HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution - 2001-R0360 - Master Plan Approval For The Lake Alan Henry Public Access Area - 09_13_2001Resolution No. 2001-RO360
September 13, 2001
Item No. 46
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT the Mayor of the City of Lubbock BE and is hereby authorized and
directed to adopt and approve for and on behalf of the City of Lubbock a Master Plan
for the phased development of recreational improvements for the Lake Alan Henry
public access area, known as the "Sam Wahl Recreation Area", and any other related
documents. Said Master Plan is attached hereto and incorporated in this Resolution as
if fully set forth herein and shall be included in the minutes of the Council.
Passed by the City Council this 13th day of September 2001.
ATTEST:
ck�--/Z -A&- . #I ^ >�
Reb cca Garza, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
Terry Ellerbrook
Managing Director Water Utilities
APPROVED AS TO RM:
t
Richard K. Casner
Natural Resources Attorney
RKC:cp Ccdocs & L:\Cityatt\Richard/LAH-MasterPlan.Res
August 20, 2001
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN
LAKE ALAN HENRY ■ POST, TEXAS
n
Schrickel, Rollins and Associates
Consultants In Landscape Architecture • Tngineering 0 Planning
CITY OF LUBBOCK
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN
LAKE ALAN HENRY ■ POST, TEXAS
WATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
P.O. Box 2000
LUBBOCK, TEXAS 79457
AUGUST 2001
Prepared by
SCHRICKEL, ROLLINS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1161 Corporate Drive West, Suite 200 Arlington, Texas 76006 817.649.3216
uitb
WILLIAM L. HARALSON & ASSOCIATES, INC.
205 Mesa Drive Richardson, TX 75080 972.231.7444
rA
RAYMOND TURCO AND ASSOCIATES
1700 Baird Farm Circle, Suite 1213 Arlington, TX 76006 817.695.1158
e++
' GREENSPACE MANAGEMENT, INC.
Arlington, TX 76006 817.478.2015
4115
Acknowledgments
Lubbock City Council
Windy Sitton, Mayor
Victor Hernandez, District 1
T. J. Patterson, District 2
J. David Nelson, District 3
Frank Morrison, District 4
Marc McDougal, District 5
Alex "Ty" Cooke, District 6
City Manager
Bob Cass
Water Utility Staff
Terry Ellerbrook, Director
Diane Locknane, Lake Alan Henry Project Coordinator
Ches Carthel, Chief Engineer
Consultants
Schrickel, Rollins and Associates
Victor W. Baxter, Project Manager
Suzanne C. Sweek, Document Manager
Hershel Lindly, Planner
Leo Sims, Planner
Jason Hodges, Project Designer
Chris Schnitger, P.E., Project Engineer
Martha Hurley, Marketing Manager
William L. Haralson & Associates, Inc.
William L. Haralson, Economist
Raymond Turco and Associates
Ray Turco, Public Opinion Consultant
Greenspace Management, Inc.
Melody Mitchell, Maintenance & Operations Analyst
n
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
National Recreation & Parks Association
National Conference of State Parks
Chad Davis, Turner LandArchitecture, Amarillo
07 Contributed photographs
r
r•+
F �
f ;e
AI
4 .
a 5
&•.a
b. A
Table of Contents
Resolution of Plan Adoption
Acknowledgments
1. Introduction
■ Purpose
■ Project Site and Location
■ Study Area
■ Goals and Objectives
■ Planning Process
2. The Project Site
■ The Natural Environment
- Geology and Soils
- Climate
- Topography
- Flora and Fauna
■ The Cultural Environment
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
+
- Historical Land Uses/Archaeology
2.3
- Easement
2.4
- Existing Development
2.4
3. Service Area Profile
■ Description
3.1
■ Demographics
■ Inventory of Existing Recreational Facilities
at Lakefront Parks
4. Public Opinion Survey (Summary)
4.1
Raymond Turco and Associates
5. Standards and Concepts
■ Area Planning
5.1
■ Facility Standards
6. Needs Assessment
■ Discussion of Methodology 6.1
- Carrying Capacity
- Demand
- Market Support
■ Consolidated Needs Assessment
7. Recommendations & Implementation
■ Site Infrastructure 7.1
■ 5-year Plan Priorities
■ Initial Phasing
■ Discussion of Funding Options
- Texas Parks & Wildlife Programs
- Revenue
- Capital Improvement Funds
- Design/Build/Operate
Appendix
A. Recommended Development Program
B. Facility Operation and Maintenance Recommendations
C. Public Opinion Survey Questionnaire
D. Examples of Campsite Layout
Bibliography
Illustrations
Figure 1
Study Area and Location Map
1.2
Plate 1
Aerial Photograph
2.5
Plate 2
Site Topography
2.6
Plate 3
Topographic Slopes
2.7
Plate 4
Soil Erodability
2.8
Plate 5
Sub -water Sheds
2.9
Plate 6
Cultural Resources
2.10
Plate 7
Development Suitability
2.11
Plate 8
Conceptual Plan
7.8
Figure D-1
Back -in Daisy Campground
D2
Figure D-2
Pull -off Camp Sites
D3
Figure D-3(a)
Linear Camp Layout
D4
Figure D-3(b)
Linear Camp Site Layouts
D5
Figure D-4
Pull -through Trailer Campground
D6
Figure D-5
20-Degree Angle Campground
D7
Figure D-6
Trailer Unit
D8
IV
a"
No Text
7-1
Figure D-7
Minimum Facility Campground Layout D9
Figure D-8(a)
Pinwheel Campground Layout D10
Figure D-8(b)
Penta Pinwheel Campground D11
Figure D-8(c)
Condominium Campground D12
v
1. Introduction
!7 Purpose
The purpose of this plan is to provide a long-range vision for the development of the
City of Lubbock's Samuel W. Wahl (Sam Wahl) Recreational Area at Lake Alan
Henry. The recreational area will be operated by Lubbock Water Utilities but is
envisioned to be a component of the City's park and recreational system, which is
otherwise operated by the Department of Community Services.
The plan is based on recognized park planning
principles and guidelines and reflects input from
citizens, City staff, and the City Council. This
document was developed as an addendum to the
1998 Comprehensive Parks. Recreation and Oven
Snace Master Plan for the Citv of Lubbock. This
plan is intended to be valid for a five-year period,
with annual reassessments recommended.
Project Site and Location
The Sam Wahl Recreational Area is in southeast Garza County, about 65 miles
southeast of Lubbock. This recreational area is located on the north shore of Lake
Alan Henry, an impoundment of the Double Mountain Fork of the Brazos River.
This lake is a municipal surface water supply for the City of Lubbock, and it is
operated in cooperation with the Brazos River Authority. It is adjacent to a 3,600-
acre wildlife habitat area and the John Montford Dam, both of which are open to the
public. The area is easily accessible, just six miles east of Texas Highway 84 on paved
Farm to Market Roads.
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL, AREA I ASTER PLAN ■ DRArr 8/01 � • �
ft
am
INTRODUCTION
Study Area
The land area included in this study is unique to city park systems but typical for
state parks. The service area covers 28 counties of the Texas South Plains. The
1995 Texas Outdoor Recreational Plan for Texas (TORP) indicates that recreational
water is scare or inaccessible in this region of Texas. What few lakes are available are
often crowded, facilities are limited, and water levels are frequently low. In order to
provide additional recreational opportunities in this area, the City of Lubbock
purchased 580 acres of land at Lake Alan Henry and near the center of the study
area.
Im"Ic
!V0.
ri. '���
lM��".
� l■��i
Ira
I�.
WE
,L
_�tl► T
LTt,
<Si��vYi
���'
96
_ILI
�,
Figure 1. Study Area and Location Map
be Sea.
9
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLANT ■ DR u-f 8/01 1.2
i
INTRODUCTION
Planning Summary
1998 Comprehensive Parks, Recreation and Recreation Master Plan.
This plan serves as the basis for the future development and fiscal planning for the
City of Lubbock park system for a five to ten year period. The plan provides specific
recommendations for the four park planning service areas or zones of Lubbock.
Additionally, the City of Lubbock recently annexed ten square miles of land adjacent
to the southwest quadrant of the city. A park master plan for this newly annexed
area was being prepared at the time of this writing. As previously mentioned, the
Samuel W. Wahl Recreational Area Master Plan
document will become an addendum to the City's
existing park and recreation plan.
Public Opinion Survey
Raymond Turco and Associates, Arlington, Texas
conducted a telephone survey of a random sample of
Lubbock residents regarding the use and
development of facilities at Lake Alan Henry. By a
ratio of eight to one, respondents supported the
construction of municipal recreational facilities at the lake. A detailed summary of
the survey results is in Section 4 and a copy of the survey instrument is included in
the Appendix.
E = Feasibility Study (Recommended Development Program
Bill Haralson & Associates, Richardson, Texas surveyed and inventoried lakefront
..,� recreational sites throughout the twenty-eight county region and made projections as
to users and revenue that are likely to be generated by a selected group of facilities at
Sam Wahl Recreational Area. The entire Haralson report is included in Appendix A.
Maintenance & Operations Study
Greenspace Management, Inc., Arlington, Texas performed a Facility Operation and
Maintenance Recommendations study for the Sam Wahl Recreation Area. This
study indicated an annual cost for facility operations at $224,366. Capital/Startup
cost for equipment required to maintain the first year, Phase 1 developments were
estimated at $141,200. This study is included in Appendix B.
Fe SAIvIUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN ■ DRAFT 8/01 1.3
I
r
Goals & Objectives
GOAL ONE. Protect and enhance the natural and cultural environment of the
Samuel W. Wahl Recreational Area for the benefit of the citizens of Lubbock and
enjoyment of park users.
Objectives
• Develop a master plan that respects the land's ability to support the facilities
proposed and the users that will be generated, in keeping with the financial
resources of the Water Utility and projected revenue for the site.
• Minimize impacts on the natural topography, geology, flora, fauna, areas of
archeological significance, and the lake's water quality.
• Provide public access to and interpretation of the site's natural assets.
GOAL TWO. Construct a system of site suitable facilities at the park that meets the
overnight and day use recreational needs of park users.
Objectives
• Construct facilities desired by Lubbock's citizens, as evidenced by the survey of
public opinion and supported by the feasibility study.
• Develop a phased schedule of infrastructure and recreational facility
development.
• Ensure the development of facilities sensitive to the
needs of the physical and mentally challenged park
users.
• Construct facilities that meet the requirements of
ADA and published standards and recommendations
for recreational improvements.
• Design facilities for sustainability and low
maintenance.
GOAL THREE. Maintain the site and manage the land so as to preserve the
natural environment and the constructed facilities.
Objectives
• Provide on -site maintenance equipment and staff.
• Plan for a superintendent who will reside at the park.
• Provide law enforcement officers to manage public safety at the park.
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN ■ DRAFT8/01
INTRODUCTION
1.4
rJ
INTRODUCTION
• Plan and continue to implement a public safety program.
• Control access to the park to insure consistency in control of users and fee
collection.
4
µ GOAL FOUR. Promote public participation in developing park improvements and
programming responsive to user desires and needs.
Objectives
• Conduct an annual assessment of the participation or use of the park's facilities.
• Continuously monitor public needs and requests.
.� • Establish an annual public review process of the park programming and
mventory.
The Planning Process
The project team consisted of staff members from Schrickel,
Rollins and Associates of Arlington, the prime consultant; William
L. Haralson & Associates, of Richardson; Ray Turco and
Associates of Arlington, and Greenspace Management, Inc.,
Arlington. Diane Locknane, lake manager for Lubbock Water
Utilities, represented the City.
The planning process for this project began in the spring of 2000
with a kickoff meeting in Lubbock with project team members.
Lubbock Water Utilities determined the 28-county study area and
the public opinion survey instrument was drafted. Interviews of
407 Lubbock residents were completed during the first two weeks
of May. Draft findings of the survey were published in August
2000. The William L. Haralson survey of lakefront recreational
facilities in and near the study area was also conducted during the
spring and early summer of 2000. The draft of this study was completed in July
2000.
