HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/11/2005 - Regular Minutes - Parks Board (3) k. PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
MINUTES
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
GOALS WORKSHOP ry 5:30 PM
REGULAR MEETING iw 7:00 PM
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
The EXIT Teen Center
1520 Rock Prairie Road • College Station, Texas
Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Director; Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director; Peter Lamont,
Recreation Superintendent; David Gerling, Recreation Superintendent; Dana Albrecht,
Recreation Supervisor; Pamela Springfield, Staff Assistant
Members Present: Jodi Warner, Chair; Harry Green; Glenn Schroeder; Jeannie
McCandless; John Crompton; Carol Blaschke; Gary Thomas; Kathleen Ireland
Members Absent: Gary Erwin
Visitors: Jane Kee - IPS Group; Veronica Morgan - Mitchell & Morgan L.L.P.; Greg
Taggart - Municipal Development Group; Tod Weingand - College Station Little League
Goals Workshop ry 5:30 p.m.
1. Call to order. Jodi W., Chair, called the Goals Workshop to order at 5:45 p.m.
2. Pardon and possible action concerning requests for absences of members.
One request had been submitted by Gary Erwin. Kathy I. moved to accept Gary E.'s
request for absence. Carol B. seconded and the vote was called. All were in favor
and the motion carried unanimously.
3. Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding Community Needs
Assessment draft report " Jamie Rae Walker: Jamie Rae Walker gave a
presentation with the preliminary results of the needs assessment that had been
done (see attached PowerPoint presentation for details). This was the first
time that the Department had done a comprehensive needs assessment.
After her draft report was completed, Jamie Rae stated that the response to the
survey had been very good, considering that it had been done over the summer.
She encouraged anyone who had questions or needed additional information to
contact her, adding that she wanted input from staff and the Board. It would be
approximately three to four weeks before the report would be packaged and ready to
be presented to City Council.
4. Discussion, consideration, and Possible action regarding Board Goals for
FY 2006. The Board spent the remainder of the workshop working on potential
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(TOD)1-800-735-2989. Agendas may
be viewed on yvww:.c5tx.gov.
goals for FY 2005-06. Based on the goals from FY 2004-05, items completed would
be removed from the list. Eleven new goals were decided upon. (See attached
list of Draft Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Goals for FY 2005-06).
Pam would put a draft list together that would be brought back to the board at the
next meeting.
A ten minute break was taken at 7:05 p.m. The meeting reconvened
at 7:15 p.m.
5. Hear visitors. Tod Weingand was present to introduce himself and to let the Board
know that he was the newly elected board President for College Station Little League.
He stated that he would be handling the business for the league for the next couple
of years and he felt that the members should know who he was. Jodi thanked Tod
for coming.
Hearing no further visitors this item was closed.
6. Discussion, consideration, and possible approval of minutes from the
regular meeting of September 13, 2005; and, from the lunch meeting
regarding the proposed Park Land Dedication for the Fojtik Subdivision on
September 21, 2005. Glenn S. made a motion to approve both sets of minutes
as presented and there was a second from Jeannie M. The vote was called. All
members were in favor and the motion passed unanimously.
7. Discussion, consideration, and possible action regarding potential Park Land
Dedication requests:
• Squid Hill Development N Park Zone 15: Ric stated that this was for a single
family residence on Jones Butler Road. Being that it was single family, the land
dedication requirement would only be 11100th of an acre, so staff was
recommending the acceptance of the cash dedication of $556.00 in lieu of land.
Glenn S. motioned to accept the staff recommendation of accepting the cash.
Kathy I. seconded and the vote was called. All were in favor and the motion
passed unanimously.
• Spring Creek Commons N Park Zone 9: This was not really a dedication - the
developer wanted to donate a strip of property that would not be used, which is
located next to Woodland Hills Park near the intersection of Highway 6 and Greens
Prairie Road. The park property at present does not have good street access. The
proposed donation is a pretty piece of property that would give some options for
access on Lakeway and make the park safer on the end because of better visibility.
The trees that are there would not be dug up and having the property would allow
the city to install a drip irrigation system for those trees.
Kathleen I. moved to accept the property donation and Gary T. seconded. Hearing
no further discussion, the vote was called. All were in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
• The Woodlands of College Station/Dovetail Development ,,, Park Zone 6:
The latest version of the dedication proposal was presented, which staff considered
Page 2
a reasonable proposal. A letter had been included in the members' packets with
approximate figures which had since changed. The latest dedication proposed was:
Dedication Request 4.36 Acres
Proposed 3.78 acres
Remaining .58 Acres
Cash Value $ 11,600
Multi-family development Fee $ 159,140
$ 170,740
Southwest Park Total Acreage 8.549 Acres
Park Zone 6 Total $ 85,901
If the dedication was accepted, it would allow for an 8.549 acre park. The city
would lose access on Christine Lane, but would have a public access easement on
the west side. The development would be a 545-unit, residential, gated community
oriented to college students, with development slated to begin immediately. With
the development fee, there would be a zone balance of $250,000±, which would
allow the city to begin doing improvements. The developer was interested in
participating in the design process of the park in terms of how they laid out their
development.
Staff was recommending acceptance of this most recent proposal. Glenn S. moved
approval of accepting the park land and the cash dedication that represented the
remainder. John C. seconded. The vote was called. All were in favor and the
motion carried unanimously.
■ Update on Board decision regarding Fojtik Subdivision — Park Zone 4: This
was an update in terms of action taken at the special lunch meeting on
September 21, 2005. The area was located behind St. Thomas Aquinas and the
Board had already voted on this. The park land dedication had been met.
This was an informational item only and no action was needed.
8. Report, discussion, and possible action regarding the status of the Parkland
Dedication Ordinance revisions. Steve said the status of this was pending and
would not be going to council for approval until the wording regarding the appraised
value was done. The Board expressed an interest in seeing this done by the end of
the year. Kathleen I. moved that the Board submit the Park Land Dedication
Ordinance revisions as written to the City Council for approval. John C. amended the
motion to include 'in a timely manner'. The motion as amended was seconded by
Jeannie M. The vote was called and all members were in favor. The motion carried
unanimously.
9. Report, discussion, and possible action regarding the status of the $200,000
cirant obtained by the city for Navasota Ladies' Tresses habitat acquisition.
Steve stated that Kristan Weaver, the Greenways Coordinator, could not attend.
This was a follow-up to a question posed at the previous meeting regarding a
$200,000 grant obtained by the city for acquisition of 70 additional acres of land for
greenways that was a habitat for Navasota Ladies' Tresses. Negotiations with the
owner to purchase the land have not been successful and the city has requested an
extension on the deadline for the grant. It was not likely that the land would be
Page 3
acquired or if the grant would be extended. This was a discussion item only and no
action was required.
10. Report, discussion, and possible action regarding Community Recreation
Centers ,.► Dana Albrecht. Dana Albrecht gave a presentation on multi-use, multi-
generational community recreation centers that she had visited as part of a
conference she had attended in Colorado. After touring different centers, one of the
most significant items that stood out was that a multitude of community needs - for
young and old alike - could be met by pooling resources into one center, with
facilities that served many functions, as opposed to having separate facilities, staff,
and resources spread throughout the city. (See attached presentation "Trends
in Recreational Facilities Design — Something for Everyone".)
This was an informational item only and no action was required.
11. Discussion, consideration, and possible action regarding existing
subcommittees and the appointment of board members to a joint committee
with the Planning and Zoning Commission. This was a follow-up item from the
joint meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) to appoint
representatives from the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to work with
representatives from P&Z. Three members would be needed to serve on an ongoing
basis for the next twelve months or so. Gary T., John C., and Kathleen I., all said
they would be interested in serving on this subcommittee. By appointing three
members, Jodi said she could sit in on items of interest without having a quorum
present. The Secretary for P&Z, Lisa Lindgren, had called Jodi asking for the names
of the subcommittee members because P&Z was interested in getting started. The
members chosen would be required to report back to their respective boards from
time to time.
Subcommittee members also needed to be appointed for the Recreation, Park, and
Open Space Master Plan Subcommittee. John C. and Kathleen I. volunteered. Ric
said that Gary E. might also be interested in serving. If he was interested he could
be appointed at an upcoming meeting. Four people could serve on that
subcommittee. Gary T. said he was also interested in serving. Steve briefly
discussed the role the subcommittee would play in the plan update process. Staff
would set up the meetings to start after the first of the year. The subcommittee
could bring items to the board if necessary.
Jodi thanked the members who volunteered. Pam S. would get the list of P&Z
subcommittee members to the P&Z Secretary.
12. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning Board and Departmental
Goals and Objectives, and the City Council Strategic Plan. Jodi asked if there
was anything related to the 2005 goals to discuss. Hearing none, this item was
closed.
13. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning the Capital Improvement
Program.
• Park Land Dedication & Capital Improvement Projects List: A CIP and Park
Land Dedication Projects list had been included in the members' packets. The list
Page 4
for FY 2005 showed all of the projects that had been completed in 2005. A new
list for FY 2005-06 had also been included with the projects that would be done in
2006. The list would grow as additional projects were added.
-- The final project costs for the VPAC & Central Soccer Field Lights and Thomas
Pool Collector Tank Repair project had been transposed on the CIP list.
-- The Wolf Pen Creek Multi-purpose Building Project's scope had increased and
the project total had grown to $1 million and would include two buildings. Ric
stated that this was an exciting project since staff had been operating out of a
trailer for ten years.
— Glenn S. said that he had assumed that when the water tank came down off of
the city property in front of Lions Park, that the property and the park would be
put on the market. Steve stated that there were still plans to put the old water
tank site on the market. However, there was really no other place to put a park
in that zone unless you had a site with a willing seller. You would also have to
take it to the public for a vote in order to sell the park property.
— The Jack & Dorothy Miller Park Basketball Court Cover Project had been
completed.
• Veterans Park & Athletic Complex: This project should go out to bid in
December.
• Steve stated that an updated Park System Inventory List had been included in the
packets.
14. Discussion of calendar, future meeting dates, and possible agenda items:
• The November regular meeting would be held on November 8, 2005.
• Agenda item requests:
--- The City Secretary, Connie Hooks would do a presentation on Open Meetings
Laws at an upcoming meeting.
A senior facility report should come before the board at the next meeting.
15. Adjourn. Kathleen I. moved to adjourn and Jeannie M. seconded. The vote was
called. All were in favor and the meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m.
Page 5
TABLE 4
The quality of the city's park and recreation services is primarily determined by the magnitude of funds the city invests in them.
N=534
Decrease tax support by: Increase tax support by:
-20% -15% -10% -5% g,, +5% +10% +15% +20% Total
# 14 # °� # % % # % # % #
Increases in tax support would enhance
the quality of EXISTING parks,while
decreases would reduce it.Would you 16 3.13 5 0.98 12 2.35 4.11 23.87 51 9.98 4 0.78 9 511
like to see the level of tax support for
park and recreation services changed?
Would you like to see the city's tax 18 3.54 3 0.59 11 2.16 4.52 24.36 51 10.02 8 1.57 9 III 509
investment in NEW park and recreation
facilities change?If so,by how much?
rn
CS Residents
TABLE 5
PRIORITY INVESTMENT AREAS IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS
Table 5 reflects the dominant use of public facilities reported in Table 2 when residents
were asked to prioritize investments for the next ten years. Trails were the dominant request
ranking first, second and seventh. Indeed, if they were aggregated into a single category, they
would overwhelm all other categories.
This reflects the changing way in which people now use park-like facilities. Prior to the
1990s, parks were used primarily for picnicking and social activities. While this use is still
important, the primary uses over the past decade have been walking,jogging, biking,
skateboarding et al., i.e., linear activities which use the periphery of the park area only. The
enhanced interest in these activities is reflected in the prioritization shown here for trails which
will accommodate them.
The second prioritization is for neighborhood parks, ponds/lakes, and gardens/arboretum.
Again, these reflect dominant use patterns reported in Table 2. However, the prominence of
ponds/lakes and gardens/arboretum suggest a desire to invest more in water and horticultural
features in our neighborhood parks. For the most part, these parks are minimally landscaped,
(they are not equipped with sprinkler systems) and these responses indicate a higher level of
landscaping should be incorporated. The primary challenge in responding to this prioritization is
that in times of drought, the city by ordinance is required to shut off its landscape sprinkler
systems. Hence, the landscaping dies. The solution to this conundrum may be for the city to
develop a network of pipes that delivers recycled water to landscapes. This is being actively
considered by the city. Another barrier to enhanced landscaping is the availability of additional
17
horticultural and forestry staff to undertake the work, but some of this requirement may be met
by soliciting neighborhood residents to volunteer their labor.
The major surprise in these data was the widespread interest in developing a Zoo and
Water Park. These may reflect a desire for something that is "different" to enhance the variety of
experiences that can be offered. It is unlikely to be feasible for the city to develop a Zoo, even
one that features only Texas species. Both the capital and operating expenses involved are
substantial- -far higher than those associated with any of the city's other facilities. If those
identifying a zoo as one of their priorities were aware of the costs involved, it seems likely that
their level of enthusiasm for the project would drop.
The Water Park prioritization is something the city should explore with a feasibility study
to ascertain the capital and operational expenses associated with such a facility, and the potential
of partnering with a private operator to provide it as was done with the ice rink. Successful
efforts have been made to convert Bee Creek into a pseudo water park, but the pool's formal,
traditional "tank" design limit what can be done there. Residents have responded with
enthusiasm to the play features that have been included at Bee Creek, which suggests a water
park would be well-received. Three points should be made about the water park option:
1/ If such a facility was built, it would probably usurp much of Bee Creek's demand (and
perhaps that of Thomas and Southwood also).
2/ The capital and operating costs of a water park substantially exceed that of a traditional
pool. However, these are likely to be partially off-set by increased revenues. Users
expect to pay higher admission price for a water park, and it will attract more users by
drawing from the region rather than only from College Station.
18
3/ Southwood Park was intended to be a water park when it was constructed in the mid-
1980s. However, vigorous opposition to the concept emanated from the neighborhood,
so the decision was made to construct a traditional pool.
Other priorities that received prominent prioritization were Art/Music facilities, Dog
Park, and Senior Center. The art/music facilities probably reflects discussion in the community
for over a decade relating to developing an arts center. At this time, this appears to be the remit
of the Art Council rather than the PARD. However, the PARD could perhaps explore the
potential of expanding its Xtra Education offerings in arts/music.
A Dog Park is being incorporated at Steeplechase Park and being considered for
inclusion at University Park. Their availability is likely to make it possible to more vigorously
encourage dog hygiene in other parks.
There is growing momentum to create more space that can be used by senior citizens.
The PARD's seniors' programs are expanding and the council has authorized the exploration of
more space to accommodate their needs. However, it is unlikely that a specialist senior citizen
center designed for their exclusive use is the solution. A more feasible option may be the
creation of a community center(perhaps similar in concept to the existing conference center on
George Bush Drive which is nearing the end of its useful life) that can be used by a multitude of
community groups, including seniors.
19
TABLE 5
Please identify the top 5 facilities from the following list on which you
would like to see College Station give priority in its investments over the
next ten years.
Please ONLY SELECT 5 facilities and put a check alongside each of them.
N=534
Walking/Biking Trails 204 38.20
Nature Trails 157 29.40
Zoo 152 28.46
Water Park 145 27.15
Ponds/Lakes 140 26.22
Neighborhood Parks 124 23.22
Extensive regional trail system(15-20 123 23.03
Gardens/Arboretum 110 20.60
Art/Music Facilities 106 19.85
Dog Park 101 18.91
Senior Center 100 18.73
Indoor pool 96 17.98
Nature Center 91 17.04
Outdoor Neighborhood Pools 77 14.42
Playgrounds 74 13.86
Indoor Recreation Center 71 13.30
Camping Areas 70 13.11
Picnic Areas 65 12.17
Cultural/Art Center 62 11.61
Skate Park 52 9.74
Fitness Stations 49 9.18
Large Regional Park 38 7.12
Frisbee Golf Course 37 6.93
Indoor Play Areas 36 6.74
Open Space Fields 35 6.55
Pavilions 31 5.81
Indoor Tennis Courts 28 5.24
Outdoor Tennis Courts 26 4.87
Horseshoe pits 25 4.68
Adult Softball Fields 24 4.49
Youth Soccer Fields 23 4.31
Equestrian Trails 22 4.12
Youth Baseball Fields 22 4.12
Youth Softball Fields 17 3.18
Archery fields 13 2.43
Remote Control Model Airplane
Facility 13 2.43
Adult Football Fields 9 1.69
Bocce courts 9 1.69
Adult Baseball Fields 7 1.31
Adult Soccer Fields 6 1.12
Youth Football Fields 6 1.12
20
CS Residents
TABLE 5A
PRIORITY INVESTMENT AREAS IN THE NEXT 10YEARS
(PARD STAFF)
The primary similarity in prioritization was the prominent support that PARD employees
gave to the Water Park and Zoo. The dominance of support for the Water Park offers further
evidence that the feasibility of this facility should be explored.
The substantial support for camping areas, adult softball fields, skate park and indoor
recreation center were all items not recognized as high priorities by residents. This may indicate
that staff have insights derived from their professional training which elude residents who are not
intimately involved in providing services.
21
KIM (*rte
City of College Station
Department of Parks and Recreation
2005 Needs Assessment
111,
41
s.a D-.artment of Remotion.Park and Tourla Science•at Taxa•. Unueralt,
Introduction
• PARD updating Recreation, Park and Open
Space Master Plan
—Designed to provide general guidance for
development of programs and facilitic
• Information from several source 'lized to
determine and priori' - +-eds
a Focus Groups(N
a Public Meeting
a Community Survey
1111Maimmillk III
Process
• 12 NGTs from January—March
• Survey sent to 1,200 residents in
June(800 SFH,400 MDU)
• Survey sent to 745 employees in
July including PARD employees.
4.
i ..... i
1
NGT Participation
• Groups
—Neighborhoods —Environmental Groups
—Aquatics —External Athletics
— Citizens with — TAMU Students
Disabilities —Teens
—Seniors —Special Interests
—Internal Athletics —Lincoln Center
—Advisory Board
—Open Public Forum
1111111111111111111111111
NGT Process
• Answer Question:
—What park and recreation facilities and services are
lacking in the College Station area which are
necessary to support the needs of your family or the
organiz.tion you represent.
Combine,Rank
w:
11111Milk .411
NGT Results
• Overall major themes
—Trails and linkages
—Non-designated open space(not ball fields)
—Communication
2
Survey Design
• Developed from NGT data.
• Reviewed by PARD employees.
• Sections
— PARD Use
• By Household representing 790 residents
— PARD Position/Performance
— PARD Priority Levels(specific factors)
— Investment Level
— PARD Priorities(Pick 5)
—Service/Facility Statements(Agree/Disagree)
— Demographics
Survey Methodology
• June mailed 1,200 surveys to residents
-Incentives buy one,admit one free ice skating pass
-Drawing for free Swimming Pool pass
•July mailed out 745 employee
4if surveys
II20 !
11
RP 17-A1
11111...1111111 MI
Response Rate
• 534 and 341 usable surveys were returned
• 45%and 46%response rates
.',<`11:—.. :f
04
IllionimM11110.111k1111 III
3
Findings—Profile Table 1
—Ages 18-34 Underrepresented
—Ages 35+Overrepresented 7476%
• Summer months 46.43%
• Sample Stratification(800/400)
—Ethnicity,gender,and
rental/owner profiles reasonably
compatible 16$4 3544 air
ft111111011144
Findings — Frequency of Use (T2)
• Neighborhood/Community Park
—Playgrounds
—Ponds/Lakes
—Picnic tables/Pavilion
• Walking Paths/Trails
• Pools
Findings — Frequency of Use (T2)
• Recreation Services
-Fewer than 20%of Households
• Walking Paths/Trails
• Pools
4
Findings — Level of Priority (T3)
• Trails
—Provide lighting for walking and jogging
paths
—More hike and bike paths linking parks,
neighborhoods,schools
—More paths around parks/fields
Findings — Level of Priority (T3)
• Trees
—Provide more shade trees
—Provide more trees along city parks
—Provide quiet,green spaces throughout the
city
•
1111
Findings — Level of Priority (T3)
• Neighborhood/Community Parks
—Acquisition of more park land
—Enhancement of maintenance at existing
parks
imima
5
Level of Priority (T3A)
• PARD Employees differed somewhat from
Residents
—Trails 3,4,and 12
—Two of Greening City Items 11,16
—Maintenance and Acquisition 1 an 10
• Pnde in what they do!
• Enhancing Parks Reinforced
—Placing more benches(8)
—Providing playgrounds at fields(5)
—Providing undesignated play space at
Level of Priority (T3B)
• City Employees reflected 2 of th- Residents'
priorities
—Trails ranked 1,4, :
—Three Greening City
• Less support for Acquis
• Less support Enhance iz ance(9)
• Additional High Priorit � � '
—Senior Center(5)
—Athletic Fields(6)
Level of Tax Support (4)
• About half keep Same Level
• About 37%willing to increase the level
—primarily 5%
MUMMINO.11111*.
