The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLincoln Center Wayne Smith Park Corridor Master PlanLINCOLN CENTER WAYNE SMITH PARK CORRIDOR MASTER 11 yy�iil•u� g . COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP 203 HOLLEMAN DRIVE EAST COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77040 L I NCOLH CENTER - WAYHE SMITH MASTER PLAN MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP CONSULTING ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, & PLANNERS 203 HOLLEMAN DRIVE EAST COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 409-693-5359 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This plan is the product of the interest, good will and civic spirit of literally hundreds of people, all of them seeking to improve this neighborhood and the City of College Station for the benefit of its citizens, now and in the future. Their participation and assistance is gratefully acknowledged. CITY COUNCIL PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD Larry J. Ringer, Mayor Fred Brown Dick Birdwell Nancy Crouch Jim Gardner Lynn McIlhaney Vernon Schneider Dick Haddox Sharon Colson, Bill Lancaster, Andrea Derrig Marci Rodgers. Gayle Schmidt Deborah Webb Mike Winner Chairman Vice -Chairman Nancy Crouch, Council Liaison Judith Arnold Pat Boughton Gary Briers LINCOLN CENTER ADVISORY BOARD Judy LeUnes, Chairman Norman Gibbs Yasin Ishaq Patricia Larke Jean Preston Oliver Smith Warren Whiting, Past Chairman 11 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP Larry M. Wells Gregory K. Taggart Kathryn I. Maddox N. B. Bardell, Jr., P.E. Kenneth R. Havel COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE CITY STAFF CONTRIBUTORS LINCOLN CENTER STAFF CITY STAFF Ron Ragland, City Manager Steve Beachy, Director Parks and Recreation Department Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director Parks and Recreation Department Jim Callaway, Director Planning Department David Pullen, P.E., City Engineer Lillian Robinson, Director Lincoln Center Dan Fette, Past Director Community Development Office Terri Dashiell Clayton Hall Melody Thomas Michael J. Swope, Chief of Police Major Ed Feldman, C.S.P.D. Sgt. Larry Johnson, C.S.P.D. Pete Vanacek, Parks and Recreation Department Veronica Morgan, Engineering Ray Terrell" Channie Hopkins q CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS C.H.O.I.C.E. Larry Johnson Janice Burke St. Matthew's Baptist Church Rev. Mr. M. O. Cooper, Pastor Larry Johnson, Deacon Willie Campbell, Deacon Clarence Britton, Deacon Pleasant Grove Baptist Church Rev. Mr. C. L. Arnold, Minister James Curtis Thompson, Deacon Sam Hill, Deacon Travis Williams, Deacon Southgate Village Tenant Council National Association of Black Journalists, T.A.M.0 Chapter Channie Hopkins, President Dian Bass Ursula Burrell Jennifer Wilkerson Pam Lee Helen Wolfe Lincoln High Alumni Association James Steen, President 3 CITIZENS Lula E. Brown George Ford, III Tony Hamilton Ken Monroe Evelyn Wells Lance Jackson Patricia Allen Ebbie and Monnie Thompson Wanda Bolden Lorenzo Grays Tyna Allen Willie Ruth Walker Jennifer Wilkerson Ursula Burrell Robbie Marie Smith Nickery Adrian Williams Bertha Steen LaTrinia Mitchell Billie J. Smedley Norman Gibbs Mike Cornelius Johnny Townsend Bobby Carroll LaTonya Terrell Andrea Kimbrough R. A. Terrell Mrs. Charlie Mae Jones Clara Moore Walter Peterson Clemmie Mitchell Sharlett Smith Robert Washington Ell Sweed Gwen Ford Randall Ford Darla Calhoun Kimberly Banks Towanna Montgomery Carl Calhoun Dorothy J. Edwards Lucy Petersen Kimmie Davis Carolyn Waldon Varonda Pharms LyNette Brown Tommy Roy Mabelene Canto Johnny and Jean Moore Kymberli Rucker Aubrey Gibbs J. T. Warren Sterling Whitley Ossie Mae Walker Lynda Harms 4 Stephanie Terry McMurray Willie McMurray Terry D. Radke Terence Turner Cassandra Jones Rhonda Washington Mrs. Willie Jackson Brian K. Nelson Iris Nicholson Steven Wick Victoria Rodriquez Terry Husted Melody Loignon Bruce Straub Monte Trenckmann Mr. and Mrs. Will Schaeffer Jamie Laurenz Dan Kotecki Louis Edith Cooper Dora McMillian Ms. Doreas J. Moore Malaika Easton Amiya R. Ghatak-Roy Robert Vernon Dawn Stevens Eddie Clipp Oscar Carverall Diana E. Bass Wanda Preston Tammie Preston Sharon Preston Mr. and Mrs. Washington James E. Steen Miss Caldwell Orlean Williams Pamela Lee Johnny Flowers Mrs. Sharilyn Taylor Lovell Mitchell Jessie M. Henson LaTonya Cooks Leola Mitchell Linda Barnes Lisa Murray Faye Daily Stacey Steptoe Early Wells James and Mrs. Devrin Paldo Leola Wilkerson Elease Carter Christland Robinson Tamra Lott Teresa Cordova Lisa Auston 5 Papa Pearson Travis L. Williams, Sr. Greg Abbott Jim Bell Stuart Pat Farmer Mr. and Mrs. Wayne Todd Lori Smith B. Watson Marie Rios Alicia McMurray Jackie Yvette Elias Alberta Davis Lucy and Joe Rodriguez Manuel Beraza Eddie Castro Eillie Brooks Mario Martinez Channie Hopkins Ruthie Glorier Aurora Gibbens Jareth Dugi Darlene Jackson Ruben Garces Joseph Peterson LaTonya Barnes Laquita Barnes Linda Tucker Mary McClenton Clarence Heard Pat Barllargeon Susan Howard Julian Pecacek Ying Feng Li Cecelia Browder Relinda M. Peterson Shirlynn Crawford Jay Robertson Tad Bourgeois Robert Kruse Martha Roger Chris Houston Ella Jimenez Mrs. John Logan Mildred Martin Malbonee Merchant Minnie McNeal Toby Searcy John Nelson Elmer Lister Charlie McGruder John McGruder Pam Wade Rudell Wilson Artie Mae Sabbs M Patricia Terrell Sheneka Merchant Myesia Merchant Keznick Smith Ruby Smith Jim Woods Joy Woods Rob Schleider Paul Smith Sandra Smith Audrey L. Williamson Annie Williams Willie Marie Bajai Franklin Betty Franklin Jessica Foster Alejandro Veliz Jackson Dernice Terry Lewis Spenser Caldwell Rona Caldwell Robert Ramsey Edward Carroll, Jr. Linda Williams Brandon Smith Tynagus Johnson Deborah Johnson Norris Steanart Lance Lowy Mamie Bell Delores Franklin James Robinson Sean Buchtler and all the other anonymous citizens who contributed their comments and insights. 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction 9 History 10 Goals and Objectives 11 Comparison to Existing Facilities 12 The Process 13 Data Collection 14 Data Analysis 17 Basis for the Plan 20 THE PLAN 22 Implementation 27 Appendix I. Land Needs and Project Phasing 101 II. Land Acquisition Procedures 201 III. Proposed Land Acquisitions 301 IV. Preliminary Cost Estimates 401 V. Funding Considerations 501 8 INTRODUCTION The Lincoln Center/Wayne Smith Park corridor is located on the west side of the City of College Station, approximately one half mile south of Texas A & M University. It is in the heart of a low -to -moderate income neighborhood. The corridor area is anchored on the north by Wayne Smith Park and the adjacent Fairview Park. On the south side is Lincoln Center, a mixed -use community center that fronts on Holleman Drive. On the west side is the Southgate Village Apartment Complex, and the east side is generally bounded by Eleanor Street which currently dead -ends into Wayne Smith Park. The land between the two park facilities, including the open area, is not city -owned; Southgate Village owns most of it. In addition, there are six small residential tracts (only two of which are occupied) which lie west of Eleanor. The area is generally flat and open with a major north -south drainageway, an un-named tributary of Bee