HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_PAREB_06.26.2008Minutes of the Meeting of
the Parks and Recreation Board
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, June 26, 2008
The Parks and Recreation Board of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday , June 26, 2008.
Members Present:
Bill Mateja, Kent Buikema , Robert Laemel, Shane Morris
Members Absent:
Barbara Owens, Bob Mathis, Mallory Bird
Staff Present:
Randy Morrow, Kimberly Garrett, Jill Kellum
Minutes
Regular Meeting
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Kent Buikema at 6:00 pm.
2. Roll Call
3. Consideration and possible action on recommendations regarding the Parks
Master Plan Priorities for the November 2008 bond election
Buikema asked how the rankings were arrived, who did the rankings and what
information was available to them in order to make those rankings. Jim Carrillo with
Halff Associates gave a background of the development needs assessment for the
parks systems. He explained that there are 3 methodologies that are used. The first
is a numerical assessment which is; there is a certain level of service; what you have
today and as your population grows do you need to keep it at that level, adjust it
upward or adjust it downward. The second is demand based. Demand is triggered
by a few things; how many players you have in sports, pool activity, but also by
what the citizens are saying. That is where the information from the surveys are
used to assess what the demand is. He stated there is a huge demand for open space
and trails. People like smaller parks where they live and citizens really like San
Gabriel and want to make sure it stays a treasure for everyone. The survey process
included 30 + stakeholder groups including the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board, groups involved with the downtown, Economic Development, staff members
from various levels within the city and many other organization including students
in the 4 , 7 and 10 grades. He stated one thing that came out of the student input
was the interest in spray grounds. The third methodology is resource based. The
resource such as the river or lake; you have a resource that people don't know about
but it is valuable enough to where you need to identify it and you need to do
something with this and work something around this. Georgetown's primary
resources are the two branches of the river, other green belts throughout the city and
the lake itself. He added that the downtown was a resource and is an opportunity as
it is very unique that people appreciate and like. Those 3 methodologies are used to
come up with the ranking of different projects. There is one priority that comes out
and it is balanced by those methodologies but is a hold over from the previous plan;
this is the northwest part of the city. It is still underserved by the need of larger
parks, so there needs to be a push to try to acquire something in that area. This is
one of the key initial actions that is a hold over from the previous plan which has not
been accomplished but really needs to be looked at and really needs the funding to
back it up to make it happen. That is the fundamental issue there that it is going to
take a significant investment to acquire that piece of land and begin to preserve it as
a park. That is the basis for developing the needs assessment and beginning to
identify the priorities that come out of it. Carrillo stated they try to layer this in a
way that is geographically well distributed throughout the city so there is balance
between things that benefit everyone in the city as well as people in different parts of
the city. For example, as the land expenditure may be predominantly in the
northwest part of the city over time then it shifts to the south east part of the city
where there will be additional needs for parkland as the population grows
significantly in that area. Smaller parks are taken care of a by development and
development codes but with the older parks to make sure there is adequate funding
to maintain those other parks.
Morrow stated they will go for a bond in November and you have 20 years to spend
the bond. Carrillo stated that if these bonds or a package of bond projects is
approved by the voters it will take a certain amount of time to make those actions
happen. Usually for this level of development it will take 5 —10 years to complete.
Jim Carrillo with Halff Associates added that the significant portion of the 52 million
is to fully fund the Garey Park. There is a time constriction that once the land is
obtained from the Garey's it must be developed in a certain number of years. The
expectation from the Garey's is to fully develop the park within a fairly short period
of time. Morrow stated that there is an actual agreement with the Garey's that when
they die the park has to be finished 3 years from the date they die or they keep all
their property, the house and the money. Garrett explained the bond process and
how the time line factors in. Jim Carrillo explained that if the 20 million is approved
by council, it essentially becomes a place holder and something that allows staff to
then issue those bonds when they are needed.
Morrow explained how staff came up with the recommended priorities:
1). Secure funding for development of Garey Park — the commitment of
council and the 3 year timeline and plus staff sat down with the Garey's
and the Garey's were going to give 5 million cash to the project also. Staff
talked to the Garey's about putting their money in the maintenance side
and then go for the bond to build the project. The Garey's agreed to put
the 5 million in a trust and that money keeps building and then every year
it will put out $500,000 out for the maintenance of that park and then as
the 5 million keeps growing it goes to the $700,000 for the park and so on.