6
Priority Investment Areas (T5)
• Trails 1,2,and 7th
-Aggregate-TOP
• Neighborhood Parks,Ponds,
Lakes,Arboretums
- Invest more in water and 14
Horticulture
—Water System and Staff
• Zoo
• Water Park
- Feasibility Study
• Art/Music,Dog Park,Senio
Center
Priority Investment Areas (T5A)
• Zoo
• Water Park
• Camping Areas, asilult softball fields, skate
park, indoor recea'tion center
BM
Priority Investment Areas (T5B)
• Zoo
• Water Park
• Trails
• Ponds and Lakes
7
Service Quality Issues (T6)
• Residents Primarily
Satisfied
. ., -Complimentary about
f• Maintenance Quality and
duality of Facilities
-Only 6%Not Satisfied
with PARD's offerings
• Work with ISO, Police,
Neighborhoo
Service Quality Issues (T6&6B)
• Communication
('Employees Too 6B)
-Offering Feedback/
Obtain answers to
questions
-Not-well informed abou, •
PARD's offerings
-Need Web based
position
Alternate Community Goals (7)
• PARD can contribute to wider Community Goals
-Preventing Youth Crime(72%6 and 7)
-Enhancing Real Estate Values(60%6 and 7)
-Other goals consistently 50%
• Except Retirees and Underemployed(41%and 36%)
-Only 6%Not Satisfied with PARD's offerings
• Provides Rationale
-Youth sports,teen and after school programs
-Interest in Parks,trails,and"Greening City"
oium•NN..m.gio
8
Alternate Community Goals (7A&B)
• PARD Staff Consistent
-Preventing Youth Crime
-Enhancing Real Estate Values
• Additional Importance
-Attracting Tourism
Overall,employees appreciate of the economic
development contribution of tourism—that is not
shared by the residents,
IMIIM10.1111111111*
Perceived Contributions to
Community Goals (8)
• Scores Disappointingly Low
—Prevnting Youth Crime(72%important)
—21%,PARD large or very large contribution
• Highest contribution-Real Estate
-Only 30 e%
• Impact on Community Health low
PARD should look to expand role
—Reposition Youth,Real Estate,and Health with
community goals to improve support for PAR
Perceived Contributions to
Community Goals (8)
• Reposition Youth, Real Estate, and Health
with community goals to improve support
for PARD.
-
4.1:X'`
1111
9
---4?`"--mll Wrr'll, - NYO
4-kql '
ric7,
£121o
,ThS
_4A-v
-
]\/OfLl1JTiLdd.6(' 11
671
Preliminary Draft
ILI
IL►
Program and Facility
Needs Assessment
Prepared by the
Texas A&M University
Department of Recreation,
Park, and Tourism Sciences ILI
ILI
KI
October 2005
tc) I Li I
611
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface 1
Sample profile 2
Frequency of use 5
Level of priority 9
Level of tax support 15
Priority investment in the next 10 years 17
Service quality issues 25
Relative importance of alternate community goals 29
PARD's perceived contributions to alternate community goals 35
Extent of collaboration with other departments 41
PREFACE
This draft includes tabulations showing the results from the needs assessment surveys,
and a narrative which represents an initial attempt to interpret the results. Three groups were
surveyed:
(i) A representative sample of College Station residents.
(ii) A census of all staff in the Parks and Recreation Department (PARD)
(iii)A census of all other employees of the city of College Station.
Procedures describing how the sample of residents was selected are given on the
following page. Among the PARD staff 58, of the 70 employees returned a survey, while 283 of
the 750 city employees in other departments responded.
In this report, the first table number (e.g., 3) reflects results from the residents' sample;
the second table number(e.g., 3A) reports PARD staff responses; while the third table number
(e.g., 3B) refers to the other city employees sample.
1
TABLE 1
SAMPLE PROFILE
The survey was mailed to 1200 College Station residents. It was structured so that 800
would be single family homes and 400 would be multiple dwelling units. The assumption was
that single family homes were most likely to contain permanent College Station residents, while
multiple dwelling units were more likely to reflect the community's college population. Greater
emphasis was given to the permanent resident group since they are likely to be the residents with
most invested in the community.
The two groups of 800 and 400 residents were drawn from the city's list of utility
customers. Every nth name was drawn from the list so it was a probability (representative)
sample. The 1200 total number was used because based on past surveys of this nature, the
research team anticipated receiving a 40% return rate and 450-500 was viewed as the minimum
number of responses needed to undertake analyses of any sub-groups that may be requested.
The survey was conducted in the early summer of 2005. This was not an ideal time since
many residents associated with the university leave the city during the summer, but it was
decided that timeliness of the information mandated that the survey not be delayed until fall.
After the initial survey was mailed, a reminder postcard requesting residents to complete it was
mailed three days later. Two weeks after the first survey was mailed, a follow-up letter and
survey were sent to those who had not completed it. Two weeks later this procedure was
repeated. This process resulted in the receipt of 517 usable, completed questionnaires being
returned (i.e., 43%).
Tables 1 through lE compare the profile of the residents who completed the
questionnaire with the profile of College Station's total population which was provided by the
2
city's planning department. It shows that the youngest age cohort, 18-34, and the oldest age
cohort, 65+ were underrepresented in the sample, while the 35-64 age groups were
overrepresented (Table 1). The underrepresentation among 18-34 year olds presumably reflects
the much smaller university enrollments in the summer and, hence, the fewer young people
resident in the city at the time of the survey. This interpretation is supported by the imbalance in
profiles shown between students and non-students in Table 1E.
This probably also explains some of the underrepresentation of apartment dwellers and
overrepresentation of single family home owners (Table IA). However, some of this imbalance
was deliberately structured into the survey by selecting twice as many single family hones as
apartments to be surveyed in order to avoid apartment respondents dominating the results.
The ethnic, gender, and rental/owner profiles of the sample's respondents were
reasonable compatible with those of the city (Tables 1B, 1C and ID).
3
- TABLE 1
N=534
Aye
MEE=CS
<,r
35-54 183 35.40
65+ 58 11.22
TABLE 1A
N=534
In what kind of residence do ou live?
IN CS*
1111.11.1111—,..W, .111111111111131
OraMillalling 15,293 52.021
Single Family 370 74.45 12,047 40.979
The number o dwelling units-not total
population living in units.
TABLE 1B
N=534
What ethnici do ou consider ourself?
ME ' CS
pinniurmoumums
R; 428 84.09 54,489 77.60
Y
36 7.07 5160 7.35
Total 509 100 70,220 100
*3,032 consider themselves some other race
and 1,365 consider themselves two or maore
TABLE 1C
N=534
Gender
Survey CS
.111111111.1111111111110111111101111
MaININIMI 262 49.25 5120
TABLE 1D
N=534
Do ou own or re��nt��our home in Coll _e Station?
NM= CS
Own 354 66.42 17,084 69.3
TABLE 1E
N=534
Are ou a Colle a or Universi Student?
Survey CS
1111111111111,
No 395 74.25 46.5
4 CS Residents
TABLE 2
FREQUENCY OF USE
It is standard practice for PARDs to classify the services they offer into the categories of
"public" and "private"services (Exhibit 1-1). These terms should not be confused with the
terms public and private sectors. The College Station PARD as a public agency offers both
public and private services.
A public service is one that is used by a majority of the community's residents or from
which a majority of the community's residents benefit. In contrast, if a program or facility
exhibits the characteristics of a private service, its benefits are received exclusively by a
relatively small sub-set of participating individuals rather than by the rest of the community.
Typically, most park facilities are perceived to be public services; while most recreation
programs are categorized as private services.
Respondents were presented with a list of facilities offered by the College Station PARD
and requested to indicate the frequency with which somebody in their household used them. In
order to rank their comparative frequencies a scoring system was used that allocated 4, 3, 2 and 1
points to reflect responses in the almost daily, about once a week, about once a month, and a few
times a year, respectively. The scores resulting from this service are shown in the column on the
extreme right of the table.
As expected,public services dominated the rankings. Neighborhood/Community Parks
and Walking Trails/Bike Trails were by far the most used amenities with 40% and 34% of
College Station residents reporting that someone in their household used them once a week or
more. The dominance of NeighborhoocUCommunity was reinforced by Playgrounds,
Ponds/Lakes and Picnic Tables/Pavilions being ranked fourth, fifth and sixth, respectively, since
5
Exihibit 1-1 The Major Distinctions Between Private and Public Services
PUBLIC ;MERIT pRivATE
SERVICE SERVICE . ;
SERVICE•
•
Who benefits? :
•
A large proportion IndividualsWho Individual„who:
of people ii the participate benefit
comriioni p participates� °-
ty most,but all members
of the community
benefit somewhat •
•
•
Who pays? •
•
•
The community q' , t
Individual users Individual users pay
through the tax pay fees that cover full costs
system.no user the incremental
h
carges ' costs associated '.",
with their use
6
these elements are located in parks. Wolf Pen Amphitheater and Festivals/Events are the other
public services on the list and they were ranked seventh and eighth.
Swimming pools were ranked third with almost 50% of College Station households
reporting that someone in their household used them during the past year. This suggests that in
College Station they, also, are perceived to be a public amenity. Even some non-users are likely
to agree with this perspective, recognizing that the community has an obligation to try and teach
all children to swim so they are safe around open water areas.
In contrast, to the public facilities, the private facilities which are comprised of
recreation services, for the most part, were used by fewer than 20% of the households in College
Station. These data suggest that the department's emphasis should be on the development of
parks and greenways with athletic and recreation facilities and programs being regarded as of
secondary importance in future allocations of resources.
7
TABLE 2
How often do you and/or someone in your household use each of the following College Station Park facilities and recreation programs?
N=534
Not at all Once Month About Once a Almost Daily Total Score
Week
1-t `12 Irillialir1111111111111111111
2� ',a�€ -^e�.� 4'Raz ?Xa rr t '
0 23 93 17 68 141 26.81 72 13.69 526 1056
'Neighborhood/CommunityParks 61 11 60 159 3
Kids Klub 473 90.27 13 2.48 30 57 6 1.15 29 5.53
Recreation Center 347 66.86 102 19.65 34 6.55 21 4.05 15 2.89 519 293
f3 (.. ( 1 �,l ., x. rTt C � §i 8tt3 i`.�$A
Ponds/Lakes 209 39.81 183 34.86 95 18.10 30 5.71 8 1.52 1E11 495
Outdoor Basketball Courts 320 61.30 116 22.22 55 10.54 25 4.79 6 1.15
Tennis Courts 360 68.57 95 18.10 42 8.00 22 4.19 5 0.95 Izei 265
Wolf Pen Amphitheatre 202 38.55 249 47.52 58 11.07 12 2.29 3 0.57 132N 413
Xtra Education 440 83.81 69 13.14 9 1.71 4 0.76 3 0.57 NEIINN
Lincoln Center 454 86.64 52 9.92 142 67 1 0.19 3 0.57 gizi 95
228 43.59 40 7.65 6 1.15 2 0.38
lia[GIMEICSII 493 93.90 22 4.19 4 0.76 4 0.76 2 0.38 flap 50
Youth Flag Football Fields 485 92.56 28 5.34 4 0.76 6 1.15 1 0.19 Nail 58
Senior Programs 481 91.62 32 6.10 11 2.10 1 0.19 0 0.00
CS Residents
TABLE 3
LEVEL OF PRIORITY
Respondents were presented with the set of items listed in Table 3 and asked to indicate
for each of them whether they should be a high, medium or low priority in future investment
decisions. Three major investment priorities emerged. First, were items related to trails,
reflecting the widespread use of Walking Trails/Bike Paths reported in Table 2. By far the
highest priority was to provide lighting for walking and jogging paths. This was complemented
with more hike and bike trails linking parks, neighborhoods and schools, which was ranked
fourth and more walking paths around parks and athletic fields which was ranked seventh.
The second investment priority was trees. Providing more shade trees at parks was
ranked third and provide more trees along city streets was ranked fifth. This was complemented
by the second ranked more generic landscaping priority of providing quiet, green spaces
throughout the city. Together these items make a strong case for prioritizing investment in
"greening the city."
The third major theme reflected the relatively high frequency of use reported in Table 2
for Neighborhood/Community Parks. Ranked sixth and seventh, respectively, were acquisition
of more parkland and enhancement of maintenance at existing parks.
There was strong sentiment expressed by 28% of the sample that there should be more
investment in improving accessibility for those with disabilities. Among the programmatic, as
opposed to facility items, priority was given to providing more art and music programs.
For the sake of consistency with the approach used in Table 2, a scoring system was adopted in
which the first two categories were assigned 3 and 2 points, respectively. No points were
awarded to low priority projects. The scores from using this approach are shown in the extreme
right column of Table 3. (Those who expressed no opinion on a particular item were excluded
from this scoring system).
9
TABLE 3
The Parks Department has a limited amount of resources and seeks guidance on where best to invest them.
Please circle the priority level you feel should be associated with each of the following Items
N=534
■ None Low Medium High
# % # % # % # % Total Points
. a> .. . '�` w,.�.,.m �. �"�,.a
..e� ."-'�, • <. _��, �
•
Provide quiet,green spaces throughout the 20 3.81 116 22.10 196 37.33
city
Link parks,neighborhoods,and schools with 23 4 40CM= 203 38 81
hike and bike trails
y r a �a tlS a T &-?�„ e z; • z �, z� ,i�i�t,"�L�:} r' 42, ''''
€�s � � � ss.
Improve accessibility for those with
disabilities(e.g.,pool lifts,sidewalks,parking, 216 41.30 150 28.68
bathrooms)
Acquire additional park land 49 9.35 11115111MEMINECO 121 23.09 IIEMINEEN
R k
Provide more art and music programs 61 11.71MEMMMM 101 19.39 WM 855
Q
Provide more directional signs identifying the 213 40.57
1121111
gway to parks
Provide personal growth classes(e.g.,car 73 14.01 198 38.00 �� 74 1420..
maintenance,career development)
si
Place more benches in parks and along trails 39 7.46 166 31.74 246 47.04 1F 708
Offer Xtra Education Classes on weekends IMMINISEIN220 42.23 123 23.61 67 12,88 521 447
Provide more undesignated,open play space 42 8.03 c c
at neighborhood parks
Provide
a wider variety of aquatic classes 74 14.20 270 51.82 130 24.95 47 9.02 Ina 401
Provide space for new activities such as 98 18.70 271 51.72 12323.47
cricket,lacrosse,rugby
CS Residents
TABLE 3A
LEVEL OF PRIORITY
(PARD STAFF)
The same scoring system and ranking rational was adopted as was used in analyzing the
residents' responses. PARD employee responses differed in some substantive ways from the
priorities of residents. The differences appear to reflect employees' intimate awareness of the
challenges associated with their particular responsibilities within the department and their
sensitivity to the demands of their users.
The three trails items were ranked 3, 4 and 12. Two of the three"greening the city" items
were ranked 11, and 16, while the "provide more trees along city streets" item was ranked close
to the end of the whole list, probably reflecting that this is not a PARD responsibility and, thus,
in the eyes of employees not a high priority. The two traditional park items, maintenance and
acquisition of parks, were ranked 1 and 10, respectively.
The dominant priority was perceived to be the allocation of more funds to enhance the
maintenance of existing parks which probably reflects both the predominance in numbers of the
park staff among those who completed the survey and their pride in what they do (maintenance
incorporates trees, flower beds, irrigation systems, cleaning, mowing, painting, building
maintenance, et al.). This emphasis among the staff on enhancing parks was reinforced by the
prominence of items such as placing more benches along trails (8), providing playgrounds at
athletic fields (5), and providing more undesignated open play space at neighborhood parks.
Like the residents, city staff regarded improving access for those with disabilities as a
high priority (2). There was a higher staff priority given to offering Xtra Education classes at
weekends (7) and, providing personal growth classes (10), than emerged from the residents'
responses.
11
TABLE 3A
The Parks Department has a limited amount of resources and seeks guidance on where best to invest them.
Please circle the PRIORITY LEVEL you feel should be associated with each of the following items.
N=58
None Low Medium High Total Score
# % # % # % #
-� :r. r `°���v� €s a�`d��® 1€�ra .:..�a eY���I�,F a•«€ � °a a}'a e u:. e ��# ����._�v, : ';� 3 • � �"� :' d ^�.:",^^
nom. �-`€�; �'� � �� �,. :< ,<:, •-.n.., x .,..��.�� _ "� «' .�> �K x��°z.v. � -. _, ,^tea° _. . ,rte ,, _ .. °°, :�+.€s'"'
Improve accessibility for those with disabilities(e.g.,pool lifts,sidewalks,parking,bathrooms) .mL 8 14.04 25 43.86 22 38.60 57 116
., `c'b,w. .,. •�`� `:`c g9 'e '�• o e
Provide playgrounds at athletic fields 3 5.26 14 24.56 23 40.35 17 29.82 57 97
Jki` .r °r 4 '44 •;.'s .°' .'. . . •
+
Provide lighting for walking and jogging paths 3 5.26 9 15.79 31 „5,4.39.„,v 14 24,56 57 104
° e e • "a e aaa sz s e,n sa s®i1 a.a •; ,a § � ° a s �,a•
- !
Provide more walking paths around parks and athletic fields 16 29.09 21 38.18 14 25.45 55 84
x .,. .� ..�.' a ,; *. R2,�yr. •.�:a , a � °r;' , .Yw,•._,..,,• t;; off,
�':L'. .� ,s ,: a,c��,�..;.:.� - _ � �. - •
Place more benches in parks and along trails 6 10.53 10 17.54 29 50.88 12 21.05 57 94
i •' a' ' e a='"iG.` �.�'` " 1. i':ss-zY «�a - e e e r'',m <�.., ,><,,.. e....�.gam. .'� o ' 0.a;
r') Acquire additional park land 14 25.00 26 46.43 12 21.43 56 88
.� �,.�:.:.� ,,�, �a.',.�w ...'��- aPn;m, ...;;,,� w.:i s- <�:,h ,3 ± 2- ,auY?s*z +s 'p�s. 4,. �x <. •�, _ya 'c:�;a"3r. :,`���.. w.�t+# t '�g`�"`*a' e' "Se`: ':�,;.
Provide more access to the indoor pool at the Junior High School during school vacations 6 10.53 17 29.82 23 40.35 11 19.30 57 79
5�® °.°L 'i �°,. . .• ® sa :ca ® a e ��"'"t� <� "'"f»<. .'.� v?' - - . . �w3`' a t ° ., .° ... ® s:"
Provide more art and music programs 6 10.34 24 41.38 18 31.03 10 17.24 58 66
43 .lz
Provide more directional signs identifying the way to parks
5 8.77 17 29.82 26 45.61 9 15.79 57 79 9
! ms
° :
Improve public bus transportation to existing park and recreation facilities 8 13.79 15 25.8628 48.28 7 12.07 58 77
7:44� Nom„,
c s' ° :7. s • ;'§: is a°.: a, '."« ` .'^'ft` ... '`. .:-..a�'i'y„°` x5 .€ 'y .;:r- +w'.ib,�1 <. .,a "my<�`9-4 �` 8 °"^.:b��'� s ,..».
Provide storage for sports leagues equipment 9 16.07 26 46.43 17 30.36 4 7.14 56 A 46
,' -- ��-' .;,�r-•.ti�.�" _�, 4�..:,`.. � ,- �� Vis" < :. i?Yw?� ..sit.,�"'�`» ':��;�a'�" .sr,°'�,�,u,. �a� '� r�< �.'es». ^u: � `.."+-`� _®:. �"`r_"� �
�[ �� @ S � .�..." to Eta`"�.,rer ..,,, ." `c`,"a',�"'.�'35�. r.'� �, 'a>.». "Hr'� �i �� .a ,� #��'� "�� :„,�a• < : F �� �„w
Provide more trees along city streets 8 14.29 28 50.00 19 33.93 3 5.36 56 47
PARD Employees
TABLE 3B
LEVEL OF PRIORITY
(CITY EMPLOYEES)
The prioritization of investments of the city employees' sample reflected two of those
identified by residents. The trails items emerged as highest priority being ranked first, fourth and
eighth, while the three "greening the city" items were ranked third, seventh and tenth. However,
there was less support for acquisition of more parkland (15) and enhancement of maintenance at
existing parks (9).
Like the other two groups, city employees ranked improving accessibility for those with
disabilities highly (2). They also gave relatively high priority to developing a senior center(5)
and providing playgrounds at athletic fields (6).
13
TABLE 3B
The Parks Department has a limited amount of resources and seeks guidance on where best to invest them.
Please circle the priority level you feel should be associated with each of the following items
N=283
None Low Medium High
% Total Points
Provide lighting for walking and jogging paths 9 3.25 INESIIIIMEMI 103 71.53 133 48.01 11111M111 605
Provide more shade trees at parks 73 36.68 111M1111111Mtgil 77 27.90 276 ,N
Provide a designated Senior Center 19 6.91 96 43.64 105 47.73 55 20.00 mispiiimai
Provide quiet,green spaces throughout the city 21 7.61 94 41.96 109 48.66 52 18.84 276 Inn
Allocate more funds to enhance the maintenance of 17 6.12 80 34.63 134 58.01 47 16.91 278 409
existing parks
, � sem •
Place more benches in parks and along trails 14 5.07 95 39.42 132 54.77 35 12.68 276 369
#Sc lr �z ,� 1 a: �r ,ae.�., ..H.��v t.,i'. _ . . _. .,._ .:� ,., a4_ _-r>. ,t.; , • Perak„=." r`"' � w� -:.� ^'; '"' °,r����" �.
Provide more access to the indoor pool at the Junior 25 9.03 110 45.08 109 44.67 33 11.91
High School during school vacations
Acquire additional park land 42 15.16 101 41.22 102 41.63 300
Provide more undesignated,open play space at 17 6.25 126 51.22 103 41.87 26 9.56
ggneighborhood parks
'NMProvide more seasonal color and landscaping in parks 31 11.19 119 46.85 104 40.94 23 8.30
Provide a wider variety of aquatic classes 25 8.99 141 54.86 91 35.41
Provide tables in parks for chess,checkers,cards 45 16.25 126 48.46 89 34.23 17 6.14 WEN 229
�' � 3Erv€ '" 'a' �'-�� 3 � W•
Provide stora.e for s••rts leagues e.uipment 60 21.90 136 51.32 69 26.04 9 3.28 11111§Elli
165
City Employees
TABLE 4
LEVEL OF TAX SUPPORT
When respondents were asked if they wanted to increase or decrease the amount of tax
they paid for existing and new park and recreation services, the dominant response by slightly
more than half of them was to keep the same level of investment. Slightly more than 10% of the
sample indicated they would prefer to decrease tax support for both existing and new amenities.
