in
wetland areas, but not as densely forested as some of the upstream areas, so the turf could grow and
be maintained. The width of the channel is narrow enough that it should not silt up - the velocity of
the water will carry the silt on out. A lake will be retained around the amphitheater and separated off
from the creek with a levee, to be maintained as a separate water feature. The lake is not a part of the
wetlands or the riparian restoration area. During a flood event, water will still cover the lake, however
the water will go down and back to a controlled level.
Most of the earthwork to be done will involve moving silt from some of the dunes into the lower areas,
with additional fill brought in to bring it up to grade. Wooden mats have been ordered to enable the
heavy equipment to get onto the silt, so that it can be moved around. As soon as the mats arrive, work
WPC Overs/g/7t Committee -ion,2000 Minutes
Page 2
will begin. There will be a natural grade transition between the wetland area and the area that will be
maintained. Elevation-wise it will be a gentle slope. There will be an observation gazebo/kiosk
installed, with wetlands educational information available.
Planting wildflowers in the grassland area was discussed. Steve Beachy said that could be looked into.
James said that perhaps Brazos Beautiful could be involved in that process if there was interest further
down the line. Steve stated that getting the turf in place and the site work done within the next four
months was the most important thing. Planting trees and flowering shrubs would be an ongoing
process as the project progressed.
Mark said that the bridge that is there now will remain. Silt will be allowed to build back up over some
of the sidewalks along the creek, since it has been a constant battle to keep the silt off of them.
Alternate routes will be established for those trails. Some of the light poles will also be removed. Mark
said that the USACE's jurisdiction included everything in the shaded area on the map he'd handed out.
James stated that there were three major portions to this project.
a. Riparian Restoration Project: This will be done in-house, and the permit has been received
(discussed above).
b. Bridge Crossing Project/George Bush East Extension: This portion of the project is for the George
Bush Drive East extension that runs next to Taco Bell. It will continue on, cross the creek, and
come out on Holleman Drive next to The Arbors Apartments. The USACE nationwide permit for
road crossings is required. The City has received verbal approval to begin the project, however
nothing has been received in writing. Mark added that the final design needs be done, and the
acquisition of one parcel of land completed, before that project can be put out to bid. The project
is moving along quite well. The latest estimate puts completion in December, 2000. If the land
acquisition goes faster, it could be completed sooner.
c. Overall Conceptual Plan: The USACE has agreed to the concept, however, there are specific details
that they want the City to address, as well as to get the final design. Mark stated that this is
difficult, because the City is making a large commitment when it moves to final design, and if its not
what the USACE wants, then the City will have to go back and start over. Mark said a lot of these
details would need to be worked out before the process gets too far along. Once the conceptual
plan is devised, that's what will have to be done, or the permit won't be any good.
Mike McClure said the USACE wants to make the pilot channel a little bit wider so the tributary can
meander within that lower area and set up various aquatic features. This would be addressed in
the final design, and he didn't think that this would be a problem. Steve said the City would
proceed with the concept, then from the concept into the design phase. There will not actually be
a permit issued for the conceptual design, it will be a letter stating that the City is in compliance.
The permit will have to be filed when the design is done, but the simple details can be addressed
now.
4® Discussion and Possible Action Concerning Current Wolf Pen Creek Development Projects:
a. Hotel/Conference Center— Project No. GG 9701, Kim Foutz: The developer, WPC, Ltd., did
not meet the November 13, 1999 deadline to close on their financing. The City sent a letter of
default providing for an additional sixty days, with a January 13, 2000 deadline, in which to cure
that default. Notices indicate that they have secured financing, they just haven't gone through the
closing process yet. The January deadline has also passed, but because of significant
conversations with the developer and their financial institution, the City has determined to take no
action through February, 2000. It is anticipated they should close by the end of February. WPC,
Ltd., wants to update all the agreements associated with the project, since some conditions have
changed. The construction timeline — the original completion date of August, 2000 - will have to
be changed, and possibly the proposed use for the second phase of development. They are
working on making those changes to forward to City Council. Kim said their wanting to update the
agreements indicates that they are still committed to the project and moving forward. A
WPC Oversight Comm/itee Jan, 2000 Minutes
Page 3
contingency plan is being put together in case WPC, Ltd., doesn't close by the end of February.
One of the keys to moving forward is preserving the tax increment zone for this particular project.
It is possible that the project could be done at a different location, however financial support
would have to be reevaluated when and if the time comes.
Kim said that there have been no discussions with WPC, Ltd., regarding the use for the Phase II
development They intend to do the full value maintenance guarantee of $21 million through the
hotel/conference center facility, since costs for the facility have escalated. An extended-stay
facility has been considered for Phase II, but they could also ask for the removal of the second
phase from the project agreement altogether.
b. Traffic Signals at Dartmouth & Holleman ® Project No® FT 9807, Mark Smith Mark said
the signals have been installed and are operational. The only thing left to do is remove the street-
name signs on poles at the corners and replace them with new street-name signs which will be
mounted on the mast arms of the signals. The new signs have been ordered and will be installed
when they are received.
c. Channel Improvements, Texas Avenue to Tributary B, Steve Beachy: Design of this
project was pending notification of the permit, and is dependent upon what direction the
committee takes once Agenda Item #5 is discussed.
d. WPC Tributary Site Improvements — Project No. PK 9942, Steve Beachy: Project is
underway, and the sidewalks have been poured. The pre-fabricated bridge is ordered and
expected in on Thursday, February 3, 2000. Once it arrives, it will be installed. This project is
coming along well.
e. Parking Improvements - Project No. PK 9903, Steve Beachy® Design of this project was
pending notification of the permit, and is dependent upon what direction the committee takes once
Agenda Item #5 is discussed.
f. Trails and Bridges — Project WP 9905, Steve Beachy: Design of this project was pending
notification of the permit, and is dependent upon what direction the committee takes once Agenda
Item #5 is discussed.
g. George Bush East Extension — Project No® ST 9916:(Discussed/a agenda item 7013-b above.)