The Schrickel Rollins team (landscape architects and a civil engineer) spent two days
at the Sam Wahl Recreational Area in August 2000, performing site inventory and
analysis — on land and water. Mapping of the site's resources and analysis of
developable areas followed. From that data the conceptual plan evolved and was
�*+ SAmuL.'I, W. Wail. REcitFnTIONAL AREA INIAST'F;R PLAN ■ DRAFT 8/01 1.5
ii
04
P"
INTRODUCTION
presented to the staff in the fall of 2000. The Maintenance and Operations study was
completed in the spring of 2001.
A public meeting in May of 2001 gave citizens the opportunity to express their ideas
for the lake. Items mentioned included a "retreat" lodge for meetings, picnicking
areas, overnight camping, *interpretive trails, docks for primitive camp access, beach
access and dedicated water-ski areas.
Phasing options for facility development were studied and budget estimates
developed. Various methodologies for waste water disposal were studied, and
options for fresh water supply were considered. A five-year development plan was
compiled. At the end of this period, the recreational area would be about forty
percent developed, based on the maximum build out envisioned by the plan.
The plan was presented to the Lubbock City Council August 30, 2001 and
adopted
SAMUEL W. WAiiL RECREATIONAL_AREA MA91E R PLAN E DRAFT 8/01
1.6
2. The Project Site
In 1983 the City of Lubbock purchased 580 acres of land to provide a recreational
area at their new reservoir, Lake Alan Henry, which is named for a former mayor.
The site is on the north shore of the lake and about two miles west of the dam.
The narrow lake stretches eleven miles up the Double Mountain Fork of the Brazos
River, creating fifty-six miles of shoreline. When the lake is completely full,
(conservation pool elevation 2220, mean sea level) it will encompass about 2,880
acres and hold 40 billion gallons of water. This is the fourth and newest of the
Brazos River Authority Lakes. The average water depth will be forty feet and as
much as 100 feet deep at the dam. The flood pool zone is between elevation 2220
and 2245.
Construction began on the John Montford dam in 1991 and was completed in 1993.
(It is named for the Texas state senator who secured statewide support for its
construction.) The dam is in Garza and Kent counties, but most of the lake is in
Garza County, about 65 miles from Lubbock. The nearest town is Post, the Garza
county seat. The adjacent 3,600-acre Lake Alan Henry Wildlife Habitat Area was
established to mitigate the habitat lost by creation of the lake. Although it has no
improvements, it provides opportunity for hiking, picnicking, bird watching, and
enjoyment of nature. It is also operated by the City of Lubbock Water Utility and is
open to the public by prior arrangement with the lake manager.
ew SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN ■ MASTER PLAN DRAFT 8/01 2.1
ii
THE PROJECT SITE
In 1993 and 1994, Texas Parks and Wildlife stocked the lake with over one million
fingerlings of bass, crappie, shad, sunfish, and catfish. The lake is a popular
destination of fisherman and tournaments are held regularly. The largest fish caught
"4 at the lake is reported to have been a 25-inch, 12.41-pound Largemouth Bass.
The Samuel W. Wahl Recreational Area opened to the public in 1994, and the
number of park visitors grows annually, even with its limited facilities. The park's
namesake is the former City of Lubbock Water Utilities director who laid the
groundwork and planning to implement the lake project.
Lake Alan Henry's principal purpose is to supply water for the City of Lubbock. If
needed, the lake can be fully drained or "scalped" to meet its critical mission. This,
of course, would severely impact the recreational opportunities of the park. Over
time, such instances are likely to be infrequent, but Sam Wahl Recreational Area
visitors and staff must be prepared for fluctuating water levels. Current lake levels
in 4 and other conditions at the site are reported on the Internet.'
The Natural Environment
Geology and Soils
The Sam Wahl Recreational Area is located in the Escarpment Breaks ecological
subregion (as described by Texas Parks and Wildlife) just east of the southern end of
the Great Plains, whose tall -grass and short -grass prairies once covered much of the
central United States. Soils in the area are believed to have developed during the
Triassic and Permian periods when most of Texas was inundated by a shallow inland
sea. Erosion has further sculpted the land. The sedimentary deposits are thin and
rocky and their red color at the park site contributes substantially to the visual quality
of the landscape? Outcrops of sandstone, shale, and limestone are significant
physical features within the park and contribute to the ruggedness of the site.
'www.ci.lubbock. tx.us/lakealanhenry. html
'Hodges
sr+ SAMUEL W. WAI-IL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN ■ tifASTER PLAN D1L1F"1 8/01 2.2
on
THE PROJECT SITE
.■ Climate
'Garza county receives about 21 inches of rainfall annually. The growing season
averages 216 days. January's mean temperature is 27, and July's is 94. Summer
daytime temperatures are generally hot, and winters are mild except when arctic cold
fronts push into the region.'
Topography
Maximum elevation is 2347.6 near the west side of
the site. As shown on the accompanying
Topographic Slopes Map, over half of the site has
moderate to severe slopes, which will limit
development. The lake collects water from a 400-
square-mile watershed, and gullies within the
recreational area carry seasonal runoff into the lake.
Depressions or playas are seasonally inundated.
Flora and Fauna
Texas' vegetational areas describe zones of unique soils, climate, and other factors
that support plant communities distinct from other regions of the state. The Sam
Wahl Recreational Area is at the western edge of the Rolling Plains Vegetational
Area, just below the Caprock Escarpment. Vegetation is typical for the area with
Cedar and Mesquite trees dominating the landscape. Other trees include
Cottonwood, Western Soapberry, and Mountain Mahogany. Plants of this short -
grass prairie area include Buffalo Grass, Big Blue Stem Grass, Little Blue Stem Grass,
Side Oats Gramma, Cholla, Prickley Pear, Yucca, Sage.4
,.„ Mammals and reptiles include the Jack Rabbit, Cotton Tail Rabbit, Antelope, Fox,
Prairie Dog, Squirrel, Badger, Mule Deer, Pinyon Mouse, Western Diamondback
Rattlesnake, and the Plains Hognose Snake. Birds include Owl, Tern, Snowy Plover,
and Hawk. Fish species in the lake include bass, crappie, shad, sunfish and catfish.
res
Threatened and endangered species in Garza County, as reported by the State of
Texas, include:
'2000-2001 Texas Almanac
'Wasowski
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN 0 VASTER PLAN DRAFT 8/01 2.3
. w
i Y
• di
� ' �"k� -
vY Y �« iiv.^ w'rvk
N
TI-IE PROJECT SITE
• American Pereguine Falcon Endangered
• Arctic Pereguine Falcon
Threatened
• Bald Eagle
Threatened
• Whooping Crane
Endangered
• Black -footed Ferret
Endangered
• Texas Horned Lizard
Threatened
The bird species are all migrants and the ferret is a "potential inhabitant" of any area
with prairie dog towns. The lizard occurs in environments such as found adjacent to
Lake Alan Henry.5
The Cultural Environment
Historical Land Uses/Archaeol=
The U. S. Army secured the Garza County area from the Kiowas and Comanches
about 1875. Ranching began in 1870 and farming soon followed. Evidence of these
activities abounds at the recreational area — from fences and old farm roads to
archaeological deposits. Mineral extraction is both a historical and a contemporary
activity.
A study conducted between 1987 and 1993 documented 425 archaeological sites in
the lake area. These sites show evidence of Native American activity such as flint
flakes, stone tools, burned rocks, and bone or shell fragments, hearths, bedrock
mortars. Management of these sites is closely regulated by State code, and precise site
locations are kept confidential. Archaeological sites are classified as follows by the
State of Texas:
• High Significance State Archaeological Landmark (SAL)
• Medium Significance Site meets SAL criteria but is not designated
as such
• Low Significance Recorded archeological site
The Cultural Resources Map indicates the general distribution of archaeological sites
'texas Parks and Wildlife
SAMUEL W. WAxL RriCREATIONAL AREA N1ASTER PLAN • MASTER PLAN DRAEr 8/01
2.3
0
TFIE PROJECT SITE
at the Sam Wahl Recreational Area.6
Easement
Most of Lake Allan Henry is surrounded by private property. However, the City's
easement, which limits development above elevation 2245 mean sea level, within 300
linear feet of elevation 2220, gives it some measure of control on how this land can
be used. The stated goal is for single family housing (built on site) to develop in as
unobtrusive a way as possible. Most developers are likely to want access to the lake
for domestic water supply and recreational activities, and the City of Lubbock will be
able to stipulate the conditions under which that access is given.
Existing Develol2ment
Initial development at the recreational area includes a permit office at the main gate,
a paved access road, a paved parking area with 167 spaces, a 5-lane concrete boat
ramp, a boat dock with a 40-boat and 15-jet ski capacity, and a 60-foot by 60-foot
fishing pier. Security lights are also provided.
Electrical service is available, but there is no potable water or sewer service at the
site. Unofficial campsites have appeared, and the .City of Lubbock has installed
portable toilets and litter receptacles and maintains the facilities.
'Prewitt and Associates, Inc.
SA,%IUEI, W. WAHI. RF_CRCATIONAL ARBA UksTER PLAN • MASTER PLAN DRAFT 8/01 2.6
I Service Area Profile
P" Twenty-eight counties of the South Plains, straddling the Caprock Escarpment,
comprise the service area for the Sam Wahl Recreational Area. The limits of the
service area were set by the City of Lubbock Water Utilities Department based on
availability of similar recreational resources within this area and distance from Lake
Alan Henry. (Refer to Page 1.4 for a map of the service area.)
Lamb, Foard, Martin, and Taylor Counties form the corners of this nearly square
€ .
service area, which comprises about 28,000 square miles. The area is characterized by
the semi -arid plains and Caprock environment described in Section 2. Population
densities are very low, except in the few cities.
The economy is supported by ranching, mineral extraction and related enterprises,
manufacturing, and agricultural activities.' The major towns and cities of the service
area are Lubbock, Abilene and Big Spring. US Highways 84 and 380 and State
Highway 207 all converge at Post, which is six miles west of Lake Alan Henry.
f-
Other major routes in the service area include IH 27/US 87 and IH 20 add to the
network that provides vehicle access to the recreational area.
Texas Parks & Wildlife noted the scarcity and inaccessibility of "recreational' water
in the South Plains region in its outdoor recreational plan.2 What lakefront
recreational facilities there are in the area (other than Lake Alan Henry) can be found
at White River Lake (Crosby County), Lake Stamford (Haskill County), Lake
n Thomas (Borden and Scurry Counties), Lake Colorado City (Mitchell County), Lake
Sweetwater (Nolan County), Lake Abilene and Lake Kirby (Taylor County), and
Lake Fort Phantom Hill Qones County). Further information on the facilities at these
lakes can be found in Table 3.4 in this section.
12000-2001 Texas Almanac
ZDeloney et. al.
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA N ASTER PLAN n DRAFT 8/01
3.1
SERVICE AREA PROFILE
The service area population was estimated at 624,281 in 2000, an increase of 4.5
percent from 1990. The largest population increase occurred in Lubbock County
where the population increased by 19,992.3 The estimated 2001 population of the
service area is 626,974. In five years the population is estimated to be 632,356.
Nearly half (47.5 percent) of the service area population resides within the nine
county area surrounding Lake Alan Henry. The following tables outline the
demographic characteristics of the service zone.
'U.S. Census Bureau Census 2000
SAMUEL W. WAM, Ris'CREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN • DRAF r 8/01 3.2
Table 3.1
28 County Service Zone
Estimated Population Changes
County
1990
2000
Census
Percent
Change
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Avg. Yrly.