However, approximately 37% indicated they would be willing to increase their support for parks,
although for the most part this increase was limited to a 5% increase. These data suggest there is
strong citizen support for parks. In an era in which advocacy of tax cuts is a dominant feature of
political dialog, almost 90% of residents indicated a preference for maintaining or increasing
funding for parks and recreation.
15
TABLE 5A
Please identify the top 5 facilites from the following list on which you would like to see
College Station give priority to in its investments over the next ten years.
N=58
# %
Water Park 34 58.62
Camping Areas 19 32.76
Zoo 19 32.76
Adult Softball Fields 15 25.86
Ponds/Lakes 14 24.14
Dog Park 13 22.41
Skate Park 13 22.41
Indoor Recreation Center 13 22.41
Large Regional Park 9 15.52
Walking/Biking Trails 9 15.52
Nature Center 8 13.79
Indoor pool 8 13.79
Senior Center 8 13.79
Neighborhood Parks 8 13.79
Remote Control Model Airplane Facility 6 10.34
Playgrounds 6 10.34
Indoor Play Areas 6 10.34
Horseshoe pits 6 10.34
Pavilions 6 10.34
Picnic Areas 6 10.34
Art/Music Facilities 5 8.62
Gardens/Arboretum 5 8.62
Nature Trails 5 8.62
Cultural/Art Center 4 6.90
Outdoor Neighborhood Pools 4 6.90
Extensive regional trail system(15-20 miles) 4 6.90
Frisbee Golf Course 3 5.17
Equestrian Trails 3 5.17
Fitness Stations 3 5.17
Open Space Fields 2 3.45
Archery fields 2 3.45
Indoor Tennis Courts 2 3.45
Adult Football Fields 2 3.45
Bocce courts 2 3.45
Adult Baseball Fields 1 1.72
Adult Soccer Fields 1 1.72
Youth Softball Fields 1 1.72
Youth Soccer Fields 1 1.72
Outdoor Tennis Courts 0 0.00
Youth Baseball Fields 0 0.00
Youth Football Fields 0 0.00
22
PARD Employees
TABLE 5B
PRIORITY INVESTMENT
(CITY EMPLOYEES)
The city employees' responses reinforced the enthusiasm of the other two groups for
development of a water park and a zoo. Like residents,ponds/lakes and trails were also
identified as prominent priorities.
23
TABLE 5B
Please identify the top 5 facilities from the following list on which you would like to see College Station give
priority in its investments over the next ten years.
N=283
%
Water Park 138 48.42
Zoo 98 34.39
Ponds/Lakes 67 23.51
Walking/Biking Trails 66 23.16
Indoor pool 61 21.40
Nature Trails 55 19.30
Extensive regional trail system(15-20 miles) 54 18.95
Senior Center 53 18.60
Camping Areas 48 16.84
Dog Park 45 15.79
Gardens/Arboretum 43 15.09
Horseshoe pits 38 13.33
Archery fields 36 12.63
Playgrounds 34 11.93
Outdoor Neighborhood Pools 33 11.58
Pavilions 33 11.58
Nature Center 32 11.23
Large Regional Park 32 11.23
Indoor Play Areas 32 11.23
Picnic Areas 32 11.23
Art/Music Facilities 31 10.88
Fitness Stations 31 10.88
Remote Control Model Airplane Facility 28 9.82
Skate Park 27 9.47
Adult Baseball Fields 23 8.07
Adult Softball Fields 23 8.07
Equestrian Trails 22 7.72
Frisbee Golf Course 21 7.37
Indoor Recreation Center 20 7.02
Neighborhood Parks 18 6.32
Youth Baseball Fields • 17 5.96
Open Space Fields 13 4.56
Indoor Tennis Courts 10 3.51
Adult Football Fields 9 3.16
Youth Softball Fields 8 2.81
Cultural/Art Center 7 2.46
Outdoor Tennis Courts 6 2.11
Adult Soccer Fields 6 2.11
Youth Soccer Fields 6 2.11
Youth Football Fields 6 2.11
Bocce courts 5 1.75
24
City Employees
TABLE 6
SERVICE QUALITY ISSUES
Most residents reported being satisfied with most of the service quality issues. They
were particularly complimentary about the maintenance quality of the parks and the quality of
facilities and services provided. Only 6% reported not being satisfied with the PARD's
offerings.
The issue which appears to warrant additional effort by the PARD relates to
communicating with residents. A majority of respondents who had experience with the issue
reported they did not find it easy to offer feedback to the PARD and to obtain answers to
questions. This was reinforced somewhat by almost one-half of the sample indicating they were
not well-informed about the PARD's offerings. The substantial turnover in the city's population,
especially that associated with college students, makes this a particularly difficult challenge.
However, this community is technology oriented and much more could be done to communicate
with residents via use of a website. The city's website is not easily accessible by the PARD
because the department lacks the employee capacity to insert daily updates on the site. It seems
unlikely that the communication problem will be improved until such a position is established in
the department.
There appeared to be widespread support for the contentions that the PARD needed to
work most closely with the ISD, police and fire on safety in the neighborhoods, and with
neighborhood groups. However, these perhaps were "motherhood" questions in that it would be
difficult not to agree that the PARD should work more closely with these other agencies.
Responding affirmatively does not necessarily mean the PARD is inadequate in its current levels
of collaboration.
25
TABLE 6
In the following section,please read each statement and CIRCLE the response which indicates how mcuh you agree or disagree with each
statement regarding College Station Park and Recreation Services.
Strongly Strongly I have no N
Disagree Disagree Agree A•ree knowled•e (534)
# # % # o % # it-
I am well-informed about College Station's 28 6.25 117 26.12 280 62.50 23 5.13 83 15.63
park facilities and recreation programs
„, ) �i
31 Yf 4 - .
i < "§r � d �=x ,a'
•1_{t
College Station parks and recreation facilities 1 0.38 24 9.06 212 80.00 29 10.94 263 49.81
are accessible to •eo•le with disabilities
£ *tp z e aN4fiec E sad ria a€ eaic s £ rt
�`'�.�=tt��.«
In general,I am satisfied with the facilities
cs
and services provided by the Parks& 42 9.25 366 80.62 46 10.13 68 13.03
Recreation Department
„ „
E- C p y �� .� OF
J" C n F" 9 9 7 f :,L;$
` l�[
s'�+.*es�^"�as9
see 40 .exs...�.. •
.. ,.,.. .,�;; 1 �,.`,. �"F. �' ,_:• ..„�•
�Onlignel
, :5:
Overall,the City of College Station has a 22 4.89 132 29.33 283 62.89 507
"park-like ambiance about it
M k� �:a 1 s`.'°sre ' a atas aCn �v
4� =�+»a.a... �,.'.x.�>..,3�..��.. ,.a'; 1 .J'•' «� .�'.�. 7 t. a.d, .,�" +.�"a .,,�'n.. .U..k..Gs�e :;: ,.�..f- �
I am well-informed about plans for parks in 4 1.67 130 54.17 65 27.08 285 54.29
my neighborhood
N �'- ,,: a`,j-,`4 N r`• . ,'s`��"` s i pE,
11 i E'.� ff 'hR`k f �'Q
The Department should work more closely
with neighborhood groups to plan and 10 4.50 60 27.03 149 67.12 297 57.23 519
maintain parks
5„".r,_.
.,
I can get to my favorite park facilities on foot 7 1.66 90 21.38 244 57.96 87 20.67 100 19.19 521
orb bic cle
CS Residents
TABLE 6B
SERVICE QUALITY ISSUES
(CITY EMPLOYEES)
City employees concurred with residents' views that the PARD should endeavor to
improve its level of communication with residents. As city employees, it was anticipated that
they would not perceive there to be difficulty in offering feedback to the PARD but 74% who
had experience with the PARD reported such a difficulty. Perhaps, most surprisingly, two thirds
of city employees indicated they were not well-informed about plans for parks in their
neighborhood. This was a much larger proportion than in the residents' sample. Almost one-third
claimed not to be well-informed about the PARD's offerings. If the 57% of the sample who
checked "I have no knowledge" on this question are included, then the magnitude of the
communication challenge is accentuated.
27
TABLE 6B
In the following section,please read each statement and CIRCLE the response which indicates how much you
agree or disagree with each statement regarding College Station Parks
Strongly Strongly I have no
Disagree Disagree Agree Agree knowledge Total
# % # % # % # % # %* N=283
I am well-informed about College Station's park facilities and recreation 9 3.59 35 13.94 174 69.32 36 14.34 26 9.39 277
programs
.,. .,a. .j.. :.. ..,-:+ - � . .' .,F„sy. .... ,q • 44:` `R{ -� :lywkr ,� .�"' ^M.+-
c' 'e.o ¢ 't s s p. .n � ° P ..... . iY°?" ae $a .r r r t i' '.
"zs I' •:.'Xaa "� 'x• <,..aa U-:.i'�. v .+-m A „x.'; xf ` +�" ; ark a
¢ 9 P Fr: 'c _ .�' «r`,y�' $ wzn� i. a. a^- S r4 s`z � r w
.. - .6�-�r-a-a ,��" .w�.�r�.� ,r-�• . r:,a�a tr,...<.'��.r�.��;�.r` r
College Station parks and recreation facilities are accessible to people 2 1.25 5 3.13 140 87.50 17 10.63 115 41.82 275
with disabilities
r.r .s ey rg.:::, . .- a �.,��� '-4d -.“ .'" - f '"-�``� ^'� r� -44,e
:', '°.s rv ' �`;
1'3 S' s'9'.3 are,trr tae ,�ev.5�e t, fs, `^ ',; .� ..a.z.a ,. ?'M'�, s-.',":.- :3 sa�iD.. ;S; «` ..,..fir -:x' -ak,�:" "° ° '.,,.. l ".t.�.':,u°x... .1'"-" : .,�:.
In general,I am satisfied with the facilities and services provided by the 0 0.00 15 5.77 168 64.62 80 30.77 17 6.14 277
Parks&Recreation Department
I<" "Pw' 1:.•
.®,i'#w yy* �¢ s % ee¢E C yY...�}¢e Ft'�°vi[ .,'� p }4''d.3 etS' � 'A; &v'S,;,..„�.sy>.q"v�,rc:'..,h w.&...:r"t „7{•,,.b:3�;,a y3�,,ms.. s,.i t u:fi.x '+a,�,.�; *Y
1•1e•re` .` a • d':'"*"
,o-_4-.."4?", a i 474,,••••;<•„, �
...,`y«
'..
r„ Overall,the City of College Station has a"park-like"ambiance about it 7 2.83 42 17.00 156 63.16 46 18.62 28 10.18 275
00
ice` 'n4"& ' +s t `t'
k `:..h°.�r :
I am well-informed about plans for parks in my neighborhood 14 11.76 64 53.78 43 36.13 2 1.68 i 156 56.73 275
aQ4
•'eY•ti .9 C " ,it„,„,*. ;C'r• i'";,•"".4,-.41;
y d��4 t�R - jk
+ w .'a • , ;: r . ,ca . ..
•
The Department should work more closely with neighborhood groups to 1 0.51 9 4.62 161 82.56 27 13.85 82 29.60 277
plan and maintain parks
5 a iea � 3 t¢ a +, v a� )r ak n�tr '• . .4 Jla Ptkw rf,r ,i.
I can get to my favorite park facilities on foot or by bicycle 22 10.89 57 28.22 105 51.98 _ 22 10.89 73 26.55 275
City Employees
TABLE 7
RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF ALTERNATE COMMUNITY GOALS
In addition to providing enjoyable opportunities for individuals, park and recreation
services have the potential to contribute to a wider set of community goals. Respondents were
presented with a list of items which represented dimensions of eight broad community goals and
were asked how important they viewed these issues. The eight broad goals are shown in the bold
type in Table 7, while dimensions of them are listed underneath each goal. The scores for each
goal shown in bold are the averages derived from the dimension items underneath the goal.
The scales ranged from 1 through 7. By far the most important goal of the eight listed
was preventing youth crime, with 72% rating it 6 or 7 at the extremely important end of the
scale. The other item which received higher than average support was enhancing real estate
values, which 60% rated at the 6 or 7 level. Support for the other goals at the 6 or 7 level was
consistently around 50%, with the exception of attracting and retaining retirees and addressing
the needs of people who are unemployed which were viewed as being of lesser importance and
received approximately 41% and 36%, respectively.
The perceived importance of preventing youth crime provides a strong rationale for the
PARD's youth sports, and teen after-school programs such as those at Kids Klub and the Lincoln
Center. The support for enhancing real estate programs, provides a rationale for the interest in
parks, trails and "greening the city" which emerged in the earlier questions because these
features are known to have a substantial positive effect on residents' property values.
29
•
TABLE 7
To help the city prioritize future investment decisions we would like you to please Indicate,how import t you view each of the following issues in the City of College Station?
Not at at Extremely
important Important Total Total
In College Station, 1.0 2.0 3.0 Neutral 5.0 6.0 7.0 6.087.0 N=534
# Ye # N # N # N # % # La # % # %
Preventing Youth Crime 5 0.95 7 1.33 8 1.46 43 8.18 60 11.41 140 26.67 240 45.59 379 72.16 526
Helping youth to develop into productive citizens 8 1.52 8 1.52 5 0.95 44 8.37 5 0.95 129 24.52 256 48.67 385 73.19 528
Providing role modals for adolescents 6 1.14 7 1.33 11 2.09 56 10.65 88 16.73 136 25.86 222 42.21 358 68.06 526
Providing youth with positive ways to fill their Gee time 1 0.19 6 1.14 7 1.33 29 5.52 87 18.57 154 29.33 241 45.90 395 75.24 525
EnvironmentalStewadrship 7 1.39 12 2.22 17 3.17 84 15.92 128 24.35 127 24.16 153 29.11 280 53.27 627
Ingrowing air quality 7 1.33 12 2.27 13 2.46 86 16.29 121 22.92 127 24.05 162 30.68 289 54.73 528
Reducing the amount of energy consumed by residents is 10 1.90 16 3.04 21 3.98 98 18.60 146 27.70 103 19.64 133 25.24 236 44.78 527
Protecting endtonmentally sensitive areas 5 0.95 7 1.33 16 3.04 67 12.71 117 22.20 151 28.65 164 31.12 315 59.77 527
Enhancing Real Estate values 4 0.76 6 1.08 10 1.97 65 12.43 127 24.10 167 31.77 147 27.90 314 59.67 526
Ensuring that parks are easily accessible to residents from their hoes is 4 0.76 5 0.95 19 3.62 97 18.48 162 30.86 148 28.19 90 17.14 238 45.33 525
Requiring that developers provide park apace for people in then developments is 7 1.33 11 2.09 8 1.52 74 14.07 113 21.48 141 26.81 172 32.70 313 59.51 526
Keeping neighborhood parks well maintained 1 0.19 1 0.19 4 0.76 25 4.75 105 19.96 212 40.30 178 33.84 390 74.14 526
Attracting and Retaining Businesses 17 3.13 13 2.47 22 4.17 87 18.51 121 22.87 146 27.70 122 23.15 268 50.85 527
Convincing businesses to loan in this comaramity 17 3.23 9 1.71 26 4.93 81 15.37 125 23.72 125 23.72 144 27.32 269 51.04 527
Li.) Encouraging executives and professionals to live in this moronity is 16 3.04 17 3.23 18 3.42 93 17.65 116 22.01 167 31.69 100 18.98 267 50.66 527
O
improving Community Health 11 2.09 a 1.58 18 3.48 73 13.81 138 26.22 147 27.99 131 24.83 278 52.82 526
Supporting and working with community health organizations 6 1.14 6 1.52 22 4.17 69 13.09 165 31.31 146 27.70 111 21.06 257 48.77 527
Helping peopk build healthy lifestyles 12 2.28 5 0.95 11 2.09 62 11.76 103 19.54 156 29.60 178 33.78 334 63.38 527
Educating residents on the benefits of healthy activity 15 2.86 12 2.29 22 4.19 87 16.57 146 27.81 140 26.67 103 19.62 243 46.29 525
Attracting and Retaining Retirees 7 1.27 11 2.03 22 4.12 113 21.45 180 30.52 128 24.30 86 16.31 213 40.61 525
Providing amenities in the community that olds adults want 5 0.95 5 0.95 17 3.24 92 17.56 167 31.87 144 27.48 94 17,94 238 45.42 524
Designing programs specifically for older adults is 8 1.52 18 3.43 23 4.38 145 27.62 156 29.71 105 20.00 70 13.33 175 33.33 525
Encouraging Senior Ctfizan to become involved in the commndty 7 1.33 9 1.71 25 4.74 101 19.17 158 29.98 134 25.43 93 17.65 227 43.07 527
Providing programs at which rented people an socialize together is 12 2.28 12 2.28 27 5.13 134 25.48 157 29.85 109 20.72 75 14.26 184 34.98 526
Attracting Tourists 21 3.93 14 2.60 25 4.69 83 15.84 127 24.08 129 24.46 128 24.40 257 48.86 526
Getting tourists to spend money in the city 17 3.24 15 2.86 24 4.57 83 15.81 121 23.05 120 22.86 145 27.62 265 50.48 525
Developing attractions that draw people from other cities is 24 4.56 16 3.04 23 4.37 92 17.49 128 24.33 120 22.81 123 23.38 243 46.20 526
Horning evens dat bring talism revenue to local businesses 21 3.98 10 1.90 27 5.12 75 14.23 131 24.86 146 27.70 117 22.20 263 49.91 527
Addressing the Needs of People who are Underemployed 20 3.86 21 3.99 38 7.16 120 22.80 135 25.71 110 20.84 82 15.64 192 36.48 526
Helping adults build skills that can be used in the workplace 22 4.17 13 2.47 36 6.83 106 20.11 140 26.57 118 22.39 92 17.46 210 39.85 527
Offering programs that meet the needs of peopk who arc unemployed is 21 3.99 30 5.70 41 7.79 126 23.95 125 23.76 95 18.06 88 16.73 183 34.79 526
Supporting and working with co ursmity welfare and employment agencies 18 3.42 20 3.80 36 6.84 128 24.33 141 26.81 s 116 22.05 67 12.74 183 34.79 526
CS Residents
TABLE 7A
RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF ALTERNATE COMMUNITY GOALS (PARD STAFF)
Like residents, the staff rated preventing youth crime as the most important of the eight
goals listed. However, it was essentially ranked equal with attracting tourists. In the past
decade, the PARD has emphasized its central role in tourism and the staff's high ranking
probably reflects this emphasis. Enhancing real estate values was also ranked highly.
31
TABLE 7A
To help the city prioritize future investment decisions we would like you to please indicate,how important you view each of the following issues in the City of College Station
N=58
Not at all Extremely
Important Important Total
1.0 2 3.0 Neutral 5.0 6.0 7.0 6.0+7.0 Total
# % # % # % # % # % # % # % #
Preventing Youth Crime 1 1.15 0 0.00 1 1.72 5 9.20 8 13.22 14 23.56 29 50.57 43 74.57 58
1 Helping youth to develop into productive citizens is 2 3.45 0 0.00 1 1.72 8 13.79 10 17.24 10 17.24 27 46.55 37 63.79 58
1 Providing role models for adolescents is 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.72 7 12.07 6 10.34 17 29.31 26 44.83 43 75.44 57
1 Providing youth with positive ways to fill their free time is 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.72 1 1.72 7 12.07 14 24.14 35 60.34 49 84.48 58
Environmental Stewardship 1 1.15 2 3.45 4 6.32 12 20.69 13 21.84 15 25.29 12 20.11 26 45.93 57
2 Improving air quality is 2 3.45 1 1.72 4 6.90 12 20.69 12 20.69 15 25.86 12 20.69 27 46.55 58
2 Reducing the amount of energy consumed by residents is 0 0.00 3 5.17 5 8.62 13 22.41 15 25.86 13 22.41 8 13.79 21 36.84 57
2 Protecting environmentally sensitive areas is 0 0.00 2 3.45 2 3.45 11 18.97 11 18.97 16 27.59 15 25.86 31 54.39 57
Enhancing Real Estate Values 0 0.57 1 1.72 3 4.60 7 11.49 9 14.94 16 27.01 23 39.08 38 66.47 58
3 Ensuring that parks are easily accessible to residents from their homes is 1 1.72 2 3.45 3 5.17 12 20.69 14 24.14 16 27.59 10 17.24 26 44.83 58
3 Requiring that developers provide park space for people in their developments is 0 0.00 1 1,72 4 6.90 7 12.07 8 13.79 17 29.31 21 36.21 38 65.52 58
3 Keeping neighborhood parks well maintained 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.72 1 1.72 4 6.90 14 24.14 37 63.79 51 89.47 57
Attracting and Retaining Businesses 0 0.00 2 3.45 2 3.45 9 14.66 12 20.69 17 29.31 17 28.45 34 57.76 58
4 Convincing businesses to locate in this community is 0 0.00 2 3.45 1 1.72 8 13.79 7 12.07 18 31.03 22 37.93 40 68.97 58
4 Encouraging executives and professionals to live in this community is 0 0.00 2 3.45 3 5.17 9 15.52 17 29.31 16 27.59 11 18.97 27 46.55 58
Improving Community Health 0 0.00 1 1.72 2 2.87 12 20.69 15 26.44 15 25.29 13 22.99 28 48.28 58
5 Supporting and working with community health organizations is 0 0.00 1 1.72 2 3.45 16 27.59 13 22.41 14 24.14 12 20.69 26 44.83 58
5 Helping people build healthy lifestyles 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.72 8 13.79 18 31.03 15 25.86 16 27.59 31 53.45 58
5 Educating residents on the benefits of healthy activity is 0 0.00 2 3.45 2 3.45 12 20.69 15 25.86 15 25.86 12 20.69 27 46.55 58
Attracting and Retaining Retirees 0 0.57 1 1.15 3 5.75 8 13.22 15 26.44 19 32.76 12 20.11 31 52.87 58
6 Providing amenities in the community that older adults want is 1 1.72 0 0.00 4 6.90 9 15.52 13 22.41 18 31.03 13 22.41 31 53.45 58
6 Designing programs specifically for older adults is 0 0.00 2 3.45 3 5.17 4 6.90 17 29.31 20 34.48 12 20.69 32 55.17 58
6 Encouraging Senior Citizens to become involved in the community is 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 5.17 10 17.24 16 27.59 19 32.76 10 17.24 29 50.00 58
6 Providing programs at which retired people can socialize together is 0 0.00 2 3.45 3 5.17 10 17.24 12 20.69 17 29.31 14 24.14 31 53.45 58
Attracting Tourists 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.57 4 7.47 10 17.24 15 25.86 28 48.28 43 74.57 58
7 Getting tourists to spend money in the city is 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 6 10.34 10 17.24 13 22.41 29 50.00 42 72.41 58
7 Developing attractions that draw people from other cities is 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 6.90 9 15.52 17 29.31 27 46.55 44 77.19 57
7 Hosting events that bring tourism revenue to local businesses is 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.72 3 5.17 11 18.97 15 25.86 28 48.28 43 74.14 58
Addressing the Needs of People who are Underemployed 2 2.87 3 4.60 4 6.32 14 24.14 13 22.41 13 21.84 10 17.24 23 39.08 58
8 Helping adults build skills that can be used in the workplace is 0 0.00 3 5.17 2 3.45 9 15.52 17 29.31 15 25.86 11 18.97 26 44.83 58
8 Offering programs that meet the needs of people who are unemployed is 3 5.17 2 3.45 6 10.34 15 25.86 11 18.97 11 18.97 10 17.24 21 36.21 58
8 Supporting and working with community welfare and employment agencies is 2 3.45 3 5.17 3 5.17 18 31.03 11 18.97, 12 20.69 9 15.52 21 36.21 58
PARD Employees
TABLE 7B
City employees like the other two groups ranked preventing youth crime first, followed
by attracting tourists and enhancing real estate values. Like PARD staff, they gave a much
higher ranking to attracting tourists then did residents. These results suggest that staff as a whole
have an appreciation of the economic development contribution of tourism to the city that is not
shared by residents.