The Garey's were concerned about the financial burden it was going to
put on the city to maintain and this way the Garey's money will actually
pay for the maintenance and the bond will pay for the whole park. The
Garey's agreed to this. Prior council had committed to funding the park
to get it built with in the 3 years. The only stipulation was that the park
would be named Garey Park and the house would be called Garey House
and that it was always a park and that it could never be sub -divided or
sold.
2). Remove football stadium to develop unique festival, performance,
Sf
music, and farmer's market venue / and begin 1 phase renovation and
enhancements of San Gabriel Park — There was a large interest in the
community to do an amphitheater in the park. After Halff Associates
spoke to the stakeholder groups they identified that the Farmer's Market
needed a place, the Wine and Food Festival, and other events that could
use this facility. Garrett explained that this is the entrance to San Gabriel
Park and how can it be beautified.
3). Develop new trails throughout the city — Morrow stated that on the
surveys it is always high on the priorities list. Morrow explained the plan
is to go south on the trail by Wolf Ranch mall and out toward the future
Garey Park and also the Southwestern University connection. Mateja
stated he has talked to 100 Sun City residents and there is less than 5%
support, for connectivity of trails to the trail system to Georgetown, Lake
Georgetown and eventually Round Rock from Sun City. He states he is
concerned that if the information is the master plan there will be a
negative response out of Sun City. Morrow and Garrett stated that the
bicycle club at Sun City brought up the idea of trail connectivity. Morrow
asked if Mateja wanted that part taken out. Mateja stated he wanted that
taken out of the master plan. Buikema asked how far in the future this
would be addressed. Jim Carrillo reiterated what Morrow and Garrett
had stated previously that the initial emphasis is on the south San Gabriel,
but there is one area on the northwest side of the city that is close to the
lake and there are no easy connections currently. Jim Carrillo stated in the
council packet there were 2 options shown on the map. One was
connecting from Sun City and using greenbelt corridors and getting close
to the lake and the lake trail system, but it was basically connecting from
Williams Drive and never intend to go into Sun City just connect from
there. Garrett stated it was a safe option to go over Williams Drive from
Sun City. The second option was for all the neighborhoods on the other
side of Williams Drive connecting and developing a route that connects to
the lake. Mateja asked if Jim Carrillo and Morrow would be available to
speak to the Sun City Board. Laemel asked questions of how the bond
election work and voter turn out. Morrow and Garrett explained that staff
and members of the board can not sell the bond. They can not tell citizens
to vote for the bond they can only give facts about the bond. The Sun City
Board asked if Jim Carrillo would attend Sun City's workshop meeting to
th
give information on July 10 at 1 pm at Sun City. Garrett stated that on
th
July 7 Finance gets Council approval to go for a bond to prepare the
necessary paperwork.
4). Preserve key open space areas — not addressed
5). Identify and acquire land for major community park and sports
complex west of IH 35 — Laemel asked if there was a major need to
acquire land for another community park west of IH 35. Morrow stated
they looked at that in the past years. Council has put $375,000 in the
budget for this park, but Morrow explained that you could not get 50
acres of land for that price. Laemal asked if there was property available
and could it be purchased for the proposed amount. Morrow stated there
is property out there, but do not know if it can be purchased for that
amount.
6). Convert two pools to spray grounds — not addressed
th
Mateja asked if when Finance presents information to the City Council on July 7
will they forecast the tax projections. Morrow and Garrett stated they do give that
information and present the worst case scenario. Morrow added that with the
growing area like Georgetown it usually is not as much as predicted, but they have
to give the worst case scenario.
Buikema entertained a motion that the advisory board supports the staff's
recommendation as seen on the Summary of Recommended Priorities page. It was
moved by Mateja and seconded by Laemel that the advisory board support the staff'
s recommendation as they go to council for input to the council for a bond issue.
Motion carries unanimously.
4. Adjourn
Laemel made a motion to adjourn the meeting.
Approve/ Attest:
//L1 L
Kent Buikema, Chair Parks and Recreation Board
Barbara Owens, Secretary Parks & Recreation