Creek, providing a natural division between park and apartment uses. Two other drainageways flow into this Bee Creek tributary, segmenting the corridor into several areas. This large expanse of under -used land, along with the increasing recreational and park needs of the neighborhood and the City as a whole, prompted city leaders to seek a way to meet these needs and enhance quality of life for area residents. At the direction of the City Council, the Parks and Recreation Department, along with the Community Development Office, began seeking a method to link the existing city -owned facilities, and by doing so, enhance neighborhood and community recreational opportunities, improve Park infrastructure, and create a truly pleasant and aesthetically pleasing place to serve the public. The Master Plan is the result of that foresight. E HISTORY LINCOLN CENTER Lincoln Center was originally constructed as College Station Negro High School on a three acre site donated by the Hrdlicka family in 1941. In the 1961 Brazos Area Plan, Lincoln was referred to as a campus -type school containing grades 1 through 12. The school was well known for athletic and academic excellence and was a source of pride for area residents. In 1966 a fire severely damaged the school and the decision was made to close the facility and send students to other College Station schools. The vacant structure was then leased by the school district to the City of College Station for recreational purposes. The City also obtained adjacent land for an all-purpose sports field. In 1973, Lincoln Center began offering a full range of recreational programs. Purchased by the City in 1978, and structurally renovated in 1985, Lincoln Center continues to meet the recreational and other needs of the surrounding neighborhood and the city as a whole. In addition to other activities at the site, Lincoln Center is the location of the College Station Parks and Recreation Department West Side Maintenance Facility. Lincoln Center also supports many social activities and service programs, currently including: teen dances, city-wide special events, meals for the elderly, a senior citizens' center, food commodity distribution, a toy library, a part-time public health clinic, income tax preparation assistance, and a tutoring program for grades 1 - 12. Wavne Smith Park This park was acquired by the City in 1954, and for many years was one of the most heavily used Little League ballfield sites in the College Station/Bryan area. In spite of its small size and congested facilities, its central location was instrumental in keeping it in use. In 1984, after completion of new ballfields at .Southwood Athletic Park, and seeking to relieve congestion, the old ballfield was taken out of service, and Wayne Smith Park was converted to a neighborhood play park. In 1987, new basketball courts, picnic facilities and a playground were installed along with landscaping and signage. The park is dedicated to Wayne Smith for his efforts and foresight in establishing the first Little League fields in College Station. 10 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Plan establishes a foundation for redevelopment, expansion and linkage of two proximate but separate park facilities, and improves park and recreation opportunities for local residents. Specific goals and objectives were as follows: Street Routinq Identify streets which need realignment Develop traffic circulation and on-site/off-site parking plan Develop pedestrian access/roadway/parking standards Plannina and Development Identify Corridor Boundaries Identify Land -Use Needs Develop Policies and Strategies for Acquiring Needed Easements, Access Points, and Rights -of -Way Develop Specific Standards for Corridor Development Develop Master Plan for Corridor Development Parks and Recreation Identify Location and Material Requirements for Park Improvements Provide Matching Funds Mechanism Generate a Cost Estimate for Acquisition and Development of the Corridor 11 COMPARISON TO EXISTING FACILITIES ( See Figure 1 ) A comparison was made between existing facilities at Lincoln Center and Wayne Smith Park and other parks of the same classification in College Station. Lincoln Center is unique among the community parks, because it performs a park/recreation function and a social service function; some of its activities fit the definition of "neighborhood" facility, and others are better classified as "community" or city-wide. Lincoln Center is the location of the only city -owned gymnasium. Because of the multiple demands placed on Lincoln Center, it compared unfavorably to other community parks, particularly in regard to outside recreational facilities. The big factor was lack of area devoted to organized playfields, as much of the available space is undeveloped, or burdened by other limiting factors, such as drainage ditches. In addition, the use of Lincoln Center for its social service functions places additional limits on space available for recreation. Wayne Smith Park is a "neighborhood" park, primarily devoted to open play, picnic use, and other forms of low intensity outdoor recreation. As a neighborhood play park, it is generally comparable to other small parks of this type within the city. 12 FIGURE 1 COMPARISON TO EXISTING FACILITIES COLLEGE STATION a PARKS INVENTORYco 0�4, �y1� �� \O� Qom? O� P p� \�`'• �C-3 ANDERSON 8.9 • • • O • • 30 D.A. -Andy" AnaerSon BEE CREEK 435 • • • • • • 1 •1 •1 • I 255 brazos cry. arboretum BRENTWOOD 7.7 I 1 • 1 I I 1 undeveloped BRISON 9.21 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 BROTHERS POND 16.11 1 1.1.1.1.1 • i• I• I• I I I I I• 1 I CENTRA4 4721.1.1 • • 1 e 1.1 • I I I 1 • • • 1.1 1 i 12971 heodouorters COMMUNITY CENTER 17.8 1• I 1 1 1 1 1 ( 1 I. I I 1 I I 75 1► om rentals CY MILLER I n I 1 1• I I. 1.1 1 10 1I• 1 dead uortefs EASTGATE 1.0 1 1 • EMERALD FOREST 4.5 1 • 1.9 I 1 • • • FAIRVIEW 1.81 1 1 1 1.1 I I 1 1 1 I I• I I 1 GABBARD 110.71 11.1.1 • I• I I I 101 1 1 1 10 1 1 GEORGIE K FITCH 11.31 1 1.1.1.1 10-1 1 i• 1• I I I I 10 HENSEL (TAMU) 129.71 . 1 • I . 1 . 1 • 1.1 i • 111.1 •1 1 1 170 LEMONTREE 15A I 1 6101 • • • • • 30 LICK CREEK 515 i •-Ff I 60 undeveloped LINCOLN CENTER 18.0 • I I 19 1 • 1 1 I• 1• I 1 1 I I .1 1421 center LIONS 1.5 11.1.1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0, LONGMIRE 1421 1 1 e I I • I I I I I I I I I I I MERRY OAKS I 4.61 l e t -e 1• • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I OAKS 7.5 • • 1 • • e • PARK SITE 102 1 1 1 ndeveloped PARKWAY 1.9 • • 1 d RAINTREE 13.0 e • • nistofical RICHARD CARTER 7.4 • • m marker SANDSTONE 150 - --- • • 30 SOUTHWOOD 44.7 • • • • • • • • • • • 5" THOMAS 161 • • • • • • • • • • 27 WAYNE SMITH 2.0 • • • 1 1 • 1 WESTCHESTER 10.01 1 •' • 1 • 1 0101,0 • • 1 1 WINDWOOD 10 • • WOODCREEK 66undeveloped WOODWAY 2.0 undeveloped LINCOLN WAYNE MNR rLAENARK �nril®I I®�®I•I I (e� I•I �•I•I•I (•I•I•) I 1 I 1 THE PROCESS Inventory and Data Collection Data Analysis Preliminary Plan and Report Preparation Final Plan Completion Approval 13 DATA COLLECTION Many different sources were used in data collection. Opinions and information were solicited from both the private and public sectors; city staff, public officials, community groups and individual citizens were all involved in the process. In addition, extensive