33
TABLE 7B
To help the city prioritize future investment decisions we would like you to please indicate,how important you view each of the following issues in the City of College Station?
N=283
Not at all Extremely
important important Total
1 2 3 Neutral 5 6 7 6&7 Total
# # lq # % # # % # 1Q # % # %
Preventing Youth Crime 2 0.60 2 0.72 7 2.63 31 10.98 37 13.13 67 23.98 134 47.96 201 71.96 279.33
Helping youth to develop into productive citizens is 2 0.71 3 1.07 9 3.21 32 11.43 36 12.86 65 23.21 133 47.50 198 70.71 280
Providing role models for adolescents is 3 1.08 2 0.72 7 2.52 38 13.67 38 13.67 65 23.38 125 44.96 190 68.35 278
Providing youth with positive ways to fill their free time is 0 0.00 1 0.36 6 2.14 22 7.86 36 12.86 71 25.36 144 51.43 215 76.79 280
Environmental Stewardship 9 3.10 7 2.62 12 4.17 56 20.15 57 20.26 65 23.12 74 26.58 139 49.70 279.67
Improving air quality is 10 3.58 9 3.23 14 5.02 56 20.07 53 19.00 58 20.79 79 28.32 137 49.10 279
Reducing the amount of energy consumed by residents is 6 2.15 5 1.79 12 4.30 62 22.22 60 21.51 68 24.37 66 23.66 134 48.03 279
Protecting environmentally sensitive areas is 10 3.56 8 2.85 9 3.20 51 18.15 57 20.28 68 24.20 78 27.76 146 51.96 281
Enhancing Real Estate Values 4 1.31 4 1.42 13 4.51 47 16.64 59 21.03 70 24.94 85 30.15 155 55.11 280.67
Ensuring that parks are easily accessible to residents from their homes is 3 1.07 3 1.07 17 6.07 72 25.71 85 30.36 57 20.36 43 15.36 100 35.71 280
Requiring that developers provide park space for people in their developments is 8 2.85 7 2.49 14 4.98 43 15.30 51 18.15 63 22.42 95 33.81 158 56.23 281
Keeping neighborhood parks well maintained 0 0.00 2 0.71 7 2.49 25 8.90 41 14.59 90 32.03 116 41.28 206 73.31 281
Attracting and Retaining Businesses 5 1.97 6 2.50 14 5.19 52 18.23 61 19.13 67 22.89 75 30.09 142 50.65 279.5
Convincing businesses to locate in this community is 5 1.80 5 1.80 13 4.68 43 15.47 48 17.27 62 22.30 102 36.69 164 58.99 278
Encouraging executives and professionals to live in this community is 6 2.14 9 3.20 16 5.69 59 21.00 59 21.00 66 23.49 66 23.49 132 46.98 281
improving Community Health 4 1.31 4 1.43 14 5.12 54 19.17 76 27.02 73 25.95 56 20.00 129 45.95 280
Supporting and working with community health organizations is 2 0.71 5 1.79 14 5.00 62 22,14 86 30.71 67 23.93 44 15.71 111 39.64 280
Helping people build healthy lifestyles 4 1.43 0 0.00 8 2.86 44 15.71 56 20.00 87 31.07 81 28.93 168 60.00 280
Educating residents on the benefits of healthy activity is 5 1.79 7 2.50 21 7.50 55 19.64 85 30.36 64 22.86 43 15.36 107 38.21 280
Attracting and Retaining Retirees 2 0.71 3 0.95 10 3.69 52 18.69 88 31.55 75 26.90 49 17.50 124 44.40 280
Providing amenities in the community that older adults want is 2 0.71 1 0.36 9 3.21 40 14.29 87 31.07 85 30.36 56 20.00 141 50.36 280
Designing programs specifically for older adults is 2 0.71 3 1.07 11 3.93 60 21.43 97 34.64 64 22.86 43 15.36 107 38.21 280
Encouraging Senior Citizens to become involved in the community is 2 0.71 4 1.43 11 3.93 57 20.36 81 28.93 77 27.50 48 17.14 125 44.64 280
Providing programs at which retired people can socialize together is 3 1.07 6 2.14 13 4.63 49 17.44 100 35.59 74 26.33 36 12.81 110 39.15 281
Attracting Tourists 5 1.78 5 1.90 11 3.80 35 12.60 46 16.29 74 26.40 104 37.22 178 63.61 280.33
Getting tourists to spend money in the city is 4 1.43 4 1.43 9 3.21 37 13.21 41 14.64 74 26.43 111 39.64 185 66.07 280
Developing attractions that draw people from other cities is 6 2.14 6 2.14 10 3.57 33 11.79 48 17.14 78 27.86 99 35.36 177 63.21 280
Hosting events that bring tourism revenue to local businesses is 5 1.78 6 2.14 13 4.63 36 12.81 48 17.08 70 24.91 103 36.65 173 61.57 281
Addressing the Needs of People who are Underemployed 17 5.94 13 4.52 20 7.14 68 24.38 70 24.96 51 18.08 42 14.99 93 33.06 280.33
Helping adults build skills that can be used in the workplace is 8 2.86 10 3.57 16 5.71 64 22.86 63 22.50 64 22.86 55 19.64 119 42.50 280
Offering programs that meet the needs of people who are unemployed is 22 7.86 17 6.07 26 9.29 72 25.71 60 21.43 43 15.36 40 14.29 83 29.64 280
Supporting and working with community welfare and employment agencies is 20 7.12 11 3.91 18 6.41 69 24.56 87 30.96 45 16.01 31 11.03 76 27.05 281
City Employees
TABLE 8
PARD's PERCEIVED CONTRIBUTIONS TO ALTERNATE COMMUNITY GOALS
When respondents were presented with the same set of eight goals and dimensions, and
asked their perceptions of the PARD's current contributions to each of them, the scores were
disappointingly low. Although 72% had indicated preventing youth crime was an important
community goal, only 21% considered the PARD made a large or very large contribution (6 or 7
on the 7 point scale) to that goal.
The highest ranking of the PARD's contributions to these goals was enhancing real estate
values where 30.5% rated them 6 or 7. In the past decade the PARD has frequently
communicated its central role in attracting tourists through its hosting of sports tournaments and
festivals/special events, but this role was recognized as being large or very large by only 27%.
The PARD is viewed by relatively few residents as having an impact on community
health. Given the recent concerns about obesity and lifestyle health problems; their costs to
society; the leadership role that PARDs in other communities have exerted in the area of
community health; and the potential of the PARD's programs to contribute to alleviating the
problem, it may be desirable for the PARD to explore opportunities for expanding its community
health role.
To strengthen widespread community support, the PARD should make an effort to
reposition their youth recreation services so they align directly with young crime prevention and
align their"greening of the city" programs with enhanced real estate values and consider
expanding their community health role. These are the most important issue to residents and
aligning services more closely with them will reinforce and solidify the community's support for
parks and recreation.
35
TABLE 8
In this section,we are interested In your perceptions of the College Station Parks and Recreation Department's current contributions to each of the Items
N=534
Very Small Very Large Total
The College Station Parks and Recreation Department's Conttibutlon 1.0 2.0 3.0 Neutral 5.0 6.0 7.0 6.087.0 Total
# % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %
Preventing Youth Crime 16 3.17 24 4.61 43 8.35 193 37.42 131 25.46 64 12.51 44 8.49 108 20.99 515
Providing rola models for adolescents 18 3.50 29 5.64 54 10.51 228 44.36 100 19.46 46 8.95 39 7.59 85 16.54 514
Helping youth to develop into productive citizens 17 3.28 15 2.89 41 7.90 196 37.76 142 27.36 64 12.33 44 8.48 108 20.81 519
Providing youth with positive ways to fill their Gee tirrc 14 2.74 27 5.28 34 6.65 154 30.14 151 29.55 83 16.24 48 9.39 131 25.64 511
Environmental Stewardship 25 4.81 32 6.32 56 10.87 226 44.13 107 20.97 41 8.08 25 4.82 66 12.89 512
Reducing the amount of energy consumed by residents is 31 6.05 40 7.81 83 16.21 214 41.80 92 17.97 37 7.23 15 2.93 52 10.16 512
Improving air quality 27 5.25 27 5.25 45 8.75 251 48.83 96 18.68 37 7.20 31 6.03 68 13.23 514
Protecting environmentally sensitive areas 16 3.14 30 5.88 39 7.65 213 41.76 134 26.27 50 9.80 28 5.49 78 15.29 510
Enhancing Real Estate Values 11 2.08 26 5.00 39 7.67 147 28.58 134 26.18 102 19.82 55 10.66 156 30.49 513
Ensuring that parka are easily accessible to residents from their hones is 16 3.12 41 7.99 54 10.53 179 34.89 119 23.20 60 11.70 44 8.58 104 20.27 513
Requiring that developers provide park space for people in their developments is 11 2.14 26 5.06 40 7.78 153 29.77 154 29.96 96 18.88 34 6.61 130 25.29 514
Keeping neighborhood parks well maintained 5 0.98 10 1.95 24 4.69 108 21.09 130 25.39 149 29.10 86 16.80 235 45.90 512
Attracting and Retaining Businesses 19 3.61 30 5.75 35 6.73 214 41.62 109 21.25 59 11.40 50 9.65 108 21.05 513
Convincing businesses to locate in this cormunity 19 3.70 26 5.07 30 5.85 203 39.57 113 22.03 69 13.45 53 10.33 122 23.78 513
Encouraging executives and professionals to live in this conmsnity is 18 3.51 33 6.43 39 7.60 224 43.66 105 20.47 48 9.36 46 8.97 94 18.32 513
l�
Improving Community Health 12 2.41 25 4.81 57 11.06 212 41.43 124 24.25 54 10.46 29 5.59 82 16.05 513
Supporting and working with coma'a'nrty health organizations 13 2.53 22 4.29 54 10.53 255 49.71 104 20.27 37 7.21 28 5.46 65 12.67 513
Helping people bold healthy lifestyles 13 2.52 29 5.63 52 10.10 174 33.79 136 26.41 77 14.95 34 6.60 111 21.55 515
Educating residents m the benefits of healthy activity 11 2.16 23 4.51 64 12.55 208 40.78 133 26.08 47 9.22 24 4.71 71 13.92 510
Attracting and Retaining Retirees 18 3.12 28 5.47 57 11.08 242 47.19 111 21.66 38 7.42 21 4.05 59 11.47 512
Providing amenities in the community that older adults want 18 3.53 33 6.47 65 12.75 241 47.25 97 19.02 36 7.06 20 3.92 56 10.98 510
Designing programs specifically for older adults is 17 3.32 24 4.69 53 10.35 247 48.24 105 20.51 43 8.40 23 4.49 66 12.89 512
Encouraging Senior Citizens to become involved in the community 16 3.12 24 4.68 51 9.94 232 45.22 127 24.76 45 8.77 18 3.51 63 12.28 513
Providing programs at which retired people can socialize together is 13 2.53 31 6.03 58 11.28 247 48.05 115 22.37 28 5.45 22 4.28 50 9.73 514
Attracting Tourists 23 4.48 32 6.23 48 9.34 162 31.58 110 21.40 81 15.69 58 11.28 139 26.97 514
Getting tourists to spend irony in the city 24 4.67 35 6.81 46 8.95 152 29.57 109 21.21 90 17.51 58 11.28 148 28.79 514
Developing attractions that draw people from other cities is 24 4.68 35 6.82 55 10.72 173 33.72 104 20.27 66 12.87 56 10.92 122 23.78 513
Hosting events that bring tourism revenue to local businesses 21 4.08 26 5.05 43 8.35 162 31.46 117 22.72 86 16.70 60 11.65 146 28.35 515
Addressing the Needs of People who are Underemployed 23 4.42 41 8.07 61 11.97 262 51.07 80 15.55 22 4.36 23 4.55 46 8.91 512
Helping adults build skills that can be used m the workplace 30 5.86 42 8.20 60 11.72 281 54.88 54 10.55 24 4.69 21 4.10 45 8.79 512
Offering programs that nest the needs of people who are unemployed is 20 3.90 31 6.04 57 11.11 262 51.07 99 19.30 22 4.29 22 4.29 44 8.58 513
Supporting and working with community welfare and mpioynent agencies 18 3.52 51 9.96 67 13.09 242 47.27 86 16.80 21 4.10 27 5.27 48 9.38 512
CS Residents
TABLE 8A
PARD's PERCEIVED CONTRIBUTIONS TO ALTERNATE COMMUNITY GOALS
(PARD STAFF)
The responses of PARD staff were higher than those of residents reflecting their
professional awareness that what the PARD offers contribute more than only an opportunity to
participate in"fun and games." Further, the three highest ranked were the same three that the
staff perceived to be most important in Table 7A, i.e., enhancing real estate, attracting tourists
and preventing youth crime.
Although a larger proportion of the staff than residents recognized PARD's contributions
to these wider community goals, it was somewhat disconcerting to see that in most cases most of
the staff were unaware of these potential contributions.
37
TABLE 8A
In this section,we are interested in your perceptions of the College Station Parks and Recreation Department's current contributions to each of the items being
N=58
Very Large Total
The College Station Parks and Recreation Very Small 1.0 2.0 3.0 Neutral 5.0 6.0 7.0 6.0+7.0 Total
Department's Contribution to: # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %
Preventing Youth Crime 1 1.78 3 4.60 2 4.02 10 16.67 13 21.84 13 22.99 15 25.88 28 50.00 57
1 Helping youth to develop into productive citizens is 2 3.57 3 5.17 1 1.72 8 13.79 12 20.69 14 24.14 16 27.59 30 53.57 56
1 Providing role models for adolescents is 1 1.75 3 5.17 2 3.45 16 27.59 12 20.69 10 17.24 13 22.41 23 40.35 57
1 Providing youth with positive ways to fill their free time is 0 0.00 2 3.45 4 6.90 5 8,62 14 24.14 16 27.59 16 27.59 32 56.14 57
Environmental Stewardship 4 7.70 4 6.32 4 8.90 18 27.59 15 25.28 8 13.22 6 9.77 13 23.81 56
2 Improving air quality is 3 5.56 5 8.62 3 5.17 16 27.59 11 18.97 9 15.52 7 12.07 16 29.63 54
2 Reducing the amount of energy consumed by residents is 7 12.28 4 6.90 5 8.62 17 29.31 16 27.59 4 6.90 4 6.90 8 14.04 57
2 Protecting environmentally sensitive areas is 3 5.26 2 3.45 4 6.90 15 25.86 17 29.31 10 17.24 6 10.34 16 28.07 57
Enhancing Real Estate Values 0 0.00 3 4.60 2 3.45 8 13.79 11 18.97 16 27.59 16 27.59 32 57.49 56
3 Ensuring that parks are easily accessible to residents from their homes is 0 0.00 3 5.17 1 1.72 12 20.69 16 27.59 15 25.86 8 13.79 23 41.82 55
3 Requiring that developers provide park space for people in their developments is 0 0.00 5 8.62 2 3.45 6 10.34 12 20.69 16 27.59 16 27.59 32 56.14 57
3 Keeping neighborhood parks well maintained 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 5.17 6 10.34 5 8.62 17 29.31 24 41.38 41 74.55 55
Attracting and Retaining Businesses 2 3.54 3 4.31 2 3.45 9 14.68 18 31.03 15 25.86 9 14.66 24 41.59 57
4 Convincing businesses to locate in this community is 2 3.51 1 1.72 2 3.45 7 12.07 18 31.03 14 24.14 13 22.41 27 47.37 57
4 Encouraging executives and professionals to live in this community is 2 3.57 4 6.90 2 3.45 10 17.24 18 31.03 16 27.59 4 6.90 20 35.71 56
Co
improving Community Health 1 1.17 3 5.17 5 8.62 14 23.56 14 24.71 12 21.26 7 12.64 20 34.71 57
5 Supporting and working with community health organizations is 0 0.00 3 5.17 5 8.62 20 34.48 11 18.97 12 20.69 5 8.62 17 30.36 56
5 Helping people build healthy lifestyles 0 0.00 2 3.45 5 8.62 8 13.79 17 29.31 16 27.59 9 15.52 25 43.86 57
5 Educating residents on the benefits of healthy activity is 2 3.51 4 6.90 5 8.62 13 22.41 15 25.86 9 15.52 8 13.79 17 29.82 57
Attracting and Retaining Retirees 0 0.58 3 4.60 7 12.07 10 17.24 21 35.63 9 16.09 7 12.07 16 28.65 57
6 Providing amenities in the community that older adults want is 1 1.75 4 6.90 5 8.62 13 22.41 20 34.48 7 12.07 7 12.07 14 24.56 57
6 Designing programs specifically for older adults is 0 0.00 2 3.45 9 15.52 10 17.24 18 31.03 11 18.97 7 12.07 18 31.58 57
6 Encouraging Senior Citizens to become involved in the community is 0 0.00 2 3.45 7 12.07 7 12.07 24 41.38 10 17.24 7 12.07 17 29.82 57
6 Providing programs at which retired people can socialize together is 2 3.51 3 5.17 5 8.62 9 15.52 23 39.66 7 12.07 8 13.79 15 26.32 57
Attracting Tourists 1 2.34 2 1.72 3 5.17 7 12.07 14 23.56 17 28.74 14 24.71 31 54.39 57
7 Getting tourists to spend money in the city is 1 1.75 0.00 5 8.62 5 8.62 15 25.86 16 27.59 15 25.86 31 54.39 57
7 Developing attractions that draw people from other cities is 1 1.75 3 5.17 3 5.17 10 17.24 14 24.14 17 29.31 9 15.52 26 45.61 57
7 Hosting events that bring tourism revenue to local businesses is 2 3.51 0 0.00 1 1.72 6 10.34 12 20.69 17 29.31 19 32.76 36 63.16 57
Addressing the Needs of People who are Underemployed 3 5.88 7 12.07 8 13.22 16 27.01 12 21.26 5 9.20 5 9.20 11 18.82 57
8 Helping adults build skills that can be used in the workplace is 2 3.51 6 10.34 5 8.62 17 29.31 17 29.31 3 5.17 7 12.07 10 17.54 57
8 Offering programs that meet the needs of people who are unemployed is 5 8.77 7 12.07 12 20.69 13 22.41 9 15.52 8 13.79 3 5.17 11 19.30 57
8 Supporting and working with community welfare and employment agencies is 3 5.36 8 13.79 6 10.34 17 29.31 11 18.97 5 8.62 6 10.34 11 19.64 56
PARD Employees
TABLE 8B
PARD's PERCEIVED CONTRIBUTIONS TO ALTERNATIVE COMMUNITY GOALS
(CITY EMPLOYEES)
The city employees' perception of the PARD's contribution to these community goals
typically were higher than those of residents and lower than those of PARD staff. Their highest
ranking was for the PARD's contribution to enhancing real estate values, followed closely by
attracting tourists, and then preventing youth crime.