Change
Borden
799
729
-8.8
722
715
708
701
694
687
-7
Cottle
2,247
1,904
-15.3
1870
1835
1801
1767
1,733
1,733
-34
Crosby
7,304
7,072
-3.2
7049
7026
7002
6979
6,956
6,933
-23
Dawson
14,349
14,985
4.4
15049
15112
15176
15239
15,303
15,367
64
Dickens
2,571
2,762
7.4
2,781
2781
2781
2781
2,781
2,800
19
Fisher
4,842
4,344
-10.3
4,294
4,244
4,195
4,145
4,244
4,195
-50
Floyd
8,497
7,771
-8.5
7,698
7,626
7,553
7,481
7,626
7,553
-73
Foard
1,794
1,622
-9.6
1,605
1,598
1,570
1,553
1,588
1,570
-17
Garza
5,143
4,872
-5.3
4,845
4818
4791
4764
4,818
4,791
-27
Hale
34,671
36,602
5.6
36,795
36,988
37,181
37,374
36,988
37,181
193
Haskell
6,820
6,093
-10.7
6,020
5,948
5,875
5,802
5,948
5,875
-73
Hockley
24,199
22,716
-6.1
22,568
22,419
22,271
22,123
22,419
22,271
-148
Howard
32,343
33,627
4.0
33,755
33884
34012
34141
33,884
34,012
128
Jones
16,490
20,785
26.0
21,214
21,644
22,074
22,503
21,644
22,074
430
Kent
1,010
859
-15.0
844
829
814
799
829
814
-15
King
354
356
0.6
356
356
357
357
356
357
0
Knox
4,837
4,253
-12.1
4,195
4136
4078
4019
4,136
4,078
-58
Lamb
15,072
14,709
-2.4
14,673
14,636
14,600
14,564
14,636
14,600
-36
Lubbock
222,636
242,629
9.0
244,627
246,626
248,626
250,625
246,626
248,626
1999
Lynn
6,758
6,550
-3.1
6,529
6,508
6,488
6,467
6,508
6,488
-21
Martin
4,956
4,746
-4.2
4,725
4704
4683
4662
4,704
4,683
-21
Mitchell
8,016
9,698
21.0
9,866
10,034
10,203
10,371
10,034
10,203
168
Motley
1,532
1,426
-6.9
1,415 1
1,405
1,394
1,384
1,405
1,394
-11
Nolan
16,594
15,802
-4.8
15,723
15,644
15,564
15,485
15,644
15,564
-79
Scurry
18,634
16,361
-12.2
16,134
15906
15679
15452
15,906
15,679
-227
Stonewall
2,013
1,693
-15.9
1,661
1,629
1,597
1,565
1,629
1,597
-32
Taylor
119,655
126,555
5.8
127,245
127,935
128,625
129,315
127,935
128,625
690
Terry
13,218
12,761
-3.5
12,715
12,670
12,624
12,578
12,670
12,624
-46
Totals i
597,354
624,281
4.51
626,974
629,647
632,321 1
634,9951
629,6451
632,372
2,692
U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000
W
i, Tm,, ...� reg x fffP� zqO T'.' f .v _ 8' c... a . _.
+ nu
W
-A
Table 3.2
28 County Service Zone
Demographic Information
County
1990
Census
2000
Census
White
Black
American
Indiana
Asian
Hispanic
Under 18
Median
Income
Borden
799
729
90.5%
0.1%
0.3%
0.0%
11.9%u
24.6%
$36,730
Cottle
2,247
1,904
81.5%
9.9%
0.0%
0.0%u
18.9%
23.9%
$21,187
Crosby
7,304
7,072
63.8%
3.91/0
0.5%
0.0%
48.9%
30.7%
$23,177
Dawson
14,349
14,985
72.5%
8.7%
0.3%
2.0%
48.2%
25.6%
$25,738
Dickens
2,571
2,762
77.6%
8.2%
0.4%
0.3%
23.9%
18.5%
$21,408
Fisher
4,842
4,344
83.7%
2.8%
0.4%
0.1%
21.4%
23.9%
$26,288
Floyd
8,497
7,771
74.2%
3.4%
0.8%
0.3%
45.9%
31.4%
$26,587
Foard
1,794
1,622
84.2%
3.3%
0.6%
0.2%
16.3%
25.8%
$23,185
Garza
5,143
4,872
74.8%
4.8%
0 20%
0.1%
37.20l0
28.0%
$26,361
Hale
34,671
36,602
66.8%
5.8%
0.9%
0.3%
47.9%
30.2%
$28,369
Haskell
6,820
6,093
82.8%
2.8%u
0.5%
0.1%
20.5%
23.7%
$23,824
Hockley
24,199
22,716
74.4%
3.7%
0.8%
0.1%
37.2%
29.1%
$31,256
Howard
32,343
33,627
80.1%
4.1%
0.6%
0.6%
37.5%
24.2%
$29,347
)ones
16,490
20,785
78.8%
11.5%
0.5%
0.5%
20.9%
22.5%u
$25,380
Kent
1,010
859
95.5%
0.2%
3.0%
0.0%
9.1%
20.6%
$28,148
King
354
356
94.1%
0.0%
1.1%
0.0%
9.6%
33.7%
$32,386
Knox
4,837
4,253
74.3%
6.9%
1.1%
0.3%
25.1%
27.7%
$23,780
Lamb
15,072
14,709
76.1%
4.3%
0.7%
0.1%
43.5%
29.6%
$26,129
Lubbock
222,636
242,628
74.3%
7.7%
0.6%
1.3%
27.5%
25.7%
$31,961
Lynn
6,758
6,550
75.50/(.
2.8%
1.0%n
0.2%
44.6%
31.2%
$26,361
Martin
4,956
4,746
79.0%
1.6%
0.8%
0.2%
40.6%
33.9%
$29,194
Mitchell
8,016
9,698
74.5%
12.8%
0.4%
0.4%
31.0%
19.8%
$24,925
Motley
1,532
1,426
87.40iu
3.5%
0.6%n
0.2%
12.1%
24.0%
$22,391
Nolan
16,594
15,802
78.5%
4.7%
0.5%
0.3%
28.0%
27.1%
$26,369
Scurry
18,634
16,361
81.3%
6.1%
0.5%
0.2%
27.8%
25.2%
$32,307
Stonewall
2,013
1,693
88.2%
3.0%
0.4%
0.4%
11.8%
22.8%
$26,494
Taylor
119,655
126,555
80.6%
6.7%
0.6%
1.3%
17.6%
26.6%
$31,606
Terry
13,218
12,761
76.0%
5.0%
0.5%
0.2%
44.1%
28.4%
$29,117
Totals
597,354
624,281
79.3%
4.9%
0.7%
0.3%
28.9%
26.4%
$27,143
U.S. Census bureau, Census 2000
SERVICE AREA PROFILE
Table 3.3
Population in 9 Counties Surrounding Lake Alan Henry
County
1990
Census
2000
Census
Change
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Change
Avg.
Annual
Lubbock
222,636
242,628
9
244,627
246,626
248,626
250,625
246,626
248,626
1999
Crosby
7,304
7,072
-3.2
7,049
7,026
7,002
7,002
7,026
7,002
-23
Dickens
2,571
2,762
7.4
2,781
2,800
2,819
2,838
2,800
2,819
19
Lynn
6,758
6,550
-3.1
6,529
6,508
6,488
6,467
6,508
6,488
-21
Garza
5,143
4,872
-5.3
4,845
4,818
4,791
4,764
4,818
4,791
-27
Kent
1,010
859
-15
844
829
814
799
829
814
-15
Dawson
14,349
14,985
4.4
15,049
15,112
15,176
15,176
15,112
15,176
64
Borden
799
729
-8.8
722
715
708
708
715
708
-7
Scurry
18,634
16,361
-12.2
16,134
15,906
15,679
15,452
15,906
15,679
-227
279,2041
296,818
(2.98)
1 298,5791
300,341
302,102
1 303,7971
300,341
302,102
1,761
U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000
�M
Service Area Population: 624,281
9 County Population: 47.55%
r; a
a
�v
t
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN • DRAiT 8/01 3.3
SERVICE AREA PROFILE
Park and Recreational Resources in the Study Area
Land Inventory
The City of Lubbock has 104 parks and special use facilities on 3,285 acres of
parkland within the corporate limits. The City also utilizes 49 sites through joint use
agreements with the surrounding school districts for athletic practice fields and
gymnasiums. Of the total park acreage, 986 acres or thirty percent is undeveloped,
and 393 acres or 12.5 percent is water area.' These water areas are in playa lakes,
which are generally shallow retention areas that hold runoff until it evaporates or
percolates into the subsurface. The addition of the 580-acre Sam Wahl Recreation
area increases the city's parkland acreage by 17.6 percent and has the potential to
provide overnight and day use facilities that are currently unavailable in the City's
park system.
Facilities Inventory
The existing facilities at Lake Alan Henry include a main gate, a paved access road, a
5-lane boat ramp, boat docks, fishing pier, a pav ed parking area with 154
vehicle/boat spaces and 13 standard parking spaces, and security lighting. These
initial improvements are minimal but do provide boating access to the lake and
opportunities for hiking and primitive camping. There is a need to provide amenities
and services to support water based activities of the park users.
A telephone survey of lakes within the study area was conducted by William L.
Haralson and Associates and the responses shown in the following table. In some
cases the respondent did not know the specific number of picnic tables or the
occupancy rate. Available information is contained in Table 3.4
'1998 Comprehensive Parks, Recreation and Open Space blaster Plan for the City of Lubbock.
SA1tiIUEL W. WAHL RECREATION AI., AREA N-LASTER PLAN ■ DRAFT' 8/01 3.6
Table 3.4
Survey of Lakes Within 28 County Study Area
Name
County
Acres
Entry
Fee'
Campground
/RV Sites
Cabins
Picnic
Tables
Gas
Dock
Boat
Ramp
Number
Rental
Rate
Number
Rental
Rate
Lake Abilene
Taylor
640
None
None
None
-
None
No
No
Lake Colorado City
Mitchell
11,619
$3.00
78
$11.00
None
-
None
No
1
Lake Fort Phantom Hill
Jones
4,246
None
6
$11.00
None
-
6
No
No
Lake Kirby
Taylor
Dry
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Lake Stamford
Haskell
60,000
None
80
-
2
$50.00
None
Boats
10
Lake Sweetwater
Mitchell
11,400
$2.00
1RV
-
None
-
30
Yes
1
Lake Thomas
Borden
8,000
None
None
-
None
-
None
No
Unknown
Canyon Lakes System
Lubbock
2,000
None
None
-
None
-
Yes
No
3
White River Lake
Crosby
1,000
$2.00
10
$7.00
None
-
10
No
1
State Parks
Big Spring
Howard
382
Varies
10
$6.00
None
-
Yes
No
No
Abilene
Taylor
529
Varies
Yes
Varies
None
-
Yes
No
No
William L. Haralson & Associates, Inc.
W
v
'Rates in effect as of Summer 2000.
4. Public Opinion Survey
Raymond Turco and Associates conducted a telephone survey of Lubbock residents
regarding "recreation facility needs and attitudes at Lake Alan Henry." The
telephone survey gathered public opinion from 407 randomly selected residents
during the first two weeks of May, 2000. This survey is accurate to within 5 percent
at the 95 percent confidence level. The survey adheres to the statistical standards
.used in the survey industry and all interviews were conducted by professional
interviewers. Please refer to Appendix C for a copy of the questionnaire. The
following are highlights of this survey.
Level of participation in outdoor recreation activities within the past 12
months
73% Visited an area park.
30% Gone fishing at an area lake.
26% Participated in a water related activity (boating, jet ski, etc.)
21% Gone camping at a state campground.
20% Participated in bird -watch activities
23% Had visited Lake Alan Henry
80% Would support construction of municipal recreation facilities at Lake
Alan Henry
A majority of respondents said they were likely to
visit the lake and participate in the following
activities at the lake if they were available
60% Fishing
57% Shopping at a lakeside marina
55% Nature walks
50% Camping
48% Renting a cabin for a vacation
47% Hiking or biking
42% Renting a boat or jet ski
SAMUEL W. %XAHL RFcRF mONAL AREA MASTER PLAN • DR,kF.-r 8/01
4.1
PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY
Of 21 facility types presented for possible construction at Lake Alan Henry
four -fifths of the respondents supported the following:
89% Picnic areas
88% Restroom/shower facilities
85% Developed campsites
85% Shade Pavilion for groups
84% Playgrounds
84% Fishing Piers
81 % A marina
80% A day camp area
80% Swimming beach
Asked to name the most important recreational facility to construct at Lake
Alan Henry, a developed campsite received twice as much mention as the
next closes items, a swimming beach and fishing piers.
