HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/20/2004 - Regular Minutes - Parks Board Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, April 20, 2004, 7:00 p.m.
EXIT Teen Center
1520 Rock Prairie Road
College Station, Texas
Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation;
Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director; Peter Vanecek, Senior Parks Planner; Scott Hooks,
Parks Operations - West District Supervisor; David Wood, Parks Planner; Kristan
Clann, Greenways Coordinator; Pamela Springfield, Staff Assistant.
Board Members Present: John Nichols, Chairman; Larry Farnsworth; Ken
Livingston; Don Allison; Jodi Warner; Glen Davis; Gary Erwin, Alternate.
Board Members Absent: Glenn Schroeder
Guests: Rhonda Raphael, Rock Prairie PTO; Steve Arden, Land Owner; Fred
Anderson, Land Owner; Joseph and Janet Johnson, Developer; Mike Hester,
Engineer; Alton Ofczarzak, Developer; Garrett Roy, TAMU Student; April Conkey,
Woodway Subdivision Resident
1. Call to order. John Nichols called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
2. Pardon N possible action concerning requests for absences of
members from meeting. No requests for absence had been submitted.
3. Hear visitors. Hearing none, this item was closed.
4. Discussion, consideration, and possible approval of minutes.
Woodway Park Public Hearing - March 3, 2004. Don Allison moved to
approve the minutes from the March 3, 2004, Public Hearing. Ken Livingston
seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
Regular Meeting - March 9, 2004. Gary Erwin moved to approve the minutes
from the March 9, 2004, meeting. Larry Farnsworth seconded the motion. All
were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
Proposed TMPA Regional Park Site Tour - April 15, 2004. Gary Erwin stated
that he had one correction to the minutes. His name had been left off of the
list of those attending the tour. Jodi Warner made a motion to approve the
minutes of the site tour with the change mentioned. Don A. seconded the
motion. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously.
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Page 1 of 6
Regular Meeting of April 20, 2004
5. Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding Woodway
Park Plan. Eric Ploeger briefly discussed the history of the Woodway Park
site and the public hearing that had been held on March 3, 2004. A concept
had been created which incorporated items based on the input from citizens at
that hearing.
Peter Vanecek described the concept for the park, which included: a jogging
loop/trail system (1/2 mile), a 50-space parking lot, a rentable picnic pavilion
that would hold approximately 80-100 people, restrooms, a standard size
playground (not a tot playground), volleyball and basketball courts, a small
shelter, a nine-hole disc golf course, and three or four picnic units in the more
heavily wooded area of the park. The pond, which would need some
renovation, would probably include a fishing pier. The disc golf course would
be separated from the areas of higher activity in the park. The walkways
would be lit.
April Conkey asked whether the jogging path would be concrete or a rubber
cushioned surface. Peter stated that perhaps a smaller loop could be done
using rubber cushioned surfacing, but the remainder would be concrete.
Ms. Conkey also asked if the disc golf area and the area around the pond
would be left wooded. Peter responded that some thinning would probably be
done for the first couple of holes for the disc golf course and for better
visibility by the Police Department. John N. added that he would prefer to see
the sidewalks set back from the street. This request would be forwarded to
the Public Works Department. The project should go out to bid in the fall.
It would cost approximately $600,000 to construct the park, plus the land
acquisition costs. The pond work was the biggest unknown factor. Don A.
made a motion to adopt the concept presented as the Master Plan for
Woodway Park, and Gary E. seconded. All were in favor and the motion
passed unanimously.
6. Discussion, consideration, and possible action regarding Park Land
Dedication requests.
■ Horse Haven Estates N The proposed subdivision of 22 lots required only
a .22 acre land dedication. Staff was recommending acceptance of the fees
of $12,232, in lieu of the land. Connectivity to nearby Windwood and
Raintree Parks would be an issue to consider in the future, as the remaining
property in that area is developed. Discussion with the developer and the
engineer followed regarding different options for connectivity.