39
TABLE 8B
In this section,we are interested in your perceptions of the College Station Parks and Recreation Department's current contributions to each of the items being
N=283
•
Very Small Very Large Total
1 2 3 Neutral 5 6 7 6&7 Total
# a # % # % # .26 # % # % # % # "/p
Preventing Youth Crime 8 2.91 9 3.27 19.7 7.16 78.7 28.60 27.89 45 16.36 38 13.82 83 30.18 275
Helping youth to develop into productive citizens is 8 2.89 8 2.89 16 5.78 86 31.05 72 25.99 47 16.97 40 14.44 87 31.41 277
Providing role models for adolescents is 9 3.28 11 4.01 24 8.76 94 34.31 66 24.09 41 14.96 29 10.58 70 25.55 274
Providing youth with positive ways to fill their free time is 7 2.55 8 2.92 19 6.93 56 20.44 92 33.58 47 17.15 45 16.42 92 33.58 274
Environmental Stewardship 13 4.72 14.7 5.33 26.7 9.71 106 38.54 64 23.40 26.7 9.75 23.3 8.54 50 18.25 274
Improving air quality is 16 5.82 15 5.45 19 6.91 115 41.82 64 23.27 29 10.55 17 6.18 46 16.73 275
Reducing the amount of energy consumed by residents is 20 7.25 23 8.33 41 14.86 110 39.86 47 17.03 17 6.16 18 6.52 35 12.68 276
Protecting environmentally sensitive areas is 3 1.11 6 2.21 20 7.38 92 33.95 81 29.89 34 12.55 35 12.92 69 25.46 271
Enhancing Real Estate Values 4.67 1.70 5.67 2.06 18.3 6.67 65.3 23.79 73.3 26.69 64.7 23.54 42.7 15.54 107 39.08 274.67
Ensuring that parks are easily accessible to residents from their homes is 4 1.45 7 2.54 25 9.06 74 26.81 85 30.80 56 20.29 25 9.06 81 29.35 276
Requiring that developers provide park space for people in their developments is 7 2.56 5 1.83 21 7.69 75 27.47 71 26.01 58 21.25 36 13.19 94 34.43 273
Keeping neighborhood parks well maintained 3 1.09 5 1.82 9 3.27 47 17.09 64 23.27 80 29.09 67 24.36 147 53.45 275
Attracting and Retaining Businesses 7.33 2.66 12.4 4.52 22.9 8.31 105 38.11 26.79 32.2 11.70 21.8 7.90 54 19.60 275.44
Convincing businesses to locate in this community is 6 2.17 12 4.33 21 7.58 99 35.74 78 28.16 31 11.19 30 10.83 61 22.02 277
Encouraging executives and professionals to live in this community is 12 4.36 14 5.09 24 8.73 115 41.82 59 21.45 33 12.00 18 6.55 51 18.55 275
Improving Community Health 4 1.46 11.3 4.13 23.7 8.63 101 36.79 84.3 30.76 32.7 11.92 17.3 6.32 50 18.23 274.33
Supporting and working with community health organizations is 4 1.45 16 5.80 22 7.97 122 44.20 70 25.36 29 10.51 13 4.71 42 15.22 276
Helping people build healthy lifestyles 3 1.10 8 2.93 25 9.16 74 27.11 98 35.90 44 16.12 21 7.69 65 23.81 273
Educating residents on the benefits of healthy activity is 5 1.82 10 3.65 24 8.76 107 39.05 85 31.02 25 9.12 18 6.57 43 15.69 274
Attracting and Retaining Retirees 5.33 1.94 13.7 4.96 26.7 9.70 96 34.91 85.7 31.16 30.3 11.03 17.3 6.30 48 17.33 275
Providing amenities in the community that older adults want is 5 1.81 16 5.80 26 9.42 97 35.14 84 30.43 31 11.23 17 6.16 48 17.39 276
Designing programs specifically for older adults is 8 2.90 15 5.43 29 10.51 94 34.06 81 29.35 32 11.59 17 6.16 49 17.75 276
Encouraging Senior Citizens to become involved in the community is 3 1.10 10 3.66 25 9.16 97 35.53 92 33.70 28 10.26 18 6.59 46 16.85 273
Providing programs at which retired people can socialize together is 2 0.73 19 6.91 21 7.64 111 40.36 72 26.18 34 12.36 16 5.82 50 18.18 275
Attracting Tourists 6.33 2.30 10 3.64 20.7 7.51 69.3 25.18 69 25.07 55 19.97 45 16.33 100 36.32 275.33
Getting tourists to spend money in the city is 6 2.17 8 2.89 19 6.86 73 26.35 63 22.74 58 20.94 50 18.05 108 38.99 277
Developing attractions that draw people from other cities is 8 2.92 13 4.74 26 9.49 64 23.36 86 31.39 44 16.06 33 12.04 77 28.10 274
Hosting events that bring tourism revenue to local businesses is 5 1.82 9 3.27 17 6.18 71 25.82 58 21.09 63 22.91 52 18.91 115 41.82 275
Addressing the Needs of People who are Underemployed 13.7 4.97 16.7 6.07 39.7 14.44 122 44.54 53 19.30 18.3 6.68 11 4.01 29 10.68 274.67
Helping adults build skills that can be used in the workplace is 9 3.28 12 4.38 41 14.96 117 42.70 57 20.80 26 9.49 12 4.38 38 13.87 274
Offering programs that meet the needs of people who are unemployed is 18 6.55 22 8.00 37 13.45 130 47.27 45 16.36 13 4.73 10 3.64 23 8.36 275
Supporting and working with community welfare and employment agencies is 14 5.09 16 5.82 41 14.91 120 43.64 57 20.73 1 16 5.82 11 4.00 27 9.82 275
City Employees
TABLE 9
PERCEIVED EXTENT OF COLLABORATION
(CITY EMPLOYEES)
Table 9 reveals the extent of the PARD's collaboration with other city departments. The
scoring system assigned 1, 2, 3 or 4 points to few times a year, about once a month, about once a
week and almost daily, respectively. The range of services in which there is perceived
collaboration is remarkable, although for the most part is is relatively infrequent. The data
illustrate the extent to which the PARD reaches out to other departments for assistance, and the
importance of PARD staff integrating their efforts with others across departmental boundaries.
The three areas in which most collaboration occurred were city rights of way,
neighborhood/community parks, and visual quality.
41
TABLE 9
How often do you as a city employee or your department work with or on the following College Station Park facilities and programs?
N=283
About Once a
Not at all Few times a year Once Month Week Almost Daily
# % # % # % # % # % Total Score
City Right of Ways 118 44.36 72 27.07 23 8.65 15 5.64 48 18.05 266 lEall
EtC=12111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 157 56.68 68 24.55 20 7.22 - 20 7.22 Efill 224
Neighborhood/Community Parks 89 32.25 115 41.67 24 _ 8.70 17 6.16 276 MIgn`; • -nom
'Walking
m 'k _ d„ ,E, �,«....4, -��
Walking Trails/Bike Paths 153 55.04 89 32.01 11 3.96 17 6.12 8 2.88 278 194
Wolf Pen Amphitheatre 109 39.21 � a�� �;��j� 5 1.80 278 229
Recreation Center 142 51.08 90 32.37 17 6.12 26 9.35 ;, 278 218
Fitness Programs 209 75.45 57 20.58 5 1.81 2 0.72 1111MIECIIIEENI 89
Ponds/Lakes 189 68.23 67 24.19 111131.161 6 2.17 3 1.08 ifiziguesai
Playgrounds 183 66.30 68 24.64 14 5.07 9 3.26 2 0.72 276
Teen Activities 202 73.19 58 21.01 11 3.99 3 1.09 2 0.72 276 97
EXIT Teen Center 188 68.36 60 21.82 17 6.18 9 3.27 1 0.36 Efiailial
Xtra Education 205 73.74 55 19.78 13 4.68 4 1.44 1 0.36 278 97
Voile ball Courts 222 80.14 41 14.80 7 2.53 6 2.17 1 0.36 277 Mil
City Employees
01
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
3arks & Recreation Needs Assessment
Survey
Conducted for the City of College Station
by
The Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences
Texas A&M University
2005
Residents
1
1.How often do you and/or someone in your household use each of the following College Station park facilities and recreation
programs? (Circle one on each line)
About About A few
Almost Once Once Times Not
Daily a Week a Month a Year at All
Neighborhood/Community ParksD W M Y N
Walking Trails!Bike Paths D W M Y N
Recreation Center D W M Y N
Outdoor Basketball Courts D W M Y N
Wolf Pen Amphitheatre D W M Y N
Lincoln Center .. D W M Y N
Picnic Tables/Pavilions D W M Y N
Ponds/Lakes D W M Y N
Swimming Pools D W M Y N
Playgrounds D W M Y N
Volleyball Courts .. D W M Y N
Tennis Courts D W M Y N
Adult Baseball Fields D W M Y N
Adult Softball Fields D W M Y N
Adult Soccer Fields D W M Y N
Adult Flag Football Fields D W M Y N
Youth Baseball Fields D W M Y N
Youth Softball Fields D W M Y N
Youth Soccer Fields D W M Y N
Youth Flag Football Fields D W M Y N
Senior Programs D W M Y N
Kids Klub .. D W M Y N
Xtra Education D W M Y N
Teen Activities D W M Y N
Fitness Programs D W M Y N
Festivals/Events D W M Y N
EXIT Teen Center D W M Y N
Residents
2
2.The Parks Department has a limited amount of resources and seeks guidance on where best to invest them.Please circle the
PRIORITY LEVEL you feel should be associated with each of the following items(Circle one on each line).
Provide lighting for walking and jogging paths NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide more shade trees at parks NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide quiet,green spaces throughout the city NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide storage for sports leagues' equipment NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide playgrounds at athletic fields NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide more walking paths around parks and athletic fields NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Improve accessibility for those with disabilities
(e.g.,pool lifts, sidewalks,parking,bathrooms) NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Link parks,neighborhoods,and schools with hike and bike trails NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide a wider variety of aquatic classes NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Acquire additional park land NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Offer Xtra Education Classes on weekends NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide more access to the indoor pool at the Junior High School
during school vacations NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide more art and music programs NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide personal growth classes(e.g.,car maintenance,career
development) NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide more seasonal color and landscaping in parks NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide tables in parks for chess,checkers, cards etc. NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide space for new activities such as cricket,lacrosse,rugby NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Improve public bus transportation to existing park and
recreation facilities NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide more directional signs identifying the way to parks NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Place more benches in parks and along trails NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide technology in parks(wireless access,geocoding) NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Allocate more funds to enhance the maintenance of existing parks NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide more undesignated, open play space at neighborhood parks ... NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide more trees along city streets NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Provide a dedicated Senior Center NONE LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Residents
3
3.The quality of the city's park and recreation services is primarily determined by the magnitude of funds the city invests in them.
It is likely that increases in tax support would enhance the quality of EXISTING park and recreation services,while decreases
would reduce it.Would you like to see the level of tax support for park and recreation services changed?If so,by how much?
(Please check one of the following.)
Reduce the tax support by: Increase tax support by:
-20% 15% -10% -5% Remain the +5% +10% +15% +20%
same
Would you like to see the city's tax investment in NEW park and recreation facilities change?If so,by how much?
(Please check one of the following.)
Reduce the tax support by: Increase tax support by:
-20% -15% -10% -5% Remain the +5% +10% +15% +20%
same
4.Please identify the top 5 facilities from the following list on which you would like to see College Station give priority in its
investments over the next ten years.Please ONLY SELECT 5 facilities and put a check alongside each of them.
Open Space Fields Dog Park Nature Center
Cultural/Art Center Large Regional Park Outdoor Neighborhood Pools
Art/Music Facilities Indoor pool Frisbee Golf Course
Skate Park Indoor Recreation Center Archery fields
Ponds/Lakes Senior Center Indoor Tennis Courts
Outdoor Tennis Courts Gardens/Arboretum Remote Control Model Airplane Facility
Equestrian Trails Walking/Biking Trails Adult Baseball Fields
Adult Softball Fields Adult Soccer Fields Adult Football Fields
Fitness Stations Playgrounds Youth Baseball Fields
Youth Softball Fields Youth Soccer Fields Youth Football Fields
Camping Areas Indoor Play Areas Horseshoe pits
Pavilions Neighborhood Parks Zoo
Picnic Areas Water Park Bocce courts
Nature Trails Extensive regional trail system(15-20 miles)
Residents
4
5.In the following section,please read each statement and CIRCLE the response which indicates how much you
agree or disagree with each statement regarding College Station Park and Recreation Services.
Strongly I have no Strongly
Agree Agree Knowledge Disagree Disagree
I am well-informed about College
Station's park facilities and recreation
programs SA A NK D SD
The Department should work more
closely with schools to develop parks
and offer programs SA A NK D SD
College Station parks and recreation
facilities are accessible to people with
disabilities SA A NK D SD
College Station Parks are well
maintained and clean SA A NK D SD
In general,I am satisfied with the
facilities and services provided by the
Parks&Recreation Department SA A NK D SD
The Department should work more
closely with police and fire personnel
on safety in parks/neighborhoods
SA A NK D SD
Overall,the City of College Station has
a"park-like" ambiance about it SA A NK D SD
I am satisfied with the availability of
fields and open spaces for unscheduled
use SA A NK D SD
The swimming pools are too
crowded SA A NK D SD
I am well-informed about plans for
parks in my neighborhood SA A NK D SD
It is easy for me to offer feedback to
the park department and to obtain
answers from them to any questionsSA A NK D SD
The Depaitnient should work more
closely with neighborhood groups to
plan and maintain parks SA A NK D SD
Residents
5
Automobile traffic around parks should
be diverted or slowed down
SA A NK D SD
I can get to my favorite park facilities
on foot or by bicycle
SA A NK D SD
6.To help the city prioritize future investment decisions we would like you to please indicate,how IMPORTANT you
view each of the following issues in the City of College Station:
Not at all Extremely
In College Station: Important Neutral Important
Helping youth to develop into productive citizens is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Improving air quality is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Ensuring that parks are easily accessible to residents
from their homes is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Convincing businesses to locate in this community is ..... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Providing role models for adolescents is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Supporting and working with community
health organizations is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Providing amenities in the community that older
adults want is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Reducing the amount of energy consumed by residents is.. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Designing programs specifically for older adults is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Getting tourists to spend money in the city is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Helping people build healthy lifestyles is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Developing attractions that draw people from other cities is... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Providing youth with positive ways to fill their free time is ... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Requiring that developers provide park space for people
in their developments is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Helping adults build skills that can be used in the
workplace is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Keeping neighborhood parks well maintained is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Offering programs that meet the needs of people
who are unemployed is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Encouraging Senior Citizens to become involved
in the community is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Educating residents on the benefits of healthy activity is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Protecting environmentally sensitive areas is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Residents
6
Encouraging executives and professionals to live
in this community is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Supporting and working with community welfare and
employment agencies is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Providing programs at which retired people can
socialize together is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Hosting events that bring tourism revenue
to local businesses is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
In this section,we are interested in your perceptions of the College Station Parks and Recreation Department's CURRENT
CONTRIBUTIONS to each of the items:
The College Station Parks and Recreation
Department's Contribution to: Very Very
Small Neutral Large
Helping youth to develop into productive citizens is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Improving air quality is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Ensuring that parks are easily accessible to residents
from their homes is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Convincing businesses to locate in this community is ..... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Providing role models for adolescents is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Supporting and working with community
health organizations is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Providing amenities in the community that older
adults want is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Reducing the amount of energy consumed by residents is1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Designing programs specifically for older adults is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Getting tourists to spend money in the city is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Helping people build healthy lifestyles is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Developing attractions that draw people from other cities is... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Providing youth with positive ways to fill their free time is ... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Requiring that developers provide park space for people
in their developments is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Helping adults build skills that can be used in the
workplace is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Keeping neighborhood parks well maintained is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Offering programs that meet the needs of people
who are unemployed is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Encouraging Senior Citizens to become involved
in the community is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Residents
7
Educating residents on the benefits of healthy activity is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Protecting environmentally sensitive areas is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Encouraging executives and professionals to live
in this community is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Supporting and working with community welfare and
employment agencies is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Providing programs at which retired people can
socialize together is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Hosting events that bring tourism revenue
to local businesses is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Residents
8
We are collecting the following information in order to understand the characteristics of our study participants.
All of the information will be kept confidential and only reported at the group level.
Are you?(Check one)
Male Female
In what kind of residence do you live?(Check one)
Single Family Home
Town House or Condominium
Apar intent Building_
Mobile Home
Other:Please indicate
Do you own or rent your home in College Station?(Check One)
Own Rent
---
Are you a College or University Student?(Check One)
Yes No
What is your year of birth? (Please state a year on the line below.)
Including yourself, indicate the NUMBER of people in your household who are in the following age categories: (If none,
write"0")
NUMBER
Under 5 years of age
6-10 years old
11-14 years old
15-18 years old
19-34 years old
35-54 years old
55-64 years old
65 years or older
What ethnicity do you consider yourself?(Check one)
American Indian Asian Black/African American
Caucasian/Anglo American Hispanic Other
Is there anything else you would like to tell us regarding College Station's Park and Recreation Services?
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE!
If you have any questions,please contact Pamela Springfield,at 979-764-3414
Return your survey in the postage-paid envelope to the
City of College Station
P.O.Box 9960 sidents
College Station,TX 77842-9960
Parks & Recreation Advisory Board
Goals & Objectives
FY2005
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION (Not Prioritized)
1. Support Regional Park Initiative (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 4)
O Complete appraisal of property
Appraiser chosen. Appraisal received May 27, 2005.
0 Develop action plan
Meeting scheduled with US Representative Edwards staff on July 13, 2005; Second meeting scheduled for
August 31st with Representative Chet Edwards and BVCOG; exploring possibilities for federal funding
Tour for Parks & Recreation Advisory Board members in fall
2. 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
3. Oversee planning process for Steeplechase Park (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2)
• Conduct public hearings
First held on February 23rd; second hearing on March 29th; Board approval on April 12th
E Develop Master Plan
O Complete design process
Design process complete.
Ei Bid project
4. Crompton Park (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2)
O Complete design process
Design complete.
0 Bid project
Project pre-bid meeting held on March 3rd; bid opening on March 10th; City Council consideration April 14th.
Complete construction
Construction underway— expected completion expected October 2005
Begin operation and maintenance
Conduct dedication ceremony
Approved by Parks&Recreation Advisory Board: October 12, 2004 Page 1 of 4
Updated: October 7, 2005
5. Veterans Park, Phase II (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2)
QAssist with Veterans Memorial expansion project
Memorial wall expansion complete November, 2004.
0 Veterans Day Ceremony November 11, 2004
Ceremony complete.
QComplete lighting of four existing soccer fields
Project is complete
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 11th. Update given to Board at August 9th regular
meeting. Plans 98% complete; bids expected in December.
6. Continued interaction with other City Boards (Lincoln Center, Bryan Parks Board,
Conference Center, P&Z, Seniors) (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2)
ElJoint meeting with DRB Presentation and discussion of the film 'Small Urban Spaces"and discussion of park concepts
for Northgate on February11th.
Report from Lincoln Center Advisory Committee
Report from Conference Center Advisory Committee
ElReport from Senior Advisory Committee
Monthly updates included in Board packets. Report scheduled for May 17th regular meeting.
Appointment of five new Senior Committee members approved at Parks Board regular meeting
on August 9th. Additional members approval presented at September 13th regular meeting.
EJoint meeting with Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting held on August 18tH
E Joint meeting with City Council
7. Park Land Dedication Ordinance Update (Planning & Development, Strategy 1)
0 Review and approval of recommendations
Draft ordinance prepared; discussion at Parks & Recreation Board regular meetings on
July 11th and August 9th. Revisions approved at joint meeting with Planning & Zoning on
August 18tH
Approval by City Council
Pending final review.
8. Urban Forest Management Plan (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 1)
Revisit or new direction?
9. Capital Improvement Projects oversight. (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2)
Intergenerational 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 completion expected September 2005.
Approved by Parks&Recreation Advisory Board: October 12, 2004 Page 2 of 4
Updated: October 7, 2005
Spray Park at Lincoln Center
Conceptual design complete; notice to proceed with preliminary design has been given; change order
required. Project expected to bid out in September.
a Determine use for old buildings at Lincoln Center
Meeting with Lincoln Former Students held in April; funds requested for testing services
0 Basketball pavilion at Jack and Dorothy Miller Park (Zone 5)
Construction in progress. Completion expected in September.
E Park Land Dedication Projects (Zone 10)
Edelweiss Gartens is in design phase.
10. Needs Assessment for facilities and programs. (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2)
0 Conduct focus group meetings
QConduct public hearings
Meeting conducted on March 3rd
0 Develop survey instrument
Survey underway.
Review and accept final report
Parks Board: Draft report at October 11, 2005 regular meeting
Council review: Possibly in December
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)
First quarter standards report
Report given at January 11th regular meeting
QSecond quarter standards report
Report given at May 17th regular meeting along with Playground Replacement Report
2 Third quarter standards report
Report given at August 9th regular meeting.
0 Fourth quarter standards report
Standards distributed to board in October 11th board packets.
M Develop recommendations for improvement
12. Southern Oaks Park (Parks & Leisure, Strategy 2)
Neighborhood celebration/dedication of park
M Review park plan for additional improvements
13. Support Greenways Program (Parks & Leisure, Strategy #2)
Q Review and assist with update of Hike and Bike Master Plan
Kristan C/ann review of Hike and Bike Trail Plan at regular meeting of November 9, 2004
Review and assist with update of Greenways Master Plan
Approved by Parks&Recreation Advisory Board: October 12, 2004 Page 3 of 4
Updated: October 7, 2005
E] Continued support of Hike and Bike Task Force
Ken Fogle update at June 14th regular Parks Board meeting.