Respondents indicated they would most want the following included in a
recreational facility at Lake Alan Henry:
37% Developed campsite
26% Fishing Pier
24% Restroom/shower facilities
21 % Swimming beach
20% Picnic areas
17% Additional boat ramp
17% Playgrounds
16% Nature hiking trails
15% Paved walking/biking trails
Financing methods (if proposed fees are inadequate):
Bond election — 59% in favor, 36% against
Increase water rates — 34% in favor, 65% against
Acceptable visitor fees
78% Under $5
56% $5-$10
23% $10-$15
SAMUEL W. WARL RECREATIONAi. AREA MASTER PLAN w DRAFT S/01 4.2
a
PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY
Respondents indicated high support for the following statements:
93% We must protect the habitat and wildlife in the area.
n 87% It is important to improve recreation in the community, including
Lake Alan Henry.
y 82% The City could develop the lake as a tourist attraction and bring in
y
additional revenues or fees from people who use the facilities.
A copy of the questionnaire used for this survey is included in the Appendix. The
., complete Turco report is available at the Lubbock Water Utilities Department.
`y
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA -TASTER PLAN ■ DRAFT 8/01
4.3
5. Standards and Concepts
Area Planning
Standards for acres of land and quantities of facilities required for a community's or
region's park needs are a common starting point in determining those needs. These
are usually expressed as a ratio of number of a
particular facility to population. For example,
one picnic table might be required for every 500
population in the service area. This
methodology relies on: (1) existing and future
population projections; (2) an accurate inventory
of existing recreational facilities, and;
(3) additional recreational facilities desired.
Within a relatively small service area, such as
most cities, this method of expressing
development standards works well.
Such standards for park and recreational facilities are detailed in such recognized
publications as the 1995 Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan (TORP) Capacity Analysis
L-
and the NRPA Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Standards. The
standards developed in the 1998 Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space
master Plan for the City of Lubbock (to which this document is appended) are not
appropriate for the recreational area because they were developed for an urban park
system. Rather this facility will more closely resemble the traditional state park with
i, its mix of overnight and day use facilities.
e■,
The service area for this study includes 28 counties, and an accurate land and
recreational facility inventory information is not readily available. A survey of
regional lakeside parks within and near the study area indicates that none are
—a developed to the extent anticipated for the Samuel W. Wahl Recreation Area.
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL. AREA IIN ASTER PLAN ■ DRArT 8/01 5.1
P
STANDARDS AND CONCEPTS
The site itself seemed to dictate a different approach. A known amount of land was
available, and that land was steep, rugged and pockmarked with archeological areas
of high significance. Consideration of the land's carrying capacity was deemed to be
of highest significance in considering "needs." This and other "needs" factors are
discussed in Section 6.
Facility Standards
Just as there are few standards for quantities of land and facilities for parks such as
the Sam Wahl Recreational Area,
little is available on spatial and
construction criteria for campsites,
boat docks, swimming beaches, etc.
The following discussion of
concepts and standards for these
types of recreation facilities is
excerpted from two authoritative
sources: Anatom3of a Park by
Albert J. Rutledge and Time -Saver Standards for Landscape Architecture: Design
and Construction Data by Charles W. Harris and Nicholas T. Dines. The reader is
reminded that any stated standard for a recreational facility should be used as a
guideline given the many variances of site and other local conditions.
The 1991 Americans with Disabilities Act impacts construction of recreational
facilities significantly, particularly with respect to "accessible routes." That is, the
route to each facility (or in cases of multiple identical facilities at least one) must be
accessible. This presents challenges for water -based activities at Lake Alan Henry
where the water level can vary significantly. ADA requirements will generally
supersede standards (such as slope) listed below where there is a conflict.
Swimming Beach
Rutledge recommends 5,000 square feet for sunbathing, 2,500 square feet for buffer
and picnicking, and 1,000 square feet of water area for swimming for every 25 linear
feet of shoreline.
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA NIAS rF:R PLAN • DRAFT' 8/01
5.2
STANDARDS AND CONCEPTS
Swimming beaches should be protected from boats, fuel spillage and organic
pollutants, and water should circulate through the area. Ideally, the beach should
face the full or at least the afternoon sun with a cross -sectional slope of four to ten
percent. The under water slope should range from seven to ten percent, be free from
rocks, and have no sudden. changes in elevation or deep holes in the swimming area.'
During average periods of use, approximately 70 percent of beach users will be on
the beach with the remaining 30 percent in the water.'
Nature Trail
Rutledge recommends a length of one to two miles or one mile of trail for every 50
daily users.
74;. If the path is to accommodate those with mobility handicaps, according to Harris
` and Dines, it should have a minimum width of seven feet, a maximum grade of eight
percent, and a firm. surface. (Slopes above five percent are required to have ramps
and railings.) Vertical clearance of adjacent vegetation should be at least T/a feet. The
trail may also be delineated with ropes running through rings on 36-inch posts, and
knots can be used to call attention to upcoming interpretive stations. Other aids to
" the less able include raised curbs, braille strips and/or raised letters on interpretive
signs and textured surfaces on the walk to. signal interpretive stations.'
Rural Hiking Trail
One mile of trail for every 40 daily users.'
Family Picnic Area Outside of Communities
Rutledge suggests 90 to 100 units per area.
One acre can accommodate 10 to 15 units, each consisting of one table -bench
combination with one grill per two tables; one rest room per each 30 units serving a
500-foot radius; and drinking fountains no further than 150 feet from picnic units.
'Rudedge
'Hams and Dines
v+ SAMUFL W. WAFIL RECREATIONAL. AREA MASTER PLAN ■ DRAFr 8/01
5.3
STANDARDS AND CONCEPTS
!"! Litter receptacles in racks should be placed near the road, no further than 150 feet
from picnic units, but not near drinking fountains. Bulletin boards should be placed
near rest rooms.3
Harris and Dines recommend 35 feet between picnic units, with a buffer strip of 200
feet between picnicking and other activities. Rest rooms should be placed at least 50
feet away, but no further than 400 feet away from any unit.
Parking should be provided at a ratio of one space per 1.5 tables with several tables
within 400 feet of the parking area.
f The cooking surface of grills should be 30 inches above the ground, rotate 360
degrees, and provide a utility shelf for cooking tools.. Plant material should be no
closer than 3 feet and cleared to a height of T/a feet.
CaMpground
Rutledge recommends 4 to 7 units per acre consisting of one tent area, one table -
bench combination, one camp stove (grill), one parking space; and one rest room per
each 30 campsites serving a 300-foot radius; drinking fountains, litter receptacles,
` and bulletin board as for picnicking, above.
RV Camping
An RV parking space should be level across its width. A slight slope along its length
is permissible, with a slope toward the rear preferred. RV campers load on the
e .
passenger side; utility connections are on the driver's side.'
Individual Campsites
Family -size sites should be 14 feet by 16 feet with a soft, level tent pad within this
area. Campfire rings should be raised two feet and seating should be provided
within three feet of the fire. Push lids on litter receptacles are preferred, and these
lids should be 40 inches from the ground.'
Refer to examples of campsite layouts in Appendix D.
t
3Rutledge
4Harris and Dines
S. MIJEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA NfAsTER PLAN DRAFT 8/01 3.4
aw
STANDARDS AND CONCEPTS
Dock
Two courtesy docks are needed for each launching facility. Minimum width of all
docks is six feet. Floating docks are preferred to stationery ones when water level
fluctuates more than 18 inches. At least one rest room should be located within 400
feet of the dock. Fire codes relating to dock areas should be consulted.'
Service Dock
A service dock or float is necessary to supply fuel to outgoing boats. Fuel storage
tanks should be located underground and above the high-water line as specified by
local and the National Fire Protection Association codes. Dumps, rest rooms, and
other permanent structures must also be constructed above the 100-year flood line
or should be flood proofed.'
Boat Ramp
Launch lanes should be at least 15 feet wide
in a multiple -lane facility and 18 feet wide in
a single lane facility. The ramp surface
should be skid resistant, and the grade
should not exceed 12 to 15 percent. The
lower end of the ramp should extend into
the water to a point where it will be at least
four feet below the lowest water elevation in
order to protect the base of the ramp from
wave action. The backing distance of a
vehicle should be limited to 200 feet,
preferably 100 feet. The maneuvering area on land should be at least 80 feet,
preferably 100 feet, in diameter. The facility also requires adequate parking for
vehicle/trailer units.
'Harris and Dines
SAMUEL W. WAHL RF"CRFATIONAI, AREA UkSTER PLAN m DRAFT' 8/01 5.5
7
r�►
6. Needs Assessment
As discussed in Haralson study (refer to Appendix A), this study is limited to the
580-acre Sam Wahl Recreational Area. Although the TORPI takes the demonstrable
position that there is a shortage of lakefront land in the South Plains, quantifying the
total amount that may be needed for the 28-county area is beyond the scope of this
plan. Clearly, development of this site will add significantly to lakefront recreational
opportunities in the South Plains.
To determine a rational basis for estimating facility needs
for the recreational area, several methodologies were
evaluated, and used, in combination with the facility
spatial standards that are available. A discussion of these
methodologies -- demand, market support, capacity
constraint, and developable land -- follows.
Finally, the rationale for each recreational facility need is
discussed and the needs are quantified in Table 6.1.
Demand Approach
Even with its limited development — boat ramp, courtesy
dock, fishing pier, portable toilets, and litter receptacles,
the recreational area is experiencing ever-increasing
numbers of visitors. (Although there are no formal
campsites, camping is occurring.) The following chart shows annual use projected
from results of traffic counts made each summer at the site. Assumptions were
made as to the average number of vehicle occupants.
IDeloney etal.
SA,%iuEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN ■ DRAFT 8/01
6.1
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Table 6.1
Lake Alan Henry Visitors
Vehicle Type - Occupants
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Veh.
I Visitors
Veh.
Visitors
Veh.
Visitors
Veh.
Visitors
Veh.
Visitors
Cars - 2
1,5551
3,110
1,561
3,122
2,555
5,110
3,323
6,646
3,114
6,228
Cycles - 1
56
56
108
108
97
97
110
110
92
92
Vehicles w/Camping Trailers - 3
2,649
180
2,783
8,3491
5,441
16,3231
6,318
18,954
8,466
25,398
Busses/RVs - 10
5
50
15
150
68
70
700
96
960
Other - 1.5
158
237
1,546
2,319
. 1,284
1,559
2,339
1,140
1,710
TOTALS
4,423
3,633
6,013
14,048
9,445
21,530
11,380
28,749
12,908
34,388
City of Lubbock Traffic Counter Data Annual Summary
(Surveys conducted from July 30 - September 03)
Fiscal year 2001 visitors are running ahead of 2000. Through April 2001, 27,781
individual entrance permits had been sold.
The public opinion survey (please refer to Section 4) assessed the attitudes of
Lubbock residents regarding development at the lake. Although the survey was
limited to the City of Lubbock, its population comprises one-third of that in the
entire study area. Twenty-three percent of the respondents acknowledged having
visited the lake in the past year. Of those who had visited the lake, 87 percent either
supported or strongly supported construction of recreational facilities at the lake. Of
those who had not visited the lake, 58 percent expressed general or "soft" support
for the recreational facilities. Following are responses to "Overall Most Important
Recreational Facility to Build at Lake Alan Henry:"
1. Developed campsite site and facilities
2. A swimming beach
3. Fishing piers
4. Campgrounds - motor homes/other vehicles
5. Nature hiking trails
6. Picnic areas
7. Restroom/shower facilities
8. A marina
9. Additional boat ramp
10. Shade pavilions for family reunions
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MISTER PLAN m DRAFT 8/01
6.2
h
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
11. Playgrounds
12. Primitive campsite/carry in/out supplies
13. A day camp area
14. Paved walking/biking trails
15. An amphitheater
Capacity Constraint Approach
This method focuses on.a review of the number of visitors who can use this
recreational area without crowding. Although there may be some differences of
opinion on what makes one feel crowded, this approach requires certain assumptions
on desirable densities for the various recreational activities at the park. The public
opinion survey results support the concept of non -crowded development and the
preservation of the environment and open
space at the Sam Wahl Recreational Area. In
order to avoid the perception of being crowded,
spatial standards for campsites and picnic tables
should be observed and plenty of buffering and
space for screening built in. The same is true for
space between the various recreational use.
"Overuse" of the recreational area could
negatively impact the lake, the land and the
environmental attributes that attract visitors in the first place. Overpopulation of the
site could also lead to safety problems, particularly on the lake. As facilities are
phased in the site manager can evaluate impact on the land and make adjustments as
necessary.
