Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07/09/2002 - Regular Agenda - Parks Board
The building is wheelchair accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available. Any request for iign interpretive services must be made 48 hours before the meeting. To make arrangements call (979) 764-3517 or (TDD) 1-800-735-2989. Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation; Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director; Peter Lamont, Recreation Superintendent; Ross Albrecht, Forestry Superintendent; Marci Rodgers, Senior Services Coordinator; Peter Vanecek, Senior Park Planner; Kristin Lehde, Staff Assistant. Board Present: John Nichols, Chair; Don Allison; Glenn Schroeder; Larry Farnsworth; Jodi Warner; Glen Davis; Bill Davis. Guest: Jack Hill, Burditt Associates Visitor: Sherry Ellison, Brazos Greenways Council 1. Call to order: The meeting was called to order by Chairman John Nichols at 7:06 p.m. John welcomed Jodi Warner to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. 2® Pardon — possible action concerning requests for absences of members from meeting® All members of the Board were present at the meeting. 3. Hear Visitors: Sherry Ellison is a member of the Brazos Greenways Council, and is interested in the Urban Forest Management Plan presentation. She encouraged that there be included in the plan provision for the preservation of trees on public and private property, and discouraged development in floodplains. 4. Installation and welcome of new members: John Nichols, Glen Davis, and Jodi Warner took the Oath of Office and the Statement of Appointed Officer. 5, Discussion, and possible approval of minutes from regular meeting of June 13, 2002: Glenn Schroeder made a motion to approve the minutes from June 13, 2002. Bill Davis seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously. 6. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning Board and Departmental Goals and Objectives, and City Council Strategies: Steve Beachy said that the City Council's Strategic Plan would be presented on Thursday, July 1lth. He added that Department and staffs goals and objectives would be derived from that plan. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting Tuesday, July 9, 2002 Page 1 of 7 The Board asked about the status of the revision of the Recreation, Park, and Open Space Master Plan. Steve stated that the Department has updated the Master Plan revision time line and would send it to the Board. John asked about the feasibility of the Department submitting an application for accreditation of their Fiscal Year 2003 Goals and Objectives. Steve responded that the Department was currently researching that possibility. An intern will be working in the Department to assemble the information needed to file an application (possibly in Fiscal Year 2004). John suggested that the Board begin looking at their goals and objectives, and suggested that this be the main discussion item during the regular meeting of August 13th. The Board was in consensus on John's suggestion. Kristin Lehde will send the Board a packet containing background information for this item prior to the meeting. 7. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning the current Capital Improvement Project Report: Steve said that the Lincoln Center Entryway Expansion project is complete. Eric Ploeger said that the City of Bryan Parks and Recreation Department has plans to construct a parking lot at Billie Madeley Park by August 2002. He added that College Station is currently processing the contract to construct two bridges at the park as well, and they should be under construction soon. Eric said that the Phase I construction of Veterans Park and Athletic Complex was going well, and that the contractor has until late September 2002 to complete the project. Glen D. asked if the project was within budget. Eric responded that it was. John asked if College Station signage would be posted at the entrance to the park. Steve responded that it would not be, but that plaques and signage would be incorporated into the park. John added that he was surprised that the City would not be posting signage with the City or Park logo on it at the entrance. Peter Vanecek said that there is a possibility that signage could be placed on the entrance gates. Glen D. asked about the status of the Jack and Dorothy Miller Jogging Track Project. Eric responded that the contractors have the materials laid on the track; however, staff is scheduled to visit with them to address some quality issues. This item was a discussion item only, and no motion was made. 8. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning the future Capital Improvement Program: Steve said that the schedule for election for the future Capital Improvement Program has been moved back to the fall of 2003. The Citizen Committee appointments will probably occur in fall 2002. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting Tuesday, July 9, 2002 Page 2 of 7 This item was a discussion item only, and no motion was made. 9. Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an Urban Forest Management Plan: Steve stated that this was a follow-up item from the June 2002 meeting. He said that the presentation of the proposed plan to the City Council had been moved from July 22" to August 22, 2002. Ross Albrecht stated that during the June 13th meeting, the Board requested that some additional information be included in the plan. He said that the revisions had been made and distributed to the Board. He added that the Executive Summary table had since been revised and would be inserted into the plan. Jack Hill distributed and discussed the revised table. He said that the proposed associated costs would be in addition to the current Forestry budget. Bill asked how the number of crews needed, based on the percentage of small and large trees, was computed. Mr. Hill responded that the figures were an estimate and were derived from an average. Bill asked if 47% of the proposed new crew's time would be dedicated to tree work. Ross said that the Summary and Observations Section suggests that new crews should be dedicated 100% to tree work. He said that he is also urging that language be incorporated into that section stating that the existing three-man crew be dedicated 100% to tree work as well. Glen Davis asked how the trees were currently being maintained. Steve replied that a lot of them are not being maintained. He added that, due to resources, the Department is more reactive than proactive. Glen D. asked if the Department had funding to assist with the implementation of the plan. Steve said that currently the Department does not have the funding. He added that the plan should be viewed as a long-range, multi -year plan. John suggested revising the Executive Summary table to incorporate one-time and reoccurring costs. Bill asked if maintenance contract expenses could be incorporated into the table as well. Bill recommended that stronger language be incorporated into the plan, advocating the development of a City ordinance to address public and private tree management. Glen D. asked how the plan would be implemented. Steve replied that attainable priorities would need to be determined, and a multi -year phasing recommendation made. He added that if Council accepts the plan, then staff would develop a multi- year implementation plan that would be presented at a later date. After some discussion, Bill made a motion to accept the report from Burditt Associates and forward it to the City Council with Board's recommendation Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting Tuesday, July 9, 2002 Page 3 of 7 that implementation of a plan be over a multi -year (four to five year) period. Larry Farnsworth seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously. Ross said that the Board had also received some revisions to the Risk Management section of the plan. He added that some minor revisions were still being made and implemented. 10. Appointment of new committee members and officers to the Senior Advisory Committee: Marci Rodgers said that the Board had received the Senior Advisory Committee's recommendations for appointments of new members: • Frank Complone • Fred Dollar • Catherine Lamb • Robert Meyer and officers: * Bill Fling, Chair • Dipankar Sen • Yvonne Stevens • Betty Wilborn) * Joanna Yeager, Vice -Chair Glen D. made a motion to approve the Committee's recommendation for the appointment of new members and officers. Glenn S. seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously. 11. Report, discussion, and possible action regarding concession operations in City parks: Peter Lamont said that the Department currently has contracts with three different vendors for concessions at the various park facilities: • The Brazos Valley Softball Umpire's Association handles concessions at Central and Bee Creek Parks; • Roy Littlefair (the owner of the local Der Wienerschnitzel) handles concessions at the Little League and Senior League fields at Southwood Athletic Complex, as well as at the Wayne Smith baseball fields, and Adamson Lagoon; and • Richard Benning (the owner of Dudley's Draw) handles the concessions at Wolf Pen Creek. Peter explained that all three contracts expire in March 2003. After that time, the Department has the option of extending the contracts for another period of two years, or rebidding them. He added that the Department would make that decision closer to the expiration date, based upon performance and input from both staff and user groups. Peter said that there have been some concerns with the vendors at the softball and baseball fields, and at Adamson Lagoon (i.e. vendors not opening and having food prepared on time, and staff behavior). The Department has been in contact with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting Tuesday, July 9, 2002 Page 4 of 7 vendors and has resolved most of the problems. However, there have been some ongoing concerns at the Little League baseball fields. The Department has been working with Mr. Littlefair and Little League to try to resolve these issues. Peter stated that the biggest problem has been with communications. Glenn S. asked what standards the Department sets when the contracts are bid out. Peter replied that he would have to research the bid package. Glenn S. said that in the future, there should be performance standards incorporated into the bid packages and the contracts that would hold the concessionaires accountable for performance. Peter said that he would review the current bid specifications and determine if additional specifications need to be added during the contract renewal process. He added that he would also check with other municipalities to determine what language has been used in their concessionaire contracts that are bid out. This item was a discussion item only, and no motion was made. 12. Deport, discussion, and possible action regarding the use of scooters, bicycles, and skateboards on sidewalks near athletic complexes: Steve said that the Department had tried to determine if there was a City ordinance or legal basis that would prohibit the use of bicycles or skateboards on sidewalks. The Department had not found anything related to the subject. Steve said that there is a possibility that the Department could place signs near athletic complex areas, but they would not be enforceable with a civil penalty. Glenn S. had asked that this item be placed on the agenda because he had received feedback from some parents who attend softball tournaments, who were concerned about safety and the use of scooters during athletic events. After some discussion, the suggestion was made to install simple signage to remind people of common courtesy when bicycling, skateboarding, or using scooters during athletic events. Steve said that the Department could develop a "user friendly" sign. This item was a discussion item only, and no motion was made. 13. Discussion, consideration, and possible action regarding a park land dedication request for the Schuessler Subdivision (Carroll Addition) in Zone 5: Peter Vanecek stated that the proposed dedication was in Zone 5. The proposed land requirement would be .257 acres, and is in close proximity to Southwood Valley Athletic Complex. Staff is recommending acceptance of the cash dedication in lieu of land. The Board had some concerns regarding access to a dedicated greenway. After some discussion, Don Allison made a motion to approve staff s recommendation to accept the cash dedication in lieu of land. Included in the motion was the recommendation from the Board that the Planning and Zoning Commission Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting Tuesday, July 9, 2002 Page 5 of 7 carefully review the Board's concern regarding access to the dedicated greenway. Bill seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously. 14. Discussion, consideration, and possible action regarding a proposed park land dedication in Zone 3: Steve said that the Department had not received a complete application for this dedication. Peter V. stated that the proposed dedication is in Zone 3. The proposed land requirement would be 1.5 acres, and is across the street from Central Park. Staff is recommending acceptance of the cash dedication in lieu of land. Glenn S. stated that there wasn't any park land between Central Park and Wolf Pen Creek, and asked if there were the potential of purchasing some land for a playground park. Steve said that there was open land in that area, but the land would be expensive. The Board discussed the feasibility of asking developers to dedicate a small portion of land for a playground park for residents. After some discussion, Bill made a motion to approve staffs recommendation to accept the cash dedication in lieu of land. Larry seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously. Glenn S. asked how park land dedication money was spent. Steve said that recently, some of the funds had been spent on small projects, such as the Oaks Park Bridge Project and improvements at Pebble Creek Park. He added that there would be more significant projects in the future, such as the Woodway Park development. Steve suggested discussing how park land dedication funds should be spent at a future meeting. Kristin will prepare a park land dedication fund report for the August 13th meeting. 15. Report, discussion, and possible action regarding a request for funding to construct a jogging track at South Knoll Elementary School: This item was a follow up from the June 13th meeting, when staff had been asked to identify a funding source for $8,000 in order to assist the South Knoll Elementary School Parent Teacher's Organization (PTO) with their request to rubberize a jogging track the school. Steve said that Eric had contacted the City's Legal Department to determine what requirements were needed to do the project, and had not received a formal response yet. Steve had informed the Assistant City Manager about the proposal. He had also contacted the College Station Independent School District Superintendent, who was not aware of the project request from the PTO. Steve added that he forwarded the request to the Superintendent and asked him to consider making a formal request to the City Manager if he supported the project, and to consider the potential for similar projects with the College Hills and Southwood Valley Elementary Schools (both of which still have concrete jogging tracks). The Board asked for a report on the status via e-mail prior to the August 13th meeting. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting Tuesday, July 9, 2002 Page 6 of 7 16. Discussion of next meeting dates and possible agendas: The next regular meeting will be held on August 13th. The main focus of the meeting will be on the Board's Fiscal Year 2003 Goals and Objectives. 17. Adjourn: Glenn S. made a motion to adjourn. Larry seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting Tuesday, July 9, 2002 Page 7 of 7 Locai9 Scenario 5500 Memorial Stormwater Analysis Results U.&Y site 7 yet Area 8 38 ac U - a— 3 Usnan. 4 C.—CyAl.,; 8 68 —t,2-4i Canopy "- 0 Do .c (0%; 13-- A-.: 105 — 1 13-41 G--Area 0 00 ac (0%) Jnp— Area 0 24 C 13�1 Impart/ A,— 6 38 ac , 7DO &.161N A.. 0 Me., 1%, Bx'" A— 0 00 - "D%q Ear. A,.. 0 08 � (1!: Bar. Am. 0 00 " tOr%i Shr UO Arno 0 00 at, 0% Shrub A,0 00 C M%t Cover I- 0 00 .. (C-A C.— i Area 0.00 (D%j C-1 2 A,— 0 00 ac (Cl* C— 2 A— 0 00 - Wet. A, ., - ..101% 1 VVaa, Ara. - ., (0%) N-0ew 1 H-4 0 Number of Homes. 0 h Sal a "=Co�.,s 0 P.—q SI.P. 1 0 Ream""I Type it R..f" Tp., It Change in womwaw runoff chwactenstics: Runoff Depth: S—.-3 1.54. S--4 , .76. Runoff - "'o""',d by 209 713'. Fl—. Flo- S— 3 9.01 cf. SCanOnQ C 49,45 Cft P—k 1`16- K Ma**—d by 522 58% Storage Vdume requred to mtbgate the change m peak Sou 2292A 3 .&c Nee time acono'nt"von. S—n. 3. 0.67 t- soan� 4, 0 20 ?- 'r... of C—Ow*lb- 1. decreased by 70 14% 't.nbff V06—: 500-ano 3, 349028.88 gation. Sbanstno*138387270 lon - I VoU.e of -=1n ff .t`e.$ed 1 1034845 75 gatta-ts Vduntek—a*%&par UMAt01FCanopy Area. 3452p4w%per *qfool Ttua vedue wool" you to attach runoff' change pfWwMm to ,MAcjubj W, Wkiply to yorid Ow -S per tnt�& 9:r -zrta, reduction benarrot Scenario 3 vs. Scenario 4 I a m lnnn•gi��gr 9v ri i.o^n q., ,.n,�r�,.. .rr �r,rr.,.n. _. _,._ ,� .�.. � .. s , IS THE ROOT ZONE? eT Jin d r 3 s� How Long . flan } site sufficient? t n e � I % .y�ilia� ,..ra..'-. 13 PARK '■ Regional "wilderness" park ■ 515-acres r Acquired in 1987 ■ Evidence of Native rl,merican habitation and =d European settlement ® Serves as habitat for the endangered Navasota Ladies' -Tresses 1 PLAN o Goal 2: Establish Lick Creek Park as a regional resource for environmental education • Objective a: Establish/develop a visitor center area within the park • Objective b: Establish an interpretive program to include trails and markers which relate to significant cultural and natural. sites PURPOSE r The purpose of this project was to determine the feasibility of developing a regional nature center within Lick Creek Park OBJECTIVES r To gather background information on the history of Lick Creek Park and the development of its master plan • To gather input from stakeholders about what they envision for a Lick Creek Park nature center ® To gather information about a spectrum of nature centers that currently operate in local and regional park systems to show possible alternatives r To review the input gathered and relate it to local resources and needs in order to determine what programs, functions, and design features would best meet the goals and objectives of Lick Creek Park 2 METHODS: CITIZEN INPUT ■ Approximately 32 contacts were made, representing various viewpoints ® Focus Group One a Open discussion ® Focus Group Two Five specific questions ■ Additional input Email to Individual interviews Four nature centers contacted Sources of information: * Web sites and brochures Interviews a Visits FOCUS GROUP ° Key park issues: Need for the formation of an advisory board -- � Need for enforcement and clarification of rules ■ Key nature center issues: Placement of [tie facility Design materials for the facility i FOCUS GROUP What about the landscape should be imcqrreted? Key features of the landscape, key community types, ecological processes, and cultural history Who will use the nature center? Surrounding communities, university students and faculty, public and private schools, and clubs L 16: IV1 1'. r�, k-, n /- / , /- U V FOCUS GROUP m What programs will be provided by the nature center? Educational, walks, demonstrations, and displays a What will the nature center look like? Reflection of local culture anti sustainable architecture a What sort ofstaff might ire needed? Director, coordinators, security, and internships INTERPRETIVE KIOSKS n Location: various locations along the Oregon Trail a Length of trail: 2100 miles m Facilities: kiosk structures M I \. L.J LY %-j L, A ly . VY J'L L J 1 s"., I WILDERNESS PRESERVE Location: Austin, TX ■ Staff.. 5 • Size ofproperty: 227-acres • Buildings: Environmental Education Center (office and gift shop) • Number ot'visitors: over 5000 s -nts a year and numerous rude 21. others n Funding sources: majority through membership duos, donations, fundraisers, and grants 14M CENTER Location: Bastrop,'rx Staff., 10 m Size of property: 19M-acres n Buildings: Environmental Learning Center (1-3 meeting rooms, large meeting area, and kitchen) and nature store (book and gift shop) m Number of visitors: 29,000 per year w Funding sources: fees and grants LOCATION 9 ® Natural building materials ® Sustainable architecture ® Native vegetation s Semi -permeable pavement ® Facilities STUDENT RESULTS: DESIGN 0 STUDENT RESULTS: DESIGN PROGRAMMING n Student research cu Interpretive walks o insect collection 0 Displays and exhibits * Demonstrations Interactive computers/database ■ Kids Center RECOMMENDATIONS i Form an advisory committee Utilize Texas A&M University and its resources Create a model of sustainable development Emphasize experiential and hands-on learning OWN n Edge of the Post Oak Savannah ykya m Reasons for choice: u Distance from sewage treatment plant w Preservation of the Post Oak Savannah Unique edge environment ALTERNATIVE ONE m Type of structure: large kiosk to Design features: simple, natural materials a Staff.- none w Programming: sell - directed, interpretive signage, brochures, and �N maps a Cost: $10,000 - $30,000 ALTERNATIVE TWO Recommended m Type of structure: full -service, �_j medium sized building A 0 Design features: sustainable architecture 0 Stair., one full-time staff member, supplemented by internships and volunteers m Programming: interpretive signage, brochures, and maps; interpretive exhibits; staff facilitated programs M ON Recommended ■ Costs: Construction costs: $380,000 a $520,000 . $1 million P Refurbishing costs: a $27,700 Operating expenses: . $35,650 . $225,000 a $600,000 FUNDING ■ Grants National Park Service a Certified Local Government Program * The Texas Historical Commission a Heritage Tourism Grants Texas Parks and Wildlife a Outdoor Recreation Grants FE FUNDING ■ The Astin 'T'rust 'RI;, ■ The Audubon Society Awki1xin ■ Capital Funding Mechanisms * Revenue bonds Tax -increment bonds ■ Fundraising Partnerships with the Brazos Greenways Council and others 6 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT FY02 GOALS r ImplementationImprove l Program Implementation of Special Projects ects Continue to Saff Development Q Implementation of New Programs implementation of City Council Strategic Issues Implementation of the CIP Program ❑ Complete 90% of the CIP Program - Refer to FY02 CIP Project List Continue to improve Staff Development Q Complete Management Academy (three (3) PARD Superintendents) (Graduation February 22, 2002) ® Complete Supervisory Academy (six (6) PARD personnel) (Class graduated on November 13, 2001) ❑ Complete Certified Playground Safety Inspector re -certification from the National Recreation and Park Association (two (2) PARD Supervisors) (Curtis Bingham, Parks Operations Superintendent, was recertified) ❑ Send one (1) PARD Supervisor to the National Recreation and Park Association sponsored Park Maintenance School (Scheduled for August 2002). Q Complete the Weapons of Mass Destruction training course (seven (7) PARD personnel) (Training December 17`h, 18`', and 19,11) 0 Complete the Principles of Emergency Management course (PARD personnel) (Graduation held on November 18, 2001) Q Participate in the Brazos Valley Regional Leadership Forum Conference (Director of PARD) (Complete April 16, 2002) Q Asst. Director to complete the Texas Forest Service's Incident Command Training (Complete March26, 2002) Implementation of City Council Strateoic Issues ❑ VS3S4a - Complete Urban Forest Management Plan (Initial presentation to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board on March 5, 2002. The Board will review again on July 9r1'. Scheduled for Council consideration on July 22"d, 2002). Q VS4S2a - Implement Park Maintenance Standards (to track performance) (1s'and 2od quarter reports complete) ❑ VS4S3a - Implement Intergenerational Park Facilities (in progress) ❑ VS4S4a - Develop recommendations for developer incentives to provide adequate park land (Draft recommendations complete. Met with local developers on February 28, 2002.) ® VS4S4b -- Complete development of Veterans Park and Athletic Complex, Phase I, and conduct needs assessment for future facilities Needs Assessment approved by Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on February 12, 2002. Presentation to the City Council on March 28, 2002). Q VS4S4c - Update Parkland Dedication Ordinance (Ordinance revisions approved by Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on October 9, 2001. Adopted by City Council on January 24, 2002. The revised ordinance will go into effect on July 24, 2002). ® VS4S4d -- Develop facility needs for future community park (November 29, 2001) Q VS4S5a - Develop plans for senior programs and facilities (Council approval on February 28, 2002)) @( VS4S5b a Prepare feasibility report on skateboard park (Report presented to Council on December 20, 2001) ® VS4s7b - Implement greenway-park connectivity demonstration project (Bee Creek and Lemon Tree parks) Q VS4s8a - Improve communication between Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning Commission (Parks and Recreation Advisory Board met with the Commission on September 20, 2001. A joint meeting with the City Council was held on December 6, 2001. Future meetings will be scheduled accordingly). Implementation of Special Proiects ❑ Review and update the Recreation, Park, and Open Space Master Plan (In progress) ❑ Develop recommendations for future Capital Improvement Program projects (In progress - preliminary recommendation complete) 13 Replace irrigation at Lemontree Park (February 1, 2002) ® Implement public art at Wolf Pen Creek Amphitheater (Bronze Wolves) (Dedication held December 17, 2001) ❑ Investigate the possibility of Departmental accreditation (in progress) ® Conduct dedication ceremony for the Wayne Bryan Bike Loop (May 11, 2002) Q Coordinate Veterans Memorial Project at Veterans Park and Athletic Complex (Groundbreaking November 12, 2001) @( Complete pond renovation at Brothers Pond Park (Complete in December 2001) ® Installation of lightening prediction systems at parks (Complete April 2002) ❑ RPTS Student Study for the Development of a Visitor/Nature Center at Lick Creek Park (in progress. Was presented to the Board on June 13"', 2002) ® Assist with The George Bush Drive Extension Grand Opening Event (April 6, 2002) Implementation of New Programs Q Investigate the potential of joint programming with the City of Bryan Parks and Recreation Department (Ongoing) Q Implement monthly PARD newsletter (First edition complete in October 2001 - Ongoing) Q Facilitate the Northgate "Back Porch Concert" Series Q Conduct Fall Special Olympics Bocce Ball Q Implement Starlight Concert Series at Wolf Pen Creek (1st Concert held on April 13, 2002) �L qp r r r � • � • • r i • Undated: July 3, 2002 ri i 7 I p�ic�T i i sT it (Updated July 2, 2002) 5iect I Cor PILAe 1 GG9705 1 $260'00111 — f„Y, I {FY'01) Complete HM0104 ) $7,195� ff struction I Complete I N!A' 1 PIA 1 NA ",Developer Complete Ric PK0106' I $120 000 FY'01 moment Complete I 'David PK0126 S34124 I FY'01 Replacement I fFY;09� fete Ric jI 0109 ) $91.500 FY'01 emt;nt �Cort�plete J Pete PK0207 S30,0001 FY'02 f p� acement i I rMM...Corylete { Pete i PK0067 1 $28,0001 $8bG.O Co late David 1 K010� �7 )�i'p) � 98 G.O II' 9 CtafAtDlef 1David 1 �K0100 I $54r600.j I Madeley Park I I Lincoln Entry Improvements (Veterans Park, Phase I I Jack & Dorothy Miller Jogging Track I I Lick Creek Park Development I (Thomas Pool Renovation I (Anderson Playground Replacement IC.S.S.C. Agreement (clubhouse) I I Hensel Park Playground Replacement I I Woodway Park Development I Lincoln Center Expansion/Improvements Cemetery Land Acquisition I IThomas Pool Shade Cover I Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction Under Construction In Design In Design In Design Pending Contract Pending Contract Pending Land Acq. Postponed until FY03 On Hold On Hold 412 you Pending rags: 2 Pending Land Acquisition 1 Postponed 1 In Design: 3 Out to Bid: 0 Under Construction: 4 On Hold: 2 Gdmptee ..w. , 13 Total: 26 Pete PK9706 Ric CD1292 Ric PK9941 David I ST0200 Ric PK0069 I Ric I PK0205 I David I PK0214 Pete PK0210 Ric PK9803 Ric Ross GG9905 Ric PK0104 07/31/01 I `10/19/01 j $256348 I 08/31/01 07/31/01 ) $71665 I 5/02 1 I $300,000 ¢ 3/02 01/14/02 I 1 3/02 I 02/20/02 $34,124 I 4/02 I I 02/28/02 1 $72,560 I l 3/02 04/03/02 $26,729 I I 5/02 1 05/07/02 $45,500 I I 4/02 06/30/02 I 1 3/02 06/30/02 A I I !/02 OW30,02 , $27420 t Pa* aed. Zone 11 5/02 05l i0l02 ? $9 r 06'i ,a. $1 00 FY 02 General Fr 0d 9/02 1 02J28/0 _ r�t�E $48,000 98 G.O. 8/02 I $90,000 FY'01 C.D.B.G. I 9/02 $2,936,800 98 G.O. I 11/02 I $29,250 FY'02 General Fund 8/02 $478,000 98 G.O. (TPWD Grant) 12/02 $277,255 FY'02 I 3/03 $30,000 FY'02 Replacement I I 10/02 NA C.S.S.C. I I Unknown $40,000 FY'02 Replacement Acct. I 8/02 $600,000 Park Ded. Zone 7 Unknown i $275,000 98 G.O. Unknown e $19,000 98 G.O. 12/03 Total Amount $5,594,644 CITY OF COLLEGE STATION PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT FY03 GOALS Implementation of the CIP Program Implementation of SpecialProjects y Continue to Improve Staff Development Implementation of New Programs Implementation of City Council Strategic Issues Implementation of the CIP Proqram ❑ Complete the Lick Creek Park Phase I project ❑ Complete master plan and design of Woodway Park ❑ Complete master plan and design of Shenendoah Park ❑ Complete intergenerational park projects ❑ Complete G.O. 1998 Bond projects ❑ Complete Thomas Pool renovation and shade structure ❑ Complete acquisition of new cemetery site Continue to Improve Staff Development, ❑ Complete Management Academy (9 person) ❑ Complete Supervisory Academy (3 people) ❑ Complete National Recreation & Park Association Park Maintenance School (i person) lLnplementation of Citv Council Strateqic Issues ❑ Complete the Recreation, Park and Open Space Master Plan update ❑ Complete the Parks & Recreation Department 2003-2007 strategic plan ❑ Complete the Lincoln Center/Tarrow Parks Master Plan update ❑ Achieve a 75% or higher rating on all major categories for park maintenance standards ❑ Develop implementation schedule of Urban Forest Management Plan ❑ Complete current capital improvement projects ❑ Comprehensive review of all leisure services programs ❑ Continue to explore cooperative efforts with other agencies Implementation ecial r iects ❑ Conduct dedication ceremony for Veterans Memorial project ❑ Conduct grand opening of Veterans Parks & Athletic Complex ❑ Investigate feasibility of joint project with College Station Soccer Club ❑ Conduct a benchmark survey of similar cities ❑ Investigate potential sources of additional revenue ❑ Complete recommendations for future CIP program ❑ Develop recommendations for existing Conference Center ❑ Conduct seasonal pay study and develop recommendations Implementation of New Programs ❑ Complete implementation of Challenger sports program ❑ Conduct dedication ceremony for Jane Pulley Softball Fields ❑ Begin operation of Veterans Park and Athletic Complex r . . . • • 7 • Updated: July 3, 2002 Senior Advisory Committee New Member Recommendations July 2002 The Senior Advisory Committee would like to make the following recommendations for new members. Frank Complone 100 Mortier Dr. # 508 College Station, Texas 778 696-6011 1 Fred W. Dollar 1102 Goode St. College Station, Texas 77840 696-4426 Catherine B. Lamb 1502 B Airline Dr. College Station, Texas 77845 694-2955 Robert E. Meyer 308-A Pershing College Station, Texas 77840 696-8591 Dipankar Sen 2802 Mescalero College Station, Texas 77845 693-6167 Yvonne A. Stevens 13800 SH 30 College Station, Texas 77845 731-1025 Betty J. Wilborn 3047 Barron Cut off R College Station, Texas 690-2460 1 Senior Advisory Committee Regular Meeting Monday, June 24, 2002 College Station Teen Center 1520 Rock Prairie Road Minutes Members Present: Phyllis Dozier, Annie Lee Finch, Laura Holmes, Bill Kling, Neal Nutall and Joanna Yeager Members Absent: Billy Lay, Mary Jo Lay, Haskell Monroe, Carol Parzen and Suzanne Reynolds Staff Present: Marci Rodgers, Senior Services Coordinator I. Call to order. The meeting was called to order by Joanna Yeager, Chair pro tempore, at 10: 1 Oam. 11. Hear visitors. Robin Stover, a volunteer attended the meeting. Ill. Approval of minutes from regular meeting on May 20, 2002 Bill Kling made the motion to approve the minutes. Annie Lee Finch seconded the motion. The motion passed. IV. New Member Applications Discussion, consideration and recommendations for new members to the Senior Advisory Committee. The committee reviewed all applications. Bill Kling made the motion that Robert Meyer, Dipankar Sen, Catherine Lamb and Fred Dollar be recommended for new members. Laura Holmes seconded the motion. The motion passed. V. Nominations for Chairman and Vice -Chairman Phyllis Dozier made the motion to appoint Haskell Monroe as Chairman and Joanna Yeager and Vice -Chairman. Neal Nutall seconded the motion. The motion passed. VI. Senior Services Coordinator report (see attached report) VII. Service Awards Presentation Service Awards were presented to Phyllis Dozier, Carol Parzen, Mary Jo Lay and Helen Siegel for their years of service on the Senior Advisory Committee. VIH. Next meeting date and agenda. The next meeting will be Monday, July 29, 2002. An orientation for the new committee members will be held prior to the regular scheduled meeting at 9:00am and the regular meeting following at 10:00am. IX. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 10:45am Senior Services Coordinator June 2002 Report Seniors Expo The first Seniors Expo was held on Wednesday, May 29th at the Brazos Center. We had approximately 1,000 in attendance and the steering committee received very positive comments from the booth participants and guests. We have reserved the Brazos Center for the Seniors Expo 2003 on Wednesday, May 28, 2003. Brazos Valley Walking Club The first meeting of the club was on Thursday, June 6, 2002 at Central Park. We had six participants. Kirstin Brekken-Shea spoke to the group on the benefits of walking and correct walking styles. The next meeting will be on the second Thursday, July 1 lth at Central Park. Computer Club The Computer Club met on Wednesday, June 19th at the PUD training room. We had 27 in attendance with speakers, Gus Roman and Cathy Rainey from the GIS Dept. The next meeting is scheduled on Wednesday, July loth at 9:OOam with speaker Dr. Randolph Wilholt who will speak on operating systems including some history. Picnic at Washington on the Brazos The seniors from Lincoln Center will enjoy a trip to Washington on the Brazos for a picnic on Tuesday, June 25th. We will also take a walking tour of the Antique Rose Emporium in Independence, weather permitting! Classic Film Series Transportation will be provided for seniors on Thursday, June 27 to the film Singin in the Rain at the George Bush Library. The bus will make three stops beginning at 5:30pm at the Villas of Rock Prairie, First Baptist Church parking lot on Welsh for those who would like to park and ride and Lulac Oakhill. The film and transportation are offered free to all seniors who call to make a reservation. July Calendar Park Board Meeting, July 9th — New Committee member recommendations from the Senior Advisory Committee will be presented along with the Chairman and Vice - Chairman names Orientation for new members will be held prior to July 29th meeting beginning at 9:OOam * Fall programs and classes CITY OF COLLEGE STATION CONFERENCE CENTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE Regular Meeting Monday, May 20, 2002, 5:15p.rn. College Station Conference Center Staff Present: Grace Calbert, Conference Center Facility Supervisor Nita Hilburn, Recording Secretary Members Present: Mollie Guin (Chair), Glenda Elledge, Ed Holdredge Members Absent: Fran Lamb (Vice Chair) Call to Order: The Meeting was called to order at 5:15 p.m. Pardon — Consider requests for absences of members from meeting: None Hear visitors m None Approval of the Minutes: Mollie Guin made a motion to approve the minutes for April 17, 2002 as written. Glenda Elledge seconded that motion. Revenue Reports: Revenue reports were reviewed for April 2002. Revenues for April 2002 were $11,516.31 versus April 2001 of $10,619.49. Number of clients served April 2002 were 4,638 vs. April 2001 of 6,793. Adjourn: Molly Guin asked for a motion to adjourn. Glenda Elledge moved the meeting to be adjourned and Ed Holdredge seconded the motion. The Meeting was adjourned at 5:50p.m. The next meeting will be held at the College Station Conference Center on Wednesday June12, 2002, at 12:00 noon. Respectfully submitted, Nita Hilburn, Recording Secretary Date Received: July 3, 2002 Park Zone: 5 Project Location:North of Graham rd.. south of Southwood oark,1401 Arnold road Name of Development: Schuessler Subdivision (also named Carroll addition on plan) Applicant:Ali Safi Address:1923 Woodsman drive City/State: College Station,Texas Phone Number: E-mail: Engineer/Planner: Ash & Browne Engineerinq ,Inc. Address: P.®.Sox 10838 City/State: Colleqe Station,Texas Phone Number: 979-846-6914 E-mail: SECTION 10- -1: Land Dedication Single Family Dwelling Units: 26 Multi -family Dwelling Units: Total Land Requirement: .257 Proposed Dedication: 0 FAX: FAX: 979-846-8914 Zip: 77840 Zip: 77842 Acres Acres Has the Planning & Zoning Commission's approval been obtained? no Land Fee: Single Family Fee ($148/dwelling unit): 26 x $148=$3,848 Multi -family Fee ($112/dwelling unit): Total Acquisition Fee: $3,848 Single Family Fee ($309/dwelling unit): 26 x $309=$8,034 Multi -family Fee ($233/dwelling unit): Total Single Family Fee: ($457/Dwelling Unit): 26 x $457=$11,882 Total Multi -family Fee ($345/Dwelling Unit): SECTION 10Development Required development cost: Staff review date and comment: July 3,2002..Staff recommends acceptance of fee vs. land dedication The subdivsion is off of Arnold rd.iust south of Southwood Park. Parks Board review and decision: Is the proposed park less than five (5) acres? N/a If yes, staff recommends: Is there an existing neighborhood park that can serve the proposed development? Yes,Southwood park If yes, staff recommends: Is the proposed park dedication in compliance with the City Comprehensive Plan and the Park Master Plan? Comments: 1. Is land in the 100-year floodplain? ems a. Detention/Retention 0 Acreage in floodplain: 1.713 acres Acreage in detention: Acreage in greenways: 1.713 acres Comments: Percentage: 21.6% Size: 0 b. Does the location require users to cross an arterial road? Meets Board Policy: Percentage: 21.6% Percentage: Percentage: c. Topography: 5-6% slopes toward creek in Greenbelt area,1-2% slope in subdivision d. Trees/Scenery: ? not shown 2. a. Is the land adjacent to a school? North across Graham rd... Cvoress Grove elem.school b. Restricted access: c. Is there screening if the park joins a non-residential use? N/a d. Park perimeter percentage that abuts a street: 0 Parks & Recreation Board: Planning & Zoning Board: City Council: OABoard\Park Land Dedication\Checklists\Originals\Long FormPark Land Dedication Ordinance Project Review Checklist.dot Revised 01116102 Page 1 of 1 Kris Lehde - July 30 Meeting From: "Glen Davis" <DAVISG@fabtexas.com> To: <klehde@ci.college-station.tx.us> Date: 7/22/2002 11:03 AM Subject: July 30 Meeting I will be in Amarillo on business July 30 and 31 on business and unable to attend the orientation meeting. file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\klehde.000\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00006.1..T 7/22/2002 Page 1 of 1 (Cris Lehde ® Re: Citizen Committee ®rienation From: "John Nichols" <jpn@ag.tamu.edu> To: <klehde@ci.college-station.tx.us> Date: 7/16/2002 11:43 AM Subject: Re: Citizen Committee Orienation Dear Kris, I will be unable to atttend the Citizen Committee Orientation meeting on July 30th, due to a trip out of town to attend a previously scheduled professional conference. Please submit this request for a pardon from the Orientation Meeting. Thank you for your assistance. John N. John P. Nichols Professor and Associate Head Department of Agricultural Economics Texas A&M University College Station, Texas 77843-2124 Tel: 979-845-8491 Fax: 979-862-3019 Email: <jpn@tamu.edu> file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\klehde.000\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00006.1..T 7/16/2002 07/03/02 13:43 V979 764 3496 DEVELOPMENT SVCS IMAM FACSIMILE COVER SHEET CITY OF COLLEGE STATION IDEVELOPAUNT SERVICES I 10 1 Texas Avenue Soulh, F0 Box 9960 College Station, Texas 7 7842 Phone (979)764-3570 / Fax (979)764-3491., Date. — .- TUIV 3. 3003 # of pages including cover: 2 ffy-o u &d not a complete fix, please call oar office m7mc&afel w sn al zwelve yforanewtr i zig , FA 9737 COMPANY- CS PARD REa Development on Krenek Ta-v across om Central Park - FROM.* Brid,=tte Geme, Asst, Dev. ManaRer FHONE; (979)764- -3,'M --- COMPANY-- City of colle"Zc Station REMARKS- [1] Urgent El For your review El Replay ASAF H M Tbe followWg is the vrelindnmy site Plan thev gave us for the vredevelo-oment rneetin% I'm "ot stire how much the layout will cha=e once thev stalt drawin!z uU k1le actual Mans. The f4ff—QwinA is a brief sumo nary of the_ jueefim: thev st4k—dthat thev were considerin!z condos at 5-7 ver unit and reauesfin!z an RA zoniruz. Thev wffl be reauired to extend Central Park Lane m their Pronertv with sidewalks. Let me know if vou need anvthin5z else. Tbwtksl Bridgette C) 9 z en 11" LiQ M V',(1HV&0R POINTS AFTE 12ONE P R-5 > -7— —'7- 7 M Z M zi -/7 Ll 0 0 zr 61 T, z U, I Tn U Vrlve Pe -king On One Side Drive & Parking On One 51de 1j4 rl/ r1l '-Gated F*W QL rft 7- 0 /A M Z Proposed 6andaminium Project On 14.2bS Acres of Lu Land at 1001 KmnekTap Road I Loaded on Tax Map 261-3b6 I TrglLbs R 1 -5280 & R1 4281 < P(iva & Farxing on Both 51dez 93 -n Requested Zoning - R-43 Uri it VeseAptlon: Bedroom, 3 & 4 ; story units having a pad size 0.16 )N X 50'0. No garages. 0 Current CwfIgur-Avri: I BulLdfingsd4b Units eser, &32 SYM IT OLD Cp BLAldlhgr, oFS Units each. 7oba; of`102 Ur is or Appioxinnarehi'141IJ 5-113var* Acre based or; 13.5q2 net acres after Ce -it-id Fork Lane RON Dedication. Deteritton Pond Drive Pa*jnq on Both 51des Fcafer-10 be Phased Over2-3Year Pedod-10 Urft Frojected for I st Phase M.Ich Is Scheduled for Ve Ilvenj by Avjg wst, 2003. UNIT BLDG 1st Phase to be along Kramak 7ap. Acce=s 4Central Z Park Lane Scheduled for.^gind Phase L. rills KREM:K TAP ROAD CHURCH CHURCH Gated Efrtry- ENTRAL FART a {{ d { e .. .c.. ., ,. :.... ..,., _.:� .:; c ....W .z •� , ., ,4 •:s,;, �ti" � 3`e: -xY" • ;>�':i '{`aa 4jjjj r , a t,�`' mT ;:{-;' ,. ;�.' . ,.. ,`,a! •_an aer ,.max; : a_Y ., ..x `i: F _.,~•:. . � 1 � r f F N^@ �'E The City of College Station, Texas, offers a wide range of parks and recreation amenities; however, at this time the city does not offer a nature center. Located in South College Station, Lick Creek Park, the city's 515-acre regional "wilderness" park would be a suitable location for a nature center for two reasons. First, Lick Creek Park's unique features would allow it to serve as a showcase for the Brazos Valley's ecology and history. Second, the Master Plan, adopted in March of 1998, and Lick Creek Park's established goals suggest that the park should serve as a resource for environmental education, through the establishment of a nature center. Therefore, this study attempted to determine the feasibility of developing a regional nature center within Lick Creek Park through gathering citizen input, surveying existing nature centers, and incorporating these ideas into recommendations which meet the goals and objectives of Lick Creek Park. Through focus groups, individual interviews, and email correspondence, citizen input was received from a range of individuals, including Texas A&M University faculty and students, community members involved in developing nature centers, and others. (lathering printed materials, viewing internet sites, speaking with personnel, and visiting nature centers provided a range of examples serving as potential models. The results of the citizen input, the nature center surveys, and the Park Planning and Design class' research generated Figure 1. A Participant at BioBlitz 2002 held at Lick Creek Park several common ideas. These ideas, briefly listed below, serve as the general recommendations of this study: (1) form an advisory committee for Lick Creek Park, (2) utilize Texas A&M University as a resource, (3) create a model for sustainable development, and (4) emphasize experiential learning by providing laboratory space and interactive programs that interpret the "big pictures." NATURE ENTER FOR LICK CREEK PARK: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY More specifically, two alternatives for the design of the center were suggested, as was a location. Primary alternatives included: 1) a large kiosk structure providing self directed interpretive materials and requiring minimal staffing and cost; 2) a full -service facility that would provide laboratory, classroom, and exhibit space in which a staff member, aided by interns and volunteers, could conduct regular programs. The second alternative better represents the desires of citizens who provided input on this project (Figure 2). The second alternative would require more initial and long term funding. Figure 3. Proposed Location for a Nature Center The yellow asterisk in Figure 3 shows the recommended location for a nature center in Lick Creek Park. This location was chosen to meet concerns about the integrity of the post oak savannah while providing cost effective, buffered access from Rock Prairie Road. The location also offers good opportunities for education about upland forests, edge habitat and the post oak savannah. Funding for a nature center at Lick Creek Park would involve combining money from a number of different sources. These sources include grants from governmental and private institutions, capital funding mechanisms, and fundraising endeavors. Figure 2. McKinney Roughs Environmental Learning Center serves as an example of alternative #2, a full service nature center. BURDITT ASSOCIATES Urban Forest Consultants Planning Design Management July 5, 2002 Mr. Ross Albrecht City of College Station Parks and Recreation Dept. 1000 Krenek Tap Road College Station, Texas 77842 RE: Urban Forest Management Plan Revisions Dear Ross. - Please find attached 12 copies of the following revision sections of the UFMP: 1. Executive Summary 2. Hazard Tree Management and Risk Policy 3. Street Tree Management 4. Park and Municipal Facility Tree Management Mail: P.O. Box 1424 5. Greenways Tree Management Conroe, TX 77305 6. Summary of Observations & Recommendations Conroe: 2040 W, Loop 336 Please distribute these copies to members of the Parks and Recreation Board for Conroe, TX 77304 936.756.3041 review. We look forward to discussing the revised sections at the Board meeting on July 9th. Houston: 281.447.2111 Very sincerely, Fax: 936.539.3240 www.burdittassociates.com Charles Burditt info@burdittassociates.com /cb Attachments: 12 copies of Revisions STATION%oITY OF COLLEGE URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of College Station has identified a need for proactive urban forest management practices. Public officials seek to promote the health, safety and general welfare for the Community as a whole. Conservation and enhancement of the natural beauty of College Station's public trees will serve to advance these goals. The following general objectives can be derived from improved preservation, reforestation, maintenance, and removal of hazard trees within the city: 1) Preserve existing tree canopy. 2) Create a healthful environment for College Station residents, businesses and industries. 3) Moderate the harmful effects of sun, wind and temperature changes. 4) Buffer noise, air and visual pollution. 5) Filter pollutants from the air and assist in the generation of oxygen. 6) Reduce storm water nmoff and the potential damage it may create. 7) Stabilize soil and prevent erosion. 8) Provide habitat for birds and other wildlife. 9) Preserve riparian banks or beds and prevent sedimentation. 10) Screen incompatible land uses and promote energy conservation 11) Protect and enhance property values. 12) Raise public awareness of the benefits of plaiting and maintaining trees in an urban environment. 13) Increase the public's knowledge of proper tree care including measures to reduce potential fire hazard with the establishment of defensible space around buildings and other structures. Goals The City of College Station has set forth that trees and the urban forest within their Community are important. The urban forestry goals of the City of College Station are to: Ideas reserve and replenish trees which are located on public roe 'including ��P' P P property g City right-of-way (ROVE, parks, and municipal facilities, 7 his titute a tree management plan; Educate the Community regarding the urban forest as a natural resource as well as the cost of maintaining that resource; Encourage citizens to advance an appreciation for trees on both public mid private space. Promote and maintain a safe environment for the Community's residents. 'I'liese short-term action items should be initiated in the order of priority indicated below (if possible). It should be noted that some items may overlap (occur simultaneously), be ongoing and\or even completed before a higher priority. 1. Establish a budget for annual urban forestry management operations. 2. Inventory all trees and available planting spaces within the City Right -of -Way and maintained parks or facilities. 3. Remove hazard trees, limbs and deadwood on public right-of-ways and public property. (Consider outside contract crew) 4. Trim or remove trees that create hazardous conditions. Improve visibility of traffic signals, streetlights, pedestrians, and vehicular traffic. Generally address site triangle issues. 5. Establish a routine systematic trimming cycle for all trees along the rights -of -way, within parks, and on publicly owned or maintained facilities. It is recommended that the city Implement a 3 to 7 year pruning cycle (3 years for training pruning of young trees and 7 years for routine pruning of mature trees). 6. Develop, adopt mid implement a reasonable care policy for hazard trees and general risk reduction. 7. Monitor trees on an annual basis for structural, disease, or cultural problems. 8. Inform the public of all ongoing urban forestry activities. Seek and welcome public input. 10. Provide training for all city personnel involved 'in Issues that impact tree health and safety. City of College Station Urban Forest Management Plan There is no particular order for initiation of these long-term action items. More than one item may be in progress at the same time. ':. Review Landscape and Streetscape Ordinances for improved planting and protection of trees by City and private sectors. Develop tree preservation standards for new constriction and renovation for city and private projects such as infrastructure improvements, repaiio> and installations that impact existing trees on public property. Increase the number of trees planted along the public rigl is -of --ways and on public lands in available planting spaces. i Continue public education and involvement in tie planning, care, maintenance, benefits and costs of the urban. forest. Provide training in-house personnel on all phases of urban and community tree care. Develop specifications for contracted services. 'I Develop a program to train personnel on the importance of proper technique when working around trees. This program should target the following disciplines within the city: All maintenance personnel 'including those active ii mowing and trimming operations. >- City employees responsible for maintenance and repair of water, sewer, and storm sewer lines. Contractor responsible for installing new water lines, sewer lines, storm sewer lies and other utilltles requiring permitting througlh the city. Develop working relationships with local and regional utilities. Improve species diversity in new plantings. Utilize species less suscepti h e to flooding, stone and wind damage. '€ Begin the tree replacement program for hose removed for health, safety or species reasons. Identify potential partners for the city's forestry program Summary of ns and Recommended To summarize tie condition of the major resources available in College Station, the overall condition of College Station's urban forest is good. Particular areas of concern fall into the categories of y^ Hiring additional tree maintenance staff to support tree issues in the areas of street trees, parks, and municipal facilities Cit y of College Station 3 Urban Forest Management Plan N hiring a mid -management forester position to deal exclusively in tree management issues ,71 The purchase of additional equipment to support maintenance operations E` Tree planting initiative with improved species diversity ` Continued departmental communication; Establish Interdepartmental Task Force T¢ Community Education Program including City departmental personnel Tree Inventory for streets, mutnicipal facilities and maintained park areas, and greenways •. • ;:, LTA L n. 11 To'. The Executive Seminary table below outlines estimated costs associated with the anticipated Urban Forestry Management Plan. Required Start-up Street Tree Inventory (15,000+ Trees) $40,000 Required Start-up Parks & Facilities Areas Tree Inventory (3-5,000Trees) $20,000 Required Start-up Greenway Tree Inventory (number unknown) �� $20,000 Contract Priority Maintenance for Street Trees (250+ Hazards) �� $64,000 Staffing, Equipment & Operating/Maintenance Costs to Prepare the Forestry Division for Management of the Programmed Maintenance $541,000 Pruning Schedule (Further detail is provided in Fable H) Total Estimated Costs for Proposed Urban Forestry Management Plan ll $685,000 Executive Summary Table of Estimated Costs Associated with the Project Noix. Cost figumr on this page are e rizrraated. Actual co its s�zcy be higher or lower d pending on various condition r surrounding the rarork being done within d5u project. Budgetay figures orguidek'ner a soaated arnth the program will need to be reviewed and possibly amended as a rmsult. City of College Stati on 4 Urban Forest Management Plan H.AZ,kR.D TREE MANAGEMENTAND RISK POLICY There is no question trees enhance a community through their aesthetic and physical contributions. College Station is quite similar to many other cities in that there are actually more trees present in the early part of this decade than existed a century W. This condition develops sometimes through the efforts of good planning and with much assistance from wildlife. Generally speaking, most species are opportunistic and, with a little luck and favorable conditions, can thrive under a variety of conditions. Eventually; however, trees succumb to an assortment of conditions that prove detrimental to their long-term health and vigor. These conditions include changes in available water, competition for nutrients, compaction of soil structure necessary for proper aeration, among others. When poor health results from stressfiil conditions, injury, or simply old age, a spiral of decline can be anticipated, if not always identified. Trees in extremely poor health may not necessarily be a hazard. An example could be a tree growing in the undeveloped park land of Lick Creek Park. A tree that is in serious decline may prove beneficial to wildlife and add slowly to the nutrient cycle in decomposition. Conversely, a healthy tree may not always be considered safe. An example of which may be a tree that is in perfectly good health that is leaning over a picnic bench in an active park. By definition, a hazard situation requires die presence of both a tree with a potential to fail and a target. Unless a target is present, a tree cannot be hazardous. As a result, assessing hazard is not limited to evaluating failure potential. Hazard evaluation must consider the potenMa zl presence of a target. Hazard trees, dead trees and deadwood can pose a threat to both persons and property throughout College Station. Trees will not maintain a static condition and can and will succumb to insects, disease, construction damage, drought, and other damaging elements or agents. These agents place the tree in stress conditions where die tree will slied limbs or even shut down and die from the resulting problems. However, preventative maintenance, annual monitoring practices, and site usage City of College Station 29 Urban Forest Management Plan identification c,ui help reduce the risk of damage, injury and/or death from Falling limbs or trees. Annual monitoring should specifically identify the following tree hazards: Living Hazards —Those trees that have been injured through natural or maiunade agents or have reached their mature status and have started a downward spiral of decline. These situations warrant the use of expert inspections and identification of the hazards to detemnnie the trees that pose a threat to persons or property and are in need of removal or mitigative measures. Dead Tree identification and removal A policy is needed to promptly locate and remove the trees that pose a threat to persons or property. The identification and removal policy should have criteria for the urgency, method of removal and the disposal of the resulting material. Deadwood Lazard The identification and removal of such, is an integral portion of the urban forest management procedures. Deadwood serves as an entryway for insects and disease as well as posing a threat to the recreational users throughout the treed portions of College Station. A policy that addresses this issue will also reduce the incidence of liability due to injury, damage, and even death. 'N Trees That Creabe Hazardous Condifions Public safety in the public right-of-way includes management of zt, trees that, by their natural growth habit, may obstruct the view of 4 `r traffic flow, traffic signals and control devices, signs and other! important elements such as children at play. Overhead clearance of streets and sidewalks for vehicular and pedestrian access, if not properly maintained, can create hazardous conditions. An effective street tree maintenance program would target these problems through a scheduled pruning cycle. A process of identification and elimination (Please afro see section below entitled Risk Reduction Through Identification & Cary) of City street [and public area] tree hazards, should include the following: Identify trees with existing and potentially hazardous conditions during the street tree inventory process (and/or daily inspections). Prioritize hazard conditions for response time (e.g. Emergency, ASAP, Scheduled, etc.) The highest priorities need to be identified (by flagging, signs, barricades, etc.) to notify and inform the public and limit access, until the hazardous condition can be eliminated. 9 Low priority hazardous conditions shall be maintained only after the highest priorities have been addressed mid/or eluninated. Trees that have a potential to create hazardous conditions shall be maintained through a predetermined schedule (maintenance cycle). City of College Station 30 Urban Forest Management Plan Risk Reduction Through Identification &Care College Station's Forestry Division of Parks and Recreation is charged with responsibility to remove dead and hazardous trees. Once hazard trees have been identified, there must be appropriate action taken to warn the general public or make the dangerous area safe, thus greatly reducing any issues of negligence or liability due to public injury. Forestry Division staff must also plant trees and conduct pruning as part of their tree related assignments. The Forestry Superintendent and staff must manage a large number of trees. That management effort must be formed from a standpoint of the overall health of the urban forest, not simply one tree. The risk management program establishes a strategy for monitoring trees or tree species, etc., that pose an anticipated risk to life or property. It should be further stated that risk reduction through hazard tree identification must naturally include corresponding procedures to remediate any clear and present danger. These procedures must go beyond tree pruning acid/or removal, and should be eventually built into (at minimum) departmental protocol, but ultimately into city ordinance. The City can eventually rest assured as "doing its job" if a full spectrum of prudent actions have been implemented. Noteworthy topics surrounding this issue include: 1) restricting access to any area (park or otherwise) that possesses an impending danger to the public, e.g. placing barricades and roping off highly hazardous trees, and 2) the strategic placement of warning indicators ui high use public areas that hold current or future danger, e.g. areas susceptible to large falling limbs during wind storms. Steps to evaluate the high -risk population of trees include: s= Identify trees with structural damage or defects Know and understand problem species within the community s <_ Consider tree problems directly related to diameter class Assess trees by condition class It may well be that budget limitations allow for only portions of the high -risk population to be assessed in the beginning. General information should be available; however, regarding many of the listed evaluation methods. As the Forestry Department establishes what type of trees fall into each category, the next step would include evaluating what resources are available and how much can be allocated to high -risk tree removals. This Is best completed by the following. 44k Evaluate the current personnel and their scheduled annual work to Determine how much time is available to conduct assessments and removals Cityof College Station.. �...... ........... �....w.,_ ..,.,, �.,. ........,.....,.�,,..�. .....,..... . �,. �...... �, ,,...,.�., 3�1 .�,,... Urban Forest Management Plan t Evaluate budgetary resources available to conduct assessments and removals A cursory inspection was conducted during the sample inventory phase of document development. This inspection was not intended to determine definitive information regarding the location of potential hazards. A specific We inventory collected in GIS format would be required to precisely establish the location and true number of trees that fall into the hazard category. All procedures for hazard identification and assessment should be conducted according to International Society of Arboriculture standards with a qualified member of the Society as the assessor. Case law has established that the City may be held liable if there is knowledge of a "traffic condition" (rich as the obstruction of a drivers uiely to an in�bortant road .ran 0 tree limbs) and also failure to correct such a condition. It is thus prudent policy to eventually develop a detailed program for not only identifying/removing/traaisplanting trees that obstruct road signs, but also reducing the City's future exposure to claims through diligent planning in the initial placement of trees within high access/public use areas. Following are methods of risk reduction pertaining to hazard trees: CIA. Remove the target. — In some cases, it may be wise to move picnic tables, cars, landscape features, etc. to prevent them from being hit by a falling tree. Its also important to prevent access by any potential target (e.g. people or vehicles). Prune the tree Remove the defective branches of the tree. Since inappropriate pruning may also weaken a tree, it should be done by a Certified Arborist. li Cable and Brace the tree. —Provide physical support for weak branches and stems to increase their strength and stability. (See photo on nght) Cam. Provide Routine care Mature trees need routine care in the form of water, fertilizer (in some cases), mulch and pruning as dictated by die season and their structure. �� .. Remom the tree. — Some Hazardous trees are best removed. If possible, plant a new tree in an appropriate place as a replacement. Urban Forest Management Y S Station 32 g Plan r Risk management is necessary to ensure the safety of the residents of College Station and also to reduce die liability of the City. Treatment to mitigate and/or reduce hazard conditions should be a part of the management criteria for College Station. Reducing the risk associated with hazardous trees can take many forms. An effective risk management program should consist of the following parts: 14 Prepare and maintain a written management program this is approved by flue appropriate administrative body. 44 Establish the level of hazard control (acceptable risk), which will depend on budget and. management philosophy. 14 Have a systematic inspection procedure. Train inspection and maintenance personnel to recognize hazardous conditions (use national standard — International Society of Arboriculture — Hazard Evaluation Form) 44 Document inspection and control recommendations. 44 Control hazardous situation in a timely manner. 40 Maintain records of Inspection and control measures. 14 Review the program and records periodically in order to make recommendations for improvement. Additionally, specific steps should be followed when establishing a risk reduction policy statement. The policy statement should then be developed into an implemented Risk Management Strategy. This statement should include: Clearly identify who is the risk reduction manager List the current monetary restraints on managing hazard trees State the responsible department's understanding of its particular responsibility to maintain a safe public area Urban ForeManagement a lst Mtatgmen.. . . C" College n 3 na e t Plan STREET TREE MANAGEMEN"I' Street trees, unlike natural forest -grown trees are not self -maintaining and may be transplanted or growing in an alien environment that requires intensive management. Street trees generally grow in poor soils, compete with sod for nutrients and water, are subject to pollutants, must develop roots under impervious surface covers, be resistant to pest problems and must withstand physical abuse from vehicles, lawn movers, weed eaters, and people. Street trees must not only endure a tough existence, but are also expected to add to the aesthetics and value of the community. Some of these factors can be partially ameliorated through tree breeding and species selection, with the balance corrected by proper cultural practices. These practices include pruning, fertilization, protection, cable and bracing, and wound treatment. College Station is responsible for public safety in the public right-of- way, and this includes street trees. Street trees do not self -prune like forest -grown trees because they are usually growing in an un-crowded or open -grown landscape. As a result, the low crown limbs obstruct traffic, signs, lighting and other hazards due to rapid crown expansion. These problems can be eliminated or reduced by frequent pruning. An Arborist should conduct proper pruning techniques, preferably one certified by the International Society of Arboriculture. All pruning operations and standard operating guidelines should be in accordance with the most currernt edition of the following industry standards: Standard Practices for Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Maintenance, ANSI A300-1995; Safety Standards, ANSI Z133.1-1994, and ISA Tree Pruning Guidelines. As a necessary part of a proper program, the following types of pruning should be done as needed on individual trees throughout the city: Ci Crown Cleaning — Removal of dead, dying, diseased, crowded, weakly attached, and low vigor branches and water -sprouts. Q Crown Thinning — Selective removal of branches to increase light penetration and air movement through the crown. Thinning reduces the wind -sail effect of the crown and also reduces the weight of heavy limbs. Thinning the crown can emphasize the structural beauty of the trunk and branches and also improve the growth and health of undestory plants or turf by increase light penetration. City of Urban Forest College anationment Plan. 34., Crown Reduction — This technique is also known as drop crotch pruning. To accomplish this, prune the branch back to its point of attachment or to a lateral that is at least one-third the diameter of the cut being made. Thinning cuts will maintain the structural integrity and natural form of a tree. This will delay the time when it will be necessary to prune again. It is also used to decrease die height and spread of a tree. Q Crown Restoration - Selection of one to three main branch stubs that will grow to reform a more natural looking crown. Thinning or heading maybe necessary to match the weight of the new branches with the strength of their attachment. Several prnings over a number of years may be necessary. This improves die structure and appearance of trees that have been topped or severely pruned using heading cuts. 04 Crown Raising— Provides clearance for buildings, vehicles, pedestrians, and vistas by removing lower branches. At lease one half of the tree's foliage must be maintained on the branches that originate on the lower two thirds of the crown. This will ensure a well -formed, tapered structure and uniformly distributed weight. Q� 'Training Pruning — To establish strong trees, it is important that they are pruned early in their development to encourage good growth, balanced crowns, and reduce conditions that could lead to problems later. Street trees receive two general types of pruning. training and maintenance. Training is done primarily on young trees to develop a branching habit that ensures standard strength and low maintenance once the tree is mature. Attintenance pruning is done on mature trees to remove hazards and improve vigor and aesthetics. Pruning cuts on street trees include lifting, scaffold, thinning, hazard, deadwood, size reduction, and pest management. CollegeCity of U ban Forest Management 35 ement g Plan All branch removal is made by cutting just outside the branch bark ridge as depicted in the following figures (USDA 1-95). 4,1 branchi rfinal bark ( p fi branch bark ii cut a ridge 11a (� ridge sz/, �r h UM dead tt'I' living branch t�a" brancha r u iji y ll l branch collar branch collar B. Cutting a small branch 2nd cut C. Cutting a larger branch Lifting cuts remove lower branches that obstnnct traffic in accordance with right-of-way clearance standards, and are made primarily during the training period. Scaffold cuts are training cuts made to develop a structurally sound crown through the retention of branches well along the main leader. Thinning cuts are made iuh training and maintenance pruning to reduce the number of branches in the crown, allowing remaining branches to become more vigorous. Hazard pruning removes those portions of the crown that prevent a public hazard, such as impending structural failure. Deadwood cuts remove partially or completely dead portions of the crown for safety and to aid in wound closure. Deadwood is done mostly on more mature trees, but All dead or dying branches should also be removed in the training period. Crown reduction may be justified in some cases where there has been a change in site characteristics or as a result of poor species selection. Avoid topping or dehoming a tree, as this technique disfigures the tree and usually results in permanent structural damage, leading to higher costs of maintenance or future removal. Damage to branches that create hazards, attracts pests, or hasten decline should be pruned to remove the damaged portion. Pest problems may be controlled through removal of infected portions of the crown and by maintaininga, healthy crown, in part by utilizing some of the various pruning techniques described above. Municipal trees that interfere with energized utility lines must be pruned within a specified distance of those lines. However, forestry crews or contractors should not prune near energized lines for reasons of safety and liability. Line clearance and vegetation management in a utility easement is the responsibility of utility arborists and foresters who are specially trained in pruning around power lines. 1'iudent and safe operation around utility lines is an essential component for municipal workers. Cityof College Station n .36 Urban Forest Management Plan fin®® ' ftning Many municipal pruning operations are scheduled by demand and immediate needs. A more proactive or controlled method of maintenance that is helping municipal pruning operations become more productive is called programmed maintenance. Programmed maintenance is the servicing of all trees in a given area of the community on a rotational basis. This servicing would include making all necessary pruning cuts on each tree in sun area and other maintenance activities. Using this system of maintenance will greatly reduce the calls for service requests, hazard maintenance and other primary tasks. Programmed maintenance will increase productivity due primarily to reduced transportation costs and more effective task scheduling. To maintain a safe, healthy and viable urban forest, the City should consider establishing a maintenance program to prune all the street trees in the city over a specified number of years. The length of the rotational pruning cycle will depend primarily on the number of trees in the city right- of-ways and the fiunds available for maintenance. The optimum pruning cycle, on the other hand, will vary based on the conditions, species, age and regional climate characteristics of the area. The condition, species mix, and age of the tree populations will influence the pruning cycle for that population. A tree with a high condition rating would be a tree with a well -developed crown, good branch management and small pruning wounds. Frequent pruning, especially when the tree is young, will allow a tree to develop a higher condition rating and thereby require less corrective pruning at maturity. This equates to a high return on investment by reducing costs of maintenance in the fixture. Tree species influence the frequency of pruning, due to a great variation in growth rate, branch arrangement, wood strength and rates of decay among species. The age of a tree also relates to the frequency of pruning. Generally, young trees need more frequent pruning because of rapid growth, the need for training, and low branches in the right-of-way. Trees growing in a warm climate with abundant moisture will grow faster and need more frequent pruning. Pruning operations in College Station must be cost effective and practical. So therefore, a balance between optimal and practical pruning cycles must be considered. In order to accomplish these goals, standard pruning cycles of 3 years for young trees (less than 6" diameter) and 7 years for mature trees (6" diameter and greater) would be recommended. These two pruning cycles would run concurrently. Pruning for trees growing in parks said other public areas maintained by the city should also be on the same pruning cycle if they are growing in close proximity to picnic areas, playgrounds, trails, facilities, buildungs, roadways or other areas frequented by people. While these are the normally City of� College Station 37� Urban Forest Management Plan accepted pruning cycles, some high use areas may require annual or bi=annual inspections and/or deadwood pruning due in part to drought conditions, storm damage and development impacts. This assessment however, is only considering the street trees of College Station. A graphic assessment of die primary needs of the City street trees based on the 2002 windshield survey is as represented in Figure 10: Figure 10 Pruning/Removal Maintenance Requirements for all Areas Surveyed This graph indicates that the priority or hazard maintenance requirements evaluated in the survey are less than 2% of the total estimated street tree inventory. The actual total combined hazard maintenance priorities for street trees sum to approximately 254 trees. Note: Cart figures on the follon z'' page are estimated Actual costs may be higher or lower depending on various conditions surrounding the zrrork being done nnthin thisproject. Budgetary figures orguidelz'nes assoczated with the program uz'll need to be mie xii and possibly amended as a result. City �of College Station 38.�..�: ie Stat Urban Forest Management Plan This first step of elimitnating die unsafe conditions existing ,,ilong the streets of the City should be ideally accomplished before start up of maintenance, or at a minimum, concurrent to scheduled maintenance cycles. It will; however, require an inventory of the street trees in order to locate the hazard priorities. The cost of a complete street tree inventory (depending on the number of attributes/tree and location) of the estimated 15,000+ trees with the GIS database is briefly outlined in Table D. Tree ventory Costs Number of Trees if Maximum Estimated Cost I Cost/Tree I Circa 15 00040,000 $2.66 Table D —Estimated Costs for Complete Tree Inventory Upon completion, the City has a choice to contract the priority maintenance or to utilize the current Forestry Crew. Since the number of priority maintenance trees is relatively small (254), it is estimated that a tree care contractor could do the work in 3 to 4 months. Otherwise, the current Forestry crew would take over one year (estimated at 2 trees/day over 127 working days) base on currently allocated forestry operations work days, i.e. 47% dedication (117 working days /year). Priority maintenance by a proposed contractor however, is outlined in Table E. Table E —Cost Outline of Priority Maintenance by Contractor According to Forestry salaries and reported overhead maintenance costs, the current 3-man Forestry Crew is rated at approximately $ 419/day The City s cost to perform this fist priority step would be approximately $53,000 (127 working days). Additional costs to the City may be expected as the debris from the larger removals will require assistance in clean Lip. Following the contracting or in-house completion of the priority pruning operation, it will be time for the City to begin the programmed maintenance pruning cycles previously mentioned for the remainitig estimated 15,431 street trees. City of College . . Station .. ... .. .. ......... .. . . . , .... , ... ... ... . , ... ...... .... _ ... , 39..... Urban Forest Management Plan Figure 11, generated from the survey of the Sire Class .Distribution, shows that approximately 12,400 (See Bi ire 6) of the street trees are young trees less than 6" in diameter. This indicates a mostly young urban forest along the City right-of-ways, which will require the shorter 3-year tramming pruning cycle to help these young trees develop a branching habit that will ensure structural strength and low maintenance once the tree is mature. The remaining population (approximately 20 %) are mature street trees 6" in diameter and larger, all qualifying for the 7 year maintenance pruning cycle. The City's 3- man Forestry Crew, who now only work 47°/0 of their time on forestry related operations, would have responsibility for accomplishing tie programmed maintenance pruning schedule. At such a low level of actual time spent performing tree related duties, the programmed maintenance pruning schedule could not be maintained without additional resources committed by die City. The current forestry operations workload and projected required pruning schedule were evaluated to determine die daily concurrent maintenance work necessary to comply with a seven and three year programmed maintenance schedule. Tables F and G oudine the 3 (young tree) and 7 (mature tree) year maintenance programs. CitY Urban of ForestCollege Staten 0 Management .... w �... 4 Station � ana Plan Young e Traanrn Cc8e 3 Year Program-11 ante Conee r Matnten � statistic. . Survey Estimate of Trees wilt Less than 6' Diameter „ �I Circa 12,400 Young Trees, Number of Young Trees Maintained per 3 Year Cycle I Circa 4,100 Year Crew Committed For ' O erations (11 y P estry . P 1. 7 Days Da s er w to Maintenance proximately 35 Number of Trees needing Daily Ap Table F 3 Year Training Cycle for Trees Less than 6" Diameter _(I Mature Tree Maintenance Cycle -7 Year Program �. � Maintenance Concern Statistic 'I Survey Estimate of Trees with Greater than 6" Diameter Circa 3,100 Mature Trees 4 Number of Mature Trees Maintained per, 7 Y Y ear Cycle .. Circa 445 Da per Y ewstry Op .. I „ ..Days Ys Yea r Coo to For. erations 117 needing ,. Number of Trees n g Daily Maintenance .. .,, . Approximately 4 Table C ®7 Year Maintenance Cycle for Trees more than 6" Diameter 1 The Forestry Crew would be required to maintain a total of 39 trees concurrently per working day. This number of trees on this limited daily basis is not a feasible accomplishment for a 3-man Forestry crew. Assuming the crew could increase efforts to a maximum of 250 days (100% commitment), the daily requirement of 18 trees would still exceed the potential for the 3-man crew. It would be practical to consider however, that two 3-man crews could maintain a schedule of 9 trees per day. For the Forestry Division to accomplish the task of maintaining a programmed maintenance pruning schedule for the city street trees, it is estimated that the following minimum personnel\resources would be required: WA Two 3-man crew equipped with chipper trucks (one with attached aerial bucket), chipper, pole saws, power saws, and necessary safety and climbing gear. These crews would be assigned specifically to maintain the programmed pruning maintenance schedule. 2 Forestry Crew Leaders and 4 Forestry workers, make up the necessary staffing requirements for this. b A Forestry Supervisor assigned to manage the two teams mentioned above. This person would need to be trained in hazard evaluation, and equipped with a vehicle and job related safety gear and equipment. WA An additional Forestry worker will be necessary to provide support for the two crews assigned to street tree maintenance. This person would operate the stump grinder, spraying and fertilizer unit(s). Additionally, this person could also be trained in tree hazard evaluation for reporting to City of College Station „41 Urban Forest Management Plan the supervisor. The creation of this career position may also require a vehicle capable of pulling or carrying the existing machinery/unit(s). We estimate that in order for the City to gear -tip the Forestry Division to commit to the above -mentioned program, a budget of approximately $484,000 would be needed. This includes Operating and Maintenance (O/M) cosh to support these men and associated equipment. Further detail is provided in Table I� Salaries/year* Capital Equipment & Ancillary Costs± ' 260,000 *Includes employee ±One Time Cost benefits I Table H —Proposed Costs for Forestay Division 0 Costs* * $30,000 First Year Total $541,000"' **Includes fuel, tools Year 2 costs less and maintenance costs equipment=$281,000 Note .° Costfigures on thispage are estimated° Actual costs may be higher or lover depending on various condition surroarnding the amrk being done )within thz: pm eet. Budgetary figures orguidelines associated asith thepangram avill need to be m ev ed and posnbly amended as a result. Communities often contract their pruning and other programmed maintenance activities because of the equipment costs associated with these activities. A pnining cycle is used with die appropriate areas of the parks or facilities, and is advertised for bids each year. It is essential to have a good contract that describes what is expected of each party, sets the work standards and allows for on -site inspections. Standard proposals, statements of work, for contracts for maintenance services offered by contractors] should include subject matter addressing the following. an outline of work to be performed, the time and resources needed to perform the work, customer (City) responsibilities in the agreement, costs, and payment terms. Contract pruning and maintenance is a common and effective method of maintaining trees, particularly in smaller communities where equipment costs cannot be justified by annual usage amounts. City of College Station 42 .. Urban Forest Management Plan PA�ZK AND MUNICIPAL Fi .CIL 'ry TEYt MAN.A.GEMENT Parks Inspectim Overview College Station's park system is extensive with approximately 1,300 acres tinder ownership or under die responsibility of the Parks and Recreation Department. Thirty parks of the system were inspected during die spring of 2002 tinder flidy dry conditions. 'lhe purpose of the inspections was to determine what general conditions and species existed in the urban forest, including both managed and unmanaged populations. The inspections were generally cursory in nature, dependent on the size of die park. An extensive Master Plan for Parks has previously been developed and, therefore, no comments will be addressed pertaining to hardscapes, recreation facilities, etc. The most common method of acquiring data for the survey was to walk through or around each park, stopping at several locations to observe and record information on clusters of trees. In some cases, clusters appeared to be naturally formed; in other instances, clusters were artificially delineated within a large group by the observing forester. In the case of Luther Jones Park, all trees were inventoried. An attempt was made to include data from as many microenvironments as possible; for example: x-') Savannah fYS Forested land with brush cleared out 4,) Forested areas with understory retained Upland areas Lowland sites } Landscaped sections Due to time and budget limitations, the large parks such as Wolf Pen Creek Park, Central Park, and Lick Creek Park were given insufficient attention to make representative inventories; but die smaller parks' inventories are much more valid in which to draw conclusions. The inventoried data represents only a glimpse of the park canopy cover, however, no representation is made as to quantitatively representing true stem numbers. The data do give a flavor of what is in each park. Most of the parks in College Station, Texas, are pleasantly inviting because of good maintenance. On the whole, lawns are neatly mowed and edged, trash and graffiti hardly exist, and most trees are reasonably vigorous. Especially commendable is the lack of basal wounds on tree trunks (particularly younger planted trees); persons who mow and use string trimmers seem to be very careful. City.. .. ..,, .. .. ..., ... _, ..,., .,. .. of College Station 43 Urban Forest Management Plan The parks are made up primarily of mature hardwoods, particularly post oak. Additional species are extensive (see Parks Species List in Appendix). The understory is extensive in yaupon. Some parks now support transplanted trees such as Bradford pear, green ash, but oak, live oak, and bald cypress. Two parks in particular are worthy of special comment and protection. Georgic V- Fitch Park, one boundary of which is contiguous with that of the public library, is home to many Mexican plum and wild cherry trees. These species were rarely found in other parks. In addition, this particular site has at least one stump apparently created by the work of beavers. Near the street, wildflowers bloom in bright profusion. Lick Creek Park, on the southeast side of town, supports Farkleberry, which also was uncommonly found in other parks; surely this park because of its large area aid many microenvironments, has other plants that will not thrive under compacted soils and extensive development. There is merit to preserving portions in the City's Master Plan. From an urban forestry standpoint, Anderson Park would repay efforts for transplanting additional trees, mulching, and supplemental watering. This park has few trees, some of them being damaged and weak. Also, the soil appears compacted in some areas, where mechanical aeration and addition of organic matter may benefit vegetation. Waste wood generated at other parks can be used to mulch newly planted trees or to foml pathways that gradually will decay to enhance die soil. An example of debris mulch ready for application was noted in Central Park. Steeplechase Park, Brothers Park, Emerald Park, and Southwest Park all contain noteworthy numbers of standing dead trees. While more than one species is involved, there appears to be a current stressor on cedar elms. Many of the Callery pear trees inventoried in general were infected with Fireblight, and some were stunted. Munidpal Fadlhks The municipal facilities buildings appear to be very well maintained. New tree plantings, as noted in many of the newer City facilities such as the Utility Customer Service Center, have been extensively landscaped with new trees. Urban Forest Management nt 1. .. Y g ��@ n Some specific tree management issues that would affect tree health mid maintenance are as follows: 0 An inventory of trees on public facilities and high use areas will facilitate rapid transition to more proactive maintenance procedures. (5 For public safety mid liability protection, a regularly scheduled tree hazard evaluation should be conducted of all public facilities and parks. Q Trees in high use areas should be protected from compaction or physical damage by mulching. Mulching is extensively used in College Station; however, additional opportunities exist. Mulched areas around trees or groups of trees will help protect from mower and weed eater damage, as well as protect the root zone area. Grass competition should be discouraged. Grouping trees in large mulch beds would enhance tree health and survival. Q Consider "resting' trees in heavy use treed areas. Fencing off the area, heavy mulching, fertilization, and aeration treatments could help restore tree vigor uh highly compacted locations. Irrigation systems used to provide moisture for trees should be configured to provide deep watering on a weekly basis during the hot summer months or, more frequently during droughty periods as experienced during the latter years of the 1990's. Q Chemical treatments around trees should not have detrimental effect on the root zone area of trees. No nr,eed and feed, fertffz Zation or herbicides other than contact, soil neutral herbicides should be applied. College Station is responsible for public safety in all public areas including parks and municipal facilities. Because these areas are highly visible and frequented by people, they must be maintained for both safety and aesthetics. Trees growing in close proximity to precise areas, playgrounds, trails, facilities, buildings, access roadways, parking areas aid other public use areas must not pose any threat to the safety of the public. There high use areas may require more frequent inspections and/or priming treatments due in part to use impact, drouglht conditions, storm damage and development impacts. These problems can be eliminated or reduced by frequent pnming. An Arborist should conduct proper techniques, preferably one certified by the International Society of Arboriculture. All pruning operations and standard operating guidelines should be in accordance with the most current edition of the following industry standards: Standard Practices for Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Maintenance, ANSI A300-1995; Safety Standards, ANSI Z133.1-1994, and ISA Tree Pruning Guidelines. City of ban Forest Station ent PIa... ....... _. C StCation 45 tM n The types of pruning generally used in the tree care industry are described below: * Crown Cleaning — Removal of dead, dying, diseased, crowded, weakly attached, and low vigor branches and water -sprouts. * Crown Thinning — Selective removal of brunches to increase light penetration and air movement through the crown. Thinning reduces the wind -sail effect of the crown said also reduces the weight of heavy limbs. Thinning the crown can emphasize the structural beauty of the trunk and branches and also improve the growth and health of understory plaints or turf by increase light penetration. Crown Reduction — This technique is also known as drop crotch pruning. To accomplish this, prune the branch back to its point of attachment or to a lateral that is at least one-third the diameter of the cut being made. Thinning cuts will maintain tine structural integrity and natural form of a tree. This will delay the time when it will be necessary to prune again. It is also used to decrease the height and spread of a tree. Crown Restoration - Selection of one to three main branch stubs that will grow to refomn a more natural looking crown. Thinning or heading may be necessary to match the weight of the new branches with the strengdi of their attachment. Several prunings over a number of years may be necessary. This improves the structure and appearance of trees that have been topped or severely pruned using heading cuts. Crown Raising — Provides clearance for buildings, vehicles, pedestrians, acid vistas by removing lower branches. At lease one half of the tree's foliage must be maintained on the branches that originate on the lower two thirds of the crown. This will ensure a well -formed, tapered structure and uniforady distributed weight. * 'Training Pruning — To establish strong trees, it is important that they are pruned early in their development to encourage good growth, balanced crowns, and reduce conditions that could lead to problems later. Trees receive two general types of pruning. training and maintenance. Training is done primarily on young trees to develop a branching habit that ensures standard strength and low maintenance once the tree is mature. Maintenance pruning is done on mature trees to remove hazards and improve vigor sand aesthetics. Pruning cuts on street trees include lifting, scaffold, thinning, hazard, deadwood, size reduction, and pest management. City of College Station,._ ................. ....., ...... ....... ...... .. .,..,.. ... .. .. 46 Urban Forest Management Plan All branch removal ii made by cutting just outside the branch bark ridge as depicted in the following figure (USDA 1-95). barkchj?If (`$�It I1+� branch bark III a g § ridge /., final Tnd cut nd 1 �V e sy? s,El l at dead t F(€(i living C � cu4 branch !a �.zta€ branch Alt nal lk €� pp j cut branch collar branch collar B. Cutting a small C. Cutting a larger branch branch Lifting cuts remove lover branches that obstruct traffic in accordance with right-of-way clearance standards, and are made primarily during the training period. Scaffold cuts are training cuts made to develop a structurally sound crown through the retention of branches well along the main leader. Thinning cuts are made in training and maintenance pruning to reduce the number of branches in the crown, allowing remaining branches to become more vigorous. Hazard pruning removes those portions of the crown that prevent a public hazard, such as impending structural failure. Deadwood cuts remove partially or completely dead portions of the crown for safety and to aid in wound closure. Deadwood is done mostly on more mature trees, but all dead or dying branches should also be removed in the training period. Crown reduction may be justified in some cases where there has been a change in site characteristics or as a result of poor species selection. Avoid topping or dehoming a tree, as this technique disfigures the tree and usually results in permanent structural damage, leading to higher costs of maintenance or fihture removal. Damage to branches that create hazards, attracts pests, or hasten decline should be pruned to remove the damaged portion. Pest problems may be controlled through removal of infected portions of the crown and by maintaining a healthy crown, in part by utilizing some of the various pruning techniques described above. Trees that interfere with energized utility lines must be pruned within a specified distance of those lines. However, forestry crews or contractors should not prune near energized lines for reasons of safety and liability. Line clearance and vegetation management in a utility easement is the responsibility of utility arborists and foresters who are specially trained in pruning around power lines. Pnident and safe operation around utility lines is an essential component for municipal workers. City of College Station 47 Urban Forest Management Plan r0arks and Rxilities Pruning Many parks and facilities pruning operations are scheduled by demand and immediate needs. A more proactive or controlled method of maintenance that assists municipal pruning operations become more productive is called programmed maintenance. Programmed maintenance is the servicing of trees in a given area of a park or facility on a rotational basis. This servicing would include making all necessary pruning cuts on each tree in an actively maintained area and other maintenance activities. Using this system of maintenance will greatly reduce the calls for service requests, hazard maintenance and other primary tasks. Programmed maintenance will increase productivity due primarily to reduced transportation costs and more effective task scheduling. Pruning1 To maintain a safe, healthy and viable urban forest, the City should consider establishing a maintenance program to prune all park and facilities designed trees aver a specified number of years. The length of the rotational pruning cycle will depend primarily on die number of designated park and facilities trees and the fiends available for maintenance. The optimum pruning cycle, on the other Band, will vary based on the conditions, species, age and regional climate characteristics of the area. Tlne condition, species mix, and age of the tree populations will influence the pruning cycle for that population. A tree with a high condition rating would be a tree with a well -developed crown, good branch management and small pruning wounds. Frequent pruning, especially when the tree is young, will allow a tree to develop a higher condition rating and thereby require less corrective pruning at maturity. This equates to a high return on investment by reducing costs of maintenance in the future. Tree species influence the frequency of pruning, due to a great variation in growth rate, branch arrangement, wood strength and rates of decay among species. The age of a tree also relates to the frequency of pruning. Generally, young trees need more frequent pruning because of rapid growth, the need for training, and low branches in the right-of-way. Trees growing in a warn climate with abundant moisture will grow faster and need more frequent pruning. Pruning operations in College Station must be cost effective and practical. So therefore, a balance between optimal and practical pruning cycles must be considered. In order to accomplish these goals, standard pruning cycles of 3 years for young trees (less than 6" diameter) and 7 years for mature trees (6" diameter and greater) would be recommended. These two pruning cycles would run concurrently and basically mirror recommendations for street tree pruning. City of Urban Forest Management Cation 4 M ent Pla.n.... 8 8 Pruning and Equiprnent For purposes of general tree conditions and species diversity study, approximately 30 parks said numerous municipal facilities were inspected. Some hazardous tree conditions were noted, predictably more in parks than public facility property. The first step is eliminating the whsafe conditions existing in the public parks and municipal facilities. This should be accomplished before start up of pruning operations. At minimum, these operations should be concurrent to scheduled maintenance cycles. It will require an inventory of the high use or maintained park and facilities areas in order to locate the hazard priorities. This type of inventory (depending on the number of attributes/tree) will include a location survey of an estimated 3,000- 5,000 trees. The GIS database provided by the City has an associated cost estimated to be a maximum of $20,000. Upon completion of the first step, the City has a choice to contract the priority maintenance or to utilize existing resources. In order to start the scheduled maintenance program and resolve the Priority maintenance issues, it is recommended that the existing forestry crew be designated only for tree care work in public parks, municipal facilities and greenways. This crew could be assigned to do the priority maintenance and initiate the programmed maintenance schedule. In order for the Forestry Division to accomplish these tasks for the city parks and municipal facilities, it is estimated that die following minimum resources would have to be committed to this program for the new fiscal year: P Utilize the existing 3-man crew equipped with chipper truck, chipper, pole saws, power saws, and. necessary climbing gear. Note: Cost figures on tlyis page are estimated. Actual costs may be higher or lower depending on various conditions surrounding the work being done within tbis project. Budgetary figures orguidelz'nes associated with the program )mill need to be remeved and possibly amended as a result. City of' College Station 49, .. Urban Forest Management Plan Maintenance Communities often contract their pruning and other programmed maintenance activities because of the equipment costs associated with these activities. A pruning cycle is used with the appropriate areas of the parks or facilities, and is advertised for bids each year. It is essential to have a good contract that describes what is expected of each party, sets the work standards and allows for on -site inspections. Standard proposals, statements of work, for contracts for maintenance services offered by contractors] should include subject matter addressing the following. an outline of work to be performed, the time and resources needed to perform the work, customer (City) responsibilities in the agreement, costs, and payment terms. Contract pruning and maintenance is a common and effective method of maintaining trees, particularly in smaller communities where equipment costs cannot be justified by annual usage amounts. City of College Station 50 Urban Forest Management Plan REENWNYSTREE MANAGEMENT College Station developed a Greenways Master Plan in February 1999. The purpose was to guide the implementation of greenways development according to portions of the City's 1997 Comprehensive Plan. A Neh)vrk of Gmenxayrfor College Stalion was the resulting document. A brief comment should be made regarding greenways and their importance ui urban environments. A greenway is a corridor that follows natural features such -,is floodplains, utility corridors (human made), roads or railway beds. While providing floodplain control and improving water quality, greenways also provide an excellent means of connecting people and places within the community. These green corridors offer alternative methods of transportation including walking, biking, skating, and jogging in an aesthetically pleasing environment. Through greenways designation, local plant and animal life are enhanced and protected. There are conclusive economic benefits to geenway corridors with studies showing increased real estate values on adjacent properties. Greenways are not new to the planning agenda of the City. Previous efforts have been directed at Wolf Pen Creek as a potential development area. This, along with other greenway locations, can become an attraction for tine Community as well as a functional part of the green infrastructure. Currently, the City's Greenways Coordinator is a part of the Public Works Department. This department in conjunction with other interested groups and appointed committees (i.e., Greenways Implementation Task Force), have the opportunity to create improved natural areas within any future development plans. Treed areas should both be preserved and created through specific reforestation or aforestation plans. Tree planting initiatives and tree preservation plans should be developed for new projects as they become imminent. The College Station plan for greenways addresses numerous opportunities for establishment and identifies maintenance requirements. Little information is offered; however, regarding the establishment and routing among established trees. In the process of providing access and City ofCollni on ......... ..50 UrbanForest Maagement Plan considering the encroachment of these natural areas, tree maintenance becomes an issue for public safety. Liability issues from falling trees and limbs must be addressed. Security of trail users may also require some removal of trees and vegetation. Tree maintenance issues associated with Greenway public access would include the following Establish a regular inspection program of all public access points located within or adjacent to the edge of greenways' natural wooded areas for potential hazard to public from falling trees or limbs. k i Inspect for potential predator (human) hiding places adjacent to trails and access areas that may require vegetation and tree removal for better security. Protect trees from access impact by preventing development directly in canopy of trees or install non -impact trails such as mulch on geotechnical fiber base on grade. Maintain the existing drainage regimes of mature wooded areas intersected with trail. access. Prevent as far as possible, pollutants from entering into the greenway drainage system. This should also be a regular inspection item. s v Protect heavy use natural access areas from public impact by periodically "resting' trails (preventing access) so that the area can recover from the impact and have a change to naturally heal itself Tree maintenance issues of public safety can be eliminated or reduced by frequent pruning. An Arborist should conduct proper techniques, preferably one certified by the International Society of Arboriculture. All pruning operations and standard operating guidelines should be in accordance with the most current edition of the following industry standards: Standard Practices for Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Maintenance, ANSI A300-1995; Safety Standards, ANSI Z133.1-1994, and ISA Tree Pruning Guidelines. The types of pruning generally used in the tree care industry are described below: Q Crown Cleaning — Removal of dead, dying, diseased, crowded, weakly attached, and low vigor branches and water -sprouts. lei Crown Thinning — Selective removal of branches to increase light penetration and air movement through the crown. Thinning reduces the wind -sail effect of the crown and also reduces the weight of beavy limbs. Thinning the crown can emphasize the structural beauty of the trunk and branches and also improve the growth and health of understory plants or turf by increase light penetration. Crown Reduction — This technique is also known as drop crotch pruning. To accomplish this, prune the branch back to its point of attachment or to a lateral that is at least one-third the diameter of the cut being made. Thinning cuts will maintain the structural uategrity and natural form of a tree. 'Plus will delay the tune when it will be necessary to prune again. It is also used to decrease the height and spread of tree. City of College Station ., .,..,...., _ ..., 51 Urban Forest Management Plan p Crown Restorafion - Selection of one to dine main bratich stubs that will gYow to reform a more natural looking crown. Thinning or heading may be necessary to match the weight of the new brunches with the strength of their attachment. Several pnttmings over a number of years may be necessary. This improves the structure and appearance of trees that have been topped or severely pruned using heading cuts. Or Crown Raising — Provides clearance for buildings, vehicles, pedestrians, and vistas by removing lower branches. At lease one half of the tree's foliage must be maintained on the branches that originate on die lower two thirds of the crown. This will ensure a well -formed, tapered stricture and uniformly distributed weight. Training Pruning — To establish strong trees, it is important that they are pruned early in their development to encourage good growth, balanced crowns, and reduce conditions that could lead to problems later. Trees receive two general types of pruning. training and maintenance. Training is done primarily oil young trees to develop a branching habit that ensures standard strength and low maintenance once the tree is mature. Maintenance pruning is done on mature trees to remove hazards ;rid improve vigor and aesthetics. Pruning cuts on street trees include lifting, scaffold, thinning, hazard, deadwood, size reduction, and pest management. All branch removal is made by cutting just outside the branch bark ridge as depicted in the following figure (USDA 1-95). t branch ark(l g( b'r branch bark r' ridge 'i�l�t3 ridge ciut I y Y , '1 � dead Vliving { i branch branch branch collar `� 4r1 ( branch collar B. Cutting a small g branch C. Cutt branch and cut a larger Lifting cuts remove lower branches that obstruct traffic in accordance with right-of-way clearance standards, surd are made primarily during the training period. Scaffold cuts are training cuts made to develop a structurally sound crown through the retention of branches well along the main Ieader. City of College Station . ._. .. .......... .......... ... ..._......_........,_,......,.....,....,...,..,_,. .,...,...52..,.. Urban Forest Management Plan Thinning cuts are made in training and maintenance pruning to reduce the number of branches in the crown, allowing remaining branches to become more vigorous. Hazard pruning removes those portions of the crown that prevent a public hazard, such as impending structural failure. Deadwood cuts remove partially or completely dead portions of the crown for safety and to aid in wound closure. Deadwood is done mostly on more mature trees, but all dead or dying branches should also be removed in the. training period. Crown reduction maybe justified in some cases where there has been a change in site characteristics or as a result of poor species selection. Avoid topping or dehoming a tree, as this technique disfigures the tree and usually results irn permanent structural damage, leading to higher costs of maintenance or removal down the road. Damage to branches that create hazards, attracts pests, or hasten decline should be pnined to remove the damaged portion. Pest problems may be controlled through removal of infected portions of die crown and by maintaining a healthy crown, in part by utilizing some of the various pruning techniques described above. Trees that interfere with energized utility lines must be pruned within a specified distance of those lines. However, forestry crews or contractors should not prune near energized lines for reasons of safety. and liability. Line clearance and vegetation management in a utility easement is the responsibility of utility arborists and foresters who are specially trained in pruning around power lines. Prudent and safe operation around utility lines is an essential component for municipal workers. Greenways Pruning Many greenways pruning operations are scheduled by demand and immediate needs. A more proactive or controlled method of maintenance that assists municipal pruning operations become more productive is called programmed maintenance. Programmed maintenance is the servicing of trees in a given greemvay area on a rotational basis. This servicing would include making all necessary pruning cuts on each tree ul any given area and other maintenance activities. Using this system of maintenance will greatly reduce the calls for service requests, hazard maintenance and other primary tasks. Programmed maintenance will increase productivity due primarily to reduced transportation costs and more effective task scheduling. City of College Sta tion ation 53 Urban Forest Management Plan Pruning uli To maintain a safe, healthy and viable urban forest, the City should consider establishing a maintenance program to prune all the greenway areas over a specified number of years. The length of the rotational pruning cycle will depend primarily on the number of designated greenway trees and the funds available for maintenance. The optimum pruning cycle, on the other hand, will vary based on the conditions, species, age and regional climate characteristics of the area. The condition, species mix, and age of the tree populations will influence the pruning cycle for that population. A tree with a high condition rating would be a tree with a well -developed crown, good bruich management and small pruning wounds. Frequent pruning, especially when die tree is young, will allow a tree to develop a higher condition rating and thereby require less corrective pruning at maturity. This equates to a high return on investment by reducing costs of maintenance in the future. "free species influence the frequency of pruning, due to a great variation in growth rate, branch arrangement, wood strength and rates of decay among species. The age of a tree also relates to die frequency of pruning. Generally, young trees need more frequent pruning because of rapid growth, the need for training, and low branches in the right-of-way. Trees growing in a warm climate with abundant moisture will grow faster and need more frequent pruning. Pruning operations ui College Station must be cost effective and practical. So therefore, a balance between optimal and practical pruning cycles must be considered. In order to accomplish these goals, standard pruning cycles of 3 years for young trees (less than 6" diameter) and 7 years for mature trees (6" diameter and greater) would be recommended. These two pruning cycles would run concurrently. Pruning1 As many areas designated for greenways may tend to connect parks through unmanaged vegetation, hazardous tree conditions exist naturally. A first step of eliminating the unsafe conditions existing in greenway areas should be accomplished prior to start up of general scheduled maintenance. An inventory of die significant greenway trees will be necessary to locate the hazard priorities. As no population tree number is accurately known for greenways, no estimate of inventory costs can be correctly assessed. Taking this into consideration, these costs may approximate die parks and municipal facilities location survey cost, which was estimated at a maximum of $20,000 City of College Station . ..,�...:.� . :::.. ......... ....... � ., _ .:,..... ... .... , ...... :..... ,.. . 54 Urban Forest Management Plan Upon completion of the first step, the City has a choice to contract the priority maintenance or to utilize e_xisti ig resources. In order to start the scheduled maintenance program and resolve the priority maintenance issues, it is recommended, as previously recommended in Parks and Facilities Maintenance Section, that the existing forestry crew be designated only for tree care work in public parks, municipal facilities and greenways. This crew could be assigned to do the priority maintenance and initiate the programmed maintenance schedule. In order for the Forestry Division to accomplish these tasks for the City parks and municipal facilities, at this time, it is suggested that the existing 3 man forestry crew and equipment designated for parks and municipal maintenance would be sufficient to also handle greenways maintenance. Note: Cost figures on this and the pmviouspage are estzmated. Actual cortr may be higher or lmauevdepending on wnozls conditions sarrrnunding the i rk being done unthin this project. Budgetarg figures orguidaines associated with the program may need to be amended as a rewlt. City g,,...of Colle a Station ....,..,._........ ......... ......_ ... ...,,.,..,. .... ..._.. ._., ...,..... . ......, ... ...,,.,, . 5 .,,._ 5 Urban Forest Management Plan SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIJONS & RECOMMENDATIONS — CRITICAL URBAN FOREST ISSUES IN COLLEGE STATION Hazard Tree rYt and Ptisk Policy Obserra bon Trees uh the City's park system were observed to be ui good condition overall. Standing dead trees were noted in inspections, as were trees with deadwood in the crown. The numbers cannot be quantified from the sample inventory (compared to street trees); however, totals appear to be less impressive than street tree hazards. There are locations in the undeveloped parks that contain moderately declining stands of trees. However, the mauitained park areas are in very good condition considering the resources available to the Parks and Recreation Department. Extensive activity 1n other areas of responsibility does not provide an abundant amount of crew hours to be devoted to the serious issue of hazard tree assessment and removals. Street trees, as seen from the data graphics included in this document, are generally in good condition as well. IIazard removals or hazard prunes represent a very small percentage of the current tree population, albeit, still considered an important aspect of tree management. The sample inventory suggests that more than 250 hazardous conditions exist currently along city streets. These may be dead or dying trees or simply serious deadwood ui the canopy. Current removals or pruning is accomplished on a "crisis management" basis, most likely generated from reports to the Forestry Division from citizens or, in the case of municipal departments, from those in sanitation or transportation positions. Trees that obstruct the view of traffic flow, pedestrian signals, traffic control devices/signals, and the observation of children at play, may create other hazardous conditions. Street and sidewalk overhead clearance, if not properly maintained, can additionally create hazardous conditions. Recommendations a Conduct a citywide inventory of all street trees and those public areas (park and municipal facilities) that are actively used. Contract out the removal or hazard pruning to an outside contractor for speed, efficiency, cost effectiveness, and to allow current Forestry Crew personnel to conduct other duties. 4C� Conduct ongoing regular inspections of street trees to identify high -risk trees and trees that create hazardous conditions. City of Urban Forest College llgMa anon 108 Management Plan AP Develop a proactive hazard tree risk management program with the goal of creating a hazard tree policy statement by December 2002. n> The hazard tree policy statement should address the issue of reasonable care. Look objectively at die City's management resources. Are they adequate to address the needs of public safety? Establish the level of care that is manageable for College Station. Develop a clear policy statement. Review the statement on an annual basis. Implement a risk management strategy. From the policy statement, you should establish what strategy is appropriate. Communicate the tree risk management program to three groups; department staff, officials, and the general public. Obrffxmion The City's street tree population is difficult to completely quantify given die variance of right-of-way widths and sampling conducted. Different areas have unique problems or cl-rallenges, an example of which is the extensive use of crepe myrtle in plantings for newer sections versus the presence of hazardous or older trees iih more established sections of College Station., Therefore, one simple approach to maintenance, diversity, planting density, etc., cannot be applied. Many opportunities exist, however, to develop improvements in die long-term street tree canopy. Reecowwwmendalikr Increase species diversity in street tree plantings. Avoid monoculture plantings. Use proper size trees to avoid utilities and visibility issues. Avoid species that have high maintenance costs or are prone to stone damage. Plan a target goal of planting approximately 125 new trees per year in City ROW. Plant slow growing and long lived species, thus spreading out die cost of removals and replanting. Initiate a programmed pruning cycle of three (3) years for young trees; seven (7) years for mature trees. Conduct a street tree inventory to locate all hazardous trees. ' Remove all hazardous trees using an outside contractor. Add six (6) Forestry Crew members to establish two new 3-men crews committed to spending 100% of their work time (annually) on tree maintenance operations. A separate yet potential option would be to contract out the maintenance of street trees. Q Add one (1) Forestry Supervisor to manage street tree maintenance. City of College Urban Forest Man109 Management Plan 4) Add one (1) Forestry worker as a support person for the new crews. Purchase additional departmental equipment for use by the new Forestry crews, supervisor and support member. Implement a community awareness and educational program addressing the benefits of the urban forest and the cost to maintain safety. Establish an annual review of progress acid goal attainment for possible budgetary recommendations. The Executive Summary table below outlines estimated costs associated with the anticipated Urban Forestry Management Plan. Required Start-up Street Tree Inventory (15,000+ Trees) $40,000 Required Start-up Parks & Facilities Areas Tree Inventory (3-5,000 Trees) I $20,000 Required Start-up Greenway Tree Inventory (number unknown) I $20,000 Contract Priority Maintenance for Street Trees (250* Hazards) I $64,000 Staffing, Equipment & Operating/Maintenance Costs to Prepare the Forestry Division for Management of the Programmed Maintenance $541,000 Pruning Schedule (F'uvtherdetat7 is provided in 'fable H) Total Estimated Costs for Proposed Urban Forestry Management Plan 1� $685,000 .Executive Summary Table of Estimated Costs Associated with the Project Note: Cost figures on thz r page are estimated. Actual costs may be higher or lolver depending on various conditzons surrounding the ruork being done within thapyea Budgetary figrrrres orgtride/ines associated ruth the pmgrarra will raced to be rerriened and possibly amended as a result. f -im-WM-unx'paLFad"*j'MtGmemA-%WTmp- Popukidbn Observation The City's parkland, municipal facilities and greenways are quite varied in tree numbers and areas being maintained, as would be expected. Different sites had their own set of unique problems or challenges. An example would be the heavily maintained landscaped areas of the municipal facilities as opposed to the less maintained open areas mid natural wooded areas of the parks and greenways. This diversity of site conditions presents a challenge to tree maintenance care, and must be carefully scheduled. City of College Station 110 Urban Forest Management Plan Recommendations P�, Increase species diversity in all site tree plantings and avoid monoculture plantings C� Use proper size trees to avoid utilities and visibility issues Plan a target goal of plantings for each year Plant slow growing and long lived species, thus spreading out the cost of removals and replanting Conduct a parks, municipal facilities and greenways tree inventory to help locate hazardous trees Remove all hazardous trees using an outside contractor P Initiate a programmed maintenance pruning cycle of three years for young trees and every seven years for mature trees Utilize the existing 3-man Forestry crew to maintain the programmed pnuning schedule Implement a community awareness and education program addressing the benefits of the urban forest and the cost to maintain safety. > Establish an annual review of progress and goal attainment for possible budgetary recommendations. Planning Obsm,ntion Review of current operating procedures indicates that excellent cooperation exists between various City departments and the Forestry Division. There is good communication with the Parks and Recreation Department and those involved in planning and construction of municipal facilities. The Forestry staff is consulted on building design, footprint, utility installation, species selection, etc., particularly observable in the new Municipal Utility Building of Krenek Tap Road. Communication is less likely to take place early on; however, in the matter of the replacement of the City's aging infrastructure such as streets, sewer, sidewalks, etc. Communication is more likely to occur later in the field process of construction, rather in the planning phase where early tree impact assessment can be made in a cost effective manner. Given the extensive responsibilities and workload of City department personnel, this is understandable. Recommendafions Develop a tree preservation ordinance that all residents and citywide departments must follow. Require a site evaluation of all impacted trees within the construction area for all city projects. City of College Statio.n.... �.. . ,....:..,.: ... , ....., . .., ....,. .�., ....::, . , .:....:.....:... ...... .......:1.11. ,,. Urban Forest Management Plan Require a tree preservation plan to be prepared and inserted into all construction documents to provide the highest opportunity for survival of city maintained trees. Require all construction contractors to attend a pre -construction meeting that addresses the tree preservation plan. Require strict contractor adherence to the tree preservation plan with site monitoring provided by urban forest professional to be engaged by contractor. * Alternatives to outside urban forest professionals would be the oversight by staff in the Forestry Division, Public Works Department, or other official. * Implement a community awareness and education program to develop local consensus for urban forestry and the costs of maintaining city trees. Tme Preservation Planning Obserraatio& The greatest opportunities to preserve the city's tree canopy are on privately held land. This next step in preservation efforts will take a major commitment by the City and support of the community. The Forestry staff already has a moderate amount of expertise in tree preservation (on construction sites). They will need to be able to consult on building design, footprint construction, utility installation, species selection, etc., for the start up of a tree preservation/planning ordinance. The best preservation experts however, work in the private sector and will be able to follow through with preservation requirements for their clients. Recommender ons Develop a tree preservation ordinance that all residents must follow. Q Require a site evaluation of all impacted trees within the construction area for all development projects prior to permitting. Require a tree preservation plan to be prepared and inserted into all construction documents as part of the building permit process. f Require strict contractor adherence to the site tree preservation plan with site monitoring provided by an urban forest professional to be engaged by contractor. r. Alternatives to outside urban forest professionals would be the oversight by staff in the Forestry Division, Public Works Department, or other official. Implement a community awareness and education program to develop local consensus for urban forestry issues. Observations College Station currently has in place GUIDELINES FOR EMERGENCY OPERATIONS, October 2001. This document does not extensively develop all tree specific actions. City of College Station „ 112 Urban Forest Management Plan Recommeiadations P Conduct a street tree inventory to establish location, size, condition, etc., of all street trees Follow steps as outlined in Document Section } Incorporate emergency tree management into the City's specifications for Emergency Response (> Implement a community awareness program and education regarding tree emergency procedures. -• =.ti r ��.� • Rekatbnsr Observations Clearly, College Station is a community in which residents are highly educated, enjoy a high standard of living, and are committed to continued improvements in the quality of life. Nationwide; however, there are misconceptions, and at times, a total absence in die public as to the financial benefits derived from the community's urban forest. A primary concern for this shortfall in understanding the roll of community trees is the lack of support by citizens and, 'in some cases, city officials for the programs that must maintain and ensure the long-term health of the trees that make up the urban forest. The citizens of College Station provide exceptional support for those items that contribute to the quality of life, including bike trails, parks, greenways, and general recreational facilities. However, the increase in the numbers of planted trees, impact of development, and general demands currently placed on the Forestry Division of Parks and Recreation Department all point to a need for the Community to learn more about the urban forest as well as the costs of maintaining it as green infrastructure. This can be most effectively accomplished through a citywide awareness, education, and public relations initiative. Recommvidatiorts * Continue Arbor Day Program. * Train employees who have direct contact with residents of the community. Handle requests promptly. * Develop literature regarding pest and disease management, pruning, and planting. Conduct educational programs for garden clubs, service organizations, schools, etc. Actively solicit opportunities to communicate with the public. C` Develop media contacts for tree related issues. Initiate a Heritage or Tree Registry Program. City of College Station..:,,, ..:. 113.::,. Urban Forest Management Plan k,D Become involved in tree planting initiatives, particularly in the newer developments. Enlist support of all age groups including youth, adults, and families in general. > Establish tree walks with signage or brochures. 