technical information sources, such as drainage and flood maps, deed records and land survey data were consulted. Listed below are the major information sources used. site visits - Project planners conducted over 30 site visits to acquire specific information, as well as to become familiar with general conditions, topography, vegetation, current improvements and park user attitudes. The site and its surroundings were extensively photographed for historical purposes, to stimulate the design process, and to assist in explanation to public bodies of current on -site conditions. Deed Records - Over 50 separate deeds, plats and ownership maps were located, researched, and subjected to standard land survey coordinate calculations in order to develop a project base map which accurately located the size and shape of the corridor and its constituent parcels. Parks Board/Lincoln Center Advisory Board - These two bodies were consulted for input at six separate meetings throughout the process --from the initial gathering of information regarding attitudes and needs, through survey evaluation to the preliminary and final concept stages of the Plan. Lincoln Center Staff - Interviews with the staff, which also included some of the maintenance staff housed on the property, gave us insight from the inside. Area Churches - MDG met with the Boards of Deacons of St. Matthews Baptist Church and Pleasant Grove Baptist Church to gain insight into neighborhood concerns and attitudes prior to conduct of the neighborhood opinion survey. City Staff - City Staff was involved at the concept stage to allow each department to note any special needs or concerns they had regarding the project area. This was accomplished through the normal site review process, with a questionaire being provid departments and local utility companies. Outside the 14 normal site review process, we met with individual senior staff members such as the Planning Director, the City Engineer, and the Community Development Administrator, as well as the Police Chief and senior police officers for input on dealing with their particular professional concerns. We conducted numerous informal meetings with Parks and Recreation Staff and Community Development Staff. Civic Oraanizations - Consultants met with individual members of C.H.O.I.C.E. and the Lincoln School Alumni Association for input as seen from their unique social, cultural, and historical perspectives. Other Public Aaencies - The State Department of Highways and Public Transportation was consulted at various stages to determine the effects on the park of the various proposed Lo-Trak designs, such as the possibility of highway infrastructure intruding into the park corridor. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department was consulted to determine needs as they relate to the Parks and Wildlife Department approval and fund matching processes. Public Documents - "Projections of Student Membership and Facility Needs for College Station Independent School District 1986-87 to 2000-0111, prepared by Population and Survey Analysts, May 1987, was used to determine expected change in the student population for this neighborhood, along with the effect of such a change on future park - recreation needs. PLAN 2000 - This important source was consulted for several reasons. It is the official growth blueprint for the City for the next ten years, and specifically addresses future park and recreational needs. Any concept developed for Lincoln Center/Wayne Smith Park Corridor must be in congruence with PLAN 2000. Neiahborhood Survev - (See Figure 2 ) .The neighborhood survey was undertaken because MDG did not believe that the classic consulting approach to citizen input, ie., one or two public hearings, would foster the necessary participation and desires and needs identification that this unique project demands. Surveys of this type are time and labor intensive, and therefore, costly; but it was imperative that this project produce a set of specific solutions to real needs, so the survey was performed. 15 Z LL Q 4q CO w(D n 4 A concerted effort was made to reach every household in the target area, and several methods were employed, including telephone calls, door-to-door interviews and questionaire drop boxes located at Lincoln Center and Southgate Village Apartments. Actual interviewing was conducted by MDG staff, neighborhood volunteers and the Texas A & M chapter of the National Association of Black Journalists. The overall response rate was better than 30%, an excellent level of feedback for this type of investigation, and indicative of the high level of public interest in the Project. Information generated by the survey was a major force in development of the Plan. The survey also identified certain social needs and concerns outside the scope of the Park plan. This information was turned over to the Community Development Office for action by that agency. 16 DATA ANALYSIS PARK AND RECREATION NEEDS Survey responses were tabulated. Needs, not only for park - related facilities, but also for social service programs, were identified and prioritized at this time. The needs for Park and Recreation facilities ranked by survey response in order of importance, greatest to least, were: 1. Outdoor Lighting 2. Outdoor Restrooms 3. Children's Play Areas 4. Barbecue Pit 5. Jogging/Fitness Track Outdoor Covered Meeting Area (Pavilion) 6. Tennis Courts 7. Softball Fields 8. Little League Baseball Fields 9. Outdoor Basketball Courts 10. Soccer/Football Fields 11. Multi -Use Auditorium Pool/Swimming Facilities (This was not an option on the survey, and these responses were written in.) 12. Regulation Track and Field Track 13. Indoor Basketball Courts 14. Boxing Ring/Training Area After examining survey -identified Parks and Recreation needs, and combining these with additional direction from the Parks Board and Lincoln Center Advisory Board, the concept development process was commenced. Identified needs were addressed in the Plan. 17 SOCIAL SERVICE NEEDS Because of the unique nature of Lincoln Center as a locus for provision of social services, MDG was asked by the Community Development Office to include social service needs in the opinion survey. This was done so that any requirement for additional space or infrastructure to meet these needs could be addressed in the final Plan. According to the survey data, the needs ranked by response, greatest to least are: 1. Day Care Center 2. Tutoring for Grades 1 - 12 3. Big Brother/Big Sister Programs 4. Public Health Clinic 5. Head Start Program 6. Community Education Classes Cultural Programs (Dance, Art, Theatre, etc.) 7. Boy Scouts/Girl Scouts 8. Branch/Mobile Library 9. Senior Citizens Programs 10. Immunization/Vaccination Program 11. Meals -on -Wheels 12. Boys Club 13. Interurban Trolley Bus Stop Many of these items either already exist, or are outside of the purview of the park plan itself, being programmatic in nature.These considerations notwithstanding, the survey responses appear to identify a perceived need for a social service facility of some type. Lincoln Center is primarily a recreation facility, and expansion of its current social service operations may damage its recreational utility, therefore, it was deemed appropriate to designate a site where such a