Glen D. moved to accept the fee in lieu of land subject to the developer
putting in a dedicated sidewalk easement from Horseshoe Drive, towards
Switch Station Road, in order to provide access to Windwood Park. (The
street name on the developer's site plan presented to the Board was shown
as Horseshoe Drive, but this had not been approved by 911 and could
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Page 2 of 6
Regular Meeting of April 20, 2004
change.) The motion was seconded by Don A. All were in favor and the
motion passed unanimously.
■ Edelweiss Gartens, Phase 6-11 N The proposed dedication of 6.03 acres
included some detention area that would be configured for use as an open
play area or practice facility. The required dedication of 3.16 acres would be
located outside of the detention area. There would be good connectivity
between this area and the existing portion of Edelweiss Gartens, creating a
total park of 13.7 acres. Staff recommended acceptance of the land
dedication.
Glen D. moved to accept the dedication of the 6.03 acres of land. Don A.
seconded. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously.
■ Williams Creek Subdivision N Approximately 110 single-family home sites
would be developed, resulting in a required dedication of little more than an
acre. There was the possibility for future phases. Staff had not come up
with a recommendation, but may want to discuss with the developer the
future of the entire piece of property. The tract has 70'-80' differences in
elevation, the likelihood of Navasota Ladies Tresses, and streams that are
under the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers, so the developer is
limited as to what can be done. The owners would have liked to dedicate
land, but had not considered any specific location.
After lengthy discussion, Glen D. moved to accept the fee in lieu of the land
dedication, with the stipulation that the developer work with staff to
determine if it would be feasible to establish a park in future phases. Don A.
seconded. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously.
7. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning requests for
naming of Jack & Dorothy Miller Park jogging track. Rhonda Raphael
with Rock Prairie PTO was present to request that the track at Jack and
Dorothy Miller Park be named in honor of Coach Carole Weldon. Since the
discussion at the April meeting regarding this, the City Council had approved
the proposed "Guidelines for the Naming of City Facilities", and a petition with
28 names in support of the request had been turned over to staff. Staff
recommended that this issue be turned over to the Facility Naming
Subcommittee to act on, and then make a recommendation to the Board. It
would probably be fall before this could be approved and a plaque created.
A meeting of the Facility Naming Subcommittee was then scheduled for
May 7, 2004, at noon. The Board asked for a resolution from the Rock Prairie
PTO Board showing that they were in support of this project. Ms. Raphael
said she would try to get this prior to the May 7th meeting. A letter from the
principal of Rock Prairie Elementary was also requested.
8. Discussion, consideration, and possible action regarding potential
park and greenway joint project with the City of Bryan. A possible
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Page 3 of 6
Regular Meeting of April 20, 2004
cooperative project was being considered that would develop a linkage
between College Station park property (Veterans Park & Athletic Complex)
and the adjacent Texas A&M property, with 90 acres of Bryan park property
through greenways and trails. Future connections could potentially go south
to Lick Creek Park and north to the Brazos Center. This was a conceptual
thought only and no proposal had been developed or specific land tracts
designated. There was a lot of floodplain involved, but if developed, it would
create a pedestrian and wildlife corridor between the sites.
Steve introduced Kristan Clann, the City's new Greenway Coordinator and
explained that this would involve greenway types of projects. This concept
was shown on the Greenways Master Plan as part of the greenways system.
This was an informational item only and no action was required.
9. Discussion, consideration, and possible action regarding Eastgate
Park Master Plan. City Council had recently elevated this project on their
list of priorities and would like for it to create more of a gateway going into
the neighborhood. Peter V. stated that this park had gone through a few
different designs, however, the new conceptual plan included major
landscaping behind the commercial buildings with raised planter beds,
flowering trees, evergreen shrubs, walkways, and possibly a sculpture
fountain area in the middle. The brick pavers used would match those in the
islands on Texas Avenue. The park was not big enough to put in a playground
or ball fields.
Keep Brazos Beautiful would be contributing approximately $40,000 to help
do part of the landscaping and additional funding would be requested to do
the remainder of the project. This would be part of the follow-up report to
City Council on April 29th (see item 10 below). The total cost for the project
would be approximately $180,000. In addition to Council's desire to see
improvements in Eastgate Park, improvements for Eastgate had also been
requested in a small area plan that had been conducted two or three years
earlier. Some of these improvements had been included in the recent bond
package as a result of that small area plan.
