Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/17/2005 - Regular Agenda Packet - Parks BoardPARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD (*- AGENDA CITY OF COLLEGE STATION REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 7:00 p.m. The EXIT Teen Center 1520 Rock Prairie Road • College Station, Texas 1. Call to order 2. Pardon and possible action concerning requests for absences of members 3. Hear visitors 4. Discussion, consideration, and possible approval of minutes from the Regular Meeting of March 8, 2005. 5. Review, discussion, and possible action regarding potential Park Land Dedication requests for: • Williams Creek Subdivision Amended Master Plan N Park Zone 14 ■ The Forest of Castlegate N Park Zone 10 6. Review, discussion, and possible approval of the Steeplechase Park Master Plan 7. Report, discussion, and possible action from the Senior Advisory Committee regarding a Senior Center 8. Parks Playground Replacement Report, discussion, and possible action 9. Report, discussion, and possible action regarding the second quarter Park Maintenance Standards. 10. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning the Capital Improvement Program: ■ Park Land Dedication Project List ■ Capital Improvement Project List ■ Veterans Park & Athletic Complex - Phase II Project 11. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning Board and Departmental Goals and Objectives, and City Council Strategic Plan 12. Discussion of calendar, future meeting dates, and possible agenda items: ■ Regular meeting N June 14, 2005 • 14t" Ever Bluebonnet Street Rodders Rod Run at Central Park — June 11-12, 2005 • Starlight Music Series Concert on June 11tn 13. Adjourn The building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for sign interpretive services must be made at least 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. creation Advisory'' Board ilar Meeting 17, 2005, 7:0.0 p.m. 7 Teen Center ck Prairie Road Station, Texas Staff Present: Steve Beachy; Ric Ploeger; Peter Lamont; Marci Rodgers, Senior Services Coordinator; Curtis Bingham; Pete Vanecek; Pam Springfield Members Present: Jodi Warner (arrived late); Jeannie McCandless; Glenn Schroeder; Carol Blaschke; Don Allison; Larry Farnsworth; Gary Erwin; and Gary Thomas Members Absent: Kathleen Ireland; Ann Ganter, CSISD Liaison Guests Present: Robert Meyer, Frank Camplone, Yvonne Stevens, Joanna Yeager, Laura Holmes, Senior Advisory Committee members; Joe Schultz, TEXCON; Wallace Phillips, Forest of Castlegate 1. Call to order. Jodi Warner, Chair would be late arriving, therefore the meeting was called to order by Don Allison as acting Chair at 7:05 p.m. 2. Pardon - possible action concerninq requests for absences of members from meetinq,. One request for absence had been received from Kathleen Ireland. Larry Farnsworth made a motion to accept the request as submitted and Gary Erwin seconded. The vote was called and the motion passed unanimously. 3. Hear visitors. Hearing none this item was closed. 4. Discussion, consideration, and possible approval of minutes from Regular Board meetinq of March 8. 2005. Larry F. moved to accept the minutes as presented and Jeannie McCandless seconded. Hearing no discussion, the vote was called. The minutes of the March meeting were unanimously approved. 5. Discussion, consideration, and possible action reqardinq park land dedication requests for the followinq proiects. ■ Williams Creek Subdivision Amended Master Plan - Park Zone 14. This subdivision had come before the Board in 2004, at which time a cash dedication had been made. The land dedication for the current seventeen lots would be .168 of an acre, therefore, staff was recommending acceptance of the $9,452 fee in lieu of the land. Another thirty-six lots have been platted and the money for those lots should be received within the next few months. This neighborhood is close to what will eventually be the park that will be built when the landfill closes. After further discussion, Larry F. moved to accept the staff recommendation of the cash dedication in lieu of land and it was seconded by Gary Thomas. Hearing no further discussion the vote was called. The motion passed six to one, in favor of the cash dedication. • The Forest of Castlegate - Park Zone 10.. The land dedication for the 295 units of this development would be 2.92 acres, however, the developer, Wallace Phillips, was proposing to dedicate 4.19 acres - all the land required for the entire development - and the development fee of $105,610. He would like to build the park himself if he can work through the legal issues with the city as he did with Castlegate Park. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Page 1 May 17, 2005 Regular Meeting Minutes A previous dedication of 1.5 acres had come from the Spring Creek Townhomes and with this dedication the total park would be 5.86 acres. Staff was recommending acceptance of the land and the dedication fee. Steve stated that discussions would be taking place regarding greenway area along the creek. If the City could acquire that greenway area, it would provide a connection to Southern Oaks Park. Street frontage is only about 27% of the perimeter of the park. Wallace Phillips suggested that perhaps the land dedication fee could be put toward the development of a parking lot for the park since there were a lot of people that came from outside the development to use the park. Glen S. moved approval of the changes and the reconfiguration of the park. Larry F. seconded. There being no further discussion, the vote was called and passed unanimously. 6. Review, discussion, and possible action from the Senior Advisory Committee reaardina a Senior Center. This item was moved up from item V. Marci Rodgers, Senior Services Coordinator introduced six of the fourteen Senior Advisory Committee members in attendance and then turned the meeting over to Bob Meyers. Mr. Meyers was there to introduce the idea of building a senior center. He stated that the seniors do a lot of things, which were summarized in Section 3 of the report the members had received. Originally their proposal had been to take over the Central Park headquarters. Since then, there has been indication that not all of the building will be vacated so they had to go to another plan. He stated that the Senior Advisory Committee was not impressed with a multi -generational building, as they felt that it would be designed for use by younger people. Therefore, the seniors would like to have a building specifically designed for ages 55 and older. They were there to ask for the board's support and help to get a senior center, and to present their petition to Council. Steve explained that some of this started when the City Council had a strategic issue that dealt with issues for seniors and talk of a senior center was discussed. As part of that initiative, the Senior Services Coordinator position came about. Using the EXIT Teen Center had been an interim solution for a meeting place, but the time had come to move forward with the idea for a senior center. A master plan would have to be developed with a public input phase. Steve recommended that the board accept this report and take it to Council. He applauded the seniors for their work on this. Mr. Meyers felt that everyone would agree that they have a good program going that reaches quit a few people. With a senior center, it would be possible to have all the senior information brought together in one place. Mr. Meyer thanked Steve and Marci for all the work they do and asked for support from the Board in the form of a motion that could then be brought to Council in the near future. Steve added that Council was aware of the topic and were anticipating a report coming to them. Glenn S. made a motion to accept and support the report, adding that at the time the City Center master plan is developed, that this be included. Larry F. seconded and the vote was called. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. 7. Review, discussion, and possible approval of the Steeplechase Park Master Plan. Ric Ploeger stated that the city had accepted the land for this park in 1999 and that City Council had approved $315,000 in 2005 budget to develop it. Two public hearings had been held in February and March, and although not a lot of people had shown up, a lot of ideas had been received. At the second hearing, staff had come back with a plan based on the suggestions from the first public hearing, with most of the recommendations included in the design. Staff was ready to move forward with the bidding and construction of the project. Pete Vanecek briefly went over the plan. The citizens had requested a dog park because there were a lot of college students living in the area with pets. There are two bus stops there for A&M, so staff proposed a bus shelter there with a roof and plexi-glass walls. There will be fencing around the dog park and some fencing around the main entrance, lights around the '/ - 3/ mile walking/jogging trail, a fabric covered playground, and a basketball court. There will be no restrooms or parking lot. A sewer line was going to be installed running under what will be the playground and staff will find out when the sewer work will be done (staff had been told summer 2005) and how deep the line will be buried. Normally they are buried 8'-10' deep. A bridge will also be installed in the park (probably steel and wood) to go over the low water crossing. It will cost approximately $315,000 to do everything, including the addition of some trees. Don A. stated that he liked the idea of putting the dog space in the retention pond. Glenn S. moved approval of the Master Plan for Steeplechase Park. The motion was seconded and the vote was called. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. 8. Park Plavaround Replacement Report. discussion. and possible action. Curtis Bingham stated that this item had come about as a result of a question posed by Kathleen Ireland at a previous meeting. She had asked how Parks replaced playgrounds and if there was a program for that. A report had been included in the packets and Curtis went over it. In the packet, the first section was a brief history referencing all playground replacements and the manufacturer of the playgrounds. He explained how detailed, formal, playground inspections were done one time per month by the Parks Operations maintenance crews. The supervisors also check them over when they are on -site. A playground inspection sheet had also been included in the packets. Steve stated that Curtis and his folks do a very good job of keeping track of the playgrounds, with the replacements now being forecast out. Don said the report was very informative and he would like to see it included in the notebooks for new board members. 