facility could be constructed in the future without damaging the planned park and recreation infrastructure of the corridor. The Plan addresses this identified need. 18 TECHNICAL NEEDS Land Survey The extensive land record research and survey calculations conducted highlight the fact that many of the land parcels in the corridor were originally poorly surveyed, if surveyed at all.Land boundaries are sometimes indefinitely described, and there were a number of conflicts noted between various deeds. In addition, existing boundary monumentation is expected to generally be inadequate to non-existant. There is no doubt that properly executed on -the -ground surveys will be required to locate parcel boundaries and provide information to clear up title conflicts, which will be necessary for the land acquisition process to procede, as well as to adequately protect both public and private property rights. Drainage Examination of the drainage ways in the project area, coupled with the demonstrated need to reclaim space for recreational facilities, indicates that project execution will require drainage improvements. These improvements will allow the site to be developed to its full potential. Utilities Utility considerations are expected to present few dificulties. There are no apparent conflicts, and the corridor will have a lessened demand for these services after development. The existing electric lines serving the Eleanor Street residences will need to be removed, and any remaining overhead electric service lines in the project area will be required to be placed underground, in order to qualify the site for TP&W funds. The large water valve vault and the gas meter installation found at the end of Eleanor street serves Southgete Village Apartments. When the land upon which these are sited is acquired for the park, the City will probably need to provide easements for their continued use. This is expected to be easily accomplished. 19 BASIS FOR THE PLAN Stated Goals Technical Considerations Citizen Input City Council Guidance Parks and Recreaton Board Guidance City Staff Input Community Organizations Parks and Wildlife Funding Requirements Community Development Program Needs 20 PRELIMINARY PLANS FUNCTION PLAN (See Figure 3) Upon examination of the multitude of requirements which the final product would need to satisfy, as well as the specifics of the site, certain general parameters for the final plan began to emerge. It was apparent that the Corridor itself could be readily divided into four basic functional areas, three of which were related to meeting the traditional parks and recreation needs of the users, and a fourth devoted to fulfilling the previously determined need for a site for a future social services facility. These divisions are: neighborhood, mixed neighborhood -community, community (city- wide), and social service. The neighborhood function area is the existing Wayne Smith Park along with the land link south to the existing north boundary of Lincoln Center. Additionally, a pedestrian link is to be accomplished to tie to Fairview Park to the north. The area of mixed neighborhood -community use is the Lincoln Center and its surrounding grounds. After examining all the expressed needs and the land available for their fulfillment, it was seen that additional space would be required to allow for provision of the required community facilities -- the Little League ballfields. The area selected is almost entirely vacant, has the potential for easy access, and should pose few severe development problems. The social service facility area is located on a tract which is currently owned mostly by the city. There are no existing park improvements . This site is ideal for its proposed use because it will form a natural buffer between the residential area to the east and the true park facilities to the west. The central location of this site will also enhance its accessibility for walk-in users. CONCEPT PLAN (See Figure 4) The Concept Plan physically allocates space on the ground for proposed improvements, turning abstraction into reality. At this stage, the preliminary Plan , as represented by the Function Plan and Concept Plan, were presented to the Parks Board and City Council for their review and comments. This is the graphic foundation for the final product. 21 FIGURE 3 FAIRVIEW AVE.__- MO�CLAIR NTCLAIR AR Ell u L SOCIAL ��SIERVICES L ELEANOR - STREET NEIGHBORHOOD �� ' HIGHLANDS M,lx:, NEIGH13 ORHOOD 'COMMUNITY r 4%� —MARYEM Z4** COMMUNITY f?040 %ik- ft-4wj PROPOSED FUNCTION PLAN FOR (LOREM&M CIEMCEIR — WIMME almoirlm [PIZ121s =1212=12 JULY 1990 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP 203 HOLLEMAN DRIVE EAST COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 FIGURE 4 FAIRVIEW AVE. I - _,r---- I PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS ---- ] I o TYPICAL SYMBOL i _ FUTURE_ -J_ SOCIAL SERVICES. MONTCLAIR PROPOSED f 1 o i HSTREET — oI EXTENSION II-, I� .1 /- - r__-�ie� . W a J HIGHLAND ~ (PROPOSED LIGHTED WALKWAYS -PROPOSED _1_17� NEIGHBORHOOD ---SOFTBALL, G, NON-REGU TI I I -PURPOSE ) MARYEM �gftgg0 --- I GA4EBO_- `'PROPOSED }`STORM SEWER- w D � I,I lip I � -'' x IA PAVI LION( Y` \ I I` y PROPOSED - TENNIS TENNIS COURT FUTURE �,- LITTLE LEAGUE COMPLEX AND MAINTENANCE! j - FACILITY ROAD A CONCEPT PLAN FOR ILOaQOdp 9[EMV[E[2 Uj%WpG PG,1G3Q T(0[2[2ODOQ JULY 1990 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP 203 HOLLEMAN DRIVE EAST COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77040 l L CgRO= PROPOSED -GAZEBO VOLLEYBALL PIT THE PLAN (See Figure 5) The Master Plan is the result of intensive and extensive data gathering and a critical analysis of those results. The Plan is reality -based. It can actually be accomplished as stated. Land parcel sizes, shapes and locations are properly mapped in accordance with existing records; drainage, access, safety, utility location, and other technical considerations have been examined at every step to ensure that what is planned can be converted to final design without major adjustments. The Plan is based on the concept that function produces form and seeks to optimize natural features and landforms, natural boundaries and land acquisition opportunities to achieve the stated goals. The Plan is cognizant of the fact that taxpayers' money is involved in its implementation, and every effort has been made to ensure that expenditures are prudent and are directed where they will have the most effect while still seeking to preserve and augment those significant improvements already constructed on the site. The Lincoln Center/Wayne Smith Park Corridor Master Plan conforms to the goals of PLAN 2000. The Plan divides the accomplishment of the project into three major phases. Each phase is an integral part of the whole, and each builds upon the successes of the preceding phases. Complete implementation of the Plan will result in full attainment of the goals set for the Lincoln Center/Wayne Smith Park Corridor, and will provide the residents of the neighborhood, as well as the whole City, with a pleasant, useful and safe place for recreation and outdoor sports. 