14. City Center Project support.
Parks and Recreation office recommendations
0 Parks and open space area recommendations
City Council presentations made May 12th and 26th
Community Center facility recommendations
Staff scheduled report to Board planned for August
15. 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)
QPassport program for Seniors
Fall session complete
a Passport program for Teens
Senior Olympics
Planning senior Olympics for 2006. Texas State Senior Games Board of Directors has officially sanctioned
the 2006 Brazos Valley Senior Games to be held in the Brazos Valley, April 20-23, 2006
International faculty and scholars picnic
Held successfully at Central Park pavilion on October 26, 2004; 2005 event to be held on September 29tH
Q 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
QBoard 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
Al Item Complete
Pending/On Hold
Approved by Parks&Recreation Advisory Board: October 12, 2004 Page 4 of 4
Updated: October 7, 2005
PARKS &
RECREATION College Station Park System Inventory
COLIEGE STATION Y
'-
wo O
Z K
w � 0 w
, N ,, H O o OJ 0 y
za
ui „,
'13 O t0 2 Q W. V2 /- F0 0 N C O >e, - J = J d y F-
PARK NAME a
K K L2 T> H w j Z T Z '. - y V
a a o U y a a S o a z o 4' w m 2 2 m ;_u_ o> c, a R OTHER
DERSON ., N .'8.94 " D 0 ..0 •6' 111;-.aM 113 •2 ` .r5 ;:
BEE CREEK C 26.50 D 0 0 1 •4 •3 • •1/4 0 2 04 • O 237
BILLIE MADELEY N .. 5.14 a
BRISON N 9.20 D • •1/3 10
BROTHERS POND N 16.12 D. : -'• "" N3 ;•2 M • FP.!;.S 0 1/2 •112 , F"
CASTLEGATE N 8.26 D • •2 •2 • 03P •1/3 401 •2
EMETERY 18.50 ` D State Historic
CENTRAL C 47.20 D 0 •2 0 1 110 01 • •2FP • 0 1 •1 •3 0 4 0 2 • 297 • Park Office
CONFERENCE CENTER ' = 2.30 D1
76Park Annex
CY MILLER M 2.50 D • •1 • •FP •1/3 0 Police
DA'ANDY'ARBORETUM A ".17.00 0 1 • p '•113
EASTGATE M 1.80 D •
0
EDELWEISS ;N 12'.30 D ! •'I •2`. S ' 11/2 •1 P `F P . • 10'-
EDELWEISS GARTENS N 7.74 U
EMERALD FOREST = N 4.59 D 01 01/3 0-1/2
GABBARD N 10.70 D • •1 01 • •FP •1/3 F F F
GEORGIE K.FITCH N ''11.30 D <• .;; . . ,•2 •1 +► • 0 F...
HENSEL(TAMU) C 29.70 D 0 02 0 3 •4 •2 • •1/3 • 70 TAMU
JACK&DOROTHY MILLER N' 10.00 :D ► •3 "•2 • '41/3 '• •1 .
JOHN CROMPTON N 15.26 D 0 0 1 • •FP • • • 50
EMONTREE N 15.40 'D 0 ;' •3 •1, • a► 03/4 1►1/2 -- 01 ` 30" Disc Golf
LICK CREEK R 515.50 D I •1.8 60
IONS M 1.50 D 3 0�2 13112 '' 10 :.
LONGMIRE N 4.16 D 02
LUTHER JONES M 1.80 L? •' .. „,' ,:s4, '!(t)'
MERRY OAKS N 4.60 D 52 12 • • •1/3 01
OAKS t v. N 7.50 ;0 0 0 .«7'; •1 ::• ' •1/4 01 •N'''Inn M 'DiscGoif
PARKWAY M 1.90 D •1 02 • _--_-- 6 -
PEBBLE CREEK N. 10.20 D • •2:' •3 #t! 0112 ',•1 > ., P, rc
RAINTREE N 13.00 D • 02 02 • •1/3 F •
RICHARD CARTER N 7.14 D '5:• ' •j/3 •" State Historic
SANDSTONE N 15.21 D • •1 • •1/3 • •1 F F F 48
SOUTHEAST C 64.00 -.U ;
SOUTHERN OAKS N 14.47 D • • 12 • •1/3 51
OUTHWEST N 4.78 U F ?,
SOUTHWOOD ATHLETIC C 44.70 D 0 0 52 • 0 2 0 5 0 6 0 4 • 0 544 Teen Center
. d
STEEPLECHASE :° .a N 9.00 . U = =
s _ •
HOMAS C 16.10 D 0 0 15 •4 • 0 3/4 • •2
UNIVERSITY N' 10.20 U ,` F
02 0 27
ETERANS ATHLETIC RA 150.00 D 0 • 02.4 0 2 406 0 Vet Memorial
.A.TARROW(W,Smith) ' C; 21.26 D 0 01 •2 0 3i. • ".•1f3 ,02 P. fa 0 3 ;t- 240 ttrii+wnCerk:
ESTFIELD N 4.29 U
state rus�ono
WINDWOOD M ' 1.37 D 402. •01 . w '.; , '
OLF PEN CREEK C 19.49 D 0 0 0 01 01 • W 53/4 36 0 Amphitheater
DODCREEK , N 6.60 D ,; •2.',`01 • -' • ' 411/3 01/2 '
WOODLAND HILLS N 13.91 U
PARK SUMMARY*
QUANTITY PARK TYPE TOTAL ACREAGE
6 Mini 10,87 C - Community Park R - Regional Park
27 Neighborhood 251.52 D - Developed RA - Regional Athletic Park
8 Community 256.25 FP - Fishing Pond State Historic - State Marker on site
1 Regional Nature 515.50 M - Mini Park U - Undeveloped
1 Regional Athletic 150.00 N - Neighborhood Park W - Wetlands
P - Pond(Non-fishing) F - Open Practice Fields
43 Total Parks-1,192.46 Total Park Acreage
0 - Lighted Facilities • - Unlighted Facilities
Hensel Park,Cemetery,and Conference Center are not included in acreage totals.
0:/PARD Overview/Parks Inventories/Park System Inventorydoc Revised October 11,2005
Park Land Dedication Ordinance
Project Review Checklist
Date Received: 10-05-05
Park Zone: 15
Current Zone Balance: 0
Project Location: Jones Butler Rd - South of FM 2818
Name of Development: Squid Hill Subdivision
Phase: N/A
Applicant: Tiersa Hopkins
Address: 11720 Old Wellborn Rd.
City/State/Zip: College Station, Texas 77845
Phone Number/Fax: 680-8087 Fax Number: 764-5872
E-mail:
Engineer/Planner: Strong Surveying
Address: 1722 Broadmoor#105
City/StateZip: Bryan, TX 77802
Phone Number/Fax: 979-776-9836 Fax Number: 731-0096
E-Mail:
REQUIRED COMPLIANCE
Section 10-B-1: Land Dedication
Single Family Dwelling Units: 1
Multi-Family Dwelling Units:
Total Land Requirement: .01 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 1 = $198.00
Multi-Family Fee ($160/dwelling unit):
Total Acquisition Fee:
Section 10-B-3: Park Development Fee
Single Family Fee ($358/dwelling unit): $358 x 1 = $358
Multi-family Fee ($292/dwelling unit):
Total Fee Amounts:
Total Single Family Fee ($556/dwelling Unit): $556 x 1 = $556
Multi-Family Fee ($452/dwelling Unit):
Section 10-B-4: Park Development in Lieu of Fee
Required development cost:
Staff review date and comment:
Parks Board review and decision:
Section 10-B-5: Minimum Park Size
Is the proposed park less than five (5) acres? N/A
If yes, staff recommends:
Section 10-B-7: Prior Park Acquisition
Is there an existing park that can serve the proposed development? No
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. Is land in the 100-year floodplain? No Percentage:
a. Detention/Retention? None 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:
(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:
Section 10-G: Approval:
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: At the October 11, 2005 regular meeting of the board,
voted unanimously to accept the cash dedication of$556.00 in lieu of land.
Planning & Zoning Commission:
City Council:
1
4y#A, \ \
-4009;„,A.16,
11 illik
a
4 ' \r"
1 4/1/4 v-10# \
. v Location 10°P;ellrAIIISIA,..•••Iah'-c"-'44'1114
li) r o . ec '
1
, ilt-8.---Irtstigai_... 41114.k 1 \
i i . . ilta fen OAT
1504140511t9A
lag.44"Nik
1001414/ 4"
4frioilii 444 404
A,,Akt,s
lihibill...
4r c 1*
)blik411111
Ab. �wl� 'Mai
Vic1r',�1TS
Protect Location ,/ 44
r _'_ S
D. W.Fleming - -,`�Part ofcalled tcal 6350.4 Ac -�\
IIIIII;.::';i,tLi.V.101
� ,�V
ILlifikA
s.6. 1!- - `� vicinity Hap
�`` ICES
a
5.00 Acres 1`
Lot 1, Block 1 �g
1
s D.W.Flaming ```
St `‘ Part of ailed 70.4 Ac.
14 `t 143/635 `�
1 A
VT.LAT Teo..•TR* A A
.___ .,. a morays rau mover over r macs
a 1000'63 a 5a4.61.
JONES-BU11ER ROAD(100'R.O.W.-Blad1 Asphalt Road)
I
Ewa
13101•Vii 1”11.10.
w.i.Ti r.G`lz"rr".R`.+� WSW aoaswoN s a�a sod+o wa wp.nFAsr
�,aaOr�es1 mar m,m.aa1 maa�la MINOR PLAT
� �
a aa..WOO 11.1 a.«isle ONEVINIMI 111,.OM MOM INSaermlY a.e.MAIN MHO A 1COAVAN nor
».Z. . AS rncam MOM aace aa.wac sac O F
`•
,app" , ,...'... �y�,�a..ii,`w".� i "' K IRON r 1u tams alas 000161t xom
Mal 10 M 11t NI FAMES ry.a„a.-,A AMT. LOT 1, BLOCK 1
LW Rm.<....,,A .1 Oa MO NAM MOAT Ile la M.C. a MTVLOTr SQUID HILL
N ea faOM W LIT4 M W OL LLE 01 A Of AC N oa
MI ROM 1Fi1t111 MT WOOL as I WE as:o
MIME r.lanr lcaua0a.00rlm n WE aarsarrs 5.0 0 ACRE S
mein':rr+�.++.4,..�`r•�.. iurarar a.....aa a..aw a.ea.ar�� aOa COWL uaw�1r�womala Or
l shoo Whom army ONLIL IT LoT Tv ALT r���mat �'(,�' 113:lad
' t_— ��,^�+a,��„Llo
CRANFORD BURNETT SURVEY, A - 7
ar.r.orra:.r wr ON
s�a•an..c rS.` _ BRAZOSCOU�COUNTYGE nTEXAS
ar.s...er.. .r SCALE;1'-SO' AUGUST. 2005
“deg,e.a.ar elm.
O ' O1NUa aI�T�Z1U�Aalm
lt7�ae 01L aa6ra anal an......•saa
a
�T QJRw1Na *+_
Vas sYa
SPRING CREEK COMMON$ ;i; ;
// ///
///r
(This is for a gift of land and not a dedi atr,oz,/uirement.)
/. ;// //
/
/
iii
,z,,,,,,,,, //, y/ ,.,,„,104,401111:111:42:1!,,/ l /
////.// /e,,,,/ ) , .011101iNglAtagpliekliikki '-. "..,i-4-;-..1.11111111100177010141p,
rill
k3
or
�>'\/\/'..,_,./,/
/ / 0- L �,�'y �� "Y, , - 1. k 9 �, �•
/ \\V v�/ � g gym: ),�'!:UPI' S ,�
11 r •
°//
a li i �� slr `
e
i
�/�
` a Woodland Hills Boulevard I
II
if
� as-Il I -- 11---) I v €
' , 0� Woodland Ridge Court 1 c � �. I
, - - E r te, f i:-..--;--1-,-...,....--"--".f ( I ww 1
\-Z--\N:11-4':‘,>, i
•\ m _ , s r%arorg aaar
K, ;,,- lif �' _ •a „__„0`Y .2r -w. ',i---- �;?,..- _- `�$,a 1 BLOCK
LOT I i 2 I + 1 40'" , _ 1
•\' i —.d 4-777-7,'" -- h ei� ...1 --ev-:sa+ ,, N a��E! .,•'LAK*C
"„ \ F ;l € -, c: 3 r N X70.pw- 'vtl 1 V i / __ _-®
s E 11
3I �I '�, o. .,i :1.1,. ..r Lakeway Drive
i j310 I I I € € "rr - -
:,INik i -t t�+ k j s,t a ss
!.. Ise K a.
0 1
»s ,t1€ 1 € a h o
� � 14 E ,BLOCK 11 a 1
'' AN' li
I n LOT 1 til : W. t2 4+ mi. ■
BLOCK 1 ` s w.a
• If i 11
::7 +...�. ;'�s «.7 II —! +� W t"t ' 0 : I u WA/ "y upas
It... t t •
1 I
,/,rill ;a1,, \i- .r-j. „,, ,,,a-----1.,1,1;�, 1 E��P �- h: ie s std 1
y , ?i I(BLOCK 1 '9. I ® r< c,,.
,, / ,-, Id �” i L0T 2 f ®�'�i .a+,oa ciixewa,,® I
1 l Ki • ®MIa3 li. Y,.rs® t
�/ , ' I t sr'' .t \ .pl �� Ems` ' Ii'T L:i
�, , t€ ttg m� l� jjj-
-
• 1.. .,::-.4,,,,,,,,
I
i i t' BLOCK 1 } gp7 ,. �.
i i , r ", LOT 3 til t s.
1 i
•
- yLjrii I
.� € «`
` r°�w Ira a c�aw..uam ccea
p t woo* , PRELIMINARY PLAT
of
State Highway No. 6 _Jana. SPRING CREEK COMMONS
"— 50.547 Acres .:147.-.111.- 1
1402.22,-.2242"-TRUST u
OW garo 1
:ecu a 45 COLI"e,Tr S&TF° aC,aC. p
� NA. �' asstxrwt.m eoelt-39-a 2.e2 rxs tax oast
D l i„...„,,,,,,,,,„.„
9P�8GLila=Pi�.jt. ���'x5 LYI.I.EGE S'4tIM'.TS nu,
Y Y_9- = ..._. i472}999-3.4'78
.®---------------.�..._........ �
WORM'6 GREEN
..._ ., DN1AS CS Lo. E
,.�-.- �(j 17100 OCAS DFiAT SR 216
•
' : akua X 73297-7209
0 0 (2232 3210-14,8 1
I
v � Uo d1 tc u
Park Land Dedication Ordinance
Project Review Checklist
Date Received: October 4, 2005
Park Zone: 6
Current Zone Balance: $85,743
Project Location: Wellborn Road and Southwest Parkway
Name of Development: Dovetail /Woodlands of College Station
Phase: N/A
Applicant: Dovetail Development, LLC
Address: 126 Briarcliff Road, Suite 9
City/State/Zip: Athens, GA
Phone Number/Fax: 706-552-3980 Fax Number:
E-mail:
Engineer/Planner: MDG (Municipal Development Group)
Address: 2551 Texas Avenue S., Suite A
City/StateZip: College Station, TX 77840
Phone Number/Fax: 979-693-5359 Fax Number: 979-693-4243
E-Mail: mdgcstx(c�vahoo.com
REQUIRED COMPLIANCE
Section 10-B-1: Land Dedication
Single Family Dwelling Units: NA
Multi-Family Dwelling Units: 545
Total Land Requirement: 4.36 Acres
Proposed Dedication: 3.78 acres
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): NA
Multi-Family Fee ($160/dwelling unit): $160 x 545 = $87,200
$87,200 (Value of .58 acre, .58 x 125 =
Total Acquisition Fee: 72.5 units, $160 x 72.5 = $11,600
Section 10-B-3: Park Development Fee
Single Family Fee ($358/dwelling unit): NA
Multi-family Fee ($292/dwelling unit): $292 x 545 = $159,140
Total Fee Amounts:
Total Single Family Fee ($556/dwelling Unit): NA
Multi-Family Fee ($452/dwelling Unit): $170,740
Section 10-B-4: Park Development in Lieu of Fee
Required development cost:
Staff review date and comment:
Parks Board review and decision:
Section 10-B-5: Minimum Park Size
Is the proposed park less than five (5) acres? NA
If yes, staff recommends:
Section 10-B-7: Prior Park Acquisition
Is there an existing park that can serve the proposed development? Southwest Park
Staff recommends the Dovetail development approved as per letter
If yes, staff recommends: October 4, 2005 including the land dedication and fees.
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. Is land in the 100-year floodplain? Yes Percentage: ?
a. Detention/Retention? Size:
Meets Board Policy?
Acreage in floodplain: ? Percentage:
Acreage in detention: ? Percentage:
Acreage in greenways: ? 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:
(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 recommends acceptance of fees and land dedication as
Staff Recommendations: per letter dated October 4, 2005:
Dedication Request 4.36 Acres
Proposed 3.78 Acres
Remaining .58 Acres
Cash Value $ 11,600
Multi-family development Fee $159,140
TOTAL $170,740 and 3.78 Acres
Section 10-G: Approval:
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: At the regular meeting of September 13, 2005, the Board
voted unanimously to accept the land dedication in whatever amount was required to complete
Southwest Park and that the street frontage requirement that is in the Park Land Dedication
Ordinance be met. At the regular meeting of October 11, 2005 the Board voted unanimously to
accept the developer's proposed dedication of 3.78 acres, $11,600 cash in lieu of land for the
remaining .58 acres, and the development fee of$159,140, fora total of$170,740 and 3.78 acres.
Planning & Zoning Commission:
City Council:
1411 r." • 4I1
IPS Group
Planning Solutions
Mr. Steve Beachy
Director of PARD
1000 Krenek Tap Road
College Station, Texas 77842
October 4,2005
RE: Dovetail Development proposal for parkland dedication for The Woodlands of
College Station.
Dear Steve:
I appreciated the opportunity to visit with you on such short notice this morning. Chuck
and I had just completed a conference call with the Dovetail Development project team
and Greg Taggert and it was great to be able to instantly talk with you about options and
ideas.
The proposal from Dovetail Development is the dedication of the property from the
current Southwest Park boundary west to the western edge of the floodway of the creek.
This constitutes approximately 3.43 acres. Please note that all acreages will be finalized
with the survey from Mr. Taggert. Dovetail Development will also dedicate
approximately 0.15 acres bound by the private road, one fork of the creek and the current
Southwest Park.The City will have access through the private access easement to this
portion of the park.
There will still be approximately 0 .71 acres required to be dedicated or addressed by fee
in lieu of land to make up the 4.36 acre requirement. My client is asking that this
remainder be handled by the fee in lieu of land option.
There will be a 40 foot wide easement dedicated through the Butler tract to comply with
the requirement for bikeways. The exact location of the easement will be determined as
the property goes through the platting process.
Dovetail Development realizes that Southwest Park will be an asset for their residential
development. With the development fee from Dovetail Development added to the
existing funds in the zone,the City would have enough to begin design and construction
of paths,maintenance access drives and other amenities such as lighted trails and design
elements that could be complementary to the Dovetail project. In any case, the Parks
1504 Foxfire Drive College Station, TX 77845 979-693-1213 www.IPSGroup.us
Department will hold public hearings to seek input on park development to serve the
needs of surrounding users. You indicated that with the land dedication and development
fee, the City could begin design right after the first of the year and could be under
construction by this time next year.
I appreciate your willingness to place this on next week's Park Board agenda. Mr.
Taggert will be submitting a revised drawing for inclusion in the packet. If there is
additional information needed please do not hesitate to let me know.
Sincerely,
� I �
��f 6
J.. e R. Kee, AICP
'rincipal
Cc: Mr. Chuck Ellison,Ellison Law
Mr. Bob Landers, Dovetail Development
• •1111,,,,,p,4„,..
4„,,400.4 >. .
� ‹..
44
,,..,, ir
S, 1"1":0,0%01%G,.„„„..,
,irt4;4...,, ,, 4,, „4.,„. <0
N•r• 40' ''' \,:"
SCHICK. tit ,.,,.-A«.-,,,.y, t Z-0,
4.0
gOJSa3�s \ \,,,,�%
/
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • . . •
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . .: : : :. : :: : : : . : : : : . : : : : : : : : : : : : :: . . : :: . . : . : : : . : : . . : . : . : : .. . . . . . . . . ... .:: .. . : . . . . ���
0 • •• •• • • • ' LOCA.7701Vi 1P ': F\''2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
\„
N N
•
\ \
,rtno,4A ao M.
PON TALBA
--,,
mai 0—0
\ \
\ \
\
( ,
. ....,<. 4: , ,K W SCHICK SUB()
\\V".' •‘
,,,,.; ...
_ •
,
! .
'....\ '.."
\*
b•Af'>‘,4111
.
'43,V=4.,,
\ ""kt •
:ek It, SI. hittstH,_,—44,2 sz,rs ,. 1,,,' '' ••••-. • . \, 4/•,,,t,711
\
C.'31'ior,,,,,
......."/
.,„/.1.10,<, ' ,,. ;ofigt;TR SEVEN . ,,,•;,,,, 1 N•<,,•0•,,u \
d•\\"'" , 41,t4..,%:.1.pow.*am.. .•-•, .P., /
..',--- A,..':,, ", ,0.r tINIF
444 AOC*
s4•410411D Aus-r4444.114110114.1,4 N •
\ \
. \
•
.../,,,,. -,- .0,', /
N N
----utwisr-LM 4 IC'T4r4tX LID
ATHLETIC COMPLEX • -. ..,—
.
.,4:4010. ',A's' / 4/4\ ostasNIS
•
75 45 ACRES
BLK 1
A.'
LOTS
,I\ '''''' '. ' . i • v.' /7/ ..".... / \..
Velh
frqi ill%
..0 \ ,...,,,..„.....e...* '\-,14;:i../7/ / . ''•••• . / \ .:
altio001 Irt-Ok
,,,c.,,,,,, , .,,,,,,iriE to',44,1,.• , y' . .
VI 1
N.. ...........----•""I Mt..:,..t.:44V V li.
N • ttiii.,:."