9. Report, discussion, and possible action regardinq the second quarter Park Maintenance Standards. Curtis B. stated that the standards were still at 89%. With the issues relating to volleyball courts and the ponds it is hard to reach that percentage. He explained that pond maintenance is difficult because you have to have a certified person to administer chemicals — even pond dye. However, Parks Operations would be certifying some of its crew members to administer chemicals. Also, in the near future, staff will be looking at some of the maintenance standards and may be removing or including some items. Steve stated that the Department was in its fourth year of maintenance standards implementation and added that it has been an excellent tool. This was an informational item only and no action was required. 10. Report. discussion. and possible action concernina the Capital Improvement Proaram. Ric stated that the regular reports had been included in the members' packets. There were a number of projects in progress: • Thomas Park rubber surfacing should be complete soon. ■ The intergenerational parks project and John Crompton Park were under construction. ■ VPAC soccer lights were installed, being tested, and the project was nearing completion. The installation at Central Park was complete. There had been some damage done to the fields when the lights were installed at VPAC, but those fields were scheduled to be taken out of service for the summer anyway. ■ The Wolf Pen Creek Multipurpose Building design was underway. ■ The Boy Scouts had built a Frisbee golf course at Lemontree Park, which had turned out very nice. Pete Vanecek had coordinated the project with the scouts. ■ The design firm was putting the final touches on the conceptual plan for the Veterans Park & Athletic Complex, Phase ll, which will drive everything once it has been approved. Steve and Ric had approved some final footprint concepts several months prior and once the conceptual plan was worked up it would come back before the board. This was an informational item only and no action was required. 11. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning Board and Departmental Goals and Objectives and Citv Council Strateqic Plan. ■ The proposed Grimes County regional park site appraisal process was nearing completion and should be ready within the next couple of weeks. A meeting would be held in June with TMPA to go over that appraisal. The Brazos Council of Governments was working with a non-profit organization for possible funding. This project was still in the preliminary stages but once the appraisal was received, it would give a dollar amount to start shooting for. There is a lot of interest in doing the project as well as interest from state and elected officials. Another tour will be arranged at a later date for Council members and any board members interested in going to the site. ■ Urban Forest Management Plan — There has been no new word on this plan. There is the possibility that may be a dead issue. ■ Park Land Dedication Ordinance update — The revised draft is tied in partially with the Unified Development Ordinance, but staff thought it best not to wait on the UDO, and will move forward with the Park Land Dedication updates, which are further along. ■ The Castlegate and Edelweiss Gartens developers were interested in developing those parks themselves. ■ City Center Project — Steve stated that he has become more involved in this process and he has recommended that the Parks Board and Planning & Zoning Commission get together to discuss this and then perhaps hold town hall meetings for input into the process. Every bond issue since 1976 has included some item related to that area - not called city center - but there has been interest in that area for the better part of thirty years by the city, who has a significant investment in the area. This has been a long term project. ■ Steve and Jodi will need to get together to do a report on the board's goals for Council when they go on their retreat. 12. Discussion of calendar, future meeting dates, and possible agenda items: ■ Regular meeting — June 14, 2005 ■ Memorial Day celebration — This program will have the first memorial pathway dedication and it will be for the War on Terror. Chet Edwards will be the guest speaker. ■ There will be a bike loop report at the next meeting. ■ A joint meeting with Planning and Zoning will need to be scheduled for sometime in the near future. 13. Adiourn. Glenn S. moved to adjourn and Gary E. seconded. The vote was called. All were in favor and the meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Park Land Dedication Ordinance Project Review Checklist Date Received: April 4, 2005 Park Zone: 14 Current Zone Balance: $13,344 Project Location: Rock Prairie Rd. Name of Development: Williams Creek Estate Subdivision Phase: 2 Applicant: Stan & Jean Stephen Family No. Two, LP Address: 2514 Memorial Drive. City/State/Zip: Bryan, Texas 77802 Phone Number/Fax: Fax Number: E-mail: Engineer/Planner: Texcon Address: 1707 Graham Rd. City/StateZip: College Station, TX 77845 Phone Number/Fax: 764-7743 Fax Number: E-Mail: REQUIRED COMPLIANCE Section 10-B-1: Land Dedication Single Family Dwelling Units: 17 Multi -Family Dwelling Units: Total Land Requirement: .168 Acres Proposed Dedication: 0 Section 10-B-2: Fee in Lieu of Land Has the Planning and Zoning Commission's approval been obtained? NO Land Fee: Single Family Fee ($198/dwelling unit): $198 x 17 = $3,366 Multi -Family Fee ($160/dwelling unit): Total Acquisition Fee: Section 10-13-3: Park Development Fee Single Family Fee ($358/dwelling unit): Multi -family Fee ($292/dwelling unit): Total Fee Amounts: Total Single Family Fee ($556/dwelling Unit) Multi -Family Fee ($452/dwelling Unit): Section 10-13-4: Park Development in Lieu of Fee Required development cost: Staff review date and comment: April 4, 2005 Parks Board review and decision: Section 10-13-5: Minimum Park Size Is the proposed park less than five (5) acres? If yes, staff recommends: acceptance of fee Section 10-13-7: Prior Park Acquisition $358 x 17 = $6,086 $556 x 17 = $9,452 N/A No, Lick Creek Park is approx. 1 mile away but not Is there an existing park that can serve the proposed development? a neighborhood park. If yes, staff recommends: Section 10-E: Comprehensive Plan Is the proposed park dedication in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Recreation, Park, and Open Space Master Plan? Comments: Section 10-F: Additional Information 1. Island in the 100-year floodplain? Percentage: a. Detention/Retention? Acreage in floodplain: Acreage in detention: Acreage in greenways: Comments: Size: Meets Board Policy? Percentage: Percentage: Percentage: Section 10-F (of the Park Land Dedication Ordinance) 10-F. 1 Any land dedication to the City under this section must be suitable for park and recreation uses. Consideration will be given to land that is in the floodplain or may be considered "floodable" even though not in a federally regulated floodplain as long as, due to its elevation, it is suitable for park improvements. (a) Neighborhood park sites should be adjacent to residential areas in a manner that serves the greatest number of users. Comments: (b) Neighborhood park sites should be located so that users are not required to cross arterial roadways to access them. Comments: (c) Sites should not be severely sloped or have unusual topography which would render the land unusable for organized recreational activities. Comments: (d) Sites should have existing trees or other scenic elements. Comments: (e) Detention/retention areas will not be accepted as part of the required dedication, but may be accepted in addition to the required dedication. If accepted as part of the park, the detention/retention area design must be approved by the City staff and must meet specific parks specifications. Comments: 10-F. 2 Parks should be easy to access and open to public view so as to benefit area development, enhance the visual character of the city, protect public safety, and minimize conflict with adjacent land uses. The following guidelines should be used in designing parks and adjacent development: (a) Where physically feasible, park sites should be located adjacent to greenways and/or schools in order to encourage both shared facilities and the potential co -development of new sites. Comments: (b) A proposed subdivision adjacent to a park may not be designed to restrict reasonable access to the park from other area subdivisions. Street and greenway connections to existing or future adjoining subdivisions may be required to provide reasonable access to parks. Comments: (c) Where a non-residential use must directly abut a park, the use must be separated by a screening wall or fence and landscaping. Access points to the park may be allowed by the Planning and Zoning Commission if a public benefit is established. Comments: (d) It is desirable that a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the perimeter of a park should abut a public street. In all cases, the City shall approve the proposed street alignment fronting on city parks. Comments: (e) Streets abutting a park shall be built in accordance with the thoroughfare plan and the standards of this ordinance; however, the City may require any residential street built adjacent to a park to be constructed to collector width to ensure access and prevent traffic congestion. The developer may request oversize participation in such an instance. Comments: Staff Recommendations: Acceptance of Parkland dedication fee. Section 10-G: Approval: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: Planning & Zoning Commission: City Council: (a) Where physically feasible, park sites should be located adjacent to greenways and/or schools in order to encourage both shared facilities and the potential co -development of new sites. Comments: (b) A proposed subdivision adjacent to a park may not be designed to restrict reasonable access to the park from other area subdivisions. Street and greenway connections to existing or future adjoining subdivisions may be required to provide reasonable access to parks. Comments: (c) Where a non-residential use must directly abut a park, the use must be separated by a screening wall or fence and landscaping. Access points to the park may be allowed by the Planning and Zoning Commission if a public benefit is established. Comments: (d) It is desirable that a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the perimeter of a park should abut a public street. In all cases, the City shall approve the proposed street alignment fronting on city parks. Comments: (e) Streets abutting a park shall be built in accordance with the thoroughfare plan and the standards of this ordinance; however, the City may require any residential street built adjacent to a park to be constructed to collector width to ensure access and prevent traffic congestion. The developer may request oversize participation in such an instance. Comments: Staff Recommendations: Section 10-G: Approval: Acceptance of Parkland dedication fee. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: At the regular meeting on May 17, 2005, the Board voted six to one to accept the cash dedication of $9,452 in lieu of the .168-acre land dedication. Planning & Zoning Commission: City Council: ,s. p: rds •L } 'jJJr s, tt �• r, I \�VIILLIN.t6 CREEK � .' 1� ' '•l; i' , '!I , , \ h �r"i t � ertx+�s�+r�rr;•�' •.,.,.,..,�.:'%-;%J.,�.J�iSY1•'I%::'"'-:�, a is - _ IIL AMENDED d - = MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN .. e - 642.51 ACRES - - =lamWILLIAMS CREEK SUBDIVISION 211.14 ACRES WILLIAMS CREEK ESTATES SUBDIVISION 116.81 ACRES q�'^^-•-�^-� - REMAINDER OF ANDERSON-STEPHEN TRACT 314.56 ACRES 4 ` q®� - NATHAN CLAYPITT SURVEY, A-90 �+'AP1a "•'m"® ""�'" ^�'""•"s'^ �*'� - S.W. ROBERTSON SURVEY. A-202 COLLEGE STATION. BRAZOS COUNTY. TEXAS SCALE: 1'.400' MARCH. 2005 - - OWNERS: st¢.�ie a• s a. atN... e..t r AM— +...r ar ++..., 7�7 11� iw. V. 20W IFS Iwy IN M YwMF. V. w. an una .0 vm w .e on v m.s 7914 M.. 9A. Ffa iw 77m ueo f..a c.....0 a. ft R Tw TAN cd. T.— 74m ENGINEER: `ECErm SURVEYOR: DEVELOPER: T CON G.t+arol Cmd7acfon ...rr - trs7 t.a tree. T ta..n..tr a IL tM un 4" rr, 1V. a7w tw 71Y M L so -an � Stu •,•• 77w Lm 7u-ny STRATEGIC PLANS IMPLEMENTATION CALENDAR APRIL 2005 - JUNE 2005 Design firm gathers input from staff, Cemetery Committee and the community Integration with finance software begins. Begin credit cards. Present results of 2nd quarter park maintenance surveys to Parks and Recreation Board Parks &"Leisure Urban Forest , Steve �_ Services Maria emenf Plan „ , Ros 9 s Program evaluations due Division 81 Program Evaluations Complete Planning underway for Senior Games Construction begins Needs Assessment report from A&M Cemetery Committee completes proposed operational issues for new site. Presentation to City Mgr. for approval. Needs Assessment report to Parks Board NOTE: Shaded items have been completed. Lights installed Programming sites Starlight Series begins Starlight Series ends 1. Called to order. 2. Pardons. 3. Hear visitors. 4. Discussion and approval of minutes. 5. Discussion and possible action, review of the following • Brazos Valley Festival of African Arts - Letter of Support • Susuki Violin Summer Program and support of future projects • Presentation of Summer Fun by LRC Staff • Supervisor Report - Oct. 2004 - March 2004 • Development of TAKS Support Team. 6. Future Agenda Items 7. Adj ourn. 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 (979) 764-3733. 1. Called to order at 6:30 2. Pardon - possible action concerning requests for absences of members from meeting. 3. Election of Officers: Kristiana Ford -Chair Jason Fikes-Vice Chair Chanda Elbert- Secretary 4. Visitors. Margrit Moores -Suzuki Violin Program Director- Discussion: • Will the board sponsor program or grants organization? • City will donate space and transportation parent assessment fee monthly parent assessment of $30.00 per child. Will look for matching funds for about $15,000 for instruments and supplies. Pilot the program this summer with 15 kids. Lucille Young -Former Black Student Association Representative- Discussion: • Trying to save 2 buildings to make offices for the Concerned Black Men and the Lincoln Former Student Association. Would like to have control over the buildings. Lincoln Center Staff will not have responsibilities but provide maintenance of the buildings. Will take approximately $250,000.00-$300,000.00 to have buildings renovated 6. The LRC will received workout equipment from the College Station Medical Center -will receive copies of the acquired equipment 7. Will review calendar for the last 6 months with Lance and staff. 8. Reestablish collaborative efforts to improve test scores by working with the school district. Need a directive and to retool efforts. Tutoring can be set up to prep for ACT, PSAT, SAT etc. in tutoring rooms. Get tutors for the older children can print TE KS test for tutoring. Have someone to talk to kids about financial aid honors courses and advanced placement. Talk with Ron Fox at the high school. 9. Bring to our next meeting -Discuss some activities for the summer such as sewing and home economics classes, basic cooking and cleaning up. 10. Meeting adjourned at 7:55 pm. 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 (979)764-3733. 4th Annual Wed. May 25 9amm3pm What's Going on? The Bryan/College Station area is experiencing a tremendous population explosion. Part of this growth over the past decade is due to a 25% increase in senior citizens. In recognition of this vital segment of our society, we are pleased to announce our 4th annual Seniors Expo. This expo, underwritten by HEB and with the cooperation of many senior service organizations in the Brazos Valley and major media sponsors KBTX, Equicom Radio Stations,TV Facts and The Eagle, will take place Wednesday, May 25, 2005 from 9:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. at the Brazos Center. The Seniors Expo is designed to showcase how businesses, organizations and activities in the Brazos Valley make our community a "Senior Friendly" place to live. There will be seminars, demonstrations and activities providing information on nutrition, housing safety, pharmaceuticals, finances, social security, retirement, volunteer opportunities, health, hobbies & leisure activities and insurance. There will be door prizes, give -a -ways, entertainment and a grand prize drawing. With over 80 booths ready to share information on our "Senior Friendly" community, make plans to join us for this fun and exciting day! FREE ADMITTANCE Brazos Center • 3232 Briarcrest Bryan, Texas Grand Prize*: A cruise for two 'No purchase necessary, must be 50 years or older to enter. Winner pays any port -charges, taxes & deposits due. Complete details for drawing available at the Expo. EOWCOM KORA•KTAM•KXCS•KZTR BRYAN-COLLEGE STATION The Eagle Here when you need us. theeagle.com CITY OF COLLEGE STATION PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD ABSENCE REQUEST FORM FOR ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICERS I will not be in attendance '01665 attendance at the meeting of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board for the reason(s) specified: Name Date Rec'cl Reason Signature Requests for Absence must be submitted to the Parks Staff Assistant at 764-3414 prior to the meeting date. Pam Springfield - RE: Reminder Page 1 From: "Kathleen Ireland" <kathyireland@earthlink.net> To: "Pam Springfield" <Pspringfield@cstx.gov> Date: 5/9/2005 1:21:09 PM Subject: RE: Reminder Hi Pam, I'm sorry, but I won't be able to make the meeting. I will be on my FREE! cruise at that time. Kathy P. S. Not really sorry, but had to say it! Pam Springfield --RE: Parks Board meeting cancelled Page 1 From: "Kathleen Ireland" <kathyireland@earthlink. net> To: "Pam Springfield" <Pspringfield@cstx.gov> Date: 4/14/2005 3:14:41 PM Subject: RE: Parks Board meeting cancelled Hi Pam, I'm going on Carnival (hope the steering problem is fixed by then!) and it's for 5 days, be back on Saturday. Going to Cozumel and Cancun. Been to both, but who cares! It's still fun to go and take a tour that I haven't been on. Excaret is just wonderful and I will definitely go back there again. It's a park on Cozumel that is just outstanding! Great to see that I wasn't the only one to miss the April 12th meeting. Could we have the meeting in May on the 24th instead? Kathy > [Original Message] > From: Pam Springfield <Pspringfield@cstx.gov> > To: <kathyireland@earthlink.net> > Date: 4/14/2005 1:18:11 PM > Subject: RE: Parks Board meeting cancelled > I'm so jealous!! What cruise line and where are you going? > Thank you! > Pamela Springfield > Staff Assistant > College Station Parks & Recreation Department > (979) 764-3414 > pspringfield@cstx.gov > >>> "Kathleen Ireland" <kathyireland@earthlink.net> 4/14/2005 1:08:47 > PM >>> > I'm sorry, but I will be on a cruise at that time. I won it and it's > FREE, > so I just have to go! > Kathy > > [Original Message] > > From: Pam Springfield <Pspringfield@cstx.gov> > > To: <gschroeder@aggiecatholic.org>; <Erwin74@aol.com>; > <J_warner@cox-internet.com>; Curtis Bingham <Cbingham@cstx.gov>; David > Gerling <Dgerling@cstx.gov>; David Wood <Dwood@cstx.gov>; Marci > Rodgers > <Marodger@cstx.gov>; Peter Lamont <Plamont@cstx.gov>; Pete Vanecek > <Pvanecek@cstx.gov>; Ross Albrecht <RALBRECHT@cstx.gov>; Ric Ploeger > <Rploeger@cstx.gov>; <kathyireland@earthlink.net>; > <allison@fabtexas.com>; > <Lfarnsworth@tamu.edu>; <blaschke@tca.net>; <joeschultz@texcon.net>; > <jeanniewmc@yahoo.com>; <olarmy58@yahoo.com> > > Cc: Steve Beachy <Sbeachy@cstx.gov> > > Date: 4/11/2005 3:41:44 PM Pam Springfield - RE: Parks Board meeting cancelled Page 2 > > Subject: Parks Board meeting cancelled > > "" High Priority > > Good Afternoon! > > Due to lack of a quorum, the regular meeting of the Parks and > > Recreation Advisory Board has been cancelled for tomorrow evening. > > At this time, we need to know your availability for Tuesday, May > 17th. > > We would like to meet the third Tuesday of May, pushing the regular > May > > meeting back by one week due to our departmental FY05-06 budgeting > > process and associated time constraints. > > Please let me know your availability for Tuesday, May 17th at your > > earliest convenience. > > Thank you! > > Pamela Springfield > > Staff Assistant > > College Station Parks & Recreation Department > > (979) 764-3414 > > pspringfield@cstx.gov > > College Station. Heart of the Research Valley. > College Station. Heart of the Research Valley. Date Received: Park Zone: Current Zone Balance: Project Location: Name of Development: Phase: Applicant: Address: City/State/Zip: Phone Number/Fax: E-mail: Engineer/Planner: Address: City/StateZip: Phone Number/Fax: E-Mail: REQUIRED COMPLIANCE Park Land Dedication Ordinance Project Review Checklist April 4, 2005 10 $ 133,195 North Side of Highway 40 Forest of Castlegate N/A Greens Prairie Investors LTD. 4490 Castlegate Dr. College Station, TX 77845 979-690-7250 Fax Number: Texcon 1707 Graham Rd. College Station, TX 77845 979-764-7743 Fax Number: Section 10-13-1: Land Dedication Single Family Dwelling Units: 295 Multi -Family Dwelling Units: Total Land Requirement: 2.92 Acres Proposed Dedication: 4.190 Section 10-B-2: Fee in Lieu of Land Has the Planning and Zoning Commission's approval been obtained? Land Fee: Single Family Fee ($198/dwelling unit): $198 x 295.00 = $58,410 Multi -Family Fee ($160/dwelling unit): Total Acquisition Fee: Section 10-13-3: Park Development Fee Single Family Fee ($358/dwelling unit): Multi -family Fee ($292/dwelling unit): Total Fee Amounts: Total Single Family Fee ($556/dwelling Unit): Multi -Family Fee ($452/dwelling Unit): Section 10-13-4: Park Development in Lieu of Fee Required development cost: Staff review date and comment: April 4, 2005 Parks Board review and decision: April 12, 2005 Section 10-13-5: Minimum Park Size $358 x 295 = $105,610 Is the proposed park less than five (5) acres? No, it is 5.863 acres If yes, staff recommends: Acceptance of land plus the