Glen D. made a motion to accept the concept presented as the Master Plan for
Eastgate Park, subject to a special request for funding outside of the normal
budget process. Don A. seconded. Discussion followed regarding the funding
of the project. Hearing no further discussion, the motion was voted on as
stated, and carried five to one.
10. Follow-up report, regarding recommendations from February 26, 2004
Park Issues Report to City Council. Steve had been asked to present to
Council at their April 29th meeting, a proposal to light soccer fields over a five-
year period and address some neighborhood park issues. Handouts were
distributed summarizing the three different options for the soccer field lights.
Ten existing soccer fields had been identified as appropriate - four fields at
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Page 4 of 6
Regular Meeting of April 20, 2004
Veterans Park, three at Central, and the three new fields to be built at
Veterans Park. (See attached handouts for details of the options.) Council
would have to authorize debt authorization to pay for this. If that is done,
then it would probably be best to group those projects as described in
Option 3.
The Neighborhood Park Proposal (attached) dealt with improvements to four
parks - Eastgate, Steeplechase Park, Woodland Hills, and University parks.
The proposal phased the improvements out, doing Eastgate and Steeplechase
first. University Park would be eligible for Community Development Block
Grant funds.
Once Council makes a recommendation as to how many of these projects they
want done and how soon, staff can move forward. This does not utilize any
existing bond money or affect any other existing projects. Glen D. asked if
the soccer clubs had been asked to help with the lighting project. Steve said
no, they had not been asked.
John N. stated that he felt both the Lighting Proposal and the Neighborhood
Park Improvement Proposal were equally important. Glen D. felt it was
important to explore all avenues of revenue generation in the lighting process,
such as grant applications for user participation. Glen D. made a motion to
endorse the general concept and the priorities as listed. Gary E. seconded the
motion. No further discussion being heard, the motion was voted on and
passed unanimously.
11. Report, discussion, and possible action regarding Fees Subcommittee
meeting. There had been a meeting of the subcommittee and one of the
items worked on had been a draft 'Athletic Field Priority of Use Policy'. The
subcommittee needed to schedule another meeting to go over the draft and
discuss a few other issues. Another meeting was set for Tuesday, April 27,
2004, at 4:00 p.m. Glen D. said he would like for the subcommittee to come
back to the Board at the May meeting with a recommendation on 2005 user
fees.
12. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning Second Quarter
Park Maintenance Standards. This report had gone out in the Board
packets. Steve explained that as part of the budget process, additional funds
would be requested to increase the Replacement Fund from $75,000 to
$100,000 per year. This would help with replacing items such as playgrounds,
court resurfacing, and drinking fountains on a timelier basis.
This was an informational item only.
13. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning the Capital
Improvement Program. Eric P. stated that nine bids had been turned in
and opened for the Lincoln Expansion Project. Six were within budget,
including alternates. Approval for the contract would go to City Council at
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Page 5 of 6
Regular Meeting of April 20, 2004
their first May meeting and construction would start shortly thereafter. A
groundbreaking ceremony would be held mid-May.
Glen D. asked if the money for the Jack & Dorothy Miller Park exercise
equipment had come out of Park Land Dedication funds. Eric said that
$40,689 had come out of that fund, with the remaining coming out of the
Replacement Fund.
14. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning Board and
Department Goals and Objectives, and City Council Strategic Plan.
Hearing no discussion, this item was closed.
15. Discussion of calendar, future meeting dates, and possible agenda
items.
■ Presentation by Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences Department
regarding conceptual plan for TMPA Regional Park N Dr. Scott Shafer had
done concept plans for the park site and would be presenting them to the
Brazos Valley Council of Governments on May 3rd. A notice would be sent
out to the Board as a reminder.
■ Regular meeting on May 11, 2004 N The May meeting would be held at the
TAMU Horticulture Gardens. There would be people there to answer any
questions posed by the Board and to do a section by section overview of the
Gardens and what it takes to keep them maintained. The board would meet
at 5:30 p.m., at the site.
16. Adjourn. A motion was made to adjourn and seconded. Hearing no
opposition, the meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Page 6 of 6
Regular Meeting of April 20, 2004