1%.‘b.".p\:a?...'"X":".;riz,7,•,-"11 6"57“""'''f///f4,.' /7,:.:411ih ukiii 414 I ;.. w.0.1,41-, ................._.1.0"00y,r ,415.:010,441.:lib 7_tt Aittir..t,k il.....HrsieLe..t.taresiii;i17 F .trir:,;,, IT.111,7715u um lin lit 4.1:i.ii...11.,"Alie4.,:t finif 11 j6/3.1*
-,. ..
---"---..,...... ''' ,.Mr?' • /, ."1011111k1 1 ______........grom 4,R -........mer-........1,,,.,,,,ammowermusaism...- 4 oft...„.4,'''::•;•s"3 .*::•:,
, •iii •
pi •.•••,, ,,,,,/,'/ ...'1111/1Nalli
,}c .4k i•• — i i 11 •c4.1...• ' dik
....-----"---.
'Sr (,.
"'•-•,......___....„.. .,j!.......______,...•-• ,,, % .."''' ''.'
4 1 . , 1,•i;: ,a.4:::::th n I
(C.4410A*Arri • -a. 11,,.04,7,,,,,„„4 ..
,i
:4 ' 44, -.1111h.. I I lif MO
.4.11111111100. .••4‘::'
e•
."*"
, r
,..., ,
.,,,,,:y•--
/
5 6I ..•••''.
.4 4,
44
F ‘1 •
/
-, ..
,117S,3
•A '''..."' 4 aosras"yr....S70 44' "...'.
4.,
\--"...--...--,..„
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 9, "SUBDIVISIONS" OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS, BY AMENDING
CERTAIN SECTIONS AS SET OUT BELOW; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
DECLARING A PENALTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION,
TEXAS:
PART 1: That Chapter 9, "Subdivisions", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College
Station, Texas, be amended as set out in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a
part of this ordinance for all purposes.
PART 2: That if any provisions of any section of this ordinance shall be held to be void or
unconstitutional, such holding shall in no way effect the validity of the remaining
provisions or sections of this ordinance, which shall remain in full force and
effect.
PART 3: That any person, firm, or corporation violating any of the provisions of this
chapter shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof
shall be punishable by a fine of not less than Twenty Five Dollars ($25.00) nor
more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each day such violation shall
continue or be permitted to continue, shall be deemed a separate offense. Said
Ordinance, being a penal ordinance, becomes effective ten (10) days after its date
of passage by the City Council, as provided by Section 35 of the Charter of the
City of College Station.
EXHIBIT "A"
That Chapter 9, "Subdivisions", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas,
is hereby amended as follows:
1. By amending SECTION 10: "Requirements for Park Land Dedication" by
deleting the entire section and substituting the following:
SECTION 10: Requirements For Parkland Dedication
10-A Purpose
This section is adopted to provide recreational areas in the form of neighborhood park facilities
as a function of subdivision and site development in the City of College Station. This section is
enacted in accordance with the home rule powers of the City of College Station, granted under
the Texas Constitution, and the statutes of the State of Texas, including, but not by way of
limitation, Texas Local Government Code Chapter 212 (Vernon 1999; Vernon Supp. 2004-2005)
as amended from time to time.
It is hereby declared by the City Council that recreational areas in the form of neighborhood
parks are necessary and in the public welfare, and that the only adequate procedure to provide for
neighborhood parks is by integrating such a requirement into the procedure for planning and
O/group/legal/ordinance/amendmentform.doc
ORDINANCE NO. Page 2
developing property or subdivisions in the city, whether such development consists of new
construction on vacant land or rebuilding and remodeling of structures on existing residential
property.
Neighborhood parks are those parks providing for a variety of outdoor recreational opportunities
and located within convenient distances from a majority of the residences to be served thereby.
The park zones established by the Parks and Recreation Department and shown on the official
Parks and Recreation map for the City of College Station shall be prima facie proof that any park
located therein is within such a convenient distance from any residence located therein. The
primary cost of neighborhood parks should be borne by the ultimate residential property owners
who,by reason of the proximity of their property to such parks, shall be the primary beneficiaries
of such facilities.
Therefore, the following requirements are adopted to effect the purposes stated above and shall
apply to any land to be used for residential purposes:
10-B General Requirements
The City Manager or his designee shall administer this Section 10, Requirements for Parkland
Dedication with certain review, recommendation and approval authorities being assigned to the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board as specified
herein.
Dedications shall cover both land acquisition and development costs for neighborhood parkland
for all types of residential development. Dedications shall be based on actual dwelling units for
the entire development. Increases or decreases in final unit count prior to final plat will require
an adjustment in fees paid or land dedicated. If the actual number of dwelling units exceeds the
original estimate additional parkland shall be dedicated in accordance with the requirements in
this Section 10 with the filing of a final plat.
The methodology used to calculate fees and land dedications is attached hereto as Appendix 1
and incorporated and made a part of this ordinance for all purposes.
Fees paid under this Section may be used only for development or acquisition of a neighborhood
park located within the same Zone as the development.
1. Land Dedication
For single family developments the area of land to be dedicated for parkland purposes shall be
equal to one (1) acre for each one hundred one(101) dwelling units. For duplex and other multi-
family development this area shall be equal to one(1) acre for each one hundred twenty-five
(125) dwelling units.
The total amount of land dedicated for the development shall be dedicated in fee simple by plat:
a. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for multi-family development,
b. Concurrently with the final plat for a single phase development,
culc:Idocume-Ilpsprin-111oca1s-11templchapter 9 amendment parkland 7 22 05.doc
10/6/05
ORDINANCE NO. Page 3
c. For a phased development the entire park shall be either platted concurrently with
the plat of the first phase of the development or
d. The developer may provide the City with financial security against the future
dedication by providing a bond, irrevocable letter of credit, or other alternative
financial guarantee such as a cash deposit in the amount of the appraised value of
the parkland. The financial guarantee shall be released upon dedication of the
parkland.
2. Fee in Lieu of Land
The amount of the Fee-in-Lieu of Land ("Fee") shall be set at an amount sufficient to cover the
costs of the acquisition of neighborhood parkland.
A landowner may elect to meet the requirements of Section 10.B.1, in whole or in part, by paying
a fee in the amount set forth below. Before making this election, for any required dedication
greater than three (3) acres, or for any development containing floodplain or greenway, the
landowner must:
a. Obtain a recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and
b. Obtain approval from the Planning &Zoning Commission pursuant to the Plat
Approval Procedures in Article 3.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance.
The fee shall be calculated as follows:
• One hundred ninety-eight dollars ($198.00)per dwelling unit for single family
development
• One hundred sixty dollars ($160.00)per dwelling unit for duplex and multi-family
development.
The total amount of the Fee calculated for the development shall be remitted:
• Prior to the issuance of any building permits for multi-family development or,
• Upon submission of each final plat for single family, duplex or townhouse development.
Fees may be used only for acquisition or development of a neighborhood park facility located
within the same Zone as the development.
The City Manager or his designee is authorized to accept the Fee for dedications of less than
three (3) acres where:
• There is a sufficient amount of parkland existing in the park zone of the proposed
development or
• The proposed dedication is insufficient for a Neighborhood Park site under existing park
design standards.
This determination shall be made based on the Recreation, Park & Open Space Master Plan, as
amended from time to time.
culc:Idocume-11psprin—lllocals—Iltemplchapter 9 amendment parkland 7 22 05.doc
10/6/05
ORDINANCE NO. Page 4
3. Park Development Fee
In addition to the land dedication, there shall also be a fee established that is sufficient to develop
the land to meet the Manual of Neighborhood Park Improvements Standards to serve the zone in
which such development is located. This fee shall be computed on the basis of three hundred
fifty-eight dollars ($358.00)per dwelling unit for single family developments and two hundred
ninety-two ($292.00) for duplex and multi-family development. The total fee shall be paid upon
submission of each final plat or upon application for a building permit, whichever is applicable.
4. Park Development Option in Lieu of Fee
A landowner may elect to construct the neighborhood park improvements in lieu of paying the
Park Development Fee under the following terms and conditions:
a. A park site plan, developed in cooperation with the Parks and Recreation
Department staff, must be submitted to the City Manager or his designee for
review. A site plan approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation and Parks
and Recreation Advisory Board is required upon submission of each final plat or
upon application for a building permit,whichever is applicable.
b. Within twelve (12) months from the date of said submission or application the
landowner shall submit detailed plans and specifications in compliance with the
site plan to the City Manager or his designee for review and approval.
c. All plans and specifications shall meet or exceed the Manual of Neighborhood
Park Improvement Standards in effect at the time of the submission.
d. If the improvements are constructed on land that has already been dedicated to
and/or is owned by the City, then the Developer must post Payment and
Performance Bonds to guarantee the payment to subcontractors and suppliers and
to guarantee Developer completes the work in accordance with the approved
plans, specifications, ordinances, other applicable laws and that City has issued a
Certificate of Completion for the improvements.
e. The construction of all improvements must be completed within two (2) years
from the date of the approval of the plans and specifications. A final, one-time
extension of twelve months may be granted by the Administrator upon
demonstration that said improvements are at least 50% constructed.
f. Completion and Acceptance—Park development will be considered complete and
a Certificate of Completion will be issued after the following requirements are
met:
i. Improvements have been constructed in accordance with the Approved
Plans
ii. All parkland upon which the improvements have been constructed has
been dedicated as required under this ordinance
iii. All manufacturer's warranties have been provided for any equipment
culc.Idocume-Ilpspnn-Illocals-lltemplchapter 9 amendment parkland 7 22 05.doc
10/6/05
ORDINANCE NO. Page 5
g. Upon issuance of a Certificate of Completion, Landowner warrants the
improvements for a period of one(1) year as per the requirements in the Manual of
Neighborhood Park Improvements Standards.
h. The developer shall be liable for any costs required to complete park development
if:
i. Developer fails to complete the improvements in accordance with the
Approved Plans
ii. Developer fails to complete any warranty work
5. Reimbursement for City Acquired Parkland
The City may from time to time acquire land for parks in or near an area of actual or potential
development. If the City does acquire park land in a park zone, the City may require subsequent
parkland dedications for that zone to be in Fee-in Lieu-of-Land only. This will be to reimburse
the City for the cost(s) of acquisition. Once the City has been reimbursed entirely for all such
parkland within a park zone, this Section shall cease to apply.
10-C Prior Dedication or Absence of Prior Dedication
If a dedication requirement arose prior to enactment of this Section 10, that dedication
requirement shall be controlled by the ordinance in effect at the time such obligation arose,
except that additional dedication shall be required if the actual density of structures constructed
upon property is greater than the former assumed density. Additional dedication shall be
required only for the increase in density and shall be based upon the ratio set forth in Section
10.B. (Credit shall be given for land dedicated or fees paid pursuant to prior parkland Ordinance
Nos. 690, 983 or 2546.)
10-D Comprehensive Plan Considerations
The Recreation, Park and Open Space Master Plan is intended to provide the College Station
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board with a guide upon which to base its recommendations.
Because of the need to consider specific characteristics in the site selection process, the park
locations indicated on the Plan are general. The actual locations, sizes, and number of parks will
be determined when development occurs. The Plan will also be used to locate desirable park
sites before development occurs, and those sites may be acquired by the City or received as
donations.
Park Zones are established by the City's Comprehensive Plan, in the Park and Open Space
element and are configured to indicate service areas for neighborhood parks. Zone boundaries
are established that follow key topographic features such as major thoroughfares, streams, and
city limit lines.
10-E Special Fund; Right to Refund
1. All parkland fees will be deposited in a fund referenced to the park zone involved. Funds
deposited into a particular park zone fund may only be expended for land or
improvements in that zone.
culc:ldocume-l1psprin-111ocals—lltemplchapter 9 amendment parkland 7 22 05.doc
10/6/05
ORDINANCE NO. Page 6
2. The City shall account for all fees-in-lieu-of land paid under this Section with reference
to the individual plat(s) involved. Any fees paid for such purposes must be expended by
the City within five (5) years from the date received by the City for acquisition and/or
development of a neighborhood park as defined herein. Such funds shall be considered to
be spent on a first-in, first-out basis. If not so expended, the landowners of the property
on the expiration of such period shall be entitled to a prorated refund of such sum,
computed on a square footage of area basis. The owners of such property must request
such refund within one (1) year of entitlement, in writing, or such right shall be barred.
10-F Parkland Guidelines and Requirements
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 and requirements shall be used in designing parks and
adjacent development.
1. Any land dedicated to the city under this section must be suitable for park and recreation
uses. The dedication shall be free and clear of any and all liens and encumbrances that
interfere with its use for park purposes. The City Manager or his designee shall
determine whether any encumbrances interfere with park use. Minerals may be reserved
from the conveyance provided that there is a complete waiver of the surface use by all
mineral owners and lessees. A current title report must be provided with the land
dedication. The property owner shall pay all taxes or assessments owed on the property
up to the date of acceptance of the dedication by the City. A tax certificate from the
Brazos County Tax Assessor shall be submitted with the dedication or plat.
2. 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. Sites should not be severely sloping or
have unusual topography which would render the land unusable for organized
recreational activities.
3. Land in floodplains or designated greenways will be considered on a two for one basis.
Two acres of floodplain or greenway will be equal to one acre of parkland
4. Where 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.
5. Neighborhood park sites should be adjacent to residential areas in a manner that serves
the greatest number of users and should be located so that users are not required to cross
arterial roadways to access them.
6. Sites should have existing trees or other scenic elements.
7. 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 Manager or his designee
cuc:Idocume—llpsprin—lllocals—lltemplchapter 9 amendment parkland 722 05.doc
10/6/05
ORDINANCE NO. Page 7
and must meet specific parks specifications in the Manual of Neighborhood Park
Improvements Standards.
8. Where park sites are adjacent to Greenways, Schools existing or proposed subdivisions,
access ways may be required to facilitate public access to provide public access to parks.
9. It is desirable that fifty percent (50%) of the perimeter of a park should abut a public
street.
10-G Consideration and Approval
Any proposal considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission under this Section shall have
been reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board or the City Manager or his designee
as provided herein, and a recommendation given to the Commission. The Commission may
make a decision contrary to the recommendation by a majority vote.
10-H Review of Land Dedication Requirements and Dedication and Development Fee
The City shall review the Fees established and amount of land dedication required at least once
every three (3) years. The City shall take into account inflation as it affects land acquisition and
park development costs as well as the City's targeted level of service for parkland per one
thousand population. Fees are authorized to be set by resolution of the City Council.
10-I Warranty Required:
All materials and equipment provided to the City shall be new unless otherwise approved in
advance by the City Manager or his designee and that all work will be of good quality, free from
faults and defects, and in conformance with the designs,plans, specifications, and drawings, and
recognized industry standards. This warranty, any other warranties express or implied, and any
other consumer rights, shall inure to the benefit of the City only and are not made for the benefit
of any party other than the City.
All work not conforming to these requirements, including but not limited to unapproved
substitutions,may be considered defective.
This warranty is in addition to any rights or warranties expressed or implied by law.
Where more than a one (1)year warranty is specified in the applicable plans, specifications, or
submittals for individual products,work, or materials, the longer warranty shall govern.
This warranty obligation shall be covered by any performance or payment bonds tendered in
compliance with this Ordinance.
Defective Work Discovered During Warranty Period. If any of the work is found or determined
to be either defective, including obvious defects, or otherwise not in accordance with this
ordinance, the designs, plans, drawings or specifications within one (1) year after the date of the
issuance of a certificate of Final Completion of the work or a designated portion thereof,
whichever is longer, or within one (1) year after acceptance by the City of designated equipment,
or within such longer period of time as may be prescribed by law or by the terms of any
cult.Idocume-llpsprin-lllocals-lltemplchapter 9 amendment parkland 7 22 05 doe
10/6/05
ORDINANCE NO. Page 8
applicable special warranty required by this ordinance, Developer shall promptly correct the
defective work at no cost to the City.
During the applicable warranty period and after receipt of written notice from the City to begin
corrective work, Developer shall promptly begin the corrective work. The obligation to correct
any defective work shall be enforceable under this code of ordinances. The guarantee to correct
the defective work shall not constitute the exclusive remedy of the City, nor shall other remedies
be limited to the terms of either the warranty or the guarantee.
If within twenty(20) calendar days after the City has notified Developer of a defect, failure, or
abnormality in the work, Developer has not started to make the necessary corrections or
adjustments, the City is hereby authorized to make the corrections or adjustments, or to order the
work to be done by a third party. The cost of the work shall be paid by Developer.
The cost of all materials, parts, labor, transportation, supervision, special instruments, and
supplies required for the replacement or repair of parts and for correction of defects shall be paid
by Developer, its contractors, or subcontractors or by the surety.
The guarantee shall be extended to cover all repairs and replacements furnished, and the term of
the guarantee for each repair or replacement shall be one (1) year after the installation or
completion. The one (1) year warranty shall cover all work, equipment, and materials that are
part of the improvements made under this section of the ordinance.
culc:Idocume-llpsprin-'lllocals-Iltemplchapter 9 amendment parkland 722 05.doc
10/6/05
Goal
We Need
Trends in Creation of a Family Recreation Center
A Family Recreational Facilities Design
Recreation Center From Vision to Reality "Something for Everyone"
"Something for Everyone"
Something fa Everyone
Multi-Step Process I. Exploratory Phase II. Discovery Phase
• Exploratory • What do we WANT? • What do we NEED?
• Discovery -Needs Assessment -Funding
• Design -User Input -Operations
• Construction —Feasibility Studies —Equipment
• Operation —Priorities/Goals —Programming
III. Design Phase IV.Construction V.Operation
• Put the dream on paper • From Vision to Reality • In House Maintenance
-PLAN for Expansion -Hire experienced contractors • Maintenance Budget Funding
-Consult with those that will manage the facility -Use durable,easy care materials • Cost Recovery
-Incorporate flexible multi use spaces
• Partnerships
—Storage,Storage,Storage
—Take care of the staff needs • Security
"41161
1
Swimming Facilities Exercise Studios Specialty Programming
PlA
11111 ,
_ ....
a
• r
r
Gymnasiums Kid's Fun Zones Rock Walls
h i � 10,
d " r 3 ..-. Ai a
i"1
,.., ,..Ltr..t3i.....VI )41 ;-7::-.4' MI
11111
p
Amenities ..., k ,,,, *.,
r 1 _ X0i »�16
., .-W-°-. ' ..i 11q'
=
wma
w
env dt ',�
2
•
/ ,,,
s
L
,vim
rq� h "�r .u
e�� 1
r . _
..... .... ...„ , .,.. „„„, ,.i.s,,,..,..:::-.......,....7*': "1.'" - ,
A,
.
.*"....--.',. ' ,. -..,..'. r'Illittli''''''''f'.::\-1''''
_. . ,.,,.�a �.
3
F' 4 d a ,
,.Fnas„
ter:
.„,,,,,,,, , ,.,-t,'-o4'.•,-4,,,,aiiit,,r...,,,`.4;i14',',..,1',:ittittit I i.t:, i; i----- •
t. s � 9 ® t 3t-
ram �0c, \ � e"
a P
s
r { 5; 111
.e
t
4
----, -
• 100.-0, 0006.,
0
I lit__ kliii.,,,,,,:;:,,,,,,t,...,,,,,. . . L'.1, " " ' 'I • " 4 ,• ....._-lk-,-,
1,441, ... . * - i ',, - '' :4 ..„-:, ' •4,,A,K.1'1, ',, ,'
, ,4,'A,•••A.'4,,..''',-44111L47,1:1'.: •
•4 - _ -. ,...7- •, -,..,--"°, ':L. '41.-.:'‘--;•i' "1°.',,° :5. . ".° .'• ', '4•.°'
•: 1. .,- i' ,
-.•• .
1 .A,
1°°'#044°-'1,`,t : ..',.. ,,, -•- . ,,, ,..i: .. .• ' ' ° , Tim
1+11,
.. .
. ,
5
CO
li 1
eM r.;'- i 1, •
A
-,''''' 1:','''.A.A.,•,____1:4'.'
111 . i ! eillitalostio
,41113'2177"'6
:. „... _-,,, ,.
i 2,__wiw. .1 , \ . . .
t
,
.., 1 , _11
....., ..
A• 4
,-...
....,
.‘i
•,1'A,,A1_,
,%.-''•
...'.-_•_'x. • '
4
„:„...
V.x.i. .<
,,, z• .I ..„_
I
..,
. ..
#
,
. .