development fee Section 10-13-7: Prior Park Acquisition A 5.863 acre park site is Is there an existing park that can serve the proposed development? located in this subdivision Park Land Dedication plus the Park Development Fee - 1.5 acres If yes, staff recommends: were dedicated from the SpringCreek Town Homes. Section 10-E: Comprehensive Plan Is the proposed park dedication in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Recreation, Park, and Open Space Master Plan? Yes Comments: Section 10-F: Additional Information 1. Island in the 100-year floodplain? No Percentage: a. Detention/Retention? No Size: Meets Board Policy? Acreage in floodplain: No Percentage: Acreage in detention: No Percentage: Acreage in greenways: No Percentage: Comments: Section 10-F (of the Park Land Dedication Ordinance) 10-F. 1 Any land dedication to the City under this section must be suitable for park and recreation uses. Consideration will be given to land that is in the floodplain or may be considered "floodable" even though not in a federally regulated floodplain as long as, due to its elevation, it is suitable for park improvements. (a) Neighborhood park sites should be adjacent to residential areas in a manner that serves the greatest number of users. Comments: It is accessible and less than 1/2 mile from all points in this subdivision. (b) Neighborhood park sites should be located so that users are not required to cross arterial roadways to access them. Comments: All the streets are residential. (c) Sites should not be severely sloped or have unusual topography which would render the land unusable for organized recreational activities. Comments: The site does not have steep slopes in the majority of the property. (d) Sites should have existing trees or other scenic elements. Comments: There are mature trees near the creek. (e) Detention/retention areas will not be accepted as part of the required dedication, but may be accepted in addition to the required dedication. If accepted as part of the park, the detention/retention area design must be approved by the City staff and must meet specific parks specifications. Comments: No retention ponds are on the property. 10-F. 2 Parks should be easy to access and open to public view so as to benefit area development, enhance the visual character of the city, protect public safety, and minimize conflict with adjacent land uses. The following guidelines should be used in designing parks and adjacent development: (a) Where physically feasible, park sites should be located adjacent to greenways and/or schools in order to encourage both shared facilities and the potential co -development of new sites. Comments: N/A (b) A proposed subdivision adjacent to a park may not be designed to restrict reasonable access to the park from other area subdivisions. Street and greenway connections to existing or future adjoining subdivisions may be required to provide reasonable access to parks. Comments: N/A (c) Where a non-residential use must directly abut a park, the use must be separated by a screening wall or fence and landscaping. Access points to the park may be allowed by the Planning and Zoning Commission if a public benefit is established. Comments: N/A (d) It is desirable that a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the perimeter of a park should abut a public street. In all cases, the City shall approve the proposed street alignment fronting on city parks. Comments: N/A (e) Streets abutting a park shall be built in accordance with the thoroughfare plan and the standards of this ordinance; however, the City may require any residential street built adjacent to a park to be constructed to collector width to ensure access and prevent traffic congestion. The developer may request oversize participation in such an instance. Comments: Acceptance of parkland dedication 4.190 acres and development fee of $105,610. There is a 5.863 park site in Staff Recommendations: the subdivision. Section 10-G: Approval: At the regular May 17, 2005 meeting the board voted unanimously to accept the development fee of $105,610, as well as the land dedication of 4.190 acres. All the land and cash requirements for this development are being Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: given during the first Phase. Planning & Zoning Commission: City Council: Y_.µ. TPaCT 36-f / ZONED R-f OPEN SPACE / 2Z,097 AC. / COVENANTS, CONDITIONS t RESTRICTIONS AI7. ICefe /±J; .IW t > [A.I MICRt 11 TRACT 3A ZONED R-f SFD-6 / 5.88 f AC. TRACT 3F ZONED R-f .SFV-6 12.981 AC. TRACT 3E ZONED R-f f 0.4Z6 AC. OPEN SPACE COVENANTS CONDITIONS & RESTRICTIONS CASREWTE SECTION Z ..._..615TlECATE SIIBOIV." PHASE 1 SECTION Z PHASE 2 VOL 421Z VOL 4616. PG 205-206 M e7-98 1:150 :':rT n., ION C{f z V Sal"ACC VOw 3s�nVPZ: '01 I 1 Ll L1 STATE HIGHWAY 40 R.O.W� VARIES 62.965 ACRES VOL 3926. PG. 65 I I FOREST ROM I ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CASRECATE SUBDIVISION SECTION 1, PHASE 2 VOL, I406. PG 53-54 I CASTLECATE t BUSINESS CORER TAIL 5793. P0. 1en •� 1 I I f5j4tf AC. SUM N 1EEr General Develoomtx,t Informatlan 1. e— —1 Mtrf nd....�t ll,. WP.•. aN Fbnl dMeYq� yN�WwNd DMapm�t =t a.,n.nRr Y=oE OroMar�M.,W l Thm..tl 1-..,_ �.. 7M le,d ,w for Y,Y Anap nw,! IS rltyla.nb t.deww ..ei.ep - tTPkd .Fw-a,r) iet. e aN d 4w W— b,eKgM req. Wept h�,IMN rS C A will b a—VtogN L. bftA Y,. tFi,p. ekMT M r,.,al1 Fb a 00 COS d tS I p A ab.Ue. baltr ed M wouP•.1 V* 6.N..t h.. e.A .amwNi.d ,10 b. I Re d Yte bNepMRq A irpst G+wo.""° 11, ""Maly-u.w St. t e. Me6..Ue. a —ka— b U. atr d cap. I. >'- m�n.(r b.t.�.tw r., tn. SMN� r ykwMb b r-d d. d W— ft BIINdfN/d ws YY"d M dw ad t. W. dtl, WCO oej t W b l.t. N.t aA la..b! alpw,t b th. e..NPI.F s LEGEND Pt10MINTY LINE I aeff UK 100 K/R RLOOPLAIN LAM �001000 AWJA T VICINITY MAP CONCEPT PLAN THE FOREST OF CASTLEGATE 76.662 ACRES Planned Development District (PDD) ROBERT STEVENSON SURVEY, A-54 COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS SCALD 1'.IW —4K row OWNER/DEVELOPER: PREPARED BY: Ote.Iu Prekk An'..t.te. W. TE CON clik" oak. TIC To" SURVEYOR: General) Cwtredom Owl. r. IRS N. 1NR 01 t L U— P. L CAIeOWRp P�•t'•IbP: Yt ITpr Ql—1, fl N 171{ PN..Fo bJ edHP. 71d.,, T— 77ea (e7e 11M (7e) 7P{-nY Rr _ :it.► r ,� ma i PARK ESTIMATE FORM Project Number: Project Description: Steeplechase Park Construction Project Budget: I. Covered Playground (5-12) W/Rubber Surface 2. Playground (Tot) W/Rubber Surface 3. Court (BB) 4. Courts (Tennis) 5. Concrete Sidewalk 6. Sidewalk Rubber Surface 7. Lighting / Elec. 8. Sign/Planters 9. Shelter/Slab 10. Landscaping/Irrigation 11. Grading/Seeding 12. Picnic Units 13. Drinking Fountain 14. Benches/Slab 15. Parking Lot + fees 16. Soccer Goals 17. Backstop 18. Bridge & Eng. Fees 19. Euro Fence 20. Bus Shelter 21. Swingset Unit 22. Dog Play Units Covered $45,000 Covered / Not Covered N/A $30,000 N/A 1800 $4.5 Sq.ft. $48,600 Sq.ft. N/A 16 # of Lights $64,000 $16,000 Size $20,000 $15,000 $1,000 2 # of Unit $5,000 1 $4,500 3 # of Benches $4,500 # of Cars N/A N/A N/A $20,000 1250' a@ $20 Ln•f $25,000 Alternate $5,000 $8,000 $3,000 Base Total 1 $309,600 Alternate Is 5,000 Total 1 $314,600 Satisfy your project requirements with a functional, versatile and attractive fencing option. The EuroScapeTM family of products offers all the advantages and security of conventional wire fencing but with innovative construction and design quality reminiscent of ornamental iron. Our unique, patented* twin -wire and rail design offers increased strength and a clean, distinctive look that blends effortlessly with landscaping. Panels are available in several styles, heights and colors to meet the requirements of most commercial, industrial and residential projects. Please visit www.FenceOnline.com for additional product information, detailed specifications and CAD drawings. * Patent pending I.800.229.5615 www.FenceOnline:com Parks and Recreation Department Steeplechase Park Public Hearing #2 - Notes CITY OFCoLLFCFSTATION College Station Larry J. Ringer Public Library 7:00 PM March 29, 2005 Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Director; Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director; Pete Vanecek, Senior Park Planner; David Wood, Park Planner; Curtis Bingham, Parks Operations Superintendent; Pamela Springfield, Staff Assistant; Guests: Jodi Warner, Chair Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and Kathy Ireland — Parks and Recreation Advisory Board member (did not constitute a quorum); William Charles Wendt — 631 Westridge Drive Mike Meschler — 203 Bernburg Court Ashley Scruggs — 519 West Ridge Drive 1. The public hearing began at 7:00 p.m. 2. Presentation and discussion of ideas reearding development of Steeplechase Park site in Park Zone 5,: Eric Ploeger introduced himself and thanked everyone for coming to see the plan that had been developed. He introduced the staff members present. He stated that at the public hearing held on February 23rd, the residents of the area had been asked what amenities they would like to see go into the park. Based on the ideas given, the Parks Planning staff had come up with a conceptual plan for Steeplechase. There was $315,000 available in the budget to develop the park. Another assessment of the budget would be done right before development begins. David Wood, the Park Planner who had developed the conceptual plan, spoke about the features and elements that he had put into the plan. In order to take advantage of the large open space, he had put basketball court further back into the park. A shelter, water fountain, a playground with a rubber surface and shade cover, a concrete slab and picnic table, a dog area and drinking fountain and a dog poop station, would all be included as elements in the park. There would also be a six-foot wide, concrete, sidewalk that would include seating areas and plenty of area lighting (located approximately every 175' around the walk). He displayed a picture of a wooden fence, explaining that the fence that would be put in would be wrought iron with six-inch slats around the dog park area, and three-inch slats elsewhere. Staff asked for comments. Will the playground be safe for two year olds? Yes, it will be one play unit that will encompass all ages. There will be a bridge on the back side of the park near the concrete spillway, which is similar to the bridge near Johnny Carino's Restaurant. It will basically be a steel pedestrian bridge with a wood deck. Will there be landscaping? Yes, ornamental trees such as pear or crepe myrtles would be planted. The bus stop will be located next to Pheasant. Good Choice! Will signs be put up so people will slow down? It is bad there and people drag race. Our intention is to talk to the traffic engineer in Public Works and see if they can install some traffic calming devices there. It may become an enforcement issue. What is a dog play unit? One is a long tube that they can go through. I spoke to the sales representative and asked what the two most popular