22 FAIRVIEW AVE. FIGURE 5 -�� j�/_�� --•- A -WALKWAY -- - } � _.._ i- .. o WALKWAY LIGHTS --� - NEW TREE _ j� Z MONTCLAIR_ a. _ rn EXISTING TREES ROSSWALK$ 1 Ci! o p� - STREET EXTENSION — �, Q 14 PARKING LOT J EXISTING PLAY . Ix iLs�.16 $ W � 1 ' J vli."AREA LIGHTB�A�ETE�I,-`. . NEW TREE- L ;'' h p O 0 w 00 wo — xao W 7- - OPEN PLAY ° / �n d i ifAaec (ZW, P , Ex sr W -- — HIGHLAND _.� -IL° WALKWAY \�.... ULLTll 7�y \j .. �,� %� ALL WALKWAY LIGHTS / N ANEAu�+t - :L -- — l PICNIC UNIT AREA LIGHTING - — SEASONAL FOOTBALL ! FIELD BENCH✓ NEW TREE - PICNIC UNIT �WALK MARYEM sox cuLVERT ON " ExrSiur, TREES' CROSSWALK LITTI_E LEAGUI/ COMPLEX "04 Z=,..� WnA�� can Of (Lomau =Crmma - w ami Il oo= Cprxm uMwomm OCTOBER 1990 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP 203 HOLLEMAN DRIVE EAST � COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 11040 0 LINCOLN CENTER WAYNE SMITH PARK CORRIDOR J M- I Phase One - Neighborhood Facilities Begins Project Acquires Land for Park Use and Creates Park Linkage Creates Traffic Linkage for Pedestrians and Vehicles Provides Drainage Improvements Reclaims Land for Recreational Use Provides Neighborhood Ball Fields/Play Area Construction Provides Neighborhood Meeting Areas and Park Amenities Provides Maintainable, Open Vistas Provides Additional Parking/Relieves Congestion Provides Park Lighting Establishes Development Standards for Corridor This phase provides for most of the neighborhood park and recreation needs identified during the data analysis, as well as physically linking Fairview Park, Wayne Smith Park and Lincoln Center. The remaining neighborhood needs are provided for in Phase Two. Park needs immediately addressed are outdoor lighting, provision of more barbecue/picnic facilities, a jogging track (one -mile circuit), tennis courts, a multi -use non -regulation adult softball and seasonal football field, a volleyball court, and two picnic shelters. This is in addition to the development of public access by the Eleanor Street extension and construction of pedestrian linkages across Luther Street to Fairview Park and south across Holleman Drive. The drainage ditch , which is currently the north boundary of Lincoln Center, is placed underground, allowing the space it occupied to be reclaimed for use by the softball field and picnic shelters. Outdoor restrooms will be provided in conjunction with a future pavilion similar to those at other city parks. This structure will also provide for a large barbecue pit and additional picnic facilities. Children's play areas, already existing, were enhanced by placing more activities near them, particularly on the south end of Lincoln Center. The volleyball pit and a shelter were placed so that multiple age groups, such as families, may enjoy non -conflictive parallel play in close proximity to each other. 23 Fitness stations may be added later to the walking/running track in order to provide for more aerobic activities. Many of the needs identified in the survey were space intensive, and it was impossible to provide for the needed Little League fields within Phase One. This continuing need is addressed in Phase Three. Phase One institutes two main development standards for the entire Lincoln Center/Wayne Smith Park Corridor, lighting and pedestrian walkways. These standards provide common elements which will visually link the facilities in the existing corridor, and will be practical for continued use in the future downstream greenbelt, if desired. In the sphere of lighting, after a brief examination of other possibilities, it was considered advantageous to continue use of the standard cylindrical cannister light already found at various installations within the Corridor, as well as at other park sites across the city, most notably Cy Miller Park. Several of these lights have been installed in the Corridor within the past six months. The cannister lights have been found to be durable and economical to operate, and provide excellent illumination as well as being vandal resistant. In addition, they have a simple, streamlined appearance, which blends in well with the landscape. The other major item requiring a standard is the pedestrian crossing. The solution sought was desired to be readily identifiable to both drivers and pedestrians as a foot -traffic path, was to serve as a park area indicator, needed to be easily installed and maintained, and be capable of withstanding the vehicular loads which would be expected in any moderate use city street. In addition to satisfying these requirements, the solution must be pleasing to the eye, as is appropriate for a park installation. The solution developed uses pattern -laid brick pavers set into the street to accomplish these ends. In addition to fulfilling the previously stated requirements, brick pavers provide an surface of noticeably different texture, which allows their immediate recognition as crossing areas by the visually impaired, and reminds vehicle drivers of the need for additional caution in the park area.(See Figure 6) 24 FIGURE 6 STANDARD DETAIL OF A PEDESTRIAN STREET CROSSING RUNNING TRACK ( CINDER OR SIDEWALK ( CONCRETE ) -.'��' .:,',:. r ;• ,:;i,•;.;;;:•• ••.•t�.; ��ti .: -; s),'Y}•}r� y'i :' `•.•''' �' i ''1 `' ti''.x•'''.t',t� 41 fir! y! %� •, ''' ,. , ., ;:; ,.. •. ...?.'. CONCRETE APPROACH *;. BRICK PAYER SECTION CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER CITY STREET PAVER SECTION IN STREET PROVIDES r FOR VEHICLE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF .,}' PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ZONE l`' BRICK PAYER SECTION WITH CONCRETE EDGING AND BASE 11 f r r f PROVIDE AMBULATORY RAMPS :;': Ste;-••'r ti.ti.ti.ti. T'"?: :';:';."^.�' .r;;:ti ; 1 l " 7�',rx 1. 1.-ti ti�:�;'lti'i•:•�;ti'} l�'v��t�;'�'� J'� 1+V-�",�%'�i'�i �l.t t.i�� 1�tii\• l• �f�• !._/Yj"5 tr�. t ,�: t fit• ti•�.+,:-:�I '�'.' •i: '. :,t�:.yid' f .r�'`.C",�,•,,r��'�:'•: t\,r•;•, .�'•,:r'�:' '.'t :'•"�': •. �'t;��1. •��'��'�'Sf•'�,'`�3''s��nl's`��'�'�'��4'ilk-�'�=ti;,f.- ,•J'r '.:yi'\�•w�.+ tin'.:'r•.•.�. w•►• LBRICK PAYER SECTION FUNCTIONS AS TRAIL USERS D IST ANCE M ARKER, IDENT IF IES CROSS ING S ITES FOR VISUALLY IMPARED, AND AESTHETICALLY AND FUNCTIONALLY LINKS THE EXTERIOR OF THE PARK WITH ITS INTERNAL CIRCULATION SCHEME. Phase Two - Social Services Area Acquires Land for Future Social Service Facility Acquires Land for Final Corridor Access to Holleman Drive Provides for Additional Pedestrian Access Expands Park Lighting System Sets Stage for Future Expansion of Greenbelt Across Holleman Assures Open North -South Vista Completes Neighborhood Park Improvements Phase Two is primarily directed at preparing a site for a future social service facility, a need which was identified by the survey. This phase also provides the final Park linkage and access to Holleman Drive, and reclaims additional recreational area through minor drainage improvements. In addition, it makes possible a future expansion to the south, across Holleman, and creation of a park greenbelt running to Southwest Parkway, if desired. The designated site was selected for several reasons. There are currently no park improvements at that location. The site backs up to a residential area and will provide an excellent buffer between park and residential uses, as well as being easily accessible to anticipated walk-in traffic. Until the buildings are constructed, the site will be devoted to open play and used as a low -activity buffer between park use and residential use. The