'11
I
„ --4
•„,,,. ,
, „,,A• ,
•$ ,
f ,k,
,p4 4. ,::.,•
• .-,-4
f, i
® .tag ,
ti
7
PARK MAINTENANCE STANDARDS
SURVEY SUMMARY FOR FY 2005
Quarterly Periods: First Quarter, FY 2005 Overall % of Standards Met: 89%
Second Quarter, FY 2005 Overall % of Standards Met: 89%
Third Quarter, FY 2005 Overall % of Standards Met: 91%
Fourth Quarter, FY 2005 Overall % of Standards Met: 89%
Categories
I. Athletic Facilities: Competitive Fields
East South West Avg. %of Stds Met Prey. Yr.%of Stds. Met
1'Quarter 96% 93% 86% 92% 86%
2"d Quarter 94% 88% 91% 91% 92%
3`d Quarter 96% 96% 93% 95% 88%
4th Quarter 94% 91% 91% 92% 92%
II. Playgrounds
East South West Avg. %of Stds Met Prey. Yr. %of Stds.Met
1St Quarter 92% 95% 87% 91% 83%
2"d Quarter 89% 91% 89% 90% 86%
3`d Quarter 89% 92% 94% 92% 92%
4th Quarter 89% 91% 89% 90% 90%
III. Pavilion/Shelter Facilities
East South West Avg. %of Stds Met Prey. Yr. %of Stds. Met
1St Quarter 91% 94% 89% 91% 90%
2"d Quarter 91% 92% 87% 90% 93%
3`d Quarter 94% 97% 90% 94% 90%
4th Quarter 91% 90% 89% 90% 92%
IV. Tennis Courts
East South West Avg.%of Stds Met Prey. Yr. %of Stds.Met
1St Quarter 97% 98% 100% 98% 91%
2"d Quarter 91% 89% 95% 92% 96%
3rd Quarter 88% 89% 100% 92% 93%
4th Quarter 88% 84% 91% 88% 91%
V. Basketball Courts
East South West Avg. %of Stds Met Prey. Yr. %of Stds. Met
l'Quarter 98% 96% 96% 97% 94%
2"d Quarter 96% 95% 98% 96% 98%
3`d Quarter 98% 99% 98% 98% 96%
4th Quarter 99% 100% 100% 100% 96%
VI. Sand Volleyball Courts
East South West Avg. %of Stds Met Prey.Yr.%of Stds.Met
1st Quarter 67% 93% 89% 83% 81%
2nd Quarter 70% 93% 100% 88% 84%
3`d Quarter 93% 85% 100% 93% 79%
4th Quarter 85% 74% 100% 86% 90%
VII. Ponds
East South West Avg. %of Stds Met Prey.Yr.%of Stds.Met
1st Quarter 92% 87% 33% 71% 70%
2nd Quarter 87% 90% 50% 76% 76%
3rd Quarter 80% 93% 44% 72% 71%
4th Quarter 86% 86% 50% 74% 73%
VIII. Parks: General Parks
East South West Avg. %of Stds Met Prey. Yr. %of Stds. Met
1s`Quarter 93% 92% 95% 93% 88%
2' Quarter 91% 90% 92% 91% 92%
3`d Quarter 90% 96% 96% 94% 89%
4th Quarter 91% 93% 94% 93% 93%
Overall District Averages
East South West Overall%of Stds Met Prey.Yr. %of Stds.Met
ls`Quarter 91% 93% 84% 89% 85%
2❑d Quarter 89% 91% 88% 89% 90%
3rd Quarter 91% 93% 89% 91% 87%
4th Quarter 90% 89% 88% 89% 89%
4:1,411 Parks & Recreation Department
Goals & Objectives FY2005
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION (Not Prioritized)
• Implementation of the CIP Program • Implementation of City Council Strategic Issues
• Continuation of Staff Development • Implementation of Special Projects & Programs
Implementation of the CIP Program
FY 2005 CIP Projects (Parks & Leisure, #2)
Status: Ongoing. Monthly report given to Board
❑� FY 2005 Park Land Dedication Projects (Parks & Leisure, #2)
Status: Ongoing. Monthly report given to Board
Continuation of Staff Development
0 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
El Complete Emergency Management Academy (Cheletia Thomas, Darrell Harvey)
Status: Wednesdays January 12 - March 2
Complete NRPA Revenue Management School (David Gerling)
Status: Peter Lamont completed the two-year course; David Gerling completed the first year.
Q 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
0 Conduct Arbor Master Training (Parks & Leisure, #1)
Status: Working on schedule for fall session.
Ej Attend the 11th Annual Southeast Texas Grounds Maintenance Conference
Status: Complete
0 Attend the Texas Cooperative Extension Forestry Unit's 'Arboriculture 101'
(Curtis Schoessow, Scott Deffendoll, and David Pemberton)
Status: Four Saturdays in January 2005
a Coordinate and prepare for TRAPS Regional Workshop in Winter 2006
Status: 2005 conference re-scheduled for January 2006 in College Station
0 Attend Texas Turfgrass Conference (Scott Hooks, Gary Marske, Paul Rucker, Keith Fails)
Status: Conference attended, December 6th- 8th
Updated: October 7, 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
0 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.
0 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; construction contract approved on March 10th and
under construction. Completion expected October 2005.
Q Review leisure service programs ( Parks & Leisure, #2)
Status: Softball program report October 12, 2004. Fall "Senior Passport"program complete; cricket league
proposal received. Internal review of Division 81 programs was been completed in April 2005.
0 Pursue cooperative efforts with the City of Bryan on joint programming (Parks &
Leisure, #2)
Status: Planning Senior Olympics for 2006; Men's D State softball tournaments July15-17 2005
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 11th. Plans 98% complete -
bids expected in December.
0 Promote performing arts (Parks & Leisure, #3)
Status: 2005 starlight concert series complete.
Continued implementation of regional planning and development initiative
(Parks & Leisure, #4)
Status: Funding approval in BVSWMA FY 2005 budget; Appraisal complete; meeting on August 31st
with Congressman Chet Edwards and BVCOG. Federal funding possibilities being explored.
,\V Develop action plan for Northgate Park (Parks & Leisure, #2)
Status: On hold pending staff discussions
0 Develop Master Plan for Steeplechase (Parks & Leisure, #2)
Status: First public hearing held on February 23wd, Second on March 29th, Board review scheduled
for May regular meeting.
Implement Arboretum improvement plan (Parks & Leisure, #2)
Status: On hold pending Bee Creek channel improvements.
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.
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.
Continue investigation of the feasibility for NRPA departmental accreditation
Status: Inventory with current level of compliance complete
Updated: October 7, 2005 Page 2 of 3
,\N Continue investigation of the feasibility of implementing a Donations Program for
the Department
Status: Draft program complete.
N 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 3"d; Parks Board focus group on March 8th; all focus groups complete; survey results
being tabulated. Draft report to board on October 11, 2005.
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. Signs installed in August 2005.
r4 Facilitate Cricket program (Parks & Leisure, #2)
Status: Facilitate start of user group; site identified for facility; organization of group in progress. On hold.
vo r.4 Northgate Music Series (Parks & Leisure, #3)
Status: Initial funding approved. On hold.
Ej Investigate Lincoln Center staffing possibilities
Status: Reorganization with existing positions complete. Two Assistant Center Supervisors in place as of
February 1st.
k\ Decide what should be done with old buildings at Lincoln Center
Status: Staff met with Lincoln Former Students in April; funding requested for testing services. On hold
pending funding approval.
if Item Complete
EN Pending/On Hold
Updated: October 7, 2005 Page 3 of 3
STRATEGIC PLANS IMPLEMENTATION CALENDAR
OCTOBER 2005 - DECEMBER 2005
STATEMENT SUBJECT TEAM OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
"Core Services Provide Effective Steve,Ross,'
s Cemetery Services Ric,
Peter L'.„, Online!Phone Rec Testing
Core Services Technology Services G4Itid
S1
Core Services City Marketing Plan •
S3 "
Core Services "EmploYee
S"3 Communication Plan
Core Services Advisory Board
S 3 . Communication
Core Services Cooperation with
S`5 . TxDOT for
Landscaping Capital
Projects
Core Services
S 6 , ,Recognition Systems.
Core Services Performance
S 6 Evaluation'Systems'"
Steve, Quarter maintenance
Parks&Leisure Parks Maintenance Ric,Curtis, standards to board 10/11/2005
Services Standards Ross
S1
Parks&Leisure Urban Forest Steve,
Services Management Plan- Ross, •
S1
Parks&Leisure Greenway Bikeway
Sertrices
S1
Parks&Leisure Public Appearance
Services issues
51 .
Parks&Leisure "intergenerational Steve,RIC, Expected Completion
Services Parks Pete V,David
S 2 W DRAFT Report to Board on Senior report to Parks&Rec. Senior Report to City Council
Parks,&Leisure Leisure Service Steve, 10/11/2005 Board
services Peter L Needs Assessment to Council Needs Assessment to Council
S Programs E3MOVED TO DECEMBER
DarrJd .-,.:.
Parks i Leisure Cooperative Efforts i, Steve, ASA State Bids ASA National bids
Services with the City of Bryan Peter L.,
$2 David G.
Out to Bid
Parks&Leisure Veterans Park Steve,ftic,
Services Phase ii Development Curtis,Ross,
S 2 PeterL.
Five-year Parks
Parks&Leisure Capital Improvement StNo pve,Ric,
Services Projects Pete v.,
S 2 ;DavidiW.,
NOTE: Shaded items have been completed.
VPAC II
ks$Leisure 3 Additional fields included in design
Par
Services' Soccer Pield light
�}irection
S2! .
Parks&Leisure Activities that
Services Enhance&Serve the
S 2: Community
Parks,&Leisure Promote the
Services Performing Arts
Parks&Leisure Strategic Placement ';
Services s of Public Art
S3 "
Parks&Leisure Regional Planning&" Steve,Ric,
Services Development Parks Board
$4 Initiatives
Expected update through council
Planning& Update Park Land Steve,
Development" Dedication Ordinance Pic
SI
Economic ` Promote Commercial
Development Development in the
S I WPC District
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT& PARK LAND DEDICATION PROJECTS FY'05
September 30, 2005
Ca•ital Im•rovement Pro"ects
Completion
Capital Improvement Project Project Funding Date Final
Projects Status Manager # Budget Source Expected/Actual Cost
SoutheastConmmunit Park�`Tvuo Acre Purchase,'a Com fete 1 M M ilf t F �0 4 4 `u /00 $4 000
East`ate tni rovements. ,G Complete Davtrt P1<0404 $4 000 rez�i e �ul /0 s 4 '144;270
Wolf PenCreelt Tiees Complet ;� Pet Y � $ 2 k} 0 n uu (�0 t 1l' i 11 1 $8 360
ns '.Complete t , ;.,.- .,Pei ` , PO400? '$70,500 � neral Bund ll� ' 4 °,, �r 04 34,500
Wol#lien CreekBig
•
ns
Park Soccer Field Light Design Complete Pete. PK0408 $20,000 General Funds 10/04
Krenek Crossing Landscaping Complete " Pete GG002 •$20,000 City Centre`• 11/04 1/08 •15,606
Lick Creek Park Bike,Rocks,Benches,&Slabs Complete Pete PK0069 $7000 `98 Bond 12/31/04 1/05. $6,650
Lincoln Center Expansion/Improvements Complete° Ric PK0319 $984,000 CDBG Funds 3/05 x1/05 $818,448
Greens Prairie Rd Landscaping&Irrigation Design Complete David ST0214 , $80;000 Street Project Fund r 4/05 '3/28 $80,000
Parkway Park I Complete Pete PK0409 $50 000 `03 G C,+Zone 2 ' '-3/05 M1 3/25 $44,795
Central'Park Soccer Lights Complete Pete PK0406 $285,000 General Fund' ' ,6/05 • 4/05 $224,174
Rock Prairie Rd Medians Landscape Complete Pete St9923 $40,000 "98 Bond 3/05 3/16 $23,903
Thomas Pool Collector Tank Repair Complete Ric PK0528 $20,000 '05 General Fund 5/05 5/15/05 $270,470 Jai `
1
VPAC Soccer Lights Complete Pete PK0511 $400,000 General Fund 5/05 5/12/05 $10,619 ,
Economic Development
Business Park Sign Complete Pete GG0302 $50,000 Business Center Fund 5/05 $49114.34
Jack&Dorothy Miller Park
Basketball Court Cover Complete Pete PK0512 $175,000 '05 General Fund 9/05 10/07/05 $152,850
Intergenerational Park Additions Substantial Completion David PK0513 $310,000 '03 Bond 9/05
Lincoln Playground Under Construction Pete PK0533 $50,000 '05 Gen.fund 11/05
Cemetery Land Acquisition Pending Land Contract Ross GG9905 $275,000 '98 G.O. Unknown
Steeplechase Park Development Out to Bid David Pk0502 $315,000 Community Dev. 12/05
Veterans Park Phase II In Design Ric P0501 $6,925,000 '03 Bond 10/07
W.A.Tarrow Spray Park In Design Ric PK0503 $245,000 Community Dev.
WPC Multipurpose Building In Design Ric $700,000 WPC T.I.F. 5/06
North ate Restrooms No status Ric $300,000 FY'05
I—Intergenerational Project
CIP Summary
Under Construction 2
Under Contract 0
Pendin. Contracts 0
Bids Received 0
Out to Bid/Re-Bid 1
In Desi•n 3
Pendin. Land Contract 1
On Hold 0
No status 1
24
Park Land Dedication Pro"ects
Completion
Park Land Dedication Project Project Funding Date Final
Projects Prioritized Status Manager # Budget Source Ex•ected/Actual Cost
ZONE 1 -$204 402
North•ate Park A •uisition On Hold Zone 1 Funds
ZONE 2-$84,466
$21435
Richard Carter Park Sidewalks Complete Pete PK0411' $20,000 ''''Replacement 10/31/04
Richard Carter Park Landscape&Irrigation Complete Pete•- .PK.0629 : $45,000 Park Zone 2 8/05 - 6/3/05'',: $15,883
Thomas Park Track Complete David Pk05526 $110,000 Zonet2 Funds ,5/05 6/21 $87,596
ZONE 3-$68 073
Cy Miller Park Sign Bed
Under Construction Peter PK0532 $9,000 Zone 3 Funds 10/15/05 $8,667
Redevelopment
Central Park Ball field entrance Improvements In Design David $27,000 veFund
Youngblood Memorial Out to Bid David PK0534 $4,000 Zone 3 Funds
Central Park Life Trail In Design David
Central Pond Sailfish Walk Complete David PK0405 $48,500 . 'Zone 3 Funds 10/15/04 12/3/04 $46,690
ZONE 4-$22,370
Zone 4 Funds+
Raintree Improvements Concrete Walks On Hold Pete NA $0 $15,000'98 Bond
Windwood Im•rovements Concrete Walks On Hold Pete NA $0 Zone 4 Funds
ZONE 5 $25,206
Jack&"D rool 1 iilerP rlcTraltl»i•htif�'• ,1 tkmplete � .• et� St?ktf.408: ,,^.. •$5 e n s r; 0/04 ;. 1{Cid. ,_,.$48,862."
ZONE 6-$85,901
Southwest Park Development On Hold Pete/David $90,000 Zone 6 Funds
Lemontree Park Disc Golf Complete - Pete V PK0527', $5,000 Zone 6 Funds 5/15/05 04115/05 $3,725
Gabbard Park Sidewalk 1 On Hold David NA $0 Zone 6 Funds
ZONE 7-$267,983
John Crompton Park Development 1 Under Construction Pete PK9803 $710,000 Zone 7 Funds Oct.10/05
ZONE 8-$42000
ZONE 9-$34,654
ZONE 10-$188,125
Desi•n Edelweiss Gartens In Design Pete
ZONE 11 -$28,643
Pebble Creek Park Improvements/Tot PlaY!round 1 Complete Pete PK0403 $36,500 Zone 11 Funds 11/04 12/04 $38,325
ZONE 12-$10,638
ZONE 13-$585
I—Intergenerational Project
Park Land Dedication Summary
Completed 7
Under Construction 2
Under Contract 0
Bids Received 0
Pending Contracts 0
Out to Bid 0
In Design 4
Pending Land Acquisition 0
On Hold 5
Total 18
O:/Projects/CIP/CIP&Park Land Ded Project List.doc Page 2
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT& PARK LAND DEDICATION PROJECTS FY'06
October 4, 2005
Capital Improvement Projects
Completion
Capital Improvement Project Funding Date Final
Projects Status Manager Project# Budget Source Expected/Actual Cost
,Lions Park Iron Fence Pete $25,000 CDBG
Lions Park Basketball Court&
Cover Pete $220,000 CDBG
Field Redevelopment Pete PK0300 $39,000
University Park Development , David PK0410 $400,000 General Fund
Northgate Restrooms No status Ric $300,000 FY'05
Lincoln Center Walk Cover Ric $45,000 CDBG
New Forestry Shop In Design Ric PK0520 $100,000 '03 Bond
Veterans Park Phase It In Design Ric P0501 $6,925,000 '03 Bond 10/07
WPC Multipurpose Building In Design Ric $700,000 WPC T.I.F. 5/06
W.A.Tarrow Spray Park In Design Ric PK0503 $245,000 Community Dev.
Lincoln Playground Under Construction Pete PK0533 $50,000 '05 Gen.fund 10/05
Jack&Dorothy Miller Park CJ.YLy-
Basketball Court Cover �n Pete PK0512 $175,000 '05 General Fund 9/05
Intergenerational Park
Additions Under Construction David PK0513 $310,000 '03 Bond 9/05
Steeplechase Park
Development Out to Bid David Pk0502 $315,000 Community Dev. 12/05
Cemeter Land Ac uisition Pendin Land Contract Ross GG9905 $275,000 '98 G.Q. Unknown
I—Intergenerational Project
CIP Summary
Under Construction 3
Under Contract 0
Pending Contracts 1
Bids Received 0
Out to Bid I Re-Bid 1
In Design 4
Pending Land Contract 1
On Hold — 0
No status 6
Park Land Dedication Pro•ects
Completion
Park Land Dedication Project Project Funding Date Final
Projects Prioritized Status Manager # Budget Source Ex•ected/Actual Cost
ZONE 1 -$204,402
North.ate Park A .uisition On Hold Zone 1 Funds
ZONE 2-$84,466
ZONE 3-$68,073
Cy Miller Park Sign Bed Under Construction Peter PK0532 $9,000 Zone 3 Funds 10/15/05 ,
Central Park Ball field entrance Improvements In Design David Redevelopment
Fund
Youngblood Memorial In Design David , PK0534 $4,000 Zone 3 Funds
Central Park Life Trail In Design David
ZONE 4-$22,370
Zone 4 Funds+
Raintree Improvements Concrete Walks On Hold Pete NA $0 $1500098 Bond
Windwood Im•rovements Concrete Walks On Hold Pete NA $0 Zone 4 Funds
ZONE 5-$25,206
ZONE 6-$85,901
Southwest Park Development On Hold Pete/David $90,000 Zone 6 Funds
Gabbard Park Sidewalk On Hold David NA $0 Zone 6 Funds
ZONE 7-$267,983
John Crompton Park Development/
Under Construction Pete PK9803 $710,000 Zone 7 Funds Oct 1/05
ZONE 8-$42,000
ZONE 9-$32,654
ZONE 10-$188 125
Desion Edelweiss Gartens In Design Pete
ZONE 11-$41,987
ZONE 12-$10,638
ZONE 13-$583
I Intergenerational Project
Park Land Dedication Summary
Completed 4H
Under
Under Construction 2
Under Contract 0
Bids Received 0
Pending Contracts 0
Out to Bid 0
In Design 4
Pending Land Acquisition 0
On Hold 5
Total 18
O:/Projects/CIP/CIP&Park Land Ded Project List.doc Page 2
Senior Services Coordinator Report
September 26, 2005
Senior World Passport Program
The International Programs Office at Texas A&M University and The Parks and
Recreation Department are co-sponsoring this free program for seniors. All session take
place at the Teen Center. Upcoming sessions:
October 4th Tunisia at 10:00am
October 20th Italy at 10:00am
October 25 Syria at 10:00am
"Howdy Teams"
The Howdy Teams are volunteers serving as greeters who welcome the passengers as
they arrive in College Station at Easterwood Airport. Currently, thirteen flights arrive
daily throughout the week and volunteers are needed on weekends and holidays. Each
shift is approximately 20— 30 minutes.
Aerofit Center
Aerofit is having October Senior Fest for individuals 55 and over. You will receive a
free trial membership for the month and Special Events are scheduled throughout the
month. Contact Carol at 823-0971 for more information.
Exploring Lunch Lecture Series
The Exploring History Lunch Lecture Series kicked off the fall season with a
continuation of the World War II focus. The lecture for September featured Red Cashion
with"WWII The Homefront". Lunch is served at the College Station Conference Center
at 11:30am and the speaker begins at 12:00noon. Please make a reservation by calling
764-3491.
Upcoming Lectures:
October 19: "Buffalo Soldiers"—Eddie Harrison
November 16: "Transportation"—Peter Hugill
December—No Lecture
Computer Club
September 28th at the Center for Regional Services we have Dr Henry Hill speaking on
Tax Planning
October 12th at the College Station Utility Service Center we have Clara Mounce
speaking on an overview of the services available in our local libraries
October 26th at the Center For Regional Services we have Kevin and Martha White for a
hands on demonstration of GIMP also secheduled for November 2nd
Xtra Education Classes
Computer Classes and bridge are is session. The Genealogy class and Intro to Field
Archaeology did not make. Registration overall was down slightly this session.
Senior Services Coordinator Report
September 26, 2005
Senior World Passport Program
The International Programs Office at Texas A&M University and The Parks and
Recreation Department are co-sponsoring this free program for seniors. All session take
place at the Teen Center. Upcoming sessions:
October 4th Tunisia at 10:00am
October 20th Italy at 10:00am
October 25 Syria at 10:00am
"Howdy Teams"
The Howdy Teams are volunteers serving as greeters who welcome the passengers as
they arrive in College Station at Easterwood Airport. Currently, thirteen flights arrive
daily throughout the week and volunteers are needed on weekends and holidays. Each
shift is approximately 20—30 minutes.
Aerofit Center
Aerofit is having October Senior Fest for individuals 55 and over. You will receive a
free trial membership for the month and Special Events are scheduled throughout the
month. Contact Carol at 823-0971 for more information.
Exploring Lunch Lecture Series
The Exploring History Lunch Lecture Series kicked off the fall season with a
continuation of the World War II focus. The lecture for September featured Red Cashion
with"WWII The Homefront". Lunch is served at the College Station Conference Center
at 11:30am and the speaker begins at 12:00noon. Please make a reservation by calling
764-3491.
Upcoming Lectures:
October 19: "Buffalo Soldiers"—Eddie Harrison
November 16: "Transportation"—Peter Hugill
December—No Lecture
Computer Club
September 28th at the Center for Regional Services we have Dr Henry Hill speaking on
Tax Planning
October 12th at the College Station Utility Service Center we have Clara Mounce
speaking on an overview of the services available in our local libraries
October 26th at the Center For Regional Services we have Kevin and Martha White for a
hands on demonstration of GIMP also secheduled for November 2nd.
Xtra Education Classes
Computer Classes and bridge are is session. The Genealogy class and Intro to Field
Archaeology did not make. Registration overall was down slightly this session.