units were and those are the units that will be used. The dog park is a good idea, since there are a lot of people in that area with dogs. Will the dog play unit be fenced? Yes, it will be. It is actually going to be a fenced -in play area for the dogs and will be located in the retention area. All of that area will be for dogs? It doesn't preclude it from being used for other uses. There will be rules posted and a dog poop station with bags for visitors to clean up after their pets. Are there going to be any lights at the basketball court? We may be able to prioritize the different items within our budget. We can possibly comeback during a later phase and try to get those in. There is an area light at the end of each court, but it will not be like lighting the court. I would suggest that `NO PARKING' signs be posted on the side of the street that the park is on - it would leave it more open. We want people to be able to park there. Neighborhood parks typically have some on -street parking unless there is some reason not to do that. The majority of use is for people who walk and ride bikes. This park will attract people to the area - possibly because of the dog area. Ric stated that this was usually a concern at public hearings and it would be interesting to see if it becomes an issue. If so, something may have to be worked out. Staff would talk to the traffic engineer about the bus stop and about traffic calming issues. The plan looks really good. I am glad that the back walking loop was not included because it is very dark in the back of the park. Was there room for a disc golf course? No, the creek makes it difficult unless you can go with a three -hole course. There is not enough room for a nine -hole course - it would conflict with the walkways. John Crompton Park has nine -holes, but the park is almost 15 acres. We could put a few in for a practice course. The next step is for the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to look at the plan, which they will either approve or direct changes to be made. Staff will notify you when it goes to the board. The project should go out to bid early to mid -summer. Will the second part of the park be left natural? The plan is to leave it natural unless improvements go in later on. At the last meeting, concern was expressed about the fence back there and we will need to get with the property owner. Eventually there will be development behind the park and it will be nice to have the tree buffer there. I would suggest putting another dog faucet in at the front of the dog area while it is being built. It will be cheaper than having to do it later. The entrance for the dog area would be a perfect place also for the poop station. Will there be only one entry? Yes. The gates will be spring loaded and will automatically shut. There will also be a maintenance entrance for tractors. Will there only be one trash can for that big area? I could put another in. We will have to be careful of what we put in there because it is designated to flood in that area. Will bags be provided at the poop station? Yes they will. Will it be wooded between the park and basketball court? If it is, kids won't be able to watch if parents are playing, and parents would want to be able to watch their children on playground from the basketball court. We can clear some underbrush. We need to look at that area and see how dense it is. Will the city do the underbrush clearing? No, it will be done by a contractor. There being no further comments or suggestions, Ric thanked everyone for attending and added that everyone would be contacted as to when the plan would go before the board, which could be in April or May. The public hearing adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Memorandum To: Jodi Warner, Chairman, College Station Parks and Recreation Board From: Robert Meyer, Chairman, College Station Senior Advisory Committee Date: March 29, 2005 Re: Senior Center The senior population of Brazos County is growing rapidly. A facility is needed to keep this population informed of local activities and to provide educational and recreational programs. At present, these programs are being held at different locations throughout the College Station area. The seniors primarily use the EXIT Teen Center which is shared with the young people. A place is needed for seniors to call their own. Seniors need a center that is designed specifically to meet their activities and special needs. At present, College Station is planning a City Center surrounded by Krenek Tap, Texas Avenue, Harvey Mitchell and Highway 6 Bypass Frontage Road. This area has the possibilities for an ideal show place for the City of College Station and should be supported by Seniors. We see this as an excellent opportunity to include a Senior Center in the developing City Center. The Senior Center should include: • A reception area/lobby including a Senior information center • Offices for staff and a reception area • Meeting rooms to accommodate small and large groups for classes, meetings and games • Quiet room for reading and conversation • A full kitchen, dining area and coffee bar • Room for computers and support equipment • Adequate room for storage • Exercise/weight room • Therapeutic pool • Restrooms and dressing/locker rooms • Convenient elevator if multi -floored • Fully indoor and outdoor handicap accessibility • Covered outdoor patio with tables for picnics and games • Indoor and outdoor walking and jogging trail • Ample parking with covered overhang entrance for increment weather (loading and unloading) • Building designed for future expansion We believe our age sensitive needs can best be met with a separate Senior Center which would not compete with activities of young people. A separate Senior Center would serve as a focal point and attract older adults. Seniors have been working for a senior center for a number of years. They represent a sizable proportion of College Station voters. Seniors spend an appreciable amount of disposable income and contribute significantly to the city tax base. We urge the City Council to support the design and construction of a separate Senior Center. Senior Services Coordinator Report April 2005 Senior Police and Fire Academy The Academy meets on Thursday mornings form 9:00am-11:30 April 14-June 2nd at the Teen Center. Topics include: Introduction & History of the Police/Fire Department, Crimes Against the Elderly, Crime Scene Search and Latent Prints, Fire/Fall Prevention and Smoke Alarms, Thermal Imaging Cameras, Engine and Ambulance visits. Seniors are welcome to participate at no cost. Ice Cream Social How can you beat ice cream and a singing quartet in the park? All seniors are invited to have ice cream and hear the Westminstrels Barbershop Quartet on Saturday, May 7th at 4:00pm-5:30pm at the Central Park Pavilion. Invite your friends and join us! Senior Dance Dance the night away. Our Spring Dance is scheduled for Thursday, May 12`h at the College Station Conference Center from 7:00pm-9:30pm. The cost is $5.00/person. Refreshments and door prizes are given away. Hear your favorite tunes from DJ Tom Byer. Seniors EXPO 2005 The fourth annual Seniors Expo 2005 is scheduled for Wednesday, May 25th from 9:00am- 3:00pm at the Brazos Center. The Expo is designed to showcase our community as a "Senior Friendly" place to live. Booths and speakers will provide information on businesses, organizations and activities in the Brazos Valley. The Senior Advisory Committee is needed to volunteer to work in the College Station Parks and Recreation Department - Senior Services Booth. Shift times are 9:00am-12:00 and 12:00 — 3:00pm. Senior Programs - FY 2005 - 1" Quarter (October, November & December) Effectivenes -Percentage of satisfied customers on Survey 99% Efficiency - Total No. of Senior Citizen Programs offered. 18 - Total No. of Senior Special Events offered. 7 - Total No. of Senior Advisory Committee Meetings 3 Output - Total No. of Senior Participants Served 794 - Annual Promotions in Senior Marketing Materials 1 - Monthly promotions in the Golden Eagle 3 Senior Programs - FY 2005 — 2nd Quarter (January, February & March) Effectiveness - Percentage of satisfied customers on Survey 99% Efficiency - Total No. of Senior Citizen Programs offered. 27 - Total No. of Senior Special Events offered. 8 - Total No. of Senior Advisory Committee Meetings 4 Output - Total No. of Senior Participants Served 942 - Annual Promotions in Senior Marketing Materials 2 - Monthly promotions in the Golden Eagle 3 SENIOR ADVISORY COMMITTEE PETITION TO PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD FOR A SENIOR BUILDING AND OPPORTUNITY TO PETITION THE COLLEGE STATION CITY COUNCIL INTRODUCTION A. Aim: (a) To discuss the possibility of building a Senior Center (b) To meet with the City Council about providing the facility B. Objectives: (1) To explain recent history of the need for a Senior Center (2) To summarize Senior programs (3) To project future senior growth (4) The describe the proposed Senior Center (5) To describe benefits to the City of College Station II. OBJECTIVE 1: TO EXPLAIN RECENT HISTORY FOR A SENIOR CENTER 1. Senior Advisory Committee proposed to convert the Parks and Recreation Headquarters to the Senior Center when the new Administration building has been completed 2. Architectural plans were drawn and room use was suggested 3. The Parks and Recreation Headquarters would make an excellent Senior Center but has some limitations 4. The Parks and Recreation Board supported the proposal on January 13, 2004 III. OBJECTIVE 2: TO SUMMARIZE SENIOR PROGRAMS 1. Senior services presently are headquartered in the EXIT Teen Center with coordinator in Parks and Recreation Headquarters 2. Computer education classes, many Senior meetings and Senior games are held in the Teen Center 3. Cooperative Exploring History Lunch/Lecture programs with the Historical Preservation Committee are held at the College Station Conference Center 4. More than 40 "Xtra Education" classes for Seniors are held at the Teen Center per year 5. The Computer Club for Seniors meets in the College Station Utilities Center Training Room on Graham Road and in the Center for Regional Services in Bryan 6. Seniors participate in the lunch program offered at the Lincoln Center 7. Day trips are planned for seniors throughout the year IV. OBJECTIVE 3: TO PROJECT FUTURE SENIOR GROWTH 1. College Station a. 55+ in 2000 at 4792 b. 60+ in 2000 at 3381, having increased 70% since 1990 2. Brazos County a. 60+ in 2000 at 13,593 having increased 26% since 1990 b. 65+ in 2000 at 10,223 and is expected to increase to 79% by 2020 or 18,329 and more that three times by 2040 with projections of 32,555 3. The population numbers of senior residents in this area are expected to increase markedly in the next two decades with the aging of "Baby Boomers" 4. Some Senior programs such as the Computer Club, draw participants form at least 50 miles away V. OBJECTIVE 4: TO DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED SENIOR CENTER 1. 