social service facilities building(s) can be built simultaneously with Phase Two, or they can be postponed to a later date depending on the wishes of the City Council and citizens. It is important that this phase be executed regardless of whether or not the facility is constructed immediately or at a later date. Land prices and construction costs will probably continue to rise over the long term; accomplishing as much of this phase as quickly as possible is expected to result in a cost savings to taxpayers, as well as allowing completion of all the neighborhood -type facilities called for in the Plan. 25 Phase Three - Community Facilities Completes Project Provides Drainage Improvements Reclaims Land for Recreational Use Creates Regulation Little League Ball Field Complex Provides Additional Parking Creates East-West Vista Provides Additional Lighting Enhances Security Establishes New Maintenance Facility for Parks and Recreation Department Alleviates Congestion Problems on Eleanor Street Side of Park Corridor Phase Three completes the project and provides the major community recreational facilities -- the Little League fields, which cannot be created any other way, but which were identified as important in the survey and in the planning of the Parks and Recreation Department. The maintenance facility to be developed in Phase Three relieves overcrowding, replaces existing antiquated facilities, and allows for additional space on Eleanor Street to be devoted to access, parking and recreational uses. This phase is intended to be a complete entity in itself. It is a part of the Lincoln Center/Wayne Smith Park Corridor, but the Park Corridor can be complete, and provide useful service without it. Phase Three provides for items that have been identified as real future needs, but its accomplishment is a long-term goal, not an immediate imperative. 26 IMPLEMENTATION The Lincoln Center/Wayne Smith Park Master Plan is designed to be implemented in three distinct phases. Each phase is an integral part of the total project, and expands and augments the accomplishments of the previous phase. Each Phase may be broken down into sub -phases, if necessary to fit budget requirements, and still allow for steady progress toward the final goal. During execution of the sub -phases, items to be completed can be selected according to funding availability. Rapid movement toward implementation will result in public confidence that the needed planned improvements will actually be constructed, as well as making possible significant improvements in recreational opportunities . Delay will result in added future expense and continued unmet parks and recreation needs . The following are recommended steps for execution of the Master Plan: 1. Commencement of land donation and property purchase inquiries, following the steps described in Appendix II 2. Conclusion of land acquisition and necessary relocation proceedings. 3. Preparation of the Site Plan for Phase One. 4. Preparation of matching funds application and submission to Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 5. Preparation of final engineering plans for Phase One (After receipt of state approval). 6. Preparation of Phase One construction contract documents. 7. Bidding process. 8. Construction and acceptance. 9. Commencement of Phase Two, repeating process for Phases Two and Three. 27 APPENDIX I. Land Needs and Protect Phasinq (See Figure 7 The completed Lincoln Center/Wayne Smith Park Corridor Master Plan divides the Project into three major phases. Each is an integral part of the total project and augments and expands the accomplishments of the previous phases. Complete implementation of the Plan will achieve the full realization of the goals originally established for this facility, and will fulfill the neighborhood and community needs identified during the data analysis process. Phase One Phase One is the Neighborhood Facilities Phase. It sets the stage for the remainder of the entire project. While Phases Two and Three can be completely eliminated or postponed indefinitely, failure to acquire the land needed for Phase One renders the rest of the Project without merit. It is important to the future of the Project that all land areas identified for acquisition in Phase One are acquired. No linkage can effectively be accomplished unless all of Parcels E, F, G, H, I, and J are acquired. Parcels A and B are important to the Project as they provide a vista and buffer zone between park uses and residential uses. However, if absolutely necessary, their acquisition can be postponed or deleted entirely. Phase Two Phase Two is the Social Service Area Phase. It is primarily directed at preparing a site for the future social services facility by acquisition of the final land parcels necessary for the needed space and construction of additional drainage improvements. In addition, this phase acquires land for the final public linkage to Holleman Drive, and makes possible the future southward expansion of the park corridor, and creation of a greenbelt, if desired. Parcels C and D are important acquisitions for the project. They provide an additional 100 feet of space for the social service center site and allow for Eleanor Street north of Thompson to be entirely devoted to public purposes (buffer). These parcels can be deleted if absolutely necessary, although doing so will result in a significant reduction in the space available for the future social services center. Parcels K and L provide the public with a western access to the park from Holleman Drive, and allow for necessary drainage improvements to be made to the south end of the park corridor. These two tracts are currently vacant and unfenced, and pedestrian and 101 FIGURE 7 � - -- FAIRVIEW -4VE-- -- W ----------- - -"o ;fCLAIR ix cr HIGH.LAND-. liARYEli "Ao PHASE Two A PHASE THREE �7 wp , cl-'L 4N ROAD EXISTING CITY OF COLLEGE STATION PROPERTY vo EANQR I 3A - ---T- . — PHASE THREE A PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND PROJECT PHASING MAP FOR 10M6MIM CEUT[EUR ym [S Mnn rg n ni ma "Lm JULY 1990 MUNICIPAL DEYELOPMENT GROUP 203 HOLLEMAN DRIVE EAST COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77840 vehicular traffic cross them to enter the park area west of Lincoln Center. Most observers are under the erroneous impression that these tracts are already owned by the city and are part of the Lincoln Center site. Without acquisition of these parcels, the Corridor could at a later date be effectively cut off from access to Holleman by development of the sites. This would eliminate the inviting aspect of the long north -south vista, and damage the security -enhancing openness which was so important to survey respondents. In addition, it seems poor public policy to create a use which encourages trespass as a means of public access when another remedy to the problem exists. To accomplish these goals, acquisition of these tracts is certainly justified. Phase Three Phase Three is likely to present significant boundary and title problems. Many of the smaller tracts were originally surveyed inaccurately, if at all. In addition, there are a number of irregularly -shaped tracts, and several instances of apparent overlapping land claims. Areas of particular concern are parcels N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, and V. Land acquisition for Phase Three is centered around Parcel AA. Clearly, if this tract cannot be acquired, the purchase of other tracts is rendered moot. In order to accomplish the full intent of the plan in this area, all of the parcels will be needed; however, acquisition of some of the smaller tracts, notably Parcels W, X and Y, Q and O, are not imperative, provided that a scaled down facility is acceptable to the City Council and the citizens of College Station. Acquisition of the smaller tracts can be conducted over a period of several years, if necessary. 