Frank Simoneaux stated that an offer letter had been sent to Richard Smith, the owner of the tract
of land on George Bush and Harvey, offering him the appraised amount for the property. He has
not accepted that offer, but has expressed and interest in selling the right-of-way rather than the
entire tract. Frank stated that the City Council has already passed a Resolution of Needs, which
is a prelude to condemnation. Mike McClure speculated that you could possibly get 20 parking
spaces on that property. There had been discussion at previous meetings about the lack of
parking, especially at that end of the park. James stated that the City Council has already
approved the need and the interest in wanting to go ahead and acquire the property however
possible. Sharon said she felt it was very important that the City be very careful about acquiring
things outside what is really needed. James said that the Council feels the same way, but was
advised that this property was necessary for the successful completion of the George Bush
extension. Mark said sometimes the price for just what is needed, plus the cost of damages, is the
same as or greater than, if the whole property is purchased. Parking was not the reason the City
made the recommendation to Council, it was because it was the most feasible offer.
h. Riparian Restoration = Project No. WP0001: (Discussed la agenda item /3 above.)
5. Discussion and Possible Action Concernin:i Master Plan Im dementation Priorities: James
stated that since the proposals for the three areas are in various stages of approval, what needs to be
done next is to balance what's wanted in terms of finances. The money is projected out from the
income from the TIF. Charles Cryan stated that currently there is $1.3 million in Drainage funds
available, just under $700,000 available in the TIF, plus a couple of other sources where funds are
WPC Oversight Committee—Jan,2000 Minutes
Page 4
available. There has been over $3 million projected out over the life of the project, with a substantial
portion of that coming in on an annual basis from the TIF. James stated that there is about $2 million
that the city could start to act on. The money for the Tributary B project is coming out of Park Land
Dedication Funds, and the George Bush Drive extension is coming out of separate funds.
Steve stated that the contract for design had been to develop a conceptual master plan, and that's
been completed. The next contract, the George Bush Drive extension, is essentially complete. Steve
said staff would next like to enter into another contract for the design of the channel improvements
from Texas Avenue to Dartmouth, seek City Council approval to do that, and hopefully have entered
into a contract sometime in March, so that the design process could begin.
Bob Mosley said as part of the design contract, McClure Engineering would address parking, trails and
bridges. Since the City does not own all the land from Texas Avenue to the Dartmouth/Holleman
intersection, they will be involved in land acquisitions as far as the channel improvements are
concerned. If the total design is there, even though there is a lack of funding for the entire project,
pieces of the project could be broken off, such as parking, sidewalks, and the Millenium Park, and bid
out as separate projects. Mike McClure reminded everyone that the project would be at the mercy of
the USACE for their final approval, but he felt the design of the channel could be done in 6-7 months.
He feels that there are some things in the design process that the USACE could help with. Projects that
could stand alone would be identified in this process. Once permission to proceed with the contract is
received, the earliest that it could be presented to City Council would be March. With the design
completed six to eight months after that. A&M's drainage projects will not change the design of the
channel. If their projects change anything, it will be how high the water rises during peak flood events.
The improvements on campus will have positive effects on the City's design.
Judith made a motion to direct staff to bring the proposal to City Council for the design portion of the
channel improvements from Texas Avenue to Dartmouth. Marsha Sanford seconded. All members
were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
Steve told the members that probably this time next year staff would be seeking approval to go forward
with the design of the downstream portion of the channel, from Dartmouth to Rudder Freeway
(Highway 6 Bypass). George asked for timelines for some of the engineering work discussed, forward.
Steve said some of that has been done, and he would have it available for the next meeting.
6. Discussion and Possible Action Concerning a Design Charette for Future Wolf Pen Creek
Projects: This design charette would be for the areas that are out of the USACE control, and would
give ideas for direction. Kay said she'd have to talk to the University again, as well as the local AIA
Chapter. Both had helped with the Northgate design charette. The participants of the charette would
need to be given the limits of what the committee wants them to look at. Issues that the committee
hasn't already discussed, such as the gateways into the area, as well as the tracts from Dartmouth to
the Bypass area, and how they connect into the project, could also be discussed. Steve said the
purpose of the charette will not be to develop a master plan because that has already been done. It
would concern the elements that go into the design process such as parking, gateways, gazebos, etc.
James asked if it was possible to get this done as a summer project. Kay said possibly, but she didn't
know for sure. James, Kay and Steve said they'd get together and go talk to someone at A&M, and
come back with a possible time for the charette at the next meeting.
7. Discussion And Possible Consideration of Future Meeting Dates: Everyone agreed that the
first Monday of the month was good, however since the January meeting was held so late in the month,
the next meeting would be the first Monday in March —the 6th.
8. Adjourn: The meeting adjourned at 1:37 p.m.