20,000 sq.ft. or a square 141 ft. building 2. Senior Center should include: • A reception area/lobby including a "Senior Information Center" • Offices for staff and a reception area • Meeting rooms to accommodate small and large groups for classes, meetings and games • A quiet room for reading and conversation • A full kitchen, dining area and coffee bar • Room for computers and support equipment • Adequate room for storage • Exercise/weight room • Therapeutic pool • Restrooms and dressing/locker rooms • A single floor structure is preferred • Center for health education, screening and vaccines • Fully indoor and outdoor handicap accessibility • Covered outdoor patio with tables for picnics and games • Indoor and outdoor walking and jogging paths • Ample parking with covered overhang entrances for inclement weather (loading and unloading) • Building designed for future expansion (possibly second floor) 3. Cost a. Building at $150 sq. ft. $ 3,000,000 b. Parking lot at $2.75 sq. ft. 250,000 c. Contents 1,750.000 $ 5,000,000 4. Hope to have the building completed in four years 5. An existing facility could also be considered to meet the future needs of seniors VI. OBJECTIVE 5: TO DESCRIBE BENEFITS TO THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION 1. A building that will add prestige to the City Center 2. A center where more individuals and people of widely varied heritage and backgrounds can meet and participate in activities 3. A structure where Senior programs may function in one location 4. A source of Senior information for the Brazos Valley 5. A building where Seniors would have first priority on space 2 VII. SUMMARY 6. A larger base of people who could support City initiatives and other City activities 7. A location where personnel from Texas A&M University can enrich educational experiences of our citizens 8. A place where some of the space pressure for meetings can be eased if the Conference Center and Administration building on Texas Avenue are sold The Parks and Recreation Headquarters has been considered for a Senior Center 2. Presently, Senior programs are held in widely diverse locations 3. Senior population in College Station and Brazos County are projected to increase rapidly in the next two decades 4. The proposed building will provide many educational, recreational and physical opportunities for our citizens in the future 5. The Seniors associated with this building will have a significantly positive benefit to our population and initiatives of the City of College Station 6. FINALLY, WE WISH TO HAVE THE SUPPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD TO HAVE THIS PETITION PRESENTED TO THE COLLEGE STATION CITY COUNCIL. 3 College Station Senior Advisory Committee Regular Meeting Monday, April 25, 2005 College Station Teen Center 1520 Rock Prairie Rd. 10:00am MINUTES Members Present: Laura Homes, Robert Meyer, Haskell Monroe, Neal Nutall, Raymond Reed, Colleen Risinger, Diupankar Sen, Yvonne Stevens, Betty Wilbom and Joanna Yeager Members Absent: Patricia Boughton, E.E. Burns, Frank Camplone, and Joe LeCour Staff Present: Peter Lamont, Recreation Superintendent I. Call to order. The meeting was called to order at 10:02am by Robert Meyer, Chairman. II. Hear visitors. None Present. III. Approval of minutes from regular meeting on March 28, 2005. Raymond Reed made the motion that the minutes be approved. Luara Holmes seconded the motion. The motion passed. IV. Discussion, consideration and possible action concerning presentation to the Parks and Recreation Board on May 17th Robert Meyer presented an outline from the Senior Advisory Committee to the Parks and Recreation Board for a senior building and opportunity to petition the College Station City Council. (Proposal attached) Changes suggested to OBJECTIVE 4 included removing elevator and requesting that a single floor structure is preferred. V. Sub -Committee reports: • Goals committee- Joanna Yeager - No report • Program committee — Yvonne Stevens — No report VI. Senior Services Coordinator Report (Report attached) VII. Next meeting and agenda items: Monday, May 23, 2005 VIII. Adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 11:35 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Parks and Recreation Department PLA YGR O UND REPLA CEMENT REPORT Presented to the College Station Parks and Recreation Advisory Board April 12, 2005 Playground Installation Information Playground Replacement 2000-2005 Scheduled Playground Replacement 2006-2009 Playground Inspection Sheet I Anderson Park Bee Creek Park play unit swing sets (2) Brothers Park play unit/swings Castlegate Park play unit swings Central Park play unit swings Edelweiss Park play unit/swings Emerald Forest Park Gabbard Park play unit/swings G.K. Fitch Park Hensel Park(TAMU) play unit/swings J. & D. Miller Park Lemontree Park Lions Park play unit tot play Unit Merry Oaks play unit/swings Oaks Park Parkway Park Pebble Creek Park Raintree Park play unittswing Sandstone Park Southern Oaks Park play unittswing Southwood Park play unit by pool play and by pavilion Thomas Park (north end) play unit/swings/slide (south end) play unit/swings W.A.Tarrow Park (south end) play unit (north end) play unit/swing Windwood Park Wolf Pen Creek Park play unit rubber cushion Woodcreek as of 8/05/04 PLAYGROUND INSTALLATION INFORMATION Gametime Kienchnick Construction 12003 $43 000I Rubber Cushion Gametime Berryman and Company $26,000 Gravel mod.# D+4122 Acklam Construction 11986 1983 $ unknown I Gravel Gametime Miracle I R.M. Dudley Contractor 12001 I $25,000 I Gravel/Rubber Gametime Total Recreation Products 2002 $49,282.89 for Rubber Cushion mod.#T4310101 unit/swings GravelRubber Gametime L.P.L. Construction Co. 11990 I $25,700 I Gravel/Rubber mod.# E9703 Gametime John Boegner Contractor 12000 I $33,500 I Rubber Cushion Gametime I Mareks Brothers Construct 11989 I $12,500 I Gravel Gametime I R.M. Dudley Contractor 1 2001 $34,124 Gravel/Rubber Gametime I Mareks Brothers Construct 1 2002 1 $23,429 I Gravel Gametime I Mareks Brothers Construct 12004 I $45,390 I Gravel Gametime I R.M. Dudley Contractor 1 2003 I $88,889 for 2 I Rubber Cushion Gametime 1 R.M. Dudley Contractor 1 2001 1 $24,000 1 Gravel/Rubber Quality Industries I Twin City Development 11990 I $10,200 Gravel/ Miracle Fuqua Construction 1999 $20,000 Gravel/Rubber Miracle I R.M. Dudley 12001 I $24,000 i GraveURubber Miracle i Mareks Brothers Construct 1 1995 I $42,700 Rubber Cushion Quality Industries Mareks Brothers Construct 11991 $10,500 j Gravel mod.# 2050 Gametime I Mareks Brothers Construct 1 1996 $47,200 for 2 Rubber Cushion Miracle I R.M. Dudley 12001 I $27,300 I GraveURubber Gametime I R.M. Dudley $259050 Rubber Cushion mod.# 731-2 11998 I Gametime { Orion Construction 12004 I $55,420 Rubber Cushion_ Mexico Forge Calcon Inc. 11984 I $11,000 ( Gravel Mexico Forge Acklam Construction 1984 about $12,000 Gravel Gametime Mareks Brothers Construct 1995 $29,800 Gravel Gametime R.M. Dudley 2000 $16,000 Gravel being replaced Gametime Diamond Construction 1987 $14,500 Gravel Gametime I E.W. Berryman Contractor 1985 I $4,000 I Gravel Gametime I Construct Resource Group 1993 $14,000 Gravel unkown 1996 $16,600 1 Miracle I Mareks Brothers Construct 1 1991 I $16,000 1 Gravel PLAYGROUNDS REPLACED 2000-2005 Thomas Park: Replaced multi -play unit at pavilion and added swing set at southern end of the park in 2000. Brothers Pond Park: Replaced multi -play unit and added swing set in 2001. Gabbard Park: Replaced multi - play unit and added swing set in 2001. IK L a s G. K. Fitch Park: Replaced multi - play unit and added swing set in 2002. J. & D. Miller Park: Replaced multi -play unit at northern end of park in 2003. J. & D. Miller Park: Replaced multi -play unit at southern end of the park in 2003. _! M M4,�. .- ntw�., Qs+. 1-0 •i .a at SCHEDULED PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT 2006-2009 The Bee Creek Park multi -play unit was installed in 1986 and is scheduled for replacement with another large multi -play unit in 2006. The Bee Creek Park swing sets should be replaced with lower swings in 2006. A large swing set to accommodate both infants and children may be considered. The Southwood Park multi -play unit by the basketball court was installed in 1984 and is scheduled for replacement in 2007. The Southwood Park multi -play unit by the pavilion was also built in 1984 and is also scheduled for replacement in 2007. Consideration is being given to replacing both play units with one large multi -play unit. The Lions Park multi -play unit was installed in 1981 and is scheduled for replacement in 2008. A separate swing set should also be installed. y* �°. :r .` �•, � ; �' '� ,�;�q, �:: Z-�,,.. y:c' ems.,. - PLAYGROUND INSPECTION SHEET Park: j Inspector: ��G�s�i���,��1%/ Unit ID: Date: Do not rely entirety upon check (✓) marks. When possible, use numbers or descriptive notations for clarification. Chains "S" Hooks Seats Hanger bracket V Fasteners Tires Bearings ' Unit Okay Other Problems: Broken or missing accessories Bolts, nuts, clamps, caps Surfaces need smoothing Stability of equipment / Paint or stain Unit Okay 5-r>rrLa— M��Q hrL.�b � eit% Needs slat replacement Frame repair Surfaces need smoothing Paint Bolts, nuts, loose or missing t Unit Okay COURTS Circle On : Volleyball Basketball Tennis Backboards Goals Nets Fasteners { Paint / Stability of equipment t/ Unit Okay Other Problems: * tit k Sarre 11A /YJ SA -k; ij "� A COMMENTS: Nets Properly anchored A Frames structurally sound SLIDES. - Handrails Slide beds Steps, ladder Fasteners / Paint Stability Unit Okay Cracks in stress points Broken, missing, loose parts Nuts, bolts, clamps, caps Steps, rings, rungs Bars, surface free from protruding edges/projections Structure stability Paint Unit Okay PLAYGROUND Ground free of trip hazards Rutting under equipment Sand Add -Ti11 Gravel Add , j� Tilt Unit Okay Other Problems: /4c�,�r ✓v 2 S Low limbs Debris Area Okay Other Problems: 'S;QA' ,.e, j,g 9c�% nti 1 92*01 In WE Needs repair Unit Okay Other Problems: Q,e1ztv/'�-.e 4,Z> OYParksMIPLAYGROUND INSPECTION SNEET.doc Revised October 5, 2004 PARK MAINTENANCE STANDARDS SURVEY SUMMARY FOR FY 2005 Quarterly Periods: First Ouarter, FY 2005 Overall % of Standards Met: 89% Second Ouarter, FY 2005 Overall % of Standards Met: 89% Third Ouarter, FY 2005 Overall % of Standards Met: % Fourth Ouarter, FY 2005 Overall % of Standards Met: % Categories I. Athletic Facilities: Competitive Fields East South West I" Quarter 96% 93% 86% 2"d Quarter 94% 88% 91% 3`d Quarter 4`h Quarter II. Playgrounds East South I" Quarter 92% 95% 2"d Quarter 89% 91% 3`d Quarter 4`h Quarter III. Pavilion/Shelter Facilities East South 0 Quarter 91% 94% 2"d Quarter 91% 92% 3`d Quarter 4`h Quarter IV. Tennis Courts East South I" Quarter 97% 98% 2'd Quarter 91% 89% 3`d Quarter 4th Quarter V. Basketball Courts East South 1' Quarter 98% 96% 2"d Quarter 96% 95% 3`d Quarter 4`h Quarter West 87% 89% West 89% 87% West 100% 95% West 96% 98% Ave. % of Stds Met 92% 91% Ave. % of Stds Met 91% 90% Ave. % of Stds Met 91% 90% Ave. % of Stds Met 98% 92% Ave_ . % of Stds Met 97% 96 Prev. Yr. % of Stds. Met 86% 92% 88% 92% Prev. Yr. % of Stds. Met 83% 86% 92% 90% Prev. Yr. % of Stds. Met 90% 93% 90% 92% Prev. Yr. % of Stds. Met 91% 96% 93% 91% Prev. Yr. % of Stds. Met 94% 98% 96% 96% VI. Sand Volleyball Courts East South West Ave. % of Stds Met Prev. Yr. % of Stds. Met V Quarter 67% 93% 89% 83% 81% 2nd Quarter 70% 93% 100% 88% 84% 3rd Quarter 79% 4d' Quarter 90% VII. Ponds East South West Avg. % of Stds Met Prev. Yr. % of Stds. Met I" Quarter 92% 87% 33% 71% 70% 2°d Quarter 87% 90% 50% 76% 76% 3`d Quarter 71% 0 Quarter 73% VIII. Parks: General Parks East South West Avg_ . % of Stds Met Prev. Yr. % of Stds. Met I" Quarter 93% 92% 95% 93% 88% 2nd Quarter 91% 90% 92% 91% 92% 3rd Quarter 89% 46 Quarter 93% Overall District Averages East South West Overall % of Stds Met Prev. Yr. % of Stds. Met 1s1 Quarter 91% 93% 84% 89% 85% 2"d Quarter 89% 91% 88% 89% 90% 3rd Quarter 870 0 4`h Quarter 890 0 PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT & PARK LAND DEDICATION PROJECTS FY `05 May 17, 2005 t (Lincoln Center Central Park Soccer Lights )Rock -...