The Haralson study estimated annual users at 131,765 with 225 campsites, 10
camping cabins and one group pavilion. (Refer to Table 6 in Appendix A.) Annual
use for the year 2000 was estimated at 34,388 with very limited facilities.
Market Approach
The approach predicts the number of facilities that could be financially supported by
park visitors.
SAIMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN 0 DRAFT 8/01 6.3
w
w NEEDS ASSESSMENT
The public opinion survey results showed that Lubbock residents were strongly
supportive of overnight and day use facilities at Lake Alan Henry. Based on this
information William L. Haralson & Associates, Inc. (WLHA), formulated a
recommended development program and a financial analysis. Revenue is assumed to
derive from three sources: overnight rentals, park store sales, and entry fees charged
• to day visitors. The analysis resulted in projections of expected revenue, operating
expenses, and net operating income. (Refer to the WLHA report, Appendix A, for
more detail and a description of the recommended development program.)
Developable Land Approach
This resource -based approach estimates the number of facilities that can be
constructed on the site and number of users that can be accommodated, consistent
with the park's natural environment, or carrying capacity. It assumes a minimum
amount of impact on the environment and existing open space, particularly steep
"^ slopes, vegetated areas, and State Archaeological Landmarks.
.A
The land best suited for the desired improvements was identified by the detailed site
analysis, which included both natural and cultural elements and is illustrated on the
maps in Section 2. The site's geology and vegetation are key attractions whose
preservation will limit development. The owner's ability to provide potable water
and process sewage are also limiting factors.
Needs Rationale by Facility Type
The Conceptual Plan identifies the proposed use areas consistent with the
goals for this project. Projections follow as to the maximum number of each
facility type can be accommodated on the site. These are shown on Table 7.1
along with facilities to be constructed during the period covered by this plan.
Camping Facilities
The overnight facilities will consume the greatest land area, 92 acres as shown on the
Conceptual Plan.
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN • DRAFT' 8/01
t- ;5
6.4
r
NEEDS rASSESSIMENT
The maximum number of facilities in each campsite category — "RV,s2 ..Muld-Use,"3
and "Campingi4 were determined by comparing acreage of each use area with the
r
standards outlined under "Facility Concepts" in Section 4. Portions of each area
were reserved for buffering and screening. (This will likely be critical for the large
camping areas abutting the north property line of the park.) Developed campsites
*- were ranked No. 1 and campgrounds were ranked No. 4 in the public opinion
survey.
ORM
Picnicking Facilities
Group Picnic Shelter — Two acres are set aside for a large pavilion with restrooms, a
forty -car parking lot, and open space for informal activity.
Picnic Units — The balance of the area designated for picnicking has been assigned to
individual picnic units at the rate of 20 per acre.
Waterfront Facilities
The lakefront situation of the land, the stated desires of Lubbock citizens, and
market support in the study area and beyond, as outlined in the feasibility study,
support the needs for these facilities in the project.
Swimming Beach
This was No. 2 on the list of desired facilities in the
public opinion survey. The site analysis indicated
only one area in the park suitable for this activity.
Boat Ramp
r
The existing boat ramp is well -used and will need to
be expanded. The ramp provides launching facilities
for fishing and ski boats as well as jet skis. An
additional boat ramp was ranked No. 9 in the
survey.
2Campsites designed for recreational vehicles and/or vehicle -trailer combinations. At least some will have
electrical hookups.
3Campsites that can accommodate tents and the vehicles described in Footnote 1.
4Walk-in campsites with minimum improvements.
SAMUEL W. WAI IL RFCREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN • DRAFT' 8/01 6.5
ii
NEEDS AssEssmENT
Fishing Piers
One pier (at the boat ramp) exists, and locations have been selected for two more so
as to provide variety and decentralization of this activity. Fishing piers were ranked
No. 7 in the public opinion survey.
Marina and Courtesy Dock
The existing dock with 40 slips (plus 15 spaces for jet skis) serves the boat ramp. It
will need to be expanded if additional lanes are added to the.boat ramp, or another
one added if a new boat tamp. is constructed in another location. A marina to
provide supplies, fuel and other marine needs will be needed. It is anticipated that
this facility will be provided by a concessionaire, with the city providing utilities and
a restroom. A marina was the No. 8 ranked item in the public opinion survey.
Docks to Provide Access to Primitive Camping Sites
These will extend the camping experience for those who enjoy"boat camping" and
• were among the facilities mentioned at the public meeting.
Playgrounds
The number of playgrounds is dictated by the number of camping areas as it is
customary to find these in or near camping facilities in state parks and similar
recreational areas. (Playgrounds were ranked No. 11 in the survey.)
Trails
Hiking/Nature Trails
Nature/hiking trails were ranked No. 5 on the list of facilities most important to
construct in the public opinion survey. These low impact facilities are easy to
incorporate into a site such as Sam Wahl. Two -and -one-half miles has been planned
for initial construction phases.
Paved Trails
These trails will have the functional purpose of providing pedestrian circulation
between use areas. As such, they will also provide recreational value.
*a S ��IUEL W. Wi1HL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN ■ rya �F-r s/ol 6.6
M"
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Support Facilities
The size, nature, and quantity of these facilities is dictated by recreational facilities,
number of park users, and administrative decisions regarding staffing. Of particular
note was the frequent mention of restroom/shower facilities by survey respondents
(No. 7). More detail on support facilities can be found in Section 7.
Other Facilities
Many other facilities such as an amphitheater, equestrian facilities, and nature center
could be accommodated on this property and may, in fact, be included in future
planning.
SAT'QULL W. Wr1I-iL RECREATIONAi, ARF;A 1 1STER PLAN 0 DRAFT 8/01 6.7
P"
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Table 6.2
Samuel W. Wahl Recreational Area
Needs Assessment
Site
Inventory
Ultimate
Need
Basis for
Need
2006
Campsites
0
100
RV
100
M, R, S, C
Multiuse
250
M, R, S, C
Tent
RV
M,R,S,C
Camping
15
15
Primitive
100
Tent
Cabins
0
10
M
Picnicking
0
Shelter with 40 tables
1
M, D
1
Picnic Units
132
R, D, S, C
75
Water Based Activities
1
Swimming Beach
0
R, D
1
Boat Ramp
1
2
R, M, D
Courtesy Dock
1
2
R, M
Fishing Pier
1
4
R, M, D
4
Trail
Hiking
4 mi.
R, D
2.5 mi.
Paved
4 MAL
C, D
.5 mi.
Playground
4
M
1
Key:
IM - Market Approach
R - Developable Land Approach (Resource)
S - Spatial Standard
D - Demand Approach
C - Capacity Constraint Approach
SA,,v[UEL W. WAI-u RECREATIONI1L AREA MASTER PLAN • DRAFT 8/01
6.8
ii
PLANS IN FILE
SEE
RESOLUTION
A,901 -,eo-:360
7. Recommendations & Implementation
Recommendations
The Conceptual Plan illustrates the recommended facilities and their distribution at
the Samuel W. Wahl Recreational Area. They reflect the results of the feasibility
study, the public opinion survey, staff recommendations, and the consultant's on -site
observations. The reader will note that the final recommendations do not precisely
reflect all elements of the contributing studies. In particular, types and numbers of
facilities recommended in the Haralson study
differ from the final recommendations. However,
this should not materially affect that study's
findings regarding projected users and revenue.
The recommendations for the first five years'
implementation of the master plan cover most of
the items receiving most frequent mention in the
public opinion survey as well as critical
infrastructure. Later additions might include the
marina, camp store, day camp, amphitheater, headquarters building, improvements
to existing camping sites, additional camping sites and picnic units, staff housing,
additional roads and parking, new entry control station, landscaping and irrigation.
5-year Plan Priorities and Phasing
The lake manager and Lubbock Water Utilities staff, provided considerable input on
current lake and recreational site use and desired phasing of facilities.
SAMUEL W. WAHI, RECREATIONAL AREA MASI ER PLAN m DRAFT 8/01
7.1
RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION
Table 7.1
Samuel W. Wahl Recreational Area
Priorities and Phasing
Priority
Facility
Year
Est. Cost
1
Accessible Fishing Pier and Access Trail
2002
$ 50,000
2
Accessible Trail
2002
40,000
3
Nonpotable Water Supply
2002
550,000
4
Septic System
2002
350,000
5
Small Restroom Building
2002
150,000
2002 Total
$ 1,140,000
6
100-space RV Campground with Electricity for
50 spaces and Nonpotable Water for 2nd
Restroom
2003
$ 750,000
7
Extend Sewer Line
2003
50,000
8
Picnic Facilities (20 units)
2003
250,000
9
Overlook
2003
35,000
2003 Total
$ 1,085,000
10
Fishing Piers (Remote) (2)
2004
$ 90,000
11
Hiking (Non ADA) Trail
2004
225,000
12
Primitive Campsites (15)
2004
97,500
13
Docks for Campsites
2004
50,000
14
Group Picnic Area
2004
350,000
15
Showers for RV Campground Restroom
2004
90,000
2004 Total
$ 902,500
16
Potable Water for Campgrounds
2005
$ 800,000
17
Expanded Parking
2005
300,000
2005 Total
$ 1,100,000
18
Swimming Beach
2006
$ 500,000
19
Paved Access Walk from HQ
2006
54,000
20
Multi -Use
2006
450,000
2006 Total
$ 1,004,000
Grand Total
$ 5,231,500
SAMUEI, W. `,VAHI, RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN ■ DRAFT 8/01 7.2
RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION
Discussion of Financing Options
The proposed budget (Table 8.2) for infrastructure, recreational, and support
facilities at the Sam Wahl Recreational Area includes nearly $10 million in
improvements. Respondents to the public opinion survey were asked several
questions regarding financing methods and user fee levels.
Financing Methods
• An increase in water rates
• A bond election
• Increased user fees
34% Support or strongly support
65% Oppose or strongly oppose
59% Support or strongly support
36% Oppose or strongly oppose
74% Support or strongly support
21% Oppose or strongly oppose
Capital Improvement Program
Clearly, a raise in water rates to finance construction of recreational facilities does
not seem to be an option. A bond program for capital improvements at the Samuel
W. Wahl Recreational Area, supported by user fee revenue, could be a potential
funding mechanism. Based on the survey results, the modest entry fee ($2.00 per
day) could be doubled without significantly affecting visits to the lake. Boating and
camping fees each carry a $2.00 additional charge. Annual permits covering all of the
above are available at $15, individual, and $60 family.
Total permit revenue for Fiscal Year 2000 was $166,034. FY 2001 revenue is
projected to be $182,637. Operating expenses for FY 2000 were $125,000 and are
projected to be $143,000 in FY 2001.
User Fees
Acceptable User Fee Levels
Survey respondents indicated that the higher the entrance fee, the less likely they
would be to visit the site.
• Entrance fee under $5.00 68% Likely or very likely to visit
• Entrance fee $5.00 - $10.00 56% Likely or very likely to visit
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA N-LkSTER PLAN ■ DRAFT 8/01
7.3
RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION
• Entrance fee $10.00 - $15.00 23% Likely or very likely to visit
• Entrance fee $15.00 - $20.00 9% Likely or very likely to visit
• Entrance fee $20.00 - $25.00 5% Likely or very likely to visit
Texas Parks & Wildlife Programs
TP&W grants are arguably a Texas municipality's best source of matching funds to
assist in acquisition and development of public parks. As previously discussed, the
Samuel W. Wahl Recreational Area presents a unique situation; that is, it's a city park
with the character of a state park. Moreover, sixty-five miles separate it from its
sponsoring jurisdiction. The nature of the site and its
proposed facilities do not exactly fit the requirements of
either the Local Recreation & Parks Account or the
Regional Park Program. However, the latter seems to have
better potential for Lubbock, and a .brief discussion follows
along with a description of two other TP&W grant
programs.
Regional Park Program — This new demonstration
program provides significant matching funds for
acquisition and development of parks meeting the
requirements of the program, which include
intergovernmental cooperation, private sector participation,
and water related recreation. Up to $1.3 million in
matching funds has been awarded. The sponsoring entity
must provide fifty percent in matching funds.
Boat Ramp Construction Program — Up to $500,000 is available for boat ramp
construction, with a 25 percent local match (of the total project) required.