102 II. Land Acquisition Land acquisition is the basis stands or falls. Without the Project cannot be undertaken. upon which a project such as this land to accomplish the goals, the Before action is taken by the City on any land acquisition, the City must first determine whether funding is to be provided wholly by city funds, or whether a matching fund grant from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is to be sought. There are special requirements for matching funds projects involving state and federal approval of project proposals and land appraisals. These must be followed explicitly or else the project may be denied matching funds participation. The development of the Lincoln Center/Wayne Smith Park Corridor should be an excellent candidate for Texas Parks and Wildlife Department matching funds, according to published evaluation criteria. General Methods Donation Donation is the most advantageous means by which the City can acquire land. Donation can be credited for matching funds, allowing great accomplishment with little actual expenditure of City funds. Tracts which are particularly suitable for donation are those which provide the owner no immediate use, or real future development potential. Parcels A, B, E, R, S, T, and V appear to fit these criteria, although donation certainly should be explored as a possibility for any land acquisition. It is suggested that donors of land to this project may be honored with a plaque or other suitable commemoration of their generosity, preferably located on the project site. Purchase Friendly fee simple purchase is.the most likely means of land acquisition to support the Project. All acquisitions by purchase are required to be at fair market value, as determined by independent appraisal. Any residence tracts sold to the City may require that Community Development relocation funds be committed for resettling the residents of that tract in compliance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646). other than the relocation, the purchase process will be similar to other land acquisitions conducted by the city. Condemnation In a few isolated instances, condemnation may be necessary to purchase a tract, not necessarily because of "unfriendly" or adversary attitudes, but to clear up title problems created by 201 numerous heirs and land transfer by intestate inheritance. This technique may also be required in situations where the current whereabouts of the property owner are unknown. Parcel N is a likely candidate for this type of acquisition. To determine the necessity of this type of acquisition for any given parcel, further in-depth research will be required. "Unfriendly" condemnation should be avoided, at least with respect to small owner -occupied residential tracts. It is extremely important that the favorable public attitudes toward the Project not be damaged by the bad feeling which can be created by adversary condemnation. Any tract which appears likely to require this type of acquisition should be critically examined with reference to the absolute necessity of its inclusion. If it is not absolutely imperative, such a tract should be deleted from consideration. Lease or Park Easement Acquisition of less than fee simple title is acceptable to federal and state funding agencies, provided that the lease or park easement is structured in such a way as to insure the intended public use in perpetuity. Shorter term leases or easements may still be useful tools for the Project, but they probably will not allow the particular parcel or improvements to it to qualify for matching funds. This approach may be a useful tool for acquiring use of lands which will be primarily for vista areas or other non - infrastructure intensive uses such as open playscapes. Possible candidates for this type of acquisition could be the western parts of Tract E, and all of Tracts A, B, K, L, and M. Summary All four techniques may be utilized to acquire the land area necessary to construct the final completed project. Clearly the best case situation for the City would involve donation of all lands involved, but judicious fitting of the technique used to the particular parcel under consideration, as well as the desires and needs of the property owner, will result in the best combination of expenditure for the results achieved. 202 Recommended Land Acquisition Procedures In order for land acquisition and development projects to qualify for funding assistance from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, or other state or Federal Agencies, certain specific steps are required by Public Law 91-646, the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act. (The Relocation Act.) For Land Purchases 1) The City or its representative makes initial contact with the proposed seller to determine if the land is available for sale for park purposes. At this point, no price should be negotiated. If the owner is willing to sell, the owner must be informed of his rights and the rights of any tenants under the Relocation Act and permission obtained for property inspection and appraisal. 2) The City obtains information as to whether or not relocation of owner or tenants will be required, and advises them of their rights under the Act. 3) The City should, at this point, obtain a boundary survey of the property. Since the purchase involves public funds and interests, it is recommended that the survey, as a minimum, conform to the Standards of a Texas Society of Professional Surveyors Category 1A, Condition II Survey. Completion of the Survey at this stage will assist the appraiser in finding the tract on -the -ground; will highlight any boundary, title or legal problems; and will assure the true size, location and extent of the tract, ultimately speeding appraisal and acquisition process. 4) The City obtains appraisal of the property. This must be accomplished before purchase negotiations commence. The owner must be given an opportunity to be present during the appraiser's on -site inspection.It is strongly suggested that an appraiser with a professional designation be employed. 5) The City submits the appraisal for review by the State. Upon receipt of approval, the City will have acceptably determined the fair -market value of the property to be acquired. 6) The City informs the owner in writing of the appraised fair - market value of the property, using a letter or a standard form of "Statement of Just Compensation". 7) The City then makes a written purchase offer of the full amount established as fair -market value just compensation. 8) The City concludes the land purchase according to standard City acquisition policies. 