�-._•- ",Complete Pete 1 rmv4VO PK0406 �ov�vuv I $285 0�0 I t U5 Ui Q.+ Zone 2 " ,. 'General Fund 1 3/05 6105 Prairie Rd Medians Landscape Complete Pete S49923 $40.000 '98 Bond I 3/06 Veterans Park Phase II In Desiqn Ric P0501 $6,925,000 '03 Bond 10/07 (Lincoln Playground I In Design I Pete I I $50,000 I '05 Gen. fund (Steeplechase Park Development I In Design I David I Pk0502 I $315,000 I Community Dev. I 12/05 IW.A. Tarrow Spray Park I In Design I Ric I PK0503 I $170,000 I Community Dev. (Cemetery Land Acquisition IJack & ler I Pending Land Contract I Ross I GG9905 I $275,000 I '98 G.O. I Unknown BasketballllrCourt Coverhy PendingI Pending Contract I Pete I PK0512 I $175,000 I '05 General Fund I 9/05 (WPC Multipurpose Building I Pending Contract I Ric I I $700,000 I WPC T.I.F. I 5/06 Ilntergenerational Park Additions Under Construction I David I PK0513 I $310,000 I '03 Bond I 9/05 IVPAC Soccer Lights I Under Construction I Pete I PK0511 I $400,000 I General Fund I 5/05 Business Park Siqn I Under Construction I Pete I GG0302 I $50,000 I Economic Development Business Center Fund I 5/05 (Thomas Pool Collector Tank Repair I Under Construction I Ric I PK0528 I $20,000 I '05 General Fund I 5/05 Northgate Restrooms I No status I Ric I I $300,000 I FY -05 CIP Summary s .Gomoletecl Under Construction 4 Under Contract I 0 Pending Contracts I 2 Bids Received I 0 Out to Bid / Re -Bid 0 In Design I 4 Pending Land Contract 1 On Hold I 0 No status 1 I — Intergenerational Project Central Park Liaht Tra vn nuiu I I Zonal Funds )I ldl@Wa7kS x. Cam fete .. .. 7 -= kk + .fir I Pete : °: PKt741"1 Q Zane $O RRR" $F I , ;Reptacarttent ;I 10/31/04 :. andscape &Irrigation Pending Contract I Pete PK0529 I $15,000 Park Zone 2 Under Contract David Pk0526 $11o,000 Zone 2 Funds 6/05 5/05 it I In Des�n David Naik .' Com Eete ( David PK0405 ( - $48,660 " 1 'Zone 3 Funds ( 10/15/04 s Concrete Walks I In Design I Pete I NA I Zone 4 Funds + $OI $15,000'98 Bond I nts Concrete Walks I In Design I Pete I NA I $01 Zone 4 Funds ILemontree Park Disc Golf Gabbard Park Sidewalk I • ; ,268 John Crompton Park Development r On Hold I Pete/David I I $90,0001 Zone 6 Funds Complete Pete U PK0527' I $5.0001 ?none 6 Funds 5/15/05 On Hold I David I NA I $01 Zone 6 Funds Under Construction Pete/David PK9803 I $710,0001 Zone 7 Funds I Oct. 1/05 On Hold I Pete/David Complete - („ "Pete PK0403 $38,50R� Z©ne 11 Funds 11/04 I — Intergenerational Project . ffedication Summary Completed 5 Under Construction 1 Under Contract 0 Bids Received I 0 Pending Contracts I 3 Out to Bid 0 In Design 3 Pending Land Acquisition 0 On Hold Total 4 15 OYProjects/CIP/C/P & Park Land Ded Project List.doc Page 2 Parks & Recreation Advisory Board Goals & Objectives FY2005 (Not Prioritized) I. Support Regional Park Initiative (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 4) Develop action plan 2. 3. I Complete appraisal of property Appraiser chosen; work should be complete by summer 2005. Tour for new Parks & Recreation Advisory Board members in spring Andy Anderson Arboretum at Bee Creek (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 1) Develop long-term plan for redevelopment once drainage issues are addressed Make additional trail improvements Install new trail markers Oversee planning process for Steeplechase Park (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2) 0 Conduct public hearings First held on February 23rd; second hearing on March 29rn; Board approval on April 12rn 0 Develop Master Plan Complete design process Design process underway. Bid project Crompton Park (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2) 0 Complete design process Design complete. 0 Bid project Project pre -bid meeting held on March 3rd., bid opening on March 10rn; City Council consideration April 14rn Complete construction Construction underway. Begin operation and maintenance Conduct dedication ceremony Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory Board: October 12, 2004 Page 1 of 4 Updated: May 16, 2005 5. Veterans Park, Phase II (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2) Complete Phase II design plans Design contract approval at October 21, 2004 City Council meeting. In conceptual design phase - plans reviewed by VPAC, Phase II Subcommittee on February 11`h. Assist with Veterans Memorial expansion project Memorial wall expansion complete November, 2004. Veterans Day Ceremony November 11, 2004 Ceremony complete. Complete lighting of four existing soccer fields Project is under construction 6. Continued interaction with other City Boards (Lincoln Center, Bryan Parks Board, Conference Center, P&Z, Seniors) (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2) Joint meeting with DRB Presentation and discussion of the film 'Small Urban Spaces" and discussion of park concepts for Northgate on February 11`h. Report from Lincoln Center Advisory Committee Scheduled for May regular meeting Report from Conference Center Advisory Committee 0 Report from Senior Advisory Committee Monthly updates included in Board packets, Report scheduled for May 17th regular meeting. Joint meeting with Planning and Zoning Commission Joint meeting with City Council 7. Park Land Dedication Ordinance Update (Planning & Development, Strategy 1) Review and approval of recommendations Approval by City Council S. Urban Forest Management Plan (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 1) Revisit or new direction? 9. Capital Improvement Projects oversight. (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2) Intergenerationa) Park Improvements (See CIP & Park Land Dedication Projects list for status.) Update given at the regular October meeting. Intergenerational Park Improvements construction contract Council approval on March 10th. Project underway. Spray Park at Lincoln Center Conceptual design complete; notice to proceed with preliminary design has been given. Determine use for old buildings at Lincoln Center Meeting with Lincoln Former Students held in April. Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory Board: October 12, 2004 Page 2 of 4 Updated: May 16, 2005 Basketball pavilion at Jack and Dorothy Miller Park (Zone 5) Contract pending. Park Land Dedication Projects (Zone 10) 10. Needs Assessment for facilities and programs. (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2) QConduct focus group meetings a Conduct public hearings Meeting conducted on March 3rd Develop survey instrument Underway. Review and accept final report Parks Board: Council review: Meeting held with RPTS students to go over scope of the project on Nov 11th 2004 11. Park Maintenance Standards Review and Direction. (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 1) 0 First quarter standards report Report given at January 11 th regular meeting 0 second quarter standards report Report given at May 19' regular meeting along with Playground Replacement Report Third quarter standards report Fourth quarter standards report Develop recommendations for improvement 12. Southern Oaks Park (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2) Neighborhood celebration/dedication of park Review park plan for additional improvements 13. Support Greenways Program (Parks & Leisure, Strategy #2) 0 Review and assist with update of Hike and Bike Master Plan Kristan Cann review of Hike and Bike Trail Plan at regular meeting of November 9, 2004. Review and assist with update of Greenways Master Plan Continued support of Hike and Bike Task Force 14. City Center Project support. Parks and Recreation office recommendations Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory Board: October 12, 2004 Page 3 of 4 Updated: May 16, 2005 Parks and open space area recommendations Community Center facility recommendations IS. Develop plan of action for Northgate Park. Review existing Northgate Redevelopment Plan Develop recommendations for neighborhood parks 16. Explore new leisure programs and activities (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2) 0 Passport program for Seniors Fall session complete Passport program for Teens Senior Olympics Planning senior Olympics for 2006. 0 International faculty and scholars picnic Held successfully at Central Park pavilion on October 26, 2004 0 Dog splash day at Hallaran Pool Held on October 24, 2004. 17. Revision of By -Laws for the Board 0 Prepare draft By -Laws Draft turned over for review by Legal. Draft received back from Legal, October12, 2004 0 Board approval with revised By -Laws Review and approval at November 9th Regular meeting. 