Applications are accepted January 31 and July 31. These grants are awarded without
regard to any other pending or active grant, but the sponsoring jurisdiction must be
in compliance with any outstanding TP&W grant projects. This program could
provide valuable assistance when the second boat ramp is constructed.
Recreational Trails Program — This program provides a maximum of $100,000 on
an 80/20 match basis (20 percent local match). Applications are accepted between
March 1 and June 1. Awards are made on the same basis as the boat ramp grants. At
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA NLISTER PLAN ■ DRAFT 8/01 7.4
RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION
the time this report was being completed, Lubbock Water Utilities had a trails grant
pending for the Sam Wahl Recreational Area.
Design/Build/Operate
Another option is to contract with a concessionaire to design and build critical
facilities within the recreational area and then operate them on behalf of the City.
From national parks to municipal golf courses, there is substantial precedent for
governmental agency/concessionaire arrangements for public parks and recreational
facilities. This could be particularly appropriate for the marina and camp store at the
Sam Wahl Recreational Area. A detailed discussion of this option is beyond the
scope of this study, but it appears that if the City constructed basic facilities,
including infrastructure and campsites, a
concessionaire would find construction of
revenue producing facilities and operation of
the entire site a more attractive prospect.
Table 7.2, Budget Cost Estimate, provides
guidance for budgeting for facilities that are
included in the Conceptual Plan for the
recreational area. The amounts shown are
based on 2001 conditions, increased for remote
area construction costs, and are for initial budgeting only. They are likely to vary as
construction design further identifies site conditions, design, materials, and other
factors.
Table 7.3
Samuel W. Wahl Recreational Area
Budget Cost Estimate
Unit
Ouan. Unit Price Amount
Camping Facilities
RV Camping Area
100
EA
6,000
600,000
Includes 100 camping spaces with
caliche drives and parking, security
lighting, electrical service, no water, no
landscaping
SANfUEL W. WAHL RECREA"I'IONrv, AREA MASTER PLt1N • DRAFT 8/01 7.3
iii
P"
RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION
Upgrade RV Camping
100
EA
10,000
1,000,000
Asphalt paving, water service, one
central restroom/shower building, a
picnic table and concrete pad each, one
tree each
Multi -Use Camping Areas
110
EA
6,500
715,000
Includes caliche roadway, camper
pullouts, tent pad, grill and picnic table,
one restroom/shower building
Cabins
10
EA
40,000
400,000
Small rustic cabins to accommodate
four people with restroom and shower,
sewer service, and 20 car parking lot
Primitive Walk-in/Boat-in Camping
Area
15
EA
6,500
97,500
Native trail, tent pad, and campfire grill.,
one restroom building, parking lot
Recreational Facilities
Day Use Area
1
LS
400,000
400,000
Open and irrigated lawn areas with
picnic tables and restroom building
Fishing Piers
3
EA
45,000
135,000
Small floating aluminum piers in
remote locations
Picnic Areas
40
Units
12,500
500,000
Covered picnic station on concrete pad
in natural unirrigated locations, one grill
per table, and litter receptacles
Group Picnic Area
1
LS
350,000
350,000
Large group pavilion with restrooms
and 40 car parking lot
Swimming Beach
1
LS
500,000
500,000
Sand beach with protective buoys. Fill
will be required to create the beach.
Access by trails and steps.
Trails
Concrete Accessible
5,000
LF
45
225,000
Native Material
20,000
LF
15
300,000
Boat Ramp
1
LS
450,000
450,000
4 lane, Courtesy Dock
Overlooks
3
EA
35,000
105,000
Playgrounds
4
EA
75,000
300,000
Operational Facilities
Entry Control Station
1
LS
150,000
150,000
Building with restrooms, parking and
circulation drives
SA' W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN ■ DRAFT 8/01 7.6
No Text
RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION
Headquarters
1
LS
100,000
100,000
Offices for Administrative staff
Residence for Park Ranger
1
LS
100,000
100,000
Maintenance Compound
1
LS
325,000
325,000
Shop, storage sheds, fenced parking
and storage area, fuel tanks
Marina (by concessionaire)
1
LS
50,000
50,000
City's contribution, sewer service, and
restroom building
Parking Lots Spaces
300
EA
1,000
300,000
Asphalt on caliche base
Infrastructure
Water
Well, ground tank, pressure tank, and
water pipe to add a potable water
system
1
LS
550,000
550,000
Expansion for potable system
1
LS
850,000
850,000
Sanitary Sewer/Waste Water
Treatment
Grinder pump, sewer line, septic held
for 2-3,000 gal/day
1
LS
350,000
350,000
Expansion facilities
1
LS
1,650,000
1,650,000
Electrical
1
LS
100,000
100,000
Telephone
1
LS
35,000
35,000
Roadways
West main road - 25' wide, HMAC
3,600
LF
150
540,000
Spur to Rustic Camping Area - 17'
wide, HIMAC
1,100
LF
110
121,000
Landscaping
1
LS
150,000
150,000
Irrigation
1
LS
40,000
40,000
Entry Development
1
LS
50,000
50,000
Total
11,538,500
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA NLASI'ER PLAN ■ DRAFT 8/01 7.7
PIR
RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION
Maintenance & Operations
Table 7.3
Current Operations and Maintenance
Item
Service Frequency/Qty.
Cost
10 rented portable toilets
2 x week
$1,300 mo.
Litter and trash pickup
2 x week liar. - Nov.
$900 mo.
10 rented 3 c.y. dumpsters
1 x week
$600 mo.
Law enforcement'
80 hours/week
$108,650 yr.
Permit office staff 2
part-time workers
'Garza County Constable's Office
2According to the lake manager, an estimated 30 percent of revenues are lost during non -staffed
hours when an "honor system" self -registration is used.
As a part of this project, Greenspace Nbmagement, Inc. provided an analysis of
staffing, equipment and budget that would be required if the park was partially
developed with campsites, swimming beach, group pavilion and picnic stations,
hiking trail, playground and boat ramp. Although it represents a midpoint
development level at the recreational area, it will guide the City in acquiring
equipment and staff and budget for operations. This report is included in Appendix
'Q
SAMU EL W. WAHI. RECREATION u, AREA MASTER PLAN • DRAM 8/01
P"
A.,
Appendix
A. Recommended Development Program
B. Facility Operation and Maintenance Recommendations
C. Public Opinion Survey Questionnaire
D. Examples of Campsite Layout
SA,�,fUFL W. `Gill -IL RECREATIONAL, AREA MASTER PLAN 0 DR-AF"I' 8/01
m
APPENDIX A
!^° RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
LAKE ALAN HENRY
for the
�" SAM WAHL RECREATION AREA
Prepared For:
THE CITY OF LUBBOCK
May 2001
ems
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
IINTRODUCTION........................................................................ 1
II SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .... 2
LakeAlan Henry.................................................................... 2
TheStudy Area....................................................................... 2
Lakes in the Study Area ......................................................... 2
TheTurco Report ................................................................... 3
Recommended Development Program ................................... 3
Financial Analysis.................................................................. 3
Mitigating Factors.................................................................. 4
III ANALYSIS OF STUDY AREA DEMOGRAPHICS .................. 5
Population............................................................................... 5
Incomes................................................................................... 5
Race Composition.................................................................. 8
Age Distribution..................................................................... 8
IV SURVEY OF SELECTED WEST TEXAS LAKES ................. 11
SurveyFindings.................................................................... 11
Conclusion............................................................................ 14
V RECOMMENDED FACILITIES AT LAKE ALAN HENRY.. 15
Overnight Facilities.............................................................. 15
Day Use Facilities
SupportFacilities................................................................. 20
VI FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF RECOMMENDED LAKE
ALAN HENRY IMPROVEMENTS 23
Overnight Facilities.............................................................. 23
ParkStore............................................................................. 23
Total Income at Lake Alan Henry ........................................ 24
WLHA Study
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure
1 Location of West Texas Lakes .................................................... 12
Table Number
1 Population by County in the Study Region .................................. 6
2 Market Area Per Capita Incomes: 1999........................................
7
3 Race Composition by Market Area Zone: 1999 ...........................
9
4 Market Area Age Distribution: 1999..........................................
10
5 Survey of West Texas Lakes ......................................................
13
6 Estimated Income From Overnight Facilities
Proposed for Lake Alan Henry ...................................................
25
7 Estimated Park Store Sales.........................................................
26
8 Summary of Income at Lake Alan Henry ...................................
27
WLHA Study
Section I
INTRODUCTION
The City of Lubbock, Texas (city) has recently constructed Lake Alan Henry as
a source of water for the city's residents and businesses. Lake Alan Henry, which is
located near Post, Texas, some 60 miles southeast of Lubbock, will cover some 2,880
acres. In addition, the City of Lubbock owns some 580 acres of parkland adjacent to the
lake.
While the primary function of Lake Alan Henry is to supply water to Lubbock,
the city wishes to utilize the lake and adjoining parkland, the Sam Wahl Recreation Area,
for recreational purposes. As a first step toward this objective, the city retained the
services of Schrickel, Rollins and Associates, Inc. (SRA) to prepare a recreational
master plan for Lake Alan Henry. SRA, in turn, associated with William L. Haralson &
Associates, Inc. (WLHA) to provide the necessary market and financial analyses.
WLHA's assignment was to evaluate study area population, survey study area lakes and
shoreline facilities, formulate recommendations for recreation facilities at Lake Alan
Henry and conduct a general financial analysis of the recommended development
program.
This report contains the findings of WLHA's evaluation of the proposed facilities.
The report is presented in six sections. Following this introductory section is a summary
of the study's findings. Subsequent sections, then, present documentation in support of
the study's findings.
This report was prepared by William L. Haralson, president of WLHA.
Assistance was provided by W. Ryan Haralson of the WLHA staff.
WLHA Study Al
M"
Section II
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This section of the report presents a summary of the findings and
recommendations of the study of recreational opportunities at Lake Alan Henry. Only
the salient points of the study are presented in this section. Supporting documentation is
provided in subsequent sections.
LAKE ALAN HENRY
Lake Alan Henry is a 2,880-acre impoundment located near Post, Texas, some 60
miles southeast of Lubbock. The lake is owned by the City of Lubbock and was
developed to provide a source of water for Lubbock. In addition to the lake, proper, there
is 580 acres of parkland, which the City wishes to have master planned.
THE STUDY AREA
The City of Lubbock staff defined a study area for the Lake Alan Henry project,
consisting of 28 counties in West Texas. This study area has an estimated population of
some 607,000. Lubbock County is the most populous county, with a population of
229,000.
LAKES IN THE STUDY AREA
WLHA was provided a list of 18 lakes in the study area to be surveyed. WLHA
found that two of the lakes were dry. Moreover, some lake offices were telephoned a
number of times in an effort to obtain information. Most of the lakes surveyed were
lacking in many of the types of facilities that typically found at lakes offering recreation
facilities. It is WLHA's opinion that there are no lakes in the study area that represent a
model for the planning of facilities at Lake Alan Henry.
WLHA Study A2
EML�.i
THE TURCO REPORT
Also on the SRA team is the firm, Raymond Turco & Associates (Turco),
which was given the assignment of conducting a poll to determine the types of facilities
that the citizens of Lubbock wish to have developed at Lake Alan Henry. That study is
well -documented in a separate report and will not be treated in detail in this study.
However, it is important to note that the recommendations presented in this report take
into account the findings of the Turco study. In essence, the Turco study found strong
interest by Lubbock residents in having overnight and day use facilities developed at
Lake Alan Henry.
RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
WLHA has formulated a development program consisting of the following
overnight and day use facilities.
• 125 RV sites
• 100 campground sites
• 10 camper cabins
• 1 group campsite pavilion
• 1 park store with laundry area
• 50 picnic tables with shelter
• Hiking trails
• 1 children's water spray (approximately 2,500 sf)
• 1 leisure pool (approximately 3,000 to 5,000 sf)
• 2 water slides (200 linear feet)
• Parking lot (400 spaces with room for expansion)
• Six sets of restroom fixtures, including showers
• 2 floating boat docks for temporary tie-ups
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
WLHA conducted a financial analysis of the recommended development
program. Revenue is assumed to derive from three generic sources: (1) overnight
WLHA Study A3
W
a*,
rentals: (2) park store sales and (3) entry fees charged to day visitors. That analysis
resulted in the following:
Total Revenue $987,712
Operating Expenses $615,455
Net Operating Income $372,257
Assuming typical financing terms, a debt service constant of approximately 10.5 percent
is realistic. Dividing this factor into net operating income yields a supportable debt
service level of approximately $3.5 million.