203 For Land Donations Land to be donated is generally subject to matching, provided that matching assistance will serve the purposes of the Act. Government owned land is not eligible for matching. After determining that a given parcel is a candidate for donation, the City should acquire a T.S.P.S. Category lA survey of the parcel. 1) The City submits to the State the names and qualifications of three appraisers. It is suggested than an appraiser with a professional designation be employed. 2) The State will approve one or more of the appraisers. 3) The City obtains an appraisal from one of the approved sources at the City's expense. 4) Appraisal is forwarded to Texas Parks and Wildlife Department for review and approval. 5) Approved appraisal becomes part of the City's project proposal as a basis for value of the donated property. 6) The City concludes acquisition according to Standard City acquisition policies. 204 III. Proposed Land Acauisitions (See Figure 7 ) Parcel Phase Parcel Acreaae Ownership Status ONE A 0.12 Ac Luther G. Jones Estate E B 0.04 Ac Michael G. Holt V E 3.74 Ac Southgate Village Limited Partners V F 0.21 Ac Thelma Walker Estate V G 0.34 Ac Ora Lee Thompson V H 0.26 Ac Sterling Whitley 0 I 0.26 Ac Lillian Robinson 0 J 0.17 Ac Joe Walker V 5.13 Ac Total TWO C 0.12 Ac Mrs. Clefus Lyons Estate 0 D 0.29 Ac Seawillow (Sue) Foster Estate 0 K 0.25 Ac James F. Steen V L 0.35 Ac Mary J. Smith Estate V 1.01 Ac Total THREE M 0.99 Ac Mary F. Washington O,R N 0.21 Ac Robinson Crusoe V 0 0.23 Ac Blossie Payton 0 P 0.19 Ac A. P. Boegner V Q 0.25 Ac Ocie Walker 0 R 0.55 Ac Lonnie & Elma Thompson V S 0.20 Ac Sylvester Steen V T 0.15 Ac Walter A. Peterson V U 0.23 Ac Bertha Wilson Steen V V 0.10 Ac Walter Peterson, Sr., et al V W 0.32 Ac Beatrice Campbell R X 0.69 Ac Oria and Eva Walker O Y 0.31 Ac James C. Thompson 0 Z 0.23 Ac Raymond Mitchell V AA 4.63 Ac William Patch, Jr., Estate V 9.28 Ac Total 15.42 Ac TOTAL PROJECT ACREAGE NOTE: All acreages are based on record data and are subject to change upon completion of on -the -ground survey. All ownership and parcel status information from tax and deed records current July, 1990. Parcel Status: V - Vacant Lot R - Renter Occupied 0 - Owner Occupied E - Empty Structure K�" IV. Preliminary Protect Cost Estimates Phase One Land Acquisition $ 203,000 Development Costs 538.000 $ 741,000 Total Expenditures Eligible for Matching Funds Phase Two Land Acquisition $ 46,000 Development Costs _65.000 $ 111,000 Total Expenditures Eligible for Matching Funds Phase Three Land Acquisition $ 312,000 Development Costs 1.028,000 $1,340,000 Total Expenditures Eligible for Matching Funds Total Project --Phases One Two and Three: $2,192,000 Total Amount Eligible for Matching Funds: $ 712,000 $ 74,000 $ 789,000 $ 1,575,000 According to present rules and regulations, Texas Parks and Wildlife can provide up to $500,000 of matching funds on any given approved park project. It is important that budget planning take into account the fact that Parks and Wildlife matching funds are provided on a reimbursement basis -- the City must pay for the project, after which matches will be made for eligible project expenditures. 401 V. Fundina Methods Because the Project is a park within a Community Development target area, there are a number of sources of the necessary land acquisition and development monies to execute the Plan. These include City of College Station Parks and Recreation Funds, Community Development Funds, Street and Drainage Funds, and budgeted Capital Improvement Funds. Relocation assistance funding when necessary is also available through the Community Development Office. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department matching funds are currently available up to a maximum of $500,000 per project. Execution of Phase Three represents a significant expenditure for a specific purpose; as such, Phase Three is an excellent candidate for bond or warrant financing to be repaid over a period of years from obligated tax sources. It may prove useful to submit Phase Three as a separate project, in order to qualify for additional Texas Parks and Wildlife matching funds. Private Donations of land are also an extremely likely source of funds. Donations can be used by the City to acquire matching funds, based on the appraised value of the donated lands, as described elsewhere in the text. 501 TOTAL POPULATION OF HOUSEHOLDS SURVEYED By Age Groups Specified on Survey 170 165 160 155 150 145 140 135 130 125 120 "' . 110 ....... 105 laa 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 ar............. _ 0-5/6-10 A 11-15/16-20 B 21-30 C 31-40 D 41-50 E OVER 50 F BREAKDOVN OF RESPONSES BY AREA 140 140 140 120 120 ;;?'? 1 2 0 100 100 100 80 80 80 60 60 60 40 40 40 20 20 20 a a 0 -- A B C D E F A B C D E F A B C D E F North of Luther Street South of Luther Street Other Areas 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FREQUENCY OF USE BY RESPONDENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES EVERY DAY A 40 38 32 28 24 18 12 8 4 0 4-5 TIMES A WEEK B FEW TIMES A WEEK C FEW TIMES A MONTH FEW TIMES A YEAR E BREAKDOWN OF RESPONSES BY AREA 40 38 32 28 18 12 8 4 0 A B C D E F North of Luther Street A B C D E F South of Luther Street 225 Responses NEVER F 40 38 32 28 24 18 12 8 A B C D E F Other WHEN RESPONDENTS LIKE TO USE THE LINCOLN CENTER/PARK On The Veekend 26% Other 8% In The Evening 29% In The Afternoon 36% FAVORITE SPORTS OF THOSE SURVEYED 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 BASKETBALL ................................................................................................................................. VOLLEYBALL .... ............... SOFTBALL TRACK & FIELD IlRn BASEBALL ...... ........ .................................................. ................. ......... n FOOTBALL SV IIViIVI ING - - - AM TENN IS.........................................n SOCCER KARATE BOWLING GOLF KICKBALL RACQUETBALL ROLLER SKATING 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 WHAT CHANGES WOULD CAUSE RESPONDENTS TO VISIT MORE? Of Those Who Never or Only Visit the Complex A Few Times A Year 0 10 20 30 40 50 Improve Safely Improve Playgrounds Different Programs Lower Fees Open More Hours i More Gym Space/Other Feel more welcome Improve Access More Bell Fields More Basketball Courts Reduce Crowding Don't Know 011wr 0 395 Responses 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 FAIRVIEW AVE.-, ---[::WALKWAY D9O0 WALKWAY LIGHTS i 16 10 J, NEW TREE z U) MONTCLAIR IL oc�_EXISTVA TKES CROSSWALKS 0 0 STREET EXTENSION x .w I--- 9 fy W EXISTING PLAYGRJ- 14 414.4 Ix j -jowi' 20 20 000 It 13 0 > 0 ILI ow. wt 10 7 8>0 v)w_ U) 1EXI EXIST. 0 an AREA LIGHT O. NEW TREE - 0 ^Q; 0*0 4 bil BENCH —JOPEN PLAY 0 -HIGHLAND BENCH*— WALKWAY LT SOFTBALL WALKWAY LIGHTS PICNIC UNIT AREA LIGHTING SEASONAL FOOTBALL FIELD BENCH NIL" NEW TREE r Pi NIT lif . C, , III- r MARYEM Bo .4 ........... . 7-, RO-40 Ot PARKING LOT ^SHELTER (21*AI4,) ELEANO'k Ll = = MANTDIW L=Vn PAIII" muuart EXmT �ACXsTill A ILI VOLLEYBALL, 0 SHELTER-i ( 21'x 24'1 �F 22 `PNpeN z MST PLAYGM)W4 W ST _j 0 EA WALK �K EXWLW TREES CROSSWALK 0 0 dD cv ' 1 Q ar-\n . � �a�� [� Q pa OF (Lumm= Cwm - WIMN MGM [Pam 9:@)MDDM OCTOBER 1990 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP 203 HOLLEMAN DRIVE EAST COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77040