0 By -Laws approval by City Council Approved by Council at the February 10th meeting Approved by Parks & Recreation Advisory Board: October 12, 2004 Page 4 of 4 Updated: May 16, 2005 ■ Implementation of the CIP Program • Continuation of Staff Development Parks & Recreation Department Goals & Objectives FY2005 (Not Prioritized) ■ Implementation of City Council Strategic Issues • Implementation of Special Projects & Programs Implementation of the CIP Program 0 FY 2005 CIP Projects (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: Ongoing. Monthly report given to Board ❑V FY 2005 Park Land Dedication Projects (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: Ongoing. Monthly report given to Board Continuation of Staff Development Q Complete Management Academy Status: The Assistant Director and all superintendents have completed the course. Complete Supervisory Academy (Mollie Binion, Darrel Harvey, Cameron Parker) Status: Graduation November 16, 2004 0 Complete Emergency Management Academy (Cheletia Thomas, Darrell Harvey) Status: Wednesdays January 12 - March 2 Q Complete NRPA Revenue Management School (David Gerling) Status: Peter Lamont completed the two-year course; David Gerling completed the first year. 0 Complete TRAPS Conference (Steve Beachy, Eric Ploeger, Peter Lamont, Curtis Bingham, Sheila Walker, Cheletia Thomas, Eli Williamson, Vera Solis, Zach Lowy, Carisse Depew, Scott Hooks, Geri Marsh. Status: Complete Conduct Arbor Master Training (Parks & Leisure, #1) Status: Working on schedule for fall session Q Attend the 11th Annual Southeast Texas Grounds Maintenance Conference Status: Complete Attend the Texas Cooperative Extension Forestry Unit's Arboriculture 101' (Curtis Schoessow, Scott Deffendoll, and David Pemberton) Status: Four Saturdays in January 2005 Coordinate and prepare for TRAPS Regional Workshop in Fall 2005 Status: 2005 conference scheduled for November in College Station QAttend Texas Turfgrass Conference (Scott Hooks, Gary Marske, Paul Rucker, Keith Fails) Status: Conference attended, December 6tn- 8tn Updated: May 4, 2005 Page 1 of 3 Implementation of City Council Strategic Issues Acquire new cemetery site and develop Master Plan (Core Services, #1) Status: Appraisals complete; negotiations in progress Continued implementation of Park Maintenance Standards (Parks & Leisure, #1) Status: FY 2004 overall 89% rating; FY 2005 goal - 90% overall; quarterly reports given to Parks Board. Continued implementation of the Urban Forest Management Plan?? (Parks & Leisure, #1) Status: On hold pending further directions Continue efforts to make parks more intergenerational (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: Report given at October, 2004 regular meeting; Project design completed and out to bid. Construction contract approved on March 1Otn Review leisure service programs ( Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: Softball program report October 12, 2004. "Senior Passport' program underway; cricket league proposal received. Pursue cooperative efforts with the City of Bryan on joint programming (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: Planning Senior Olympics for 2006; National softball tournaments in 2005 and 2006 Develop veterans Park & Athletic Complex, Phase II (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: Design contract approval at October 21, 2004 City Council meeting; In conceptual design phase -plans reviewed by VPAC Phase II Subcommittee on February 11rn QPromote performing arts (Parks & Leisure, #3) Status: 2005 starlight concert series underway. Continued implementation of regional planning and development initiative (Parks & Leisure, #4) Status: Funding approval in BVSWMA FY 2005 budget; appraiser retained Develop action plan for Northgate Park (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: On hold pending staff discussions Develop Master Plan for Steeplechase (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: First public hearing held on February 23rd Second on March 29tn, Board review scheduled for May regular meeting. Implement Arboretum improvement plan (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: Implementation of Special Projects and Programs 0 Implementation of the remote sports lighting system (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: Complete; New soccer lights will include Sky Logic Q Continue implementation of automated registration software (RecWare) Status: In progress; software installed; testing completed; training completed and software in use. 0 Conduct benchmark survey of similar cities Status: On-line survey completed January 27th. Results collected from all Big 12 Conference Schools. Results will be received by all involved. 0 Continue investigation of the feasibility for NRPA departmental accreditation Status: Inventory with current level of compliance complete Continue investigation of the feasibility of implementing a Donations Program for the Department StatUS: Draft program complete Updated: May 4, 2005 Page 2 of 3 Conduct Program and Facilities Needs Assessment (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: Agreement with TAMU's RPTS department approved; February - focus groups complete; public hearing held on March 3rd Parks Board focus group on March 8rh; all focus groups complete; draft document in review. C Acquire and implement AED's at select PARD facilities Status: Funding approved in FY 2005 budget; acquisition complete; training held April 1-2. Acquire and install Wolf Pen Creek street banners (Economic Development, #1) Status: Banner design complete; bid awarded for 36 steel banners; signs received; installation pending until light poles can be painted. Facilitate Cricket program (Parks & Leisure, #2) Status: Facilitate start of user group; site identified for facility; organization of group in progress Northgate Music Series (Parks & Leisure, #3) Status: Initial funding approved 0 Investigate Lincoln Center staffing possibilities Status: Reorganization with existing positions complete. Two Assistant Center Supervisors in place as of February 15r Decide what should be done with old buildings at Lincoln Center Status: Staff met with Lincoln Former Students in April. Updated: May 4, 2005 Page 3 of 3 Pam Springfield - Re: Agenda for Tuesday's Parks and Recreation Advisory Board El Meeting Page 1 From: "ANN GANTER" <aganter@csisd.org> To: "Pam Springfield" <Pspringfield@cstx.gov> Date: 5/13/2005 11:42:10 AM Subject: Re: Agenda for Tuesday's Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Pam, I am assuming from your email that the meeting is on May 17. If so —here I go again. I have a school board meeting that night naming our Teacher of the Year and Support Person of the Year. S0000000000 once again, I will not be there. Guess that will make me the winner as the worst rep ever. Ann Ann Ganter College Station ISD Director of Public Relations/ Education Foundation 1812 Welsh aganter@csisd.org 764-5422 Meeting q.- I- Park Land Dedication Ordinance Project Review Checklist Date Received: April 4, 2005 Park Zone: 14 Current Zone Balance: $13,344 Project Location: Rock Prairie Rd. Name of Development: Williams Creek Estate Subdivision Phase: 2 Applicant: Stan & Jean Stephen Family No. Two, LP Address: 2514 Memorial Drive. City/State/Zip: Bryan, Texas 77802 Phone Number/Fax: Fax Number: E-mail: Engineer/Planner: Texcon Address: 1707 Graham Rd. City/StateZip: College Station, TX 77845 Phone Number/Fax: 764-7743 Fax Number: E-Mail: REQUIRED COMPLIANCE Section 10-B-1: Land Dedication Single Family Dwelling Units: 17 Multi -Family Dwelling Units: Total Land Requirement: .168 Acres Proposed Dedication: 0 Section 10-B-2: Fee in Lieu of Land Has the Planning and Zoning Commission's approval been obtained? NO Land Fee: Single Family Fee ($198/dwelling unit): $198 x 17 = $3,366 Multi -Family Fee ($160/dwelling unit): Total Acquisition Fee: Section 10-13-3: Park Development Fee Single Family Fee ($358/dwelling unit): Multi -family Fee ($292/dwelling unit): Total Fee Amounts: Total Single Family Fee ($556/dwelling Unit): Multi -Family Fee ($452/dwelling Unit): Section 10-13-4: Park Development in Lieu of Fee Required development cost: Staff review date and comment: April 4, 2005 Parks Board review and decision: Section 10-13-5: Minimum Park Size Is the proposed park less than five (5) acres? If yes, staff recommends: acceptance of fee Section 10-13-7: Prior Park Acquisition $358 x 17 = $6,086 $556 x 17 = $9,452 N/A No, Lick Creek Park is approx. 1 mile away but not Is there an existing park that can serve the proposed development? a neighborhood park. If yes, staff recommends: Section 10-E: Comprehensive Plan Is the proposed park dedication in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Recreation, Park, and Open Space Master Plan? Comments: Section 10-F: Additional Information 1. Island in the 100-year floodplain? Percentage: a. Detention/Retention? Acreage in floodplain: Acreage in detention: Acreage in greenways: Comments: Size: Meets Board Policy? Percentage: Percentage: Percentage: Section 10-F (of the Park Land Dedication Ordinance) 10-F. 1 Any land dedication to the City under this section must be suitable for park and recreation uses. Consideration will be given to land that is in the floodplain or may be considered "floodable" even though not in a federally regulated floodplain as long as, due to its elevation, it is suitable for park improvements. (a) Neighborhood park sites should be adjacent to residential areas in a manner that serves the greatest number of users. Comments: (b) Neighborhood park sites should be located so that users are not required to cross arterial roadways to access them. Comments: (c) Sites should not be severely sloped or have unusual topography which would render the land unusable for organized recreational activities. Comments: (d) Sites should have existing trees or other scenic elements. Comments: (e) Detention/retention areas will not be accepted as part of the required dedication, but may be accepted in addition to the required dedication. If accepted as part of the park, the detention/retention area design must be approved by the City staff and must meet specific parks specifications. Comments: 10-F. 2 Parks should be easy to access and open to public view so as to benefit area development, enhance the visual character of the city, protect public safety, and minimize conflict with adjacent land uses. The following guidelines should be used in designing parks and adjacent development: (a) Where physically feasible, park sites should be located adjacent to greenways and/or schools in order to encourage both shared facilities and the potential co -development of new sites. Comments: (b) A proposed subdivision adjacent to a park may not be designed to restrict reasonable access to the park from other area subdivisions. Street and greenway connections to existing or future adjoining subdivisions may be required to provide reasonable access to parks. Comments: (c) Where a non-residential use must directly abut a park, the use must be separated by a screening wall or fence and landscaping. Access points to the park may be allowed by the Planning and Zoning Commission if a public benefit is established. Comments: (d) It is desirable that a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the perimeter of a park should abut a public street. In all cases, the City shall approve the proposed street alignment fronting on city parks. Comments: (e) Streets abutting a park shall be built in accordance with the thoroughfare plan and the standards of this ordinance; however, the City may require any residential street built adjacent to a park to be constructed to collector width to ensure access and prevent traffic congestion. The developer may request oversize participation in such an instance. Comments: Staff Recommendations: Acceptance of Parkland dedication fee. Section 10-G: Approval: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: At the regular meeting on May 17, 2005, the Board voted six to one to accept the cash dedication of $9,452 in lieu of the .168-acre land dedication. Planning & Zoning Commission: City Council: