Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/12/2024 - Regular Agenda Packet - Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board College Station, TX Meeting Agenda Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, TX 77840 Internet: www.microsoft.com/microsoft-teams/join-a-meeting Meeting ID: 269 753 645 57 | Passcode: QfdsL9 Phone: +1 979-431-4880 | Phone Conference: 917 612 881# The City Council may or may not attend this meeting. August 12, 2024 3:30 PM Bush 4141 Community Room College Station, TX Page 1 Notice is hereby given that a quorum of the meeting body will be present in the physical location stated above where citizens may also attend in order to view a member(s) participating by videoconference call as allowed by 551.127, Texas Government Code. The City uses a third party vendor to host the virtual portion of the meeting; if virtual access is unavailable, meeting access and participation will be in-person only. 1. Call meeting to order and consider absence requests. 2. Hear Visitors. At this time, the Chairperson will open the floor to citizens wishing to address issues not already scheduled on today's agenda. Each citizen’s presentation will be limited to three minutes in order to allow adequate time for the completion of the agenda items. Comments will be received and city staff may be asked to look into the matter, or the matter may be placed on a future agenda for discussion. A recording may be made of the meeting; please give your name and address for the record. 3. Agenda Items 3.1. Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes. Attachments: 1. May 20, 2024 3.2. Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan by amending the Thoroughfare Plan and Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan to remove the future extension of Balcones Drive, a Minor Collector, between the Jones Crossing Development and Welsh Avenue including associated future bike lanes and sidewalks. Sponsors: Jason Schubert Attachments: 1. Amendment Exhibit 2. Applicants Supporting Information 3. Letter of Support - First Baptist Church of College Station 3.3. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the Week Without Driving challenge. 3.4. Presentation and discussion regarding the proposed FY25 City budget as it relates to items related to walking, biking, and greenways. 3.5. Presentation and discussion regarding the following items related to biking, walking, and greenways: Page 1 of 24 Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board Page 2 August 12, 2024 a. Public Meetings of Interest b. Capital and Private Project Updates 3.6. Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board calendar of upcoming meetings. a. September 9, 2024 ~ Bicycle, Pedestrian and Greenways Advisory Board Meeting at 3:30 p.m. in the Bush 4141 Community Room 4. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items. A member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. 5. Adjourn. Adjournment into Executive Session may occur in order to consider any item listed on the agenda if a matter is raised that is appropriate for Executive Session discussion. I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the website and at College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas, on August 7, 2024 at 5:00 p.m. City Secretary This building is wheelchair accessible. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need accommodations, auxiliary aids, or services such as interpreters, readers, or large print are asked to contact the City Secretary’s Office at (979) 764-3541, TDD at 1-800-735-2989, or email adaassistance@cstx.gov at least two business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. If the City does not receive notification at least two business days prior to the meeting, the City will make a reasonable attempt to provide the necessary accommodations. Penal Code § 30.07. Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun. "Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun) A Person Licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (Handgun Licensing Law), may not enter this Property with a Handgun that is Carried Openly." Codigo Penal § 30.07. Traspasar Portando Armas de Mano al Aire Libre con Licencia. “Conforme a la Seccion 30.07 del codigo penal (traspasar portando armas de mano al aire libre con licencia), personas con licencia bajo del Sub-Capitulo H, Capitulo 411, Codigo de Gobierno (Ley de licencias de arma de mano), no deben entrar a esta propiedad portando arma de mano al aire libre.” Page 2 of 24 MINUTES BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, AND GREENWAYS ADVISORY BOARD MEETING May 20, 2024 MEMBERS PRESENT:Chairperson Elizabeth Cunha, Board Members Dennis Jansen, Joy Chmelar, Jake Madewell, Brad Brimley and Neo Jang MEMBERS ABSENT:Board Member Kathy Langlotz STAFF PRESENT:Director of Planning & Development Services Anthony Armstrong, Assisting Director Molly Hitchcock, City Engineer Carol Cotter, Transportation Planning Coordinator Jason Schubert, Transportation & Mobility Engineer I Katherine Beaman-Jamael, Graduate Traffic Engineer II DeAnna Ordonez, Traffic Engineer II Michael Holmes, Business Services Manager Daniel Smith and Staff Assistant II Grecia Fuentes AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to Order and consider absence requests. Chairperson Cunha called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. There were no absence requests for consideration. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Hear Visitors. There were no visitors who wished to speak. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Agenda Items. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.1: Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes. Board Member Jansen motioned to approve the meeting minutes from April, Board Member Jang seconded the motion, minutes were approved 6-0. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.2: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an audit of the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan. Coordinator Schubert presented this item. Page 3 of 24 Board Member Jang asked how long the last Master Plan update had taken to complete. Coordinator Schubert answered it took about a year for all the planning efforts, but it would depend on all the updates staff would do this time. Board Member Jansen asked what it would cost the city to designate a road into a bike route. Coordinator Schubert responded that it usually consisted of a green Bike Route sign being placed. Board Member Jansen stated that there was a lot of streets that were bike routes that could be labeled with a sign if we wanted more designated bike routes. Transportation & Mobility Engineer Beaman-Jamael clarified that staff needed to evaluate safety first practices. She stated that currently The League of American Bicyclist did not accept any streets that were more than 35 miles per hour. She added that staff would need to exercise engineering judgement to determine what was appropriate for the kind of users that are utilizing it along with the volumes and speeds. Board Member Brimley wanted to verify that what he understood that it was more complicated than just putting up a sign. Transportation & Mobility Engineer Beaman-Jamael said it was just a matter of evaluating where bike routes were most appropriate. Board Member Jansen said he was just trying to find out why there was bike routes that could be designated, but staff was not doing it. Chairperson Cunha asked staff if the answer to why we were not doing that was because we did not have any designated funding and the bike routes marked on the map might not of met the criteria for a bike route. Board Member Jansen asked if the routes did not meet the criteria, then why were they listed there as a plan. Board Member Brimley explained it was because it was for a future plan and not to be implemented today. Coordinator Schubert mentioned that the network was established in 2010 and staff had only visited it one time back in 2018. He added that he could not speak about how everything was done over time, but he thought that bike routes have been desired. He has spoken up before to get a pot of money that was given to implement a lot of them, but he could ask for a small amount of money to get those off the list. Page 4 of 24 Board Member Brimley asked Traffic Engineer Holmes if the city had a program in place for street sign replacements to look at a specific corridor in order to see when they are going to be replaced. He said that maybe those could implement street signs as well. Traffic Engineer Holmes said that they check signs periodically to make sure they are up to standard and replace them as needed, but not in a specific order. Board Member Jang mentioned that maybe implementing it into a schedule he had asked for like when the city streets get their markings repainted on the roads. Traffic Engineer Holmes stated that markings typically get reported faster than what signs might be. He said they just refresh where it is needed and there is not much of a process for it. Board Member Brimley asked if there was anything else that could be done to address what Board Member Jansen mentioned earlier regarding prioritizing funding smaller projects like the bike route signs. Director Armstrong stated that as staff moved forward with this update, they could look at the prioritization of those low hanging fruit projects and bring them to the board for advice. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.3: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an overview of leading pedestrian intervals at signalized intersections. Traffic Engineer Holmes presented this item. Board Member Jang asked to explain more on untenable length crossing. Traffic Engineer Holmes said a lot of those minimums came from the pedestrian time that is given based on the guidelines for the signal timings. He said that the requirement of the pedestrian time for the diagonal crossing just made the cycle length excessive during the study they had done. He also mentioned that one of the primary reasons they wanted to avoid those diagonal crossings was due to emergency access. He used an example of pedestrians getting stranded in the middle of a diagonal crossing while a fire truck was coming through traffic. Chairperson Cunha asked if staff had looked at other cities that also had all four way stops to see if they allowed diagonal crossing. Traffic Engineer Holmes said Nashville had several of them, but their intersections were much smaller than ours. Board Member Brimley explained that there was a very fine amount of time that could be allocated to each phase of a traffic signal. If they timed the signals for people crossing diagonally then that would take longer for all the other phases of people in cars. So traffic engineers have timed it for people crossing length wise in one direction. Page 5 of 24 Chairperson Cunha said she thought the city had said they timed it to cross the L shape, meaning to cross two intersection crossings back-to-back. Traffic Engineer Holmes clarified that they did not design the parameter that way, but some people may be able to cross both intersection crossing lengths within that time. Chairperson Cunha asked if there were any cons of Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI’s). Traffic Engineer Holmes said the cons were that the cost for them was typically between 200 to 1,200 dollars. He said the main drawback was the mobility of the corridor especially when dealing with coordinated signals. Board Member Brimley asked if there was a process in place to accept requests for the LPI’s. Traffic Engineer Holmes said he has only been a part of one, but he thinks they probably came from citizen requests and complaints through the website portal. He said there is a portal to report traffic signals and a comment card under traffic engineering section that has a generalized form. He added that most of them do not happen by a citizen requesting one, but from a situation that has been evaluated by staff to be the best solution. Board Member Jang asked if a citizen request came in for an LPI could that streamline the process. Traffic Engineer Holmes said it could, but typically while staff would consider it as a solution they would still have to look at all the other options to be thorough. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.4: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a debrief of the 2024 Cycle with Council event. Board Member Jang thanked Chairperson Cunha for taking over the signage placement, but mentioned that there was a group of volunteers waiting to help set up for the route. Chairperson Cunha explained that it easier for one person to do all the signs so that it flows better. She worries that having multiple people work on it might leave room for a gap somewhere. She said she goes through it and makes notes of how many signs are needed for the route and then has her son run it one last time to make sure it is a seamless experience. It also makes picking up the signs easier since they know where all of them were placed. Board Member Jang also thanked the city crew in the parks department for coming out to power wash the underpass twice before the event. He mentioned that he was shocked when it was announced that groups would have to go in waves. Chairperson Cunha explained that they have to do it in waves and the waves are best divided by speed, but she did agree that the second wave of cyclist was a really big group. Board Member Jansen mentioned said that on the way back on Barron Road it was unclear what way needed to be taken. Page 6 of 24 Board Member Madewell agreed that the route was well run and there was a very good turnout. He said that he also was confused on the Barron Road crossing coming back. Chairperson Cunha apologized but stated that they needed to be riding on the wrong side of the road on that part of the route. Coordinator Schubert mentioned that the waves might need to be sorted out in advance before it was time to go. Chairperson Cunha mentioned to the Board that perhaps the routes should be recycled from now on. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.5: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the unfunded stand-alone bicycle and pedestrian projects. Chairperson Cunha asked for coordinator Schubert to show City Council the slide where it showed all the unfunded projects there was and the total cost to cover all of them. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.6: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board calendar of upcoming meetings. a)Public Meetings of Interest – 1. City Council Meeting Workshop: May 23, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers – Discussion of crosswalk on Midtown Drive at the shared use path underpass 2. Council Transportation & Mobility Committee: May 24, 2024 at 3:30 p.m. in the 1938 Executive Conference Room. b) Capital and Private Project Updates – There were no updates for these projects. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.7: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board calendar of upcoming meetings. a) June 10, 2024 ~ Bicycle, Pedestrian and Greenways Advisory Board Meeting at 3:30 p.m. in the Bush 4141 Community Room. b) July To Be Determined ~ Bicycle, Pedestrian and Greenways Advisory Board Meeting AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Discussion and possible action on future agenda items. A Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the Page 7 of 24 recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. Board Member Jansen would like to hear about the bike route destination on FM 2818. He mentioned there was a bike route sign on Dartmouth Street and FM 2818 on both directions. He said cars coming off the highway are driving at 55 miles per hour down the feeder road then turning right on FM 2818 do not know it is a bike route until they get to Dartmouth. Board Member Jang would like to do a presentation “A week without driving”. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 5:06 p.m. APPROVED: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ Elizabeth Cunha, Chairperson Grecia Fuentes, Board Secretary Page 8 of 24 August 12, 2024 Item No. 3.2. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Remove the Future Extension of Balcones Drive Sponsor: Jason Schubert Reviewed By CBC: Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Greenways Advisory Board Agenda Caption: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan by amending the Thoroughfare Plan and Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan to remove the future extension of Balcones Drive, a Minor Collector, between the Jones Crossing Development and Welsh Avenue including associated future bike lanes and sidewalks. Relationship to Strategic Goals: • Improving Mobility Recommendation(s): Staff recommends denial of the request. Summary: The app licant is requesting to amend the Comprehensive Plan by amending the Thoroughfare Plan and Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan to remove the future extension of Balcones Drive, a Minor Collector, between the Jones Crossing Development and Welsh Avenue including associated future bike lanes and sidewalks. This section of future Minor Collector is approximately 1,675 feet in length, of which approximately 450 feet is located in existing right-of-way and approximately 1,225 feet is located on property owned by the First Baptist Church of College Station. The existing portion of Balcones Drive from Wellborn Road (FM 2154) into the Jones Cross Development is approximately 1,500 feet in length and was constructed in 2018 with the platting of the property and development of the HEB site. As described in the Review Criteria, removal of the Balcones Drive extension will have a negative impact to the transportation network serving this area of the City. The Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board is required to make a recommendation on Comprehensive Plan amendments that affect biking, walking, or greenways. The Planning & Zoning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing and make a recommendation at their August 15, 2024 meeting and the City Council is scheduled to hold a public hearing and have final consideration at their September 12, 2024 meeting. REVIEW CRITERIA 1) Changed or changing conditions in the subject area of the City: The future extension of Balcones Drive between Wellborn Road and Welsh Avenue was added to the Thoroughfare Plan with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 2009. The land area it serves is designated on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use & Character Map for General Commercial, Urban Residential, and Natural & Open Areas. The Jones Crossing Development property has developed roughly half of its 71-acre land area since it started construction in 2017 and is developing in accordance with Comprehensive Plan. The property First Baptist Church of College Station is located platted in 1982 and the church site has expanded but has not had significant changes to the site in recent years. The properties served by the Balcones Drive extension have frontage to other existing thoroughfares. Page 9 of 24 These include Wellborn Road (FM 2154), a 6-lane Major Arterial, Harvey Mitchell Parkway (FM 2818), a 4-lane roadway designated as a future 6-lane Major Arterial, and Welsh Avenue, a Major Collector. Traffic volumes from TxDOT for Wellborn Road adjacent to the Jones Crossing Development were estimated to be 24,000 vehicles per day in 2009 and have increased to over 40,000 vehicles per day in 2023. Traffic volumes from TxDOT for Harvey Mitchell Parkway were estimated to be 22,000 vehicles per day in 2009 and have increased to over 37,000 vehicles per day in 2023. Traffic volumes on Welsh Avenue adjacent to the First Baptist Church property have been estimated to be between 10,000 and 11,000 vehicles since 2012. Since 2009, bicycle and pedestrian network changes in the area include the construction of a shared- use path connection near the existing terminus of Balcones Drive into Steeplechase Park to the south and from Balcones Drive to Harvey Mitchell Parkway. Also, TxDOT has received funding for a shared use path to be constructed along the south side of Harvey Mitchell Parkway that will be from the Jones Crossing Development east to Texas Avenue. 2) Compatibility with the existing uses, development patterns, and character of the immediate area concerned, the general area, and the City as a whole: The planned extension of Balcones Drive is intended to provide added circulation and connectivity to the roadway network in this area of the City which serves developing commercial and multi-family uses. The subject properties largely have frontage to two Major Arterials and the proposed extension would provide a backage road and alternate routes for vehicles, bicycle, and pedestrian to access the Jones Crossing Development without needing to utilize high volume, high speed Major Arterial roadways. Removing the extension would negatively impact the access of the surrounding area that is envisioned to have as the City builds out. The proposed thoroughfare extension crosses the existing First Baptist Church property which has an impact to their existing site and to the potential of the unplatted portion of their property. First Baptist Church has submitted a letter of support for removing the thoroughfare extension to remove this impact to their property. The extension, however, would be located largely along their existing drive aisle and driveway to Welsh Avenue. This configuration results in a lesser impact to their property than what most street extensions across developed property would have as much of the area being utilized for their drive aisle could be utilized for the street. The letter from First Baptist Church cites concerns with being able to fund the extension, the amount of right-of-way needed and site impacts if the extension were to occur. State law restricts cities from requiring more infrastructure than what is roughly proportionate to a proposed development. Unless the church site has substantial development activity or converts into other, more intense uses, the City would need to contribute funds or implement the project as the full construction could not be required. The amount of right-of- way needed and how bicycle and pedestrian facilities are provided can be evaluated with the design of the extension and adjusted as able to reduce the impact to the existing site and parking areas. 3) Impact on environmentally sensitive and natural areas: The extension of Balcones Drive would cross Bee Creek Tributary B.3. Where the crossing would be located the creek is not identified on FEMA maps to be 100-year floodplain though a floodplain study by the applicant performed for the Jones Crossing development has identified that 100-year floodplain exists in this area. Thoroughfares are the larger roadway network of the City and crossing of creek and floodplain areas is done in appropriate locations to make valuable network connections. As creek and floodplain are environmentally sensitive natural areas it is important to be prudent to limit the impact to them. Page 10 of 24 Since the creek is located at the edge of the Jones Crossing property, staff requested that the developer stop the construction of Balcones Drive at the edge of the studied floodplain and not continue to their property line since they would not be able to complete the full crossing to the other side of the creek on the adjacent First Baptist Church property. This was intended to limit the impact to the natural environment in the interim, not require a temporary turnaround in that natural area, and to allow the crossing to be constructed when the Balcones Drive was extended across the First Baptist Church property and a full design of the crossing could be determined with the appropriate street elevation and drainage structures. In doing so, the applicant provided funds to the City in the amount of $734,704.36 which was the estimated amount for the construction of the approximately 450 feet of street. The right-of-way for this section was dedicated with the plat and is available for the street to be constructed. 4) Impacts on infrastructure including water, wastewater, drainage, and the transportation network: The proposed amendment does not impact water or wastewater services. As stated in the proceeding Review Criteria, the Balcones Drive extension would cross Bee Creek Tributary B.3 and drainage and floodplain impacts would be determined through those studies and mitigated with the design of the roadway crossing. A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was provided with the rezoning application submitted for Jones Crossing in 2016. As stated by the applicant, the TIA evaluated if the extension of Balcones Drive over to Welsh Avenue would be needed with the full build-out of the development and determined that the extension was not needed for that. A TIA is a snapshot that estimates traffic conditions for assumed uses developed over a specified timeline. The TIA that was performed utilized traffic counts from 2015 and assumed the full build-out would occur by 2018 so is no longer valid. The need for thoroughfare connections, like the Balcones Drive extension to Welsh Avenue, are not based on snapshots of specific timeframes but on the transportation needs and the benefits of those connections to the transportation network as the City builds-out. The City and Bryan/College Station Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) utilize travel demand models to estimate and assess the thoroughfare network needed to serve the City long-term. Staff requested MPO staff perform a run of the travel demand model in this area without the Balcones Drive extension to help determine what the impact may be on adjacent roadways. The analysis did not have conclusive results which is disappointing though not surprising. A travel demand model performs best in evaluating the larger regional highway and arterial roadway network and is more challenged to accurately assess smaller collector roadways due to the macro-nature of the model and the small intricacies of a particular location in the model and how the traffic analysis zones are configured and how the assumed uses interact with the surrounding thoroughfare network. The applicant has cited various efforts to collaborate with the City and First Baptist Church to have the Balcones Drive extension completed and concludes that the unsuccessful efforts are a result of an apparent lack of interest by the City in completing the project. They thereby are requesting the extension be removed from the Thoroughfare Plan so it is no longer required and the $734k in funds submitted for the remaining 450 feet on their tract be returned. While efforts to this point have not resulted in the extension being initiated, it does not indicate that the extension is not an important connection for this area. The Jones Crossing development is roughly half developed and traffic on the adjacent Major Arterials, which provide access from the growing City and beyond to Texas A&M University, are projected to increase making alternatives and redundancy in the network more critical over time. Funding for capital projects are prioritized as funds are available and based on the needs of the City at the time. A preliminary priority analysis performed in 2020 showed the Balcones Drive Page 11 of 24 extension was ranked sixth in priority out of 17 potential roadway projects. Funding has not yet been identified for it though the project can be considered when a prioritization effort for roadway projects is undertaken again. A future partnership of the City, Jones Crossing developer and First Baptist Church of College Station is likely the most successful course action to realize the extension. The developer has indicated an interest to create a signalized access and median opening along Harvey Mitchell Parkway. Discussions have occurred with staff and TxDOT regarding the concept which have been favorable. There are design concerns though due to a potential traffic signal’s proximity to the ramps and grade separation of Wellborn Road and Harvey Mitchell Parkway and the necessary relocation of the driveway and drive aisle on the property on the opposite side of Harvey Mitchell Parkway that would need to be resolved. While a signalized driveway on Harvey Mitchell Parkway would create more access to the Jones Crossing Development from that corridor, it does not replace the benefit to all users and adjacent area of having the Balcones Drive connection to Welsh Avenue. 5) Consistency with the goals and strategies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan: The Thoroughfare Plan and Bicycle Plan, and Pedestrian Plan are established to meet the long-term transportation needs of the City’s residents and its visitors. Removal of the Balcones Drive extension from the Thoroughfare Plan and the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan would be in conflict with their goals and objectives by reducing future connectivity for all users and making the network more dependent on a smaller number of higher volume roadways. Budget & Financial Summary: N/A Attachments: 1. Amendment Exhibit 2. Applicants Supporting Information 3. Letter of Support - First Baptist Church of College Station Page 12 of 24 Page 13 of 24 1 of 6 Project Type: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Project Subtype: Thoroughfare Plan Short Description: Balcones Drive (Jones Crossing Development to Welsh) Thoroughfare Amendment APPLICATION FEES: Rezoning App Fee: $1,566.00 Total: $1,566.00 COMP PLAN: Total Acreage: 1.664-Acres on FBC property, .624 acres within Jones Crossing Development. Total acreage is 2.288. Community Character: This application is related to Community Character. Not Applicable. Transportation: This application is related to Transportation. Applicable. Other: This application is related to other (please explain below). Not Applicable. Element & Loc Amended: What specific element of the Comprehensive Plan (for example, Land Use & Character designation, Thoroughfare Plan Context Class, or thoroughfare alignment) and at what specific location (if applicable) is requested to be amended? Thoroughfare alignment (including the Pedestrian and Bicycle alignments) of the proposed two- lane Minor Collector that is currently shown to connect the existing portion of Balcones Drive from where it terminates in the Jones Crossing Development to Welsh Avenue. The roadway alignment removal is a change to the Thoroughfare Plan and the removal of the bike lane/sidewalks is a change to the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan. Amendment Request: Please list the amendment(s) requested. Our request is to delete the segment of Balcones Drive from where it terminates in the Jones Crossing Development to Welsh Avenue from the Thoroughfare Plan. This would include the proposed bike lanes, sidewalks and vehicle travel lanes. The removal of the bike lane/sidewalks is a change to the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan. Page 14 of 24 2 of 6 Reason for the Amendment: Please explain the reason for the amendment(s). In October 2015, in association with the Jones Crossing Development, initial meetings were held among the City of College Station (COCS), First Baptist Church (FBC), and Stratus Properties (Stratus) to discuss the alignment and extension of Balcones Drive from Wellborn Road to Welsh Avenue. After two additional meetings in early 2016, discussions regarding participation in the extension of Balcones to Welsh broke down for several reasons: • there was no proposed fiscal participation by FBC or the COCS; • FBC was not willing to grant the right-of-way for the roadway extension; and • the COCS required a traffic signal at Balcones and Welsh and other improvements that significantly increased the cost of the project. Between September 2016 and August 2017, the Jones Crossing Development worked through multiple steps of the entitlement process. In particular, the Final Plat for the subdivision was submitted, reviewed, and approved. A requirement of this approval was for Stratus to provide fiscal surety for the final portion of Balcones Drive within the Jones Crossing Subdivision. Because the final portion of Balcones required a creek crossing and the property line is in the middle of the creek, it was not possible to complete construction of the road to the property line. Thus, surety in the amount of $734,704.36 was posted in cash with the COCS prior to the final plat being approved by P&Z and filed of record. The Grand Opening for the Jones Crossing Development and its anchor tenant, HEB, was held on September 12, 2018. A new round of discussions among the COCS, FBC, and Stratus were held between Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. At that time, FBC was willing to dedicate the required right-of-way for the roadway extension as long as their site was improved along the roadway, i.e., new curb line and driveways constructed, etc. Stratus discussed the potential use of a 380 Agreement between the COCS and Stratus to fund the Balcones extension to Welsh Avenue in conjunction with the $734,704.36 fiscal surety posted with the Jones Crossing Plat. The COCS was not interested in a 380 Agreement and discussions failed again. In April 2021, Stratus met with Jennifer Prochazka, Assistant City Manager, to discuss removing the extension of Balcones from the Thoroughfare Plan and the possibility of the city refunding the $734,704.36. The request was based on the unlikelihood of Balcones being extended by FBC or by the city as a CIP project. At that time, Ms. Prochazka stated that staff did not support the proposal to remove Balcones from the Thoroughfare Plan. nor did they believe Balcones would be constructed in the future by either the City or FBC. Following subsequent conversations, staff indicated they would recommend the Balcones Extension project for inclusion in the 2022 Bond Election. In February 2022, the Bond Election Citizen Advisory Committee was formed and by March 2022, the city’s shortlist of projects was released. The Balcones extension was not on the list. It is our understanding that the Balcones extension was submitted for consideration by the City’s Transportation Planner but was removed from the project list prior to it being submitted to the Citizen Advisory Bond Committee for consideration. Stratus has attempted several times to work with the COCS to participate in the extension of Balcones. FBC cannot afford to fund construction of their portion of the bridge and the remaining roadway to Welsh Avenue, and based on the decisions that COCS has made, it is apparent that completing the Balcones extension is not a priority for the City. The only way the Balcones extension will be constructed is if it is included in a future bond election in 5-10 years. Page 15 of 24 3 of 6 Because of the failure of multiple efforts and the apparent lack of interest in completing this project, the applicants request that this portion of Balcones Drive be removed from the city’s thoroughfare plan and that the $734,704.36 that was posted seven (7) years ago by Stratus be released. Changed Conditions: Please explain the changed or changing conditions in the subject area of the City. This area of College Station is mostly built out and traffic patterns are unlikely to change significantly in the future. The Jones Crossing TIA determined that development of the project does not necessitate the extension of Balcones Drive. Several other traffic improvement projects have been completed in the area along Wellborn Road recently. These include the closure of the Cain Road railroad crossing, the construction of a new railroad crossing and traffic signal at the Deacon Drive intersection, and the widening of Rock Prairie Road with railroad crossing improvements at Wellborn. Additionally, the Jones Crossing Development constructed a pedestrian bridge connection from Balcones Drive to Steeplechase Park and extended a shared use path through the development to FM2818 where it will be extended with future development / projects. Existing Element: Please show the compatibility with the existing uses, development patterns, and character of the immediate area concerned, the general area, and the city as a whole. This area of College Station is mostly built out, with almost all greenfield areas developed or approved for planned development. The Jones Crossing TIA proves that the extension of Balcones is not required for the overall transportation network. The extension of Balcones to Welsh would only serve as a convenient but not necessary back door to the Jones Crossing development. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Environment Impact: Please list any impacts on environmentally sensitive and natural areas. The alignment of this roadway extension necessitates a crossing of Bee Creek Tributary B.3. This portion of creek was identified as a perennial tributary in a preliminary jurisdictional determination of Waters of the United States, which was completed in October 2015 as part of the Jones Crossing project. Choosing not to construct this roadway eliminates any potential construction impacts to this existing creek and preserves its health and character. Infrastructure Impact: List any impacts on infrastructure, including water, wastewater, drainage and transportation network. There are no planned utility extensions along the Balcones extension route. Therefore, there would be no impact to existing water, wastewater, or drainage networks. As mentioned previously, this area is mostly built out except for areas approved for future development within Jones Crossing, and required infrastructure for this future development has already been constructed. Existing utilities are located along Welsh Avenue and within the FBC property to serve their facilities. The Jones Crossing TIA determined that the Balcones extension is not required for the overall transportation network. Page 16 of 24 4 of 6 Goals & Objectives: Explain consistency with the goals and strategies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The goal of Chapter 9 – Collaborative Partnerships in the City’s Comprehensive Plan is to have “well-coordinated planning at all levels and effective engagement with local jurisdictions, institutions, and organizations to further realize the City’s vision and support the broad community.” The Comprehensive Plan further explains, “The purpose of which is because collaborative partnerships are essential in leveraging resources for maximum efficiency and benefit. Many challenges that communities face are regional issues – like mobility network congestion and housing affordability – or are even broader in scope, such as environmental sustainability and natural disaster recovery which cross jurisdictional boundaries.” After eight (8) years of trying to cooperate with the city, Stratus is convinced that the Balcones extension is not a priority for the City and thus there is no desire on the city’s part to collaborate in constructing the extension of Balcones Drive. Another goal from the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 8 – Managed Growth is “Fiscally responsible and carefully managed development that is aligned with growth expectations and the ability to provide safe, timely, and efficient infrastructure and services.” As the Comprehensive Plan states, “The purpose of this chapter is to establish the necessary policy guidance and associated strategic actions to enable the City of College Station to manage its ongoing physical growth and development in a sensible, predictable, and fiscally responsible manner.” Stratus made many attempts to partner with the city in order to construct the Balcones extension in a sensible, predictable and fiscally responsible manner. The surety that was posted in 2017 has lost significant value due to increased construction costs and inflation. There have been opportunities for the city to benefit from a cost-free dedication of right-of-way from FBC and from monetary participation by Stratus, but the City chose not to participate when presented with these opportunities and, with regard to this project, failed to act in a fiscally responsible manner. Because the City must now bear the entire cost of acquiring right- of-way acquisition extending the roadway, the only fiscally responsible option is to remove the Balcones extension from the Thoroughfare Plan. Additional Properties: 2200 Metalmark Way (Geo ID#362100-0101-0020) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Acknowledgement (1): The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true, correct, and complete. Agreed. Acknowledgement (2): IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more than one owner, all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application must Page 17 of 24 5 of 6 be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its behalf. Understood. Project Proposal Meeting Acknowledgement: Applicant acknowledges that they understand a Project Proposal Meeting with neighborhood representatives is required for all CPAs requesting changes to the Future Land Use & Character Map, as stated in UDO Section 3.22. Understood. LOCATION: Address: 2300 Welsh Avenue Parcel Number: 582800-3000-0060 Applicant Information: Name: Mitchell & Morgan, LLP C/O Veronica Morgan Address: 3204 Earl Rudder Freeway South City: College Station State: Texas Zip Code: 77845-6457 Phone: 979-260-6963 Email Address: v@mitchellandmorgan.com Owner Information: Name: College Station 1892 Properties, LLC C/O Chessie Zimmerman Address: 212 Lavaca Street, Suite 300 City: Austin State: Texas Zip Code: 78701 Phone: 512-708-0739 Email Address: czimmerman@stratusproperties.com Owner Information: Name: 1892 Jones Crossing, LTD C/O Don Jones Address: 804 Berry Creek City: College Station State: Texas Zip Code: 77845 Phone: 979-255-6600 Email Address: donaldwjones@gmail.com Owner Information: Name: First Baptist Church of College Station C/O Trustees Address: 2300 Welsh Avenue City: College Station Page 18 of 24 6 of 6 State: Texas Zip Code: 77845 Phone: 979-696-7000 Email Address: info@fbccollegestation.com Contact Primary Information: Name: Mitchell & Morgan, LLP C/O Veronica Morgan Address: 3204 Earl Rudder Freeway South City: College Station State: Texas Zip Code: 77845-6457 Phone: 979-260-6963 Email Address: v@mitchellandmorgan.com Contact Secondary Information: Name: Mitchell & Morgan, LLP C/O Kerry Pillow Address: 3204 Earl Rudder Freeway South City: College Station State: Texas Zip Code: 77845-6457 Phone: 979-260-6963 Email Address: kerry@mitchellandmorgan.com Contact Tertiary Information: Name: Mitchell & Morgan, LLP C/O Tina Weido Address: 3204 Earl Rudder Freeway South City: College Station State: Texas Zip Code: 77845-6457 Phone: 979-260-6963 Email Address: tina@mitchellandmorgan.com Engineer Information: Name: Mitchell & Morgan, LLP C/O Veronica Morgan Address: 3204 Earl Rudder Freeway South City: College Station State: Texas Zip Code: 77845-6457 Phone: 979-260-6963 Email Address: v@mitchellandmorgan.com Page 19 of 24 City of College Station March 5, 2024 Attn: Planning & Development Services P.O. Box 9960, College Station, TX 77842 RE: Letter of Support for a Thoroughfare Plan Amendment to Remove Balcones Drive between Welsh Avenue and the current terminus within the Jones Crossing Development in College Station, Texas To Whom It May Concern, We are writing you this letter on behalf of Stratus Properties to show our support for the removal of Balcones Drive from the City of College Station’s Thoroughfare Plan, specifically the portion of Balcones Drive from Welsh Avenue to the current terminus of the roadway within the Jones Crossing Development. Stratus Properties started working on the Jones Crossing Development in August 2015. By October 2015 we had our first meeting between Stratus Properties and representatives from the City of College Station to discuss the extension of Balcones Drive. Over the next couple of years, there were several meetings and attempts made by Stratus Properties to work with First Baptist Church of College Station and the City of College Station to extend Balcones Drive to no avail. Through these meetings our church learned a tremendous amount about development requirements in the city. We now know that the development of property in the City of College Station, including grading, land development, utilities, new buildings or parking lots, etc., requires platting of the property. Our church campus is located on approximately 17.817-acres (25.997-acres when floodplain acreage is included), 4.587-acres of this property is currently un-platted. To develop this 4.587 acres with a building expansion and associated parking lot, we would be required to dedicate right-of-way to the City and to construct the portion of Balcones Drive and/or any utility extensions identified on the City’s Master Plans within our property. Balcones Drive is a 38-foot-wide Minor Collector on the Thoroughfare Plan that requires a 60-foot right-of-way dedication. If the church were to ever construct this roadway it would have the following impacts to church property: • 430-LF of roadway construction costs • 2.66 acres lost to the Balcones extension (1.664 acres lost to right-of-way and .998 acres lost to being separated from the property due to the road extension) • 44 parking spaces lost to require modifications to the existing parking lot. This 4.587-acres was gifted to the First Baptist Church of College Station in December 2005 from Edsel Jones. The consideration in the Special Warranty Deed states “a gift deed arising out of Page 20 of 24 [Mr. Jones] deep respect and appreciation for the Church which has served him and his family for many years, and to the honor and glory of our Lord whose mission the church seeks to serve, and further as a gift to honor the valuable years of service of Malcolm Bane whose ministry, as pastor, reached the Edsel G. Jones family in special and life changing ways.” Our goal is to someday be able to utilize this gift from Mr. Jones to continue to serve this community as he intended. Given the city requirements that FBC construct Balcones prior to developing this 4.587-acres, we will likely never be able to use this property for any church facilities. Our church is a non-profit organization. As a non-profit, we are limited in our ability to raise funds. It is very unlikely that we would be able to afford the construction of this roadway. We believe whole heartedly that the development of the road in this location should be the responsibility of the City of College Station. We understand that Stratus Properties made a request of the city to place this road on the last bond election and the city opted not to include it, so with this we have assumed that this is not a roadway that the city feels is important to construct. Stratus Properties is not going to construct it, and it would be extremely difficult for the church to construct it. This results in our conclusion that it is appropriate to remove it from the Thoroughfare Plan. Therefore, we fully support the efforts of Stratus Properties as they seek to remove this portion of Balcones Drive from the City of College Station’s Thoroughfare Plan and are happy to join them in this request. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Steve Rodgers Brian Hennings Jack Madeley Trustee Trustee Trustee cc: file Page 21 of 24 Page 22 of 24 [Mr. Jones] deep respect and appreciation for the Church which has served him and his family for many years, and to the honor and glory of our Lord whose mission the church seeks to serve, and further as a gift to honor the valuable years of service of Malcolm Bane whose ministry, as pastor, reached the Edsel G. Jones family in special and life changing ways.” Our goal is to someday be able to utilize this gift from Mr. Jones to continue to serve this community as he intended. Given the city requirements that FBC construct Balcones prior to developing this 4.587-acres, we will likely never be able to use this property for any church facilities. Our church is a non-profit organization. As a non-profit, we are limited in our ability to raise funds. It is very unlikely that we would be able to afford the construction of this roadway. We believe whole heartedly that the development of the road in this location should be the responsibility of the City of College Station. We understand that Stratus Properties made a request of the city to place this road on the last bond election and the city opted not to include it, so with this we have assumed that this is not a roadway that the city feels is important to construct. Stratus Properties is not going to construct it, and it would be extremely difficult for the church to construct it. This results in our conclusion that it is appropriate to remove it from the Thoroughfare Plan. Therefore, we fully support the efforts of Stratus Properties as they seek to remove this portion of Balcones Drive from the City of College Station’s Thoroughfare Plan and are happy to join them in this request. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Steve Rodgers Brian Hennings Jack Madeley Trustee Trustee Trustee cc: file Page 23 of 24 Page 24 of 24