MITIGATING FACTORS
While WLHA is of the opinion that the proposed development program is viable,
there are two factors that could mitigate against the project's success.
The first is the water level of Lake Alan Henry. WLHA has been advised by the
City's Utility Department that, since the lake's primary function is to supply water to
Lubbock, there may be occasions when the lake is drawn down to the point of being dry.
This occurrence would have a negative impact on the operation of the park's facilities.
Accordingly, before proceeding with the recommended development program, City
officials may wish to consider their policy regarding water consumption from Lake Alan
Henry.
The second factor to be considered is the lack of potable water at Lake Alan
Henry. At present, there is no source of drinking water on -site at Lake Alan Henry.
Without a source of drinking water, the viability of the recommended development
program for the lake's shoreline will be very much in question.
"°"" WLHA Study A4
w�
Section III
ANALYSIS OF STUDY AREA DEMOGRAPHICS
This section of the report presents an analysis of demographics with the 28-county
region defined by City staff. Included are discussions of population levels trends,
incomes, ethnic composition and age distribution.
POPULATION
.m Table 1 presents a summary of population levels and trends for the 28 counties
comprising the study area used for this assignment. Shown in the table are population
figures for each county for 1990, 1999 and 2004. As shown, the total study area
population is estimated to have been 687,000 in 1999, compared to 597,000 in 1990. By
2004, the study area population is projected to drop to 681,000.
The most populous county in the study area is Lubbock. In 1999, Lubbock's
population was 228,600, or approximately 37.6 percent of the total study area. This share
is only slightly higher than the 1990 figure. Lubbock County is projected to lose a small
amount of population over the next five year, tracking parallel to the study area as a
whole.
INCOMES
Table 2 presents a summary of estimated per capita incomes for the study area
counties for 1999. It may be noted that per capita incomes in the study area are below the
national average, except for Borden County. As shown, per capita incomes range from
56 percent of the national average in Mitchell County to 155 percent of the national
average in Borden County. Lubbock County ranks near the top of the study area counties
at 94 percent of the national average.
�'"' WLHA Study A5
G
Table 1
POPULATION BY DISTANCE
FROM THE PROPOSED SITE
1990
1997
2002
1990-1997
1997-2007
Distance
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Number
From Site
(000)
of Total
(000)
of Total
(000)
of Total
(000)
Percent
(000) Percent
0 to 5 Miles
11.2
40.2%
12.2
40.2%
13.3
40.2%
0.1
1.2%
0.2
1.8%
5 to 10 Miles
2.2
8.0%
2.4
8.0%
2.7
8.0%
0.0
1.2%
0.0
1.8%
10 to 15 Miles
2.7
9.6%
2.9
9.6%
3.2
9.6%
0.0
1.2%
0.1
1.8%
Subtotal
16.2
57.9 %
17.6
57.9 %
19.2
57.9 %
0.2
1.2%
0.3
1.8%
15 to 25 Miles
3.2
11.6%
3.5
11.6%
3.8
11.6%
0.1
1.7%
0.1
1.8%
25 to 50 Miles
3.9
13.9%
4.2
13.9%
4.6
13.9%
0.1
1.7%
0.1
1.8%
50 to 75 Miles
4.7
16.7%
5.1
16.7%
5.5
16.7%
0.1
1.7%
0.1
1.8%
Total
27.9
100.0 %
30.4
100.0 %
33.2
100.0 %
0.4
1.5 %
0.6
1.8%
Source: CACI, Inc. - Federal
Table 2
MARKET AREA
PER CAPITA INCOMES
(1999)
Per Capita
Market Area Zone
Incomes
Index 1
Borden
$
28,517
1.55
Cottle
$
12,418
0.67
Crosby
$
11,804
0.64
Dawson
$
13,425
0.73
Dickens
$
12,728
0.69
Fisher
$
14,282
0.78
Floyd
$
11,767
0.64
Foard
$
13,936
0.76
Garza
$
14,337
0.78
Hale
$
14,511
0.79
Haskell
$
15,692
0.85
Hockley
$
16,522
0.90
Howard
$
16,312
0.89
Jones
$
13,514
0.73
Kent
$
15,049
0.82
King
$
15,109
0.82
Knox
$
11,344
0.62
Lamb
$
13,601
0.74
Lubbock
$
17,259
0.94
Lynn
$
12,281
0.67
Martin
$
11,721
0.64
Mitchell
$
10,386
0.56
Motley
$
13,482
0.73
Nolan
$
14,237
0.77
Scurry
$
14,630
0.79
Stonewall
$
15,234
0.83
Taylor
$
17,143
0.93
Terry
$
17,737
0.96
Total U.S.
$
18,406
1.00
Source: CACI, Inc.- Federal
WLHA Study A7
RACE COMPOSITION
Table 3 presents a summary of race composition within the study area with U. S.
figures included for comparison. It may be noted that the race composition of the study
area differs substantially from the national pattern. With the exception of Mitchell
County, the study area counties have a much lower percentage of blacks, compared to the
national average. On the other hand, most counties have a much higher percentage of
"others". The departure from the national pattern is explained by the high percentages of
..� Hispanics residing in the study area.
AGE DISTRIBUTION
Table 4 presents a summary of data regarding age distribution among the 28 study
area counties, with data for the U. S. included for comparison. It may be noted that there
is considerable difference among the various counties. Most counties (19) have a higher
percentage of population in the categories under 15 year of age, compared to the national
average. By contrast, 21 counties have a higher percentage in the 65 and over category,
compared to the national average.
WLHA Study A8
Table 3
RACE COMPOSITION BY
MARKET AREA ZONE: 1999
Market
Area Zone
White
Black
Other
Total
HisRanic(1)
Borden
95.6%
0.4%
4.0%
100.0%
19.1 %
Cottle
98.5%
0.6%
0.9%
100.0%
0.9%
Crosby
76.6%
4.5%
18.9%
100.0%
49.2%
Dawson
62.8%
4.1%
33.1 %
100.0%
51.7 %
Dickens
82.6%
4.9%
12.5%
100.0%
22.9%
Fisher
90.6%
4.0%
5.4%
100.0%
25.7%
Floyd
59.5%
3.7%
36.8%
100.0%
46.8%
Foard
83.2%
5.8%
11.0%
100.0%
17.2%
Garza
88.1 %
6.6%
5.3%
100.0%
34.4%
Hale
64.1%
6.0%
29.9%
100.0%
48.0%
Haskell
76.3%
3.6%
20.1%
100.0%
24.0%
Hockley
74.7%
4.1%
21.2%
100.0%
38.4%
Howard
73.3%
4.2%
22.5%
100.0%
33.2%
Jones
75.0%
9.6%
15.4%
100.0%
21.0%
Kent
86.1%
0.6%
13.3%
100.0%
15.7%
King
87.5%
0.0%
12.5%
100.0%
18.0%
Knox
74.6%
6.8%
18.6%
100.0%
27.6%
Lamb
85.1 %
5.4%
9.5%
100.0%
43.1 %
Lubbock
75.0%
8.1%
16.9%
100.0%
29.1%
Lynn
74.1%
3.2%
22.7%
100.0%
48.6%
Martin
57.6%
1.8%
40.6%
100.0%
46.9%
Mitchell
67.8%
15.2%
17.0%
100.0%
30.9%
Motley
85.9%
5.4%
8.7%
100.0%
11.5%
Nolan
73.5%
5.1%
21.4%
100.0%
31.7%
Scurry
69.6%
5.9%
24.5%
100.0%
30.1%
Stonewall
93.1%
5.3%
1.6%
100.0%
15.2%
Taylor
80.3%
6.6%
13.1%
100.0%
19.2%
Terry
72.7%
4.1%
23.2%
100.0%
47.4%
Total U.S. 78.2%
(1) Any Ethnic Group
Source: CACI, Inc. - Federal
12.5% 9.3% 100.0% 11.3%
WLHA Study A9
Table 4
MARKET AREA
AGE DISTRIBUTION: 1999
Age
Category Borden Cottle Crosby Dawson Dickens Fisher Floyd
Under
6.9%
5.6%
8.3%
7.6%
5.3%
5.9%
9.1%
5 to 14
16.2%
14.8%
17.5%
16.5%
13.4%
14.9%
17.6%
Subtotal
23.1 %
20.4 %
25.8 %
24.1 %
18.7 %
20.8%
26.7 %
15 to 19
6.5%
7.2%
8.0%
7.3%
8.0%
6.9%
7.6%
19 to 24
4.2%
3.5%
5.3%
4.8%
4.2%
3.8%
5.6%
25 to 34
8.5%
8.4%
10.1%
13.1%
7.7%
8.5%
10.0%
35 to 44
14.4%
11.4%
11.8%
15.7%
12.0%
13.2%
12.3%
45 to 64
27.8%
25.6%
23.8%
20.7%
24.3%
25.9%
22.2%
65 and Over
15.5%
23.5%
15.2%
14.3%
25.1%
20.9%
15.6%
Total
Foard
Garza
Hale
Haskell
Hockley
Howard
Jones
U. S.
6.1%
8.3%
9.3%
6.3%
8.9%
7.4%
5.5%
7.0%
14.3%
18.1%
17.6%
14.5%
18.7%
15.5%
13.4%
14.6%
20.4%
26.4%
26.9%
20.8%
27.6%
22.9%
18.9%
21.6%
5.9%
7.7%
8.4%
5.9%
9.2%
7.7%
6.6%
7.2%
4.5%
4.5%
7.2%
3.8%
6.5%
6.1%
10.8%
6.5%
8.7%
10.0%
11.9%
9.2%
11.7%
11.6%
13.6%
13.9%
12.1%
13.0%
13.3%
12.0%
13.6%
14.6%
12.9%
16.4%
22.5%
22.7%
20.6%
24.0%
20.8%
22.4%
20.7%
21.7%
25.9%
15.7%
11.7%
24.3%
10.6%
14.7%
16.5%
12.7%
Total
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
100.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Age
Total
Category
Kent
King
Knox
Lamb
Lubbock
Lynn
Martin
Mitchell
Motley
Nolan
Scurry
Stonewall
Taylor
Terr
U. S.
Under 5
5.9%
7.2%
7.4%
7.9%
7.7%
8.6%
9.4%
5.6%
5.1%
7.3%
7.3%
6.6%
8.2%
8.7%
7.0%
5 to 14
15.5%
16.7%
15.5%
17.5%
14.6%
17.0%
19.3%
13.9%
13.2%
15.7%
16.2%
14.9%
15.3%
17.7%
t4.6%
Subtotal
21.4%
23.9%
22.9%
25.4%
22.3%
25.6%
28.7%
19.5%
18.3%
23.0%
23.5%
21.5%
23.5%
26.4%
21.6%
15 to 19
6.8%
9.5%
6.8%
6.9%
8.8%
7.0%
8.2%
6.3%
7.3%
7.6%
7.5%
6.4%
8.1%
8.9%
7.2%
19 to 24
2.5%
5.6%
4.0%
5.5%
10.0%
5.8%
5.1%
4.0%
3.2%
5.4%
5.4%
3.6%
8.4%
6.5%
6.5%
25 to 34
8.2%
11.4%
9.2%
9.9%
15.1%
11.2%
10.9%
20.0%
7.6%
10.3%
13.7%
10.5%
12.7%
10.7%
13.9%
35 to 44
12.4%
18.3%
12.4%
12.2%
15.1%
11.3%
13.7%.