4P Request professional assistance from commercial marketing, public relations, or advertising firms. Urban Forest Management Plan . .i, CollegeCity of station 14 na PARK LAND DEDICATION ORDINANC�# PROJECT REVIEW CHECKLIST Date Received: Julv 3,2002 Park Zone: 3 Project Location:1007 Krenek Tap Road, north of Central Park,north and west of the Lutheran Church Name of Development: ? Applicant: James S.Stewart Address: City/State: Zip: Phone Number: 817-429-8563 FAX: 817-429-8664 E-mail: Engineer/Planner: Address: City/State: Zip: Phone Number: FAX: E-mail: SECTION 10-13-1: Land Dedication Single Family Dwelling Units: Multi -family Dwelling Units: 202 Total Land Requirement: 1.5 Acres Proposed Dedication: Acres SECTION 10-B-2: Fee in Lieu of Land Has the Planning & Zoning Commission's approval been obtained? No OABoard\Park Land Dedication\Checklists\Originals\Long ForrnPark Land Dedication Ordinance Project Review Checklist.dot Revised 01116102 Land Fee: Single Family Fee ($148/dwelling unit): Multi -family Fee ($112/dwelling unit): 202 x $112=$22,624 Total Acquisition Fee: $22,624 Single Family Fee ($309/dwelling unit): Multi -family Fee ($233/dwelling unit): 202 x $233=$47066 Total Fee Amounts: Total Single Family Fee: ($457/Dwelling Unit): Total Multi -family Fee ($345/Dwelling Unit): $69,690 (if after AuQ.1,02 $452x 202=$91,304 Required development cost: Staff review date and comment: Parks Board review and decision: Is the proposed park less than five (5) acres? If yes, staff recommends: SECTION 10-13-7: Prior Park Acquisition Is there an existing neighborhood park that can serve the proposed development? No. Central Park is across the street, which is a communitv park but serves the neighborhood as a neighborhood park function also. If yes, staff recommends: SECTION 10-E: Comprehensive Plan Is the proposed park dedication in compliance with the City Comprehensive Plan and the Park Master Plan? Comments: SECTION 10®F: Additional Information 1. Is land in the 100-year floodplain? no a. Detention/Retention Size: Acreage in floodplain: Acreage in detention: Acreage in greenways: Comments: Percentage: b. Does the location require users to cross an arterial road? no c. Topography: d. Trees/Scenery: 2. a. Is the land adjacent to a school? no b. Restricted access: Meets Board Policy: Percentage: Percentage: Percentage: c. Is there screening if the park joins a non-residential use? d. Park perimeter percentage that abuts a street: Parks & Recreation Board: City Council: ADMPILSTRATION SUPPRESSION PREVEYI40N FAb 'ON City ot College Station I POLICE I I I DEVELOP�hIF]YI' I SERVICES ADMINISTRATION I BUSQJFSS PARK I ACCOUKNVG UA�O II IDCI.IALSON II PURCHASING R[DEVFLOPMEVT � nOAA�S �) I I MANAGIIv1ENI' —{ SERVICES I —I DEVELOPhYNI' —{ COU T QUARTERMASTER II RETAR. I 1 DEVElOPIVIINI COIvMJN1�GT10N5 / SPECIAL CI%OJECTS/ PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS R SERVICES IIf MAYOR AND COUNCIL CTI Y CITY ATTORNEY SECRETARY MUNICIPAL APPOINTED JUDGES BOARDS CrtY MANAGER'S OFFICE City Nk=ga —is— City Manager COMMUNRV OFFICE OF PROGRAMS AMS H MANAGENRNf AND BUDGET PUBLIC COMMUNITY COMMUMCATIONS AND DEVELOP MAR[a:.TPIG I PARKS & I DEVELOPMENT' I PUBLC RECREATION I I SERVICES WORKS ADWmNISTRATION N STREETS QNSPECI]. d RECREATION f P[.ANNpVG � DR AOE y FACR,IT�S ( —I DEVELOPMiN1G I II PARKS I TRAFi7C OP FORESTRY I SO[AD WASTE -I I 1 co Co—Bc ENGINEERA'O —ll VLSITORS BUREAU CAPMAL PROJECTS ARTS COUNCIL J F�.A�CE I 1 PUBLIC OFFICE OF HUMAN UTILR3FS TECHNOLOGY Be RISOURC6 WFORMATION SFRVIC6 ELECTRIC I MANAGEMENT 1 INFORMATION SERVICES WATPR y AND MAP SERVICES WASTEWATER I CO FAR C� ON PRQ-li'/MM. U CUSTOMER SERVICES LBRARY City of ColleLye Station Parks and Recreation Department Overview Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future! City of College Station Mission Statement "On behalf of the citizens of College Station, home of Texas A&M University, the City Council will promote and advance the quality of life in the community. " Vision Statements 1. Core Services — We will provide high quality customer focused basic city services at a reasonable cost. 2. Parks and Leisure Services — We will provide a large range of recreational and cultural art Opportunities. 3. Planning and Development — We will provide a well planned community. 4. Economic Development — We will provide a strong and diverse economic environment. Vision Statement #2 Parks 11 Recreation City of College W.Hon Parks and Leasure Services Strategy 1 — We will maintain a high quality park system Strategy 2 — We will promote comprehensive programs and related facilities that target all age groups Strategy 3 — We will integrate the commmity with a system of gteenways and bikeways Strategy 4 — We will promote cultural arts Parks and Recreation Department 1VI><ss>Ion��jajer�i "To provide the citizens of College Station with facilities, recreational, and leisure activities that are geographically and demographically accessible and serve a diversity of interests. " Parks & Recreation City of College ztation Secondary Mission Statement "The Department also supports the City's Emergency Management Program and assists with disaster planning, coordination, response, and recovery. " 0 2 Parks and Recreation Department * Approximately 480 Employees • 21 Buildings a r n • 21 Work Locations • 42 Parks • 1,167.5 Acres of Park Land - - — • Over 50 Separate Leisure Programs • Headquarters at Central Park Parks and Recreation Dep rtment - - - - - - Programs * Aquatics * Education and Instruction o Athletics e Entertainment * Special Events - - - - - - — * Supervised Recreation (D Senior Services Departmental - - Goals and Objectives • Implementation of the Capital Improvement Project Program • Continue to Improve Staff Development - • Implementation of City Council Strategies • Implementation of Special Projects • Implementation of New Programs G 3 Parks and recreation Advisory Board's Goals & Objectives • Establish policies and standards for re -appraisal of existing parks, facilities, and services offered by the Department • More interaction between the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning Commission, and shared vision with the City Council • Implementation of the approved Capital Improvement Program • Planning and coordination for the next bond issue • Review and update the Recreation, Park, and Open Space Master Plan Parks and Recreation Advisory Board's Goals & Objectives Cont. • Veterans Park and Athletic Complex, Phase II Development • Skate Park facility planning • Review funding sources for the installation of backstops and batting cages at Bee Creek Park v Review funding sources for the repair or replacement of the jogging track at Jack and Dorothy Miller Park • Support the implementation of the Greenways Master Plan • Support the City Council's Interagency Plan on any Parks and Recreation related issues • Develop programs and facilities for Senior Citizens t Hscal Year 2002 Parks and recreation Department widget * 5 "Divisions" ® 22 "Cost Centers" ® Approximately $6.3 Million Budget ® Approximately $1 Million in Revenue * $500,000 from the College Station Independent School District for Kids Klub El Faster Plans Veterans Park and Athletic € omplex (150-Acre Regional Athletic Park) evEy 5 C7i Discover the beneats P.,elleee s AND, ` and becreatee 'e Provide Good Things In Life►► Mayor Ron Silvia Mayor Pro Tempore James Massey City Manager Thomas E. Brymer College Station, Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future City Council John Happ Winnie Garner Scott Mears Dennis Maloney Anne Hazen IIIl 11, 1 11 11 1 1 11 ills 1 1 III I I I 1 1 ,I 111 , , , I I Id , 1111 III II I i I, I I'l 11 4 111 11 , I I I III I I. I I II , 1, , I , II II I , I I ICI I II,I II II II , I I . I , I IIi IIIIIII J Ii, 111IIIII I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I IIIIII , 111111 1111 1 :14 1 , 1 11 , , III I. i , I , , Il I I , 11 1111 , V 111111 1 111111 AL I III [lilt I I . 10 11 1, 111 , I , 1 It I I I 11111 111 1 : I I Ii I I ( I ", I I I Li =1 - College Station City Council, Parks and Recreation Board, Planning and Zoning Commission, Cemetery Committee, Joint Relief Funding Review Committee, College Station Business Development Corporation, Construction Board of Adjustments and Appeals/Building and Standards Commission, Library Committee, FaVade Improvement Committee, Wolf Pen Creek Design Review Board, Zoning Board of Adjustments, Historic Preservation Committee Citizen Advisory Board Orientation Tuesday, July 30, 2002 at 6:00 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas Overview from Elected and Appointed Officials regarding role of committee members, city's strategic plan, staff relations with committees, meeting procedures and legislative matters. 2. Review by Department Directors and Staff Liaisons on board responsibilities, staff relations, and reporting procedures. Oath of Office to newly appointed officers. City Manager Thomas E. Brymer I certify that this agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the Municipal Building, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas on July 25, 2002 at 10:00 a.m. Providing Customer Service Excellence Office of the City Secretary College Station, Texas Senior Advisory Committee New Members July 2002 The Senior Advisory Con-u-nittee would like to make the following recon-u-nendations for new members and officers. Frank Complone 100 Mortier Dr. # 508 College Station, Texas 77845 696-6011 Fred W. Dollar 1102 Goode St. College Station, Texas 77840 696-4426 Catherine B. Lamb 1502 B Airline Dr. College Station, Texas 77845 694-2955 Robert E. Meyer 308-A Pershing College Station, Texas 77840 696-8591 Dipankar Sen 2802 Mescalero College Station, Texas 77845 693-6167 Yvonne A. Stevens 13800 SH 30 College Station, Texas 77845 731-1025 Betty J. Wilbom 3047 Barron Cut off Rd. College Station, Texas 690-2460 Bill Kling, Chairman Joanna Yeager, Nice -Chairman The following retpised Executive Summary Table replaces the tables found on pages 4 & 110. Summary of EsfiniaW Cbsts ProposW fbr the Won Foresby Mnagema Mn The Executive Summary table below outlines estimated costs associated with the 3 key areas of the Urban Forestry Management Plan. 1) Street Tree Management Required Start-up Street Tree Inventory (15,000+ Trees) $40,000 Contract Priority Maintenance for Street Trees (290+ Hazards) $64,000 Staffing, Equipment & Operating/Maintenance Costs to Prepare the $541,000 Forestry Division for Management of the Programmed Maintenance (See Table H) Pruning Schedule Total Estimated Costs for Street Tree Management $645,000 2) Parks & Municipal Facility Tree Management Required Start-up P & M Facilities Tree Inventory (3-5,000 Trees) $20,000 Total Estimated Costs for Parks & Municipal facility Tree Management $20,000 3) Greeways Tree Management II Required Start-up Greenway Tree Inventory (number unknown) II $20,000 Total Estimated Costs for Greenways Tree Management II $20,000 Grand'rolal of Costs for Proposed Urban Forestry Management Plan $683.000 f i7osf is bi ad&fion /v cunvnt Fbmsfty DVvidbn budget) Executive Summary Table of Estimated Costs Associated with the Project Note: Cost figures on this pag e are estimated Actual costs may be higher or lower dependi ng on various conditions surrounding the "rk being done wtbin thisprojed Budg etary orguideknes associated nth thepro ,gram will need to be renewed andpauibyl amended as a result. City of College Station Urban Forest Management Plan The following s i,/. Executive Summary Table replacesf f f 1 1 �,. t The Executive Summary table below outlines estimated costs associated with the 3 key areas of the Urban Forestry Management Plan. 1) Street Tree Management Required Start-up Street Tree Inventory (15,000+ Trees) $40,000 Contract Priority Maintenance for Street Trees (250+ Hazards) (� $64,000 Staffing, Equipment & Operating/Maintenance Costs to Prepare the $541,000 Forestry Division for Management of the Programmed Maintenance (See fable H) Pruning Schedule 1 Total Estimated Costs for Street Tree Management $645 000 2) Parks & Municipal Facility Tree Management j4 Required Start-up P & M Facilities Tree Inventory (3-5,000 Trees) I� $20,000 Total Estimated Costs for Parks & Municipal Facility Tree Management II $20,000 3) Greeways Tree Management ' Required Start-up Greenway Tree Inventory (number unknown) �l $20,000 Total Estimated Costs for Greenways Tree Management , $20,000 Grasid Total of Costs for Proposed Urban Forestry Management $685,000 (colt is m ad&lzb t to current ForestyLMq on .budget) Executive Summary Table of Estimated. Costs Associated with the Project Note: Costgures on this page are estimated. Actual costs may be higher or lomer depending on various conditions surrounding the nrork being done mithin thisproject. Budgetay figures orguidelines assoczated avith theprogram 1mill need to be revien ed and posnbly amended as a result. City of College Station Urban Forest Management Plan City of College Stat1*0 eIliion reat nia" rtma-nt Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future �JV.� Division/Contact Parks and Recreation Department Contacts Adw:jnistration Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation ........................... Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation .............. Kris Lehde, Staff Assistant .......................................................... Pain Springfield, Sr. Secretary ... ...... ........................... .............. Helen Banks, Secretary .................................... ........................... Ann Marie Hazlett, Secretary ....................................................... Pete Vanecek Sr. Park Planner .................................................... Afsanch Yazdani, Park Planner/Graphics Coordinator ................. David Wood- Park Planner Location ............... 764-3413 ...... ......... _ Central Park ................... 764-3415 ....... ......... .. Central Park .." ......... I ........ 764-3414 ............... ... Central Park ............... ... 764-6271 ................... Central Park .....I ............. 764-3486 ................... Central park .............. '--.764-3486. .................. Central Park — ................... 764-3412 ................... Central Park ...................... 764-3443 .............. I .... Central Park 74A '2QQQ .......................... I ................... - ................... Central Pam Peter Lamont, Recreation Superintendent .......................................................... 764-3731 .................... Central Park David Hudspeth, Recreation Supervisor (Athletic Leagues) ............................... 764-3424 .................... Central Park Patrick Hazlett, Asst. Recreation Supervisor (Athletic Leagues) ......................... 764-63-86-' "'*'******'*'**** Central Park Geri Marsh, Recreation Supervisor (Athletic Events) ................................ 764-3487/3736 ... Central Park Sheila Walker, Recreation Supervisor (Special Events) ...................................... 764-3408 " Central Park Jana Wood, Recreation Supervisor (Kids Klub) .......................... .................. ... 764-3831 ................... Parks Annex Marci Rodgers, Senior Services Coordinator ..... ................................................ 764-6371 .......... I ........ Parks Annex Spmia�� David Gerling, Recreation Superintendent ............................................ ............ 764-3730 .................... Central Park Kelly Kelbly, Recreation Supervisor (Teen Center) ............................................ 764-3441 ............ .Exit Teen Center Dana Albrecht Recreation Supervisor (Xtra Education/Instruction) ................... 764-3472 ....... - ........... Central Park Jenny y Hartsfield, Asst. Recreation Supervisor (Xtra Education/Instruction) .... ... 764-3442 ....................Central Park Grace Calbert, Conference Center Supervisor .................................................... 764-3726 - .......... Conference Center Amador Cantu, Asst. Conference Center Supervisor ...................................... ... 764-3725 .......... Conference Center Nita Hilburn, Conference Center Secretary ........................................................ 764-3720 .......... Conference Center Lance Jackson, Lincoln Center Supervisor ......................................................... 764-3733 ................ Lincoln Center Neal Donovan, Asst. Center Supervisor ........................... ........ - ................. 764-6244 .......... ..... Lincoln Center Nita Hilburn, Lincoln Center Secretary .............................................................. 764-3779 ................ Lincoln Center Vera Solis, Pools Supervisor ................ ............................................................ 764-3540 ................... Central Park Teresa Galvez, Pool Technician ......................................................................... 764-3540 .................... Central Park owatim Curtis Bingham, Parks Operations Superintendent .................................... ........ 764-3411 .................... Central Park Paul Rucker, East District Operations Supervisor ............................................... 764-3729 ............... East Dist Shop Scott Hooks, West District Operations Supervisor .............................................. 764-3728 ....... ...... West Dist. Shop Gary Marske, South District Operations Supervisor ........................................... 764-3564 ............. South Dist. Shop Fff-esw Ross Albrecht, Forestry Superintendent ............................................................. 764-3410 .................... Central Park Gerald Guillory, Forestry Supervisor .... ................................... .................... 764-3444. ...... ............ Central Park Delmer Charanza, Cemetery Sexton .................................................................. 764-3738 ............ ....... Central Park Addresses: Central Park ............................. ................................................... Conference Center ....................... .............................. 1000 Krenek Tap Road .............. 1300 George Bush Drive Annex ................................1300 George Bush Drive (adjacent to the Conference Center) Lincoln Center ................................................. Exit Teen Center ......................... 1000 Eleanor Street cercation ...... ............ .......... .......... ......................... 1600 Rock Prairie Road South District Maintenance Shop ..... .......................................... East District Maintenance Shop ............................................... 1600 Rock Prairie Road ... 1000 Krenek Tap Road WY of Collegc Wation West District Maintenance Shop ......................................................... ...... 103 Holleman Mission Statement On behalf of the citizens of College Station, home of Texas A&M University, the City Council will promote and advance the quality of life in the community. Coire Values Collaboration and cooperation Regionalism Active member of the Brazos Valley Community We support activities that promote municipal empowerment Excellence in customer service Fiscal responsibility Promote health, safety, and general well being of the community Promote involvement and participation of citizenry �7Won s�a� �nflo A. Core Services We will provide high quality customer -focused basic city services at a reasonable cost. 20 PaR-ks and L&ujre Servkes We will provide a large range of recreational and cultural art opportunities. 3. Planning and Development We will provide a well -planned community. I, EconomicDevelopment D r a qf. Vision Statement #2 — Parks and Leisure Services We will provide a large range of recreational and cultural art opportunities. The following are the four strategies and associated implementation plans for Vision Statement #2.- Strategy #1 — We will maintain a high quality park system a. Continue implementation of Park Maintenance Standards b. Urban Forest Plan Strategy #2 — We will promote comprehensive programs and related fachMes that tairget 2H age groups a. Continue efforts to make parks more intergenerational b. Review Senior and Teen programs c. Pursue cooperative efforts with the City of Bryan on Joint programming d. Complete development of Veterans Park and Athletic Complex, Phase I e. Develop new five-year Parks Capital Improvement Projects Strategy #3 — We will integrate the community with 2 system of greenways and hikeways a. Acquire greenways and pursue grants for acquisition of greenways and bikeways Strategy 94 — We will promote cultural arts a. Promote public art b. Library services improvement c. Performing arts center development d. Promote performing arts e. Investigate a potential city museum Part, i'ieercation City of College Station Mall Ifilaegilum-l"Oult, V IF planning, coordination, response, and recovery. Divisions0000 0000°00000000�000aoaaaa0000000000000000aoa000 oa000aoaoo5 CostCenters ............... 0000aooa0000.........................._22 Full=Time/Benefited Employees 00000aa000a000000000a00000©o72 Part—Time/Benefited Employees .................. 0 .... _ _ ... I Seasonal Employees......................................... _ 343 Non —City Employees 0000 .aoaoo.... o a a o o oaa000aoomooa©aooaooaao Facilities Recreation Center .............. .........°000000aa0000a000 ........ _I Conference Center.,.......... a0000aaoaaaaa000000a000aoa..... _I Annex... ao moo©0000a00000aa000©eoeooa0000eoeoaom®am©oaoaa®aeo 000aa� Amphitheater ......... ........ 