HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/09/2002 - Regular Minutes - Parks Board (2)* *MINUTES **
College Station Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, April 9, 2002, at 6:00 p.m.
Parks and Recreation Department Conference Room
1000 Krenek Tap Road
College Station, Texas
Staff Present: Steve Beachy, Director of Parks and Recreation; Eric Ploeger, Assistant Director; Peter Vanecek,
Senior Park Planner; Curtis Bingham, Parks Operations Superintendent; Jane Kee, City Planner; Judy Downs,
Greenways Coordinator; Spencer Thompson Jr., Graduate Civil Engineer; Mary Tucker, Action Center
Coordinator; Kris Lehde, Board Secretary.
Board Present: Glenn Schroeder; Don Allison; Larry Farnsworth; Bill Davis; Jon Turton; Glen Davis (arrived at
7:25 p.m., during Item #13); Laura Wood, Alternate.
Board Absent: John Nichols, Chairman.
Guests:
Dr. Jon Rodiek
Lance Permenter
Andrew Schultz
Frank Thurmond
Larry Wells
1. Call to order: Glenn Schroeder called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. Steve Beachy requested that
Item #10 (Discussion, consideration, and possible action regarding a Greenways report concerning "Head
4W Lake" and the Bee Creek area) be moved to the top of the agenda. The Board was in consensus on moving
this item up.
2. Pardon — possible action concerning requests for absences of members from meeting: Larry Farnsworth
made a motion to accept the absence of John Nichols as excused. Don Allison seconded the motion. All were
in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
3. Hear visitors: There were no visitors present at the meeting.
4. Discussion, consideration, and possible approval of a proclamation in honor of Dr. John Crompton:
Steve said that the Recreation, Park, and Tourism Sciences Department at Texas A &M University would be
having a symposium on April 19, 20, and 21, 2002, and would be honoring Dr. John Crompton. Steve felt
that presenting Dr. Crompton with a proclamation would be a good way to honor him at the event.
Jon made a motion to endorse the proclamation for Dr. Crompton on behalf of the Board. Bill Davis
seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
5. Discussion and possible approval of minutes from the joint meeting of February 19, 2002, and the
regular meeting of March 5, 2002: Jon Turton made a motion to approve the minutes from February 19,
2002, and from March 5, 2002. Larry 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 Strategic Issues: Steve said that the Department is making good progress with all of its goals.
The only exception is the City Council's strategy to provide developer incentives for neighborhood parks. He
added that items would be added to the Departmental goals as City management assigns them.
7. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning the current Capital Improvement Project Report:
Steve stated that the development of the first phase of Veterans Park and Athletic Complex is going well and
is ahead of schedule. He also reported on the progress of the Veterans Memorial Project. He stated that to
date, approximately $495,000 has been raised for the project. (The goal of the project is to raise $500,000).
He added that the statue had been cast, and bids would be solicited for the construction of the plaza around the
monument. The dedication of the park and memorial will be held on November 11, 2002. The dedication
will be a major event, with former President George Bush invited to attend.
This item was a report only, and no motion was made.
8. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning the future Capital Improvement Project Program:
Steve stated that a list of the Capital Improvement Projects is scheduled to be presented to the City Council on
April 25` He added that the recommendation from City staff is to postpone the bond election until the spring
of 2003 to allow time for the Citizens Committees to review the potential projects. He added that this would
also give the Department and the Board some additional time to review the potential projects and to work on
existing projects. Glenn Schroeder asked what additional steps would need to be taken. Steve responded that
additional work would need to be done, but he felt that the Board is at a good starting point in the process.
Glenn stated that Veterans Park and Athletic Complex has been viewed as much of an economic development
item as it has been a parks item, and said that the project should be split out from the rest of the park project
requests. Jon added that he was not satisfied that the park is packaged well enough to survive the bond
election process. Steve reminded the Board that the Council meeting would be on April 25` and said that
representation from the Board during that meeting would be helpful.
This item was a report only, and no motion was made.
9. Subcommittee recommendation and possible action concerning naming the Bee Creek Softball Fields in
honor of Mrs. Jane Pulley: A subcommittee consisting of Advisory Board members Larry Farnsworth and
Glenn Schroeder met with Mr. Jim Raatz and Steve Beachy on Tuesday, April 2, 2002. The recommendation
from staff and the subcommittee was approval of the request (from Mr. Raatz, and the petition signed by 41
residents) to name the Bee Creek Softball Fields in honor of Mrs. Jane Pulley.
Jon made a motion to accept the recommendation of the staff and subcommittee to name the Bee Creek
�%W Softball fields in honor of Mrs. Jane Pulley. Bill seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion
passed unanimously.
10. Discussion, consideration, and possible action regarding a Greenways report concerning "Head Lake"
and the Bee Creek area: The City's Greenways Coordinator, Judy Downs, said that the A &M Church of
Christ had donated the Head Lake property (which is in a greenway) to the City of College Station, and that a
grant application had been submitted to do a T21 recreational trail in this location. The application was
denied, but the City Council agreed to enter into a contract with the Landscape Architect Department at Texas
A &M University to do conceptual designs for four separate greenways projects, that are connections between
parks, into a trail system. Judy introduced Dr. Jon Rodiek from the Texas A &M University's Landscape
Architect Department and students Andrew Schultz and Lance Permenter.
Dr. Rodiek showed a PowerPoint presentation of the proposed Head Lake Master Plan. He said that there are
four main goals for the project that have been taken directly from the Greenways Master Plan:
1. Land Use Goal: To encourage a kind of land use on public and adjacent private property that provides an
open space and natural landscape that is more in harmony with the surrounding natural environment.
2. Community Appearance Goal: The goal is to promote, in College Station, land uses that create
aesthetically pleasing and safe environments for its citizens. Dr. Rodiek said that the goal of the plan is to
make sure that the site is placed adequately so that it is an addition to the community and not a detraction
to the overall visual environment. He added that the design has the opportunity to become a public
refuge.
3. Transportation Goal: To promote the development of an alternative means of traveling within College
Station, along bicycle and walking corridors and away from vehicular traffic. These pathways should,
wherever possible, strive to connect neighborhoods, schools, parks, retail /office areas, and the University
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, April 9, 2002
Page 2 of 5
in a safe and pleasing manner. Dr. Rodiek added that the design proposes placing a bike path that will
connect the sites.
4. Parks and Recreation Goal: College Station should enhance its system of parks, recreation facilities, and
open space, and encourage additional connections by a system of linear parkways, which utilize creek
beds, drainage ways, and other natural features. Dr. Rodiek added that the site has excellent potential for
intergenerational park features, nature -based education, and bike trails.
Dr. Rodiek said that the design package was put together by considering the following land parcels:
- Parcel 1 (approximately 7.05 acres): This is the land that was donated by the A &M Church of Christ.
The key features include Head Lake, an existing access road, a creek/drainage channel, and vegetation.
- Parcel 2 (approximately 27 acres): This land is currently owned by Mr. Swoboda. The key features
include a creek/drainage channel, dense vegetation, an open grassland floodway, and connection to
Emerald Forest Park.
- Parcel 3 (approximately 8.58 acres): This land is currently owned by Mr. Swoboda. The key features
include visibility from Highway 6, frontage to Emerald Plaza, open grassland, and dense
vegetation/forest.
- Parcel 4 (approximately 4.8 acres): This land is currently owned by Mr. Swoboda. Mr. Swoboda has a
contract pending to lease this land out to a dentist, who verbally stated that she would be willing to
dedicate the back of the property to complete the greenways connection.
Dr. Rodiek said that the concept vision of the design includes the following:
- Habitat Preservation;
- Restoration;
14W - Bikeway Linkage; and
- Recreation.
Students Andrew Schultz and Lance Permenter presented the concepts of the plan (see attached PowerPoint
presentation).
Steve stated that a sounding test had been performed on Head Lake a number of years ago, and that there had
been concerns of a relatively steep drop -off. Lance responded that lie had looked at the old sounding charts.
He too, had expected to find that steep drop -off, but now there is a very gradual slope. One explanation for
that could be that the drop -off filled with silt over time. Steve asked what would happen with the rubble and
debris that had been placed at the west end of the lake when the lake was built. Lance suggested removal of
the rubble and debris, although it would be expensive. Judy added that there is the possibility of applying for
grant applications that could help with the restoration of Head Lake. Don asked about the water doubling in
depth around the blinds and the piers. Lance stated that these features should be constructed to withstand
water, but that he would expect that area to be flooded.
Judy said that the design concept had also been presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission, and that
there wasn't any action required until they find out whether a grant is pending. She added that Dr. Rodiek and
his students were also working on three other designs, and asked the Board if they would like to see them as
they are completed. The Board was in consensus on viewing the designs.
This was an informational item only, and no motion was made.
11. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning the Parks and Recreation Department
Strategic Plan: Steve said that the Department's Strategic Plan is in draft format. The City's management
staff has recommended some reformatting of the plan, as well as the addition of an executive summary. Steve
added that the Department intends to present the revised plan to the Board and to the City Council in the
summer, and asked the Board to submit feedback pertaining to the plan to himself or Kris Lehde.
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, April 9, 2002
Page 3 of 5
12. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning a park land dedication request for the
University Preserve Subdivision: Peter Vanecek said that the proposed subdivision is in Park Zone 2,
located east of Munson Drive, north of Dominik Drive. The land requirement for development is .237 acres,
which is too small for a park. Surrounding parks are Parkway (%4 of a mile away), Merry Oaks (% of a mile
away), and Oaks (% of a mile away). Staff is recommending the acceptance of the fee in lieu of the land
requirement.
Larry made a motion to accept the fee in lieu of land for the University Preserve Subdivision. Don seconded
the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
13. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning a park land dedication request for the Spring
Creek Subdivision: Eric said that this proposed subdivision is in Park Zone 9, and is located on the north
side of Greens Prairie Road, east of State Highway 6, adjacent to Woodland Hills. Eric introduced the
developer of the subdivision, Frank Thurmond (also the developer for Woodland Hills), and Larry Wells with
the Municipal Development Group. The park land dedication for Woodland Hills was first reviewed and
approved by the Board in 1996. Several reconfigurations of the park have also been approved by the Board
since that time. Eric said that the Spring Creek Subdivision is a completely separate subdivision, but because
there was a considerable amount of property donated over -and -above the required dedication for Woodland
Hills, Mr. Thurmond would like consideration from the Board for that dedication to count toward the
dedication requirement for the Spring Creek Subdivision, which is .89 acres. However, Mr. Thurmond would
still be required to pay the development fee.
Eric said that during the review of the request, there was concern about access from the proposed subdivision
to Woodland Hills Park. He added that staff is proposing that Mr. Thurmond install an access easement that
would be a minimum of 20' between the two subdivisions, and would allow for bicycle and pedestrian traffic
to Woodland Hills Park, as well as serve as an emergency exit for residents in Woodland Hills. Staff has also
requested that the easement be clearly designated as an entryway for park and emergency vehicle access only.
After some discussion, Don made a motion to accept the park land dedication requirement as being met for
the Spring Creek Subdivision with the understanding that Mr. Thurmond will install an easement that will
allow access to Woodland Hills Park. Jon seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed
unanimously.
14. Report, discussion, and possible action concerning potential developer incentives: Steve said that this
item was taken to the City Council on January 24, 2002. During that meeting, Council directed staff to come
up with alternative options that are not monetary. A meeting was held with City staff and members of the
local development community on February 28` Several ideas were discussed during that meeting (please see
attached notes from meeting), but nothing has been decided.
This item was a report only, and no motion was made.
15. Discussion, consideration, and possible action concerning scheduling a special Board meeting date to
discuss the draft Urban Forest Management Plan that is scheduled for City Council consideration in
June 2002 (City Council Vision Statement #3, Strategy 4.a): Steve said that this item was placed on the
agenda to schedule a special workshop meeting to review and discuss the draft Urban Forest Management
Plan. After some discussion, the meeting was scheduled for May 7, 2002, from 3:00 p.m. to
5:00 p.m. (Note: This meeting has since been canceled. The draft plan will be delivered to the Board on May
10` and is scheduled for discussion and possible approval during the regular Board meeting on
May 14, 2002.)
16. Review, discussion, and possible action concerning the Parks and Recreation Department Second
Quarter Maintenance Standard Report (City Council Vision Statement #4, Strategy 2.a).: Curtis Bingham
gave a report to the Board. He said that the overall percent of standards met during the first quarter was 77 %.
He added that during the second quarter, there was a significant increase to 83 %, and said that there were
three significant categories that increased during that quarter. These categories are:
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, April 9, 2002
Page 4 of 5
�a3 ^ `� - '" . , r �,:. r..c.a.�{y�fit.•,H�'..�er;.�" �c..9_Ta r . ._' _ - �. - '�.�,!.; i's� ?�^r,� �..., s,- sf�F,�.;= 1 c.G.c:. .,. .�. - .. -
- The athletic fields. Curtis explained that the fields were not being used for league play during the first
quarter, so the fields were in good shape at the time of the evaluation.
The playgrounds. To increase the standards, the Department revamped some of the wooden decks and
benches at the playground units. Also, the playground unit was replaced in the West District at
Gabbard Park.
The volleyball courts. To increase the standards, the Department did some sand work and replaced
some netting. The volleyball court at Raintree Park was completely redone. Curtis added that the
Department only has a few volleyball courts, so the increase /decrease in standards would make a big
difference.
Curtis said that there are certain factors, such as weather, that could skew the report. He added that there
are some areas of the methodology that have been addressed that need to be modified to make the standards
more measurable without skewing them.
After some discussion, Glen D. made a motion to approve the second quarter maintenance standard report.
Jon seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
17. Discussion of next meeting dates and agendas.: The following were requested as possible agenda items:
- Possible approval of the Parks and Recreation Department's 2002 User Fees; and
- Discussion and possible action concerning the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board's Fiscal Year
2003 budget priorities.
Don suggested that the Board tour some of the parks and related facilities. Steve said that he would come
up with a program and a date for the tour.
18. Adjourn: The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
4
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, April 9, 1001
Page 5 of 5