0000°°....... .......... _... I Maintenance Shops ........... ooaoaoaa000000eoesaaaao o a ,o' Y� cn o Q of O 0 Lighted College Station w Q Q �, w w j J a C) Facilities Park System a; o Z z ��—, m LL m Z 'Unlighted ¢ 0 W o ° �, Z w ¢ ¢ � } z Facilities Inventory Y w � J Z Z o w Y � Z w X wa¢ iagazm� n¢ � Z O� 0-w U) o- Z F-n ANDERSON � N 1 8.94 0 0 •} 1 • 1 • • 2 •5 1 30 BEE CREEK - Arboretum C 143.50 0 0 0 • 3 • 31 • • • I 0 2 0 4 • 0 237 BILLIE MADELEY PK, SITE N 1 5.14 1 I I 1 I I l ___ I I undeveloped BRISON N 1 9.201 1 • 1 01l3 i 1 I I I I 1 to BROTHERS POND N 1 16-12 • I • 3 01 • I • I • I.112 • I.1/2r I I I CASTLEGATE N 1 4.351 • I I 1 0 1 I• I I • I •l 1)•2 1 1 1 "CEMETERY 1 18.501 I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 city cemetery CENTRAL C 147.201 0 0 l 0 1 g o 1 ©2 ® 01 • 1 • 3 0 4 0 2 • 297 park office "CONFERENCE CENTER 1 2.301 0 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 176 I annex CY MILLER M 1 2.50 • 1 • 1 I® 1® I I I I police depL EASTGATE M :! .:1.80I I I •113 1 1 1 ! I• I 11 I ! I I :. :;.:_I :.....:!'- EDELWEISS N 1 12.301 10 1 1 101 l 1 • 1 1• I.1 •1 1 I• I 110 EDELWEISS GARTENS , . N ::'1 i.7:74 T • 1 J 1 I >:::J <:;:.I . I ; .,:.1 ,,•.:J ::.( I - ',, . f 1 I I , ,:. :; . EMERALD FOREST N 4.59I I 1 1021011 I 101/2GABBARD :.,: _ '`N :10.701 I �'' ,',I'•.1< • 1 1 GEORGIE K. FITCH N 11.30 • 1® 2 I•11• 1 1:1/31 I I01 'HENSEL`(TAMUI.'e,.,* . ;:;.:z ::C' 1 29.701,,"0 102-.103 1 a4 1 o 1 I.':® I `;:.::( a:.,`;I: • `1 1{ <) • :� > 0":1` TAMU'.;.._ JACK 8 DOROTHY MILLER - N 10.001 1• 1 I e 2 I o 21 • l 1 1i1/31 • lei I I I 1 LEMONTREE •. N I:15:40 0 1 1;<• 1 ., a.•, ,x- •3/4J ..:= 1•1/2! '';.. l o I . I 41 ;1. ':.I 30 LICK CREEK R 1515.501 1 ( 1 1 1 1 10 I 1 1 1 1 I 160 I undeveloped. LIONS .s,:.-:. M !A Sol .I ;1.31 021 1 ` I 101/2 . I ii ,.I LONGMIRE N I 4.161 1 I Il e 21' I •.I1 I 1I • } I I1 o :1 :.J1I1 . 2/3LUTHER JONES M l 1 IIMERRY OAKS N 460I0I0 0 71 J t • tOAKS.Ni7.50 /4IPARKWAY M 1 11 1a1 1 I ..IiII 6 1. JPEBBLE CREEK 10201 • 102102 ..I1 I RAINTREE N 1 13,00 10 1® 2 • t I 1 0 I 1 I I• I - RICHARD CARTER N � 714I . I :;>I I ;.. I " f • I I I I - `I 1 ": 1 I i :. :'.historical site _ SANDSTONE N 115.211 1• 1 1 l• 1 1• ) •1/1 loll I I 1 148 1 SHENANDOAH PARK SITE N 1 12.001 :::...I I I - I I I :... I ( I 1 -: 1 r. >:I :: 'undeveloped SOUTHEAST COMM. PARK C 162.00 1 I I I I 1 I 1 undeveloped SOUTHWEST PARK SITE N 1 4.78 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 + 1 undeveloped SOUTHWOOD ATHLETIC C 144 701 0 l 0 1021 • 1 1 I I 10 2 0 51 106 041 • I o 154-4 teen center ` STEEPLECHASE PARK SITE N!_ 9.001 I I <. * I I ) I 1 I I_ ) J I I I 1 I undeve_ loped THOMAS C 116.101 I I o I. 5I 04 10 I I �01/3I • I• 21 1 I 1 o21 1 0 127. I UNIVERSITY PARK SITE N 110.20 f +:undeveloped - VETERANS ATHLETIC PIC _- RA_ 150 not • I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 b2.4102 1 1 1 1 1406 1 WA. TARROW W" o" ,.,, C 21261 0 0 1 1. 21 o 3 0 1 1.1 /31 02 1 I o3 I I I 12 WESTFIELD N 4.29I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 4R I :-.corridor d undeveloped WINDWOOD M 1 1.37 1 1- 2 1 a 1 1 1 1 1 1 I WOLF PEN CREEK C 19.491 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 01 1 0 ® 1.1/21 I I 1 1 amphitheater WOODCREEK N I 6.601 1 1 136 0 2 0l I a I 1 1.1/3 I01/21 1 1 I 1 0 I 1 WOODLAND HILLS M 1 3.201 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 ! I 1 undeveloped WOODWAY PARK SITE N 1 9.261 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 I undeveloped & PARK TYPE: PARK SUMMARY R£MEAT'ON M - Mini Park Coll Siariory N - Neighborhood Park Quantity Type of Parks TotalAcreage C - Community Park 7 Mini Parks 14.07 R - Regional Park RA - Regional Athletic Park 26 Neighborhood Parks 233.72 *8 Community Parks 254.25 *Hensel Park is not included in the total acreage for I Regional Natural Park 515.50 Community Parks. 1_ Regional Athletic Park 150.00 **Cemetery and Conference Center are not included in the acreage. � 1E 9> UNIVERSITY DR. Iii, dIj I GEORGE BUSH DR. W. A. Luther hones' "arrow Park: Pair -Lincoln Center L UTT 'Wayne Smith Yo4h---- Baseball Coate Hex C, 0= Woo way Park Southwest P Steeplechase Park ZMWESTRIME I �ack & Dorothy Miller Park WE Q> Billie Mad( Hense Park Park' '111,1141111il I1,1111I Awk, O niversit irk Eastgate Park < Thomas Par ti Veterans LIJ FRANCIS Athletic Park o arkway RA70SV Brison Park - Park !0 Carter Park Park DOMINIK k g Park erry Oaks Anderson rk Park Ani— flAR11LYRD-,Wnjf Pen 0 HWY 30 Gabba -0 Creek Park �-,,Park Windwood Park Bee Cree SOUTHWESTPKWY Rafln tree ]Park PI --&RJ�AP R Ulf Cy miner C ntral Georgie fC. Park Park (Parks Office) Fetch Park Lon Mqr Forest Park agW Brothers sEas7A Par - g( sandstone Park Southwood ' Athletic Park Edelweiss Park IN N.GRAHAM V�gffiPrk Ew de�eass Gartensffi� el)d BAaRRON RD. SOUTHERN PLANTATION Shenandoah Park ®R Castlegate Park im GREENS PRAIRIE odcreek Park /IV Southeast Community Park COLLEGE STATION PARKS ANL CREATION FY03 Organizabonal DIRECTOR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DIV. 80 DIV. 84 DIV. 81 DIV. 82 DIV. 83 Administration Forestry Recreation Special Facilities Parks Operations 14employees i 7 I 12employeea� 31 employee PARKS FORESTRY II RECREATION RECREEATION OPERATIONS SUPERINTENDENTSUPERINTENDENT$ SUPERINTENDENT SUPERINTENDENT RECREATION RECREATION CONFERENCE LINCOLN POOLS SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR CENTER CENTER SUPERVSO YoulhServices Instructions SUPERVISORS SUPERVISOR ASSISTANTREC. ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR CASSISTANT POOLS GRAPHICS SENIOR STAFF INSTRUC ONNS SUPERVISORONFERENCE CENTER j�°f�j I TECHNICIAN COORDINATO PLANNER ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR J 1 1 1 SECRETARY I SECRETARY PLANNER R. ENIORSERVICE RECREATION RECREATION RECREATION RECREATION I SECRETARY COORDINATOR SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR (Pn SchMIAgeCare Special Events Athletic Leagues AthledoEvents Specialist ASSISTANT REC. SECRETARY SUPERVISOR Athletic Events/ Leagues i ISECRETARYU 1 SOUTH WEST EAST FORESTRY CEMETERY DISTRICT I DISTRICT DISTRICT SUPERVISOR l SEXTON I SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR SUPERVISOR I I PARKS PARKS PARKS PARKS PARKS PARKS PARKS HORTICULTUR FORESTRY CEMETERY CEMETERY CREWLEADEF IRRIGATION I CREW LEADER CREW LEADER CREW LEADER CREW LEADE 1 CREW LEADER CREW LEADER SPECIALIST CREWLEADER CREWLEADER GROUNDS GROUNDS WORKER WORKER (2 POSITIONS) I PMENT EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT��II,, OPERATOR OPERATOR OPERATOR OPERATOR HORTICULTURE I OPERATOR OPERATOR OPERATOR I FORESTRY REGULAR EMPLOYEES I ((ddjj WORKER I GROUNDS GROUNDS GROUNDS GROUNDS LIP pOSIT1ON NUMBER FILLED GROUNDS GROUNDS WORKER WORKER ] WORKER I WORKER HORTICULTURE/ HORTICULTURE P2 66 I WORKER WORKER +'I I FORESTRY FORESTRY FULLTIME � 1 4 tg WORKER WORKER PARTTIME 1 1 GROUNDS WQ�R ( GROUNDS I GROUNDS Tzu 73 67 GROUNDS GROUNDS ORKER HORTICULTUFf HORTICULTURE/ I WORKER41 WORKER y y qy I GROUNDS I FORESTRY FORESTRY �Ill�lg Vacant fAW WORKER19 0 FUNDS 11 -1- In l Fiscal Year } iBudget (reference AS 400) (includes Service Level Adjustments) -- -- I— - — - Administration Recreation -- Special Facilities 5380 5381 S382 $651,139 $992,083 $1,961,563 Administration Administration Administration 641 641 651 j $651,139 I $234,964 $73,537 Athletics (HM) I Instruction 47 1 1 645 $934 I $214 811 1 1 Athletics I H/M Programs 643 I 650 $373.367 ' $10,850 I Concessions 1 Aquatics 644 652 $1,855 $955,530 I I Programs H/M Conference Center 646 653 I Parks Operations= 5383 $1,805,606 1 Administration 651 $427.886 1 East District 656 $577,448 1 South District 657 $403,891 1 West District 658 $396,381 $97,843 $266,671 Recreation 1 1 $992,083 Senior Services Lincoln Recreation Center 647 654 16% $46,338 $268,668 �WMPro Programs g 1 � Youth Services 650 ! 655 I $144,269 1 I $171,496 Operati or $1,805,6( 29% Forestry 5364 $ 894, 916 1 FUM Wolf Pen Creek 648 $87,, 760 I Cemetery 649 i $138.415 1 Forestry 659 $668,741 Administration Forestry $651,139 $894,916 10% 14% Special Facilities $1,961,563 31% CITY OF COLLEGE STATION PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT FY02 GOALS ® Implementation of the CIP Program o Implementation of Special Projects Continue to Improve Staff Development Implementation of New Programs Implementation of City Council Strategic Issues Implementation of the CIP Pro pram ❑ Complete 90% of the CIP Program - Refer to FY02 CIP Project List (54% Complete as of July 2002) Continue to Improve Staff Development • Complete Management Academy (three (3) PARD Superintendents) (Graduation February 22, 2002) Q Complete Supervisory Academy (seven (7) PARD personnel) (Class graduated on November 13, 2001) ❑ Complete Certified Playground Safety Inspector re -certification from the National Recreation and Park Association (two (2) PARD Supervisors) (Curtis Bingham, Parks Operations Superintendent, was recertified) ❑ Send one (1) PARD Supervisor to the National Recreation and Park Association sponsored Paris Maintenance School (Scheduled for August 2002), Q Complete the Weapons of Mass Destruction training course (seven (7) PARD personnel) (Training December 17'h, I r, and 19tn) ❑ Complete the Principles of Emergency Management course (PARD personnel) (Graduation held on November 18, 2001) ❑ Participate in the Brazos Valley Regional Leadership Forum Conference (Director of PARD) (Complete April 16, 2002) Q Asst. Director to complete the Texas Forest Services Incident Command Training (Complete March26, 2002) Implementation of Citv Council Strategic Issues ❑ VS3S4a - Complete Urban Forest Management Plan (Initial presentation to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board on March 5. 2002. The Board will review again on July 9t'. Scheduled for Council consideration on August 22nd. 2002_ ® VS4S2a - Implement Park Maintenance Standards (to track performance) (1s ,2nd, and 3rd quarter reports complete) ❑ VS4S3a - Implement Intergenerational Park Facilities (in progress) ❑ VS4S4a - Develop recommendations for developer incentives to provide adequate park land (Draft recommendations complete. Met with local developers on February 28, 2002.) ® VS4S4b - Complete development of Veterans Park and Athletic Complex, Phase I, and conduct needs assessment for future facilities Needs Assessment approved by Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on February 12, 2002. Presentation to the City Council on March 28, 2002). ❑ VS4S4c - Update Parkland Dedication Ordinance (Ordinance revisions approved by Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on October 9, 2001. Adopted by City Council on January 24, 2002. The revised ordinance will go into effect on July 24, 2002). ® VS4S4d - Develop facility needs for future community park (November 29, 2001) L� VS4S5a -- Develop plans for senior programs and facilities (Council approval on February 28, 2002) ❑ VS4S5b -- Prepare feasibility report on skateboard park (Report presented to Council on December 20, 2001) Q VS4s7b - Implement greenway-park connectivity demonstration project (Bee Creek and Lemon Tree parks) ❑ VS4s8a -- Improve communication between Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning Commission (Parks and Recreation Advisory Board met with the Commission on September 20, 2001, A joint meeting with the City Counc held on December 6, 2001. Future meetings will be scheduled accordingly). Implementation of Special Projects ❑ Review and update the Recreation, Park, and Open Space Master Plan (in progress) ❑ Develop recommendations for future Capital Improvement Program projects (In progress - preliminary recommendation complete) Q Replace irrigation at Lemontree Park (February 1, 2002) Cat Implement public art at Wolf Pen Creek Amphitheater (Bronze Wolves) (Dedication held December 17, 2001) ❑ Investigate the possibility of Departmental accreditation (In progress) Q Conduct dedication ceremony for the Wayne Bryan Bike Loop (May 11, 2002) H Coordinate Veterans Memorial Project at Veterans Park and Athletic Complex (Groundbreaking November 12, 2001) B Complete pond renovation at Brothers Pond Park (Complete in December 2001) B Installation of lightening prediction systems at parks (Complete April 2002) ❑ RPTS Student Study for the Development of a Visitor/Nature Center at Lick Creek Park (In progress. Was presented to the Board on June I P, 2002.Final Report due in August 2002) Q Assist with The George Bush Drive Extension Grand Opening Event (April 6, 2002) 1 lementation of New Proorams Investigate the potential of joint programming with the City of Bryan Parks and Recreation Department (Ongoing) Q Implement monthly PARD newsletter (First edition completed October 2001 - ongoing) ® Facilitate the Northgate 'Back Porch Concert" Series (Agreement with KORA. Concerts conducted weekly at Northgate) Q✓ Conduct Fall Special Olympics Bocce Ball (October 2001. At Southwood Valley Park. Will be held again in October 2002) * Implement Starlight Concert Series at Wolf Pen Creek (Concerts held from April - July 2002. Estimated total attendance at 33,700) ❑ Participate in Neighborhood Conference (September 14, 2002) Updated: J?�/i 22. 2002 City of College Station Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Fiscal Year 2002 Goals and Objectives (not prioritized) Establish policies and standards for re -appraisal of existing parks, facilities, and services offered by the Department. El Review quarterly reports on park maintenance standards and develop recommendations regarding levels of service (VS4S2a) (January 8, 200�). ❑ Review proposed park conceptual plans and make recommendations for intergenerational features (VS4S3a). ❑ Review and develop recommendations for Urban Forestry Plan (VS3S4a) (Endorsed by the Board on July 91h. Will be presented to Council for consideration on August 22'` 2002). ❑ Review preliminary cost estimates for CIP prepared by Staff. More interaction between Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and Planning and Zoning Commission, and shared vision with the City Council (VLL 38u). Cf assist with the review and preparation of the Unified Development Ordinance (November 13, 2001). El Review and recommend possible changes to the Park Land Dedication Ordinance (October 9, 2001). 0 Conduct a point meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission to discuss goals (September 20, 2001). ❑ Conduct a point meeting with the City Council to confirm goals (December 6, 2001). Implementation of the approved Capital Improvement Program. H Castlegate Park site review (November 13, 2001). Cif Lick Creek Park site review (December 11, 2001) 0 Madeley Park site review. (February 19, 2002) ❑ Woodway Park site review. ® Shenandoah Park site review (On Hold). Planning and coordination for the next bond issue. ❑ Identify and assess the needs for future park facilities. (February 5, 2002) Q Review preliminary cost estimates prepared by Staff. (February 5, 2002) CAI Determine priorities for development. (February 12, 2002) ❑ Develop a recommendation for consideration in the 2002 bond program. Review and update the Recreation, mark, and Open Space faster Plana Ef Review of Section II (Goals and Objectives) of the plan (February 12, 2002) * Review of Parks and Recreation Department 5-Fear Strategic Plan, (T ebruary 12, 2002) ❑ Review of Sections I, IV, V, and VI of the plan. ❑ Review of Section VII (Prioritization of Needs and Plan Implementation) ❑ Review and comments regarding Section III (Plan Development Process). ❑ Review of Revised Master Plan Parks & Recreation Advisory Board FY2002 Goals and Priorities Parks & Rec. Advisory Board Approval• October 9, 2001 Updated: July 23, 2002 Page I of 2 Veterans park and Athletic Complex, phase H Development. 10 Review needs for future facilities and programs (December 11, 2001) 10 Determine priorities for development. (1 ebrucrr)7 5, 2002) Cal Develop recommendations for implementation. (F(Ibrucuy 12, 2002) Q Review preliminary cost estimates prepared by Staff. (Illarch 3, 2002) Skate Park facHiEy planning (V S4S,;b)• @l Develop recommendation for scope of project. (November 13, 2001) • Develop recommendation for facility use. (November 13, 2001) • Develop recommendation for implementation. (November 13, 2001) Review funding sources for the installation of two backstops and two batting cages at Bee Creek Park. (Note: A service level adjusiment will be requested for FY03). 9 Review preliminary cost estimates prepared by Staff (November 13, 2001)0 ED Determine needs for program requirements, • Develop recommendations for scope of project. • Develop recommendations for implementation. Review funding sources for the repair or replacement of the jogging track at Jack and Dorothy Miller Parka • Review proposed project cosh estimates (December 11, 2001). • Review founding alternatives (Corrrpleted by Staffi. • Develop recommendations for implementation. Support implementation of the Greenways Master Plan. * Receive update report from Greenways Coordinator (October 9, 2001). ® Review Recreation, Park, and Open Space faster Plan as it relates to greenways. Support the City Couuncil`s Interagency (flan on any Park and Recreation related issues. Continue dialog with the College Station Independent School District regarding future schooYpark developments. ® Continue dialog with Texas A&M University regarding Hensel Parr and Veterans Park and Athletic Complex. Develop programs and facilities for Senior Citizens. 0 Receive input from fall Eisenhower Leadership Development Program group. (December 6, 2001) if Determine priorities for programs and facilities (January 8, 2002). 0 Develop recommendations for implementation (January 8, 2002). o t : • ,�'bo Parks & Recreation Advisory Board F72002 Goals and Priorities Parks & Rea Advisory Board Approval• October 9, 2001 Updated- July 23, 2002 Page 2 of 2 PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT CIS PROJECT LIST (Updated July 17, 2002) .. ... -. .._, . .. . ,. .a _ ........ - .,. s<� .<,N , �..>,..�.�,�-..�._..,._.-.-'_.____.. - - � i ol� �I $... , - � � ;. ids Y ���� k � i € � �s w�� a ��, tf " � � F. _�§ edt, Business-CenterLandstapingP*", a a t will MIR— 0 G ftftl btft Z Pabbld,drieWft* IM 4 �4 ------ Ripbafd-Cader-N F_zf _9 Un 61P 291-- ic Madeley Park Under Construction Pete PK97063. $48,000 98 G.O. 8/02 -7- Veterans Park, Phase I Under Construction Ric PK9941 $2,936,800 98 G.O. 11/02 Jack & Dorothy Miller Jogging Track Under Construction David ST0200 $29,250 FY'02 General Fund 8/02 Lick Creek Park Development In Design Pete PK0069 $478,000 98 G.O. (TPWD Grant) 12/02 Thomas Pool Renovation In Design Ric PK0205 $277,255 FY'02 3103 Anderson Playground Replacement In Desiqn David PK0214 $30,000 FY'02 Replacement 10/02 C.S.S.C. Agreement (clubhouse) Pending Contract NA C.S.S.C. Unknown Hensel Park Playground Replacement Pending Contract Pete PK021 0 $40,000 FY'02 Replacement Acct 8/02 Woodway Park Development Pending Land Acq. Ric PK9803 $600,000 Park Ded. Zone 7 Unknown Lincoln Center ExpansionAmprovements Postponed until FY03 Ric Cemetery Land Acquisition On Hold Ross GG9905 $275,000 98 G.O. Unknown Thomas Pool Shade Cover On Hold Ric PK0104 $19,000 98 G.O. 12/03 Pending cts: 2 'Pending Land Acquisition Postponed 1 in Design: 3 :Out to Bid: 0 .Under Construction: 3 .On Hold: 2 :Complete; Total: 26 19 AMAN SOFTBALL RETAINING MAINTENANCE FIELDS —7 � WALL BUILDING uall"M to LIMITS OF 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN 'VMRAN8 MrINIOA!AL A,RrtA bar M. Xf APPROVED MASTER PLAN May 25,2000 w TRAILS WRN ENTRANCE NAME SURFACE DISTANCE USE EQUESTRIAN ALUM CREEK NATURAL 1.02 MR. PEDESTRIAN t'�{�/ � p ENTRANCE COPPERHEAD CUT CRUSHED STONE .20 MR. BUK[E,PEDESTRRARROCK P I DEER RUN CRUSHED STONE 1.30 MR. 8iKE,PEDESTRIAN,BEQUESTRIAN (�((JJJJi RARIE RD. ELM CIRCLE CONCRETE .19 MR. PEDESTR RAN PARIC� — IRON BRIDGE TRAIL NATURAL 1.14 MI. PEDESTRIA6� POST OAK LOOP CRUSHED STONE .46 MR. PEDESTRIAN CENTE is ° RACCOON RUN NATURAL .63 MR, PEDESTRIAM 0_ �_ RESijRO IDS SEDGE MEADOW WOOD DECKING .03 MR. PEDESTRIAN YAUPON TRAIL NATURAL .40 MR. PEDESTRIAN MUSTANG TRAIL CRUSHED STONE 34 MR. EGUESTMAN,PEDRSTMAVd I�1TD00 �, R C SROO CULVERT PI T. All LEGENDr-.'- ,EQUESTRIAN " 1.HOMESTEAD SITE :: P "l"' PIPE PARKING' 2.OLD ROAD NEW IAGE 3.OLD FIELD °F WASTEWATER :. 4.NAVASOTA LADIES TRESSES �� , q'; :TREATMENT. 5.WEST PRARIE SOLD IRON BRIDGE ARK SCo6[MCADow 8A� OARDWAL ' 7.OLD FIELD-BOARDWALK. 1 NT:AREA B WALK &'OVERd�®K ulvERr IPc B.TILLANDSIA OAK "�sr we Task . 9.PLANDERA SLOUGH 10.NAVASOTA LADIES TRESSES 11.MIKANIA SWAMP IdEW E :BIKE• RACK . J 'r - 12.BOTTOMLANDS 13.HOMESTEAD/EAST PRARIE s? NEW ARIDGE 1 14.MESA BIKE RACK BIKE. _A`� - ' . '. .:•<,NE 15.SEDGE MEADOW EEY•-?R it a .•'• :: NEW �B O �N NOT TO SCALE B� E' RACK w. EW BRIDG I O '�ONTWYPOINT IMASTER P Fo PREPARED EV TAMU RECREATION & PWRM DEPT. �Tls a f EE AR AND PARKS PLANNING/CITY OF COLLEGE TATION I &a` P-R-1101I WOLF PEN CREE MASTER PLAN of ;,fA.KlN HCAIH ARTsjaj:R FAlj PREPARED BY: COLLEGE STATION PARKS & RECREATION PLANNING, DEVFI-OPME,NIT SERVICES,& PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL JULY 9,1998 I, a .0 SCUI-WrURF-E G3^ROFN/P^RKtNC4 ARa.-. VAFllrlC>UT H Of -RIVE COMMERCIAL I COMNERCIAL ob COMW� �fALA4 -7. PAFiKNCa un 0—", --COPAVERCIA ARKING (223 -�ACE3) J_ ix The College Station Parks and Recreation Department is a long-time role model for developing partnerships, The benefits are endless, and pale in comparison to the endless list of people and organizations that partner with this department. The Parks and Recreation Department has developed partnerships with approximately 130 0 different agencies and organizations. Embracing the Past, Exploring the Futtirel. f,7 b 'Ali tu ITO