12.7%
11.6%
14.3%
15.7%
11.4%
14.5%
13.5%
16.4%
45 to 64
26.6%
24.4%
22.7%
23.1%
18.8%
24.3%
22.0%
20.1%
26.3%
23.2%
21.5%
25.8%
20.8%
20.7%
21.7%
65 and Over
22.1 %
6.9%
22.0%
17.0%
9.9%
M.8%
11.4%
17.4%
25.7%
16.2%
12.7%
20.8%
12.0%
13.3%
12.7%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: CACI, Inc. - Federal
Section IV
SURVEY OF SELECTED WEST TEXAS LAKES
This section of the report presents a summary of the findings of WLHA's survey
of some 18 lakes located in a 28-county study area as defined by the City of Lubbock
staff. The location of these 18 lakes is shown in Figure 1, while a summary of findings is
presented in Table 5. It should be noted that, while every effort was undertaken to obtain
complete data on every lake, this was not entirely possible. WLHA's main source of data
was telephone contact with personnel associated with the various lakes. Not every
attempt to reach someone was successful. Moreover, some of the personnel contacted
could not answer every question put to them. In general, WLHA staff gained the
impression that the operation of shoreline facilities at the various lakes surveyed was not
a very high priority. To augment the data obtained from the telephone survey, WLHA
resorted to using the Internet with some success.
SURVEY FINDINGS
The survey of the selected lakes yielded the following.
• The 18 lakes ranged in size from 640 acres (Lake Abilene) to
60,000 acres (Lake Stamford).
• Two of the lakes surveyed were dry and no further data were
obtained from these
• Of the 16 remaining lakes, 7 charged entry fees ranging from $2.00
to $4.00, while 9 lakes had not entry fee.
• Nine lakes offered campground sites; however only one, Caprock
Canyons State Park, had as many as 100 sites, while only four had
more than 50 sites.
WLHA Study All
mm�
PIR
r
ram,
Table 5
R
SURVEY
OF WEST TEXAS LAKES
a
Campground/RV
Sites
Cabins
Picnic
Rental Occupancy
Rental
Occupancy Tables
Gas
Boat
Name
County
Acres
Entry Fee Number
Rate Rate
Number
Rate
Rate Number
Rentals
Dock
Ramp
Caprock Canyons State Park
Briscoe
15,160
$
2.00
100 $
10.00 Unknown
None
-
- 50
Horses
No
Unknown
Coleman Lake
Coleman
2,000
None
None
- Unknown
None
-
- None
None
No
No
E. V. Spence
Coke
14,950
$
2.00
15
- Unknown
4
Unknown 50
None
No
4
Lake Abilene
Taylor
640
None
None
Unknown
None
-
- None
None
No
No
Lake Colorado City
Mitchell
11,618
$
3.00
78 $
11.00 Unknown
None
-
- None
None
No
1
Lake Fort Phantom Hill
Jones
4,246,
None
6 $
11.00 Unknown
None
-
- 6
None
No
No
Lake O. H. Ivie
Coleman
19,200
$2.00
62
- Unknown
1 Pavilion
$ 25.00
Unknown 62
None
No
4
Lake Kemp
Baylor
16,540
$
4.00
None
Unknown
None
-
- N/A
None
No
No
Lake Kirby
Taylor
Dry
-
-
None
-
- None
None
No
Unknown
Lake Meredith
Potter
16,505
None
None
- Unknown
None
-
- 2
None
Yes
5
Lake Stamford
Haskell
60,000
None
80
- Unknown
2
$ 50.00
Unknown None
None
Boats
10
Lake Sweetwater
Mitchell
11,400
$
2.00
1 RV
- Unknown
None
-
- 30
None
Yes
1
Lake Thomas
Borden
8,000
None
None
-
None
-
- None
None
No
Unknown
MacKenzie Reservoir
Swisher
896
$
2.00
36 $
10.00 Unknown
1 Shelter
$ 10.00
Unknown N/A
None
No
2
Miller's Creek Reservoir
Baylor
Dry
-
-
- -
None
-
- -
-
No
Unknown
The Canyon Lakes System
Lubbock
2,000
None
None
- Unknown
None
-
- Yes 2 Pavilions
No
3
Twin Buttes Reservoir
Green
9,080
None
None
-
None
-
- None
None
No
Unknown
White River Lake
Crosby
1,000
$
2.00
10
$7.00 Unknown
None
-
- 10
None
No
1
Source: William L. Haralson & Associates,
i
Inc. Telephone
Survey
W
e
Not one lake staff person could offer an opinion as to the level of occupancy experienced
by their campground.
• Five campgrounds charge fees for their use. These fees range from
$7.00 to $11.00.
• Very few lakes offer cabin rentals. E. V. Spence has 4 cabins,
which is the most of any lake. Again, there was no data on the
occupancy of these cabins.
• Seven lakes offer picnic tables; however, only 3 have as many as
50.
• Caprock Canyons was the only location to offer any kind of
rentals -horses.
• Only two lakes have gas docks available. It was a general
consensus by personnel at other lakes that gasoline is an
environmental problem.
• Not quite half of the lakes surveyed have boat ramps. The rest
either do not have them or WLHA was unable to obtain the
information.
CONCLUSION
WLHA is of the opinion that there is very little to be learned from the lakes
surveyed. Based on WLHA's discussions with representatives of the various lakes, there
appears to be very little enthusiasm for offering the type of recreational experience that
would appeal to the regional market. Certainly, there is no facility surveyed that the City
of Lubbock could hold up as a model to be emulated.
'"' WLHA Study A14
o
Section V
RECOMMENDED FACILITIES
AT LAKE ALAN HENRY
This section of the report presents the Project Team's recommendations for
recreation facilities to be developed at Lake Alan Henry.
Broadly speaking, there are two types of recreation facilities that could be
developed at Lake Alan Henry: day use facilities and overnight facilities. Day use
facilities reflect the activities in which day visitors engage. These include picnicking,
fishing swimming and hiking. Overnight facilities include various types of lodging,
including campgrounds, RV sites and camping cabins. Of course, visitors staying
overnight will utilize many, if not all, of the same facilities as day visitors.
OVERNIGHT FACILITIES
The Turco study revealed that there is strong interest among Lubbock residents
for overnight facilities at Lake Alan Henry. By contrast, WLHA's survey of existing
lakes in the study area revealed very little competition for such facilities. Accordingly,
WLHA is of the opinion that well -planned overnight facilities at Lake Alan Henry would
be well received by residents of Lubbock and the rest the study area alike. The following
are WLHA's recommendations for the development of overnight facilities at Lake Alan
Henry, subject to any site restrictions that may arise later in the planning process.
RV Park
WLHA recommends the development of an RV park with a minimum of 125
spaces with the capability to expand to 250. Our research has shown that ownership of
RVs is increasing at a rapid rate, while the number of RV sites has not kept pace.
Moreover, most of the existing RV parks are not capable of meeting the needs of modern
RVs. The newer models are longer, wider and require more utility power than older
models, and many RV parks simply cannot accommodate them.
"�"' WLHA Study A15
Pull -Through Sites Pull -through sites are the preferred configuration for an RV park.
As the name implies, pull -through sites are designed to allow an RV to enter the site at
one point and exit at another, thereby obviating the need to back up. This feature is
particularly appealing to those with very large motorhomes and/or those towing another
vehicle. This type of site is the most expensive to build and requires the most land area.
For modern RVs a drive of 70 feet in length (at a 60 degree angle from the road) and 30
feet in width is often needed. Approximately 3,000 square feet per site should be
allotted. Each site should be provided with sewer and water service. In addition, each
site should have 20, 30 and 50 amp receptacles. Other features that are desirable, if
available are telephone and cable television service.
Back -In Sites Although pull -through sites are preferred, there are reasons to consider
including some back -in sites. One reason is that they are cheaper to develop and require
less space. Another is that there may be areas within the park that will not accommodate
the larger pull -through sites. The length of the drive should be at least 30 feet, with a
width of 10 feet. The amount of area required per site will depend on its design. For
example, if the RV is towing another vehicle, or if it is being towed by another vehicle,
there will be the need for a parking space for the second vehicle. Space requirements for
back -in sites are somewhat less than those of pull -through sites and densities of up to 20
sites per acre are possible. Utility requirements are the same as for pull -through sites.
Buddy Sites Frequently, friends and families travel together in two RVs. Thus, when
staying at an RV park, they will want to situate their RVs in such a way as to allow social
interaction. However, since all RVs have their doors on the right side, in conventional
sites, the RV on the right would have its door facing away from the RV on the left.
However, with buddy sites, this problem is resolved by having the two RVs enter pull
through sites from opposite directions. Buddy sites, though, are not exactly the same as
pull -through sites. While it is true that RVs do, indeed, "pull through" buddy sites, they
are different from pull -through sites in that a larger common area is provided between the
two RVs and some type of visual barrier, such as a planter, is placed between these RVs
"'"" WLHA Study A16
` and their neighbors. Utility requirements for buddy sites are the same as for pull -through
sites. However, they require somewhat more space for common areas and visual barriers.
Buddy sites also require two-way roads.
Tent Sites
In WLHA's view, a campground with 100 tent sites should be developed separate
from the RV park if there is sufficient land available at Lake Alan Henry. Tent sites do
not need to be as large as RV spaces, since they, generally, do not have to accommodate
large vehicles. Rather, tent site requirements include a parking space (which can be at a
right angle to the road), a "footprint" for the tent, a picnic table, a barbeque grill and a
lawn area. Wherever possible, trees for shade and shrubs for visual barriers are also
desirable.
Group Sites
The Turco report revealed some level of interest in group pavilions at Lake Alan
Henry. WLHA is of the opinion that such a facility could be used as the nucleus for a
group campground site. This concept that has proven popular in various parks operated
by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. The market for these facilities includes RV clubs,
family reunions and scout troops. A typical configuration for group tent sites is a wagon
wheel, often with the pavilion, picnic tables and a barbeque grill in the center area. Space
permitting, WLHA recommends the development of one group facility, initially. We,
further, recommend that the pavilion have sufficient capacity to accommodate 100
persons at one time. The camping area should not be developed, rather, it can have a
grassy surface. This arrangement will allow the pavilion to be used as a day use facility,
when not otherwise in use.
Camping Cabins
Camping cabins are a popular form of overnight accommodations in many
national, state, and county parks. Camping cabins are generally rustic in appearance,
with a simple floor plan and basic utilities. A typical configuration for a camping cabin
is a kitchen/living room in front with two bedrooms and a bathroom in the back.
WLHA Study A17
Frequently, such cabins will be furnished with two sets of bunk beds in one bedroom to
maximize occupancy. They, typically, have 400 to 500 square feet of floor area.
Moreover, they are often manufactured mobile homes that are constructed off -site and
brought to their site. A major advantage of camping cabins is that, if sharing a park with
an RV park or campground, they can be introduced in small clusters of 5 to 10, with their
.� number increased as demand dictates. Ideally, these cabins should be situated at a
location that offers a vista of the lake.
DAY USE FACILITIES
The Turco report found strong interest in a number of day use facilities. In order
of their ranking, these include a swimming beach, a fishing pier, hiking trails, picnic
areas, shade pavilions and playgrounds. These are discussed, in turn, below.
Swimming Beach
WLHA is of the opinion that a swimming beach at Lake Alan Henry would prove
to be a popular attraction, if properly designed and maintained. However, the problem
with such a facility is the uncertainty regarding the lake's water level. Since the lake is a
source of water for the City of Lubbock, it is possible that its water level may fluctuate up
and down, thereby rendering the shoreline unsuitable for a beach.
An alternative to the beach might be the development of water features on the
surrounding park land. In fact, there are a number of water features that could be
developed there that are likely to be more popular than a swimming beach. A few of
these are cited briefly below.
• A children's water sprayground This facility is a
grouping of creative fountains, some of which are
interactive. The can be situated in a shallow pool or on a
flat surface that allow the water to run off or be re-
circulated. The fountains are controlled by a computer and
are programmed to turn off when there is no activity.
""'; WLHA Study A18
• Zero depth leisure pool This facility can be constructed at
any scale; however, an appropriate size would be 3,000 to
' 5,000 square feet, with water depth ranging from 0 to 18
inches. Pool could be appointed with fountains, shade and
various play structures.
• Water Slides There are a variety of water slides on the
market that would be appropriate for Lake Alan Henry.
i
Flumes of 150 to 200 linear feet and elevations of 20 to 30
feet would provide a valid entertainment experience.
The facilities cited above could be combined to create an attraction that would
more than offset the absence of a swimming beach on Lake Alan Henry.
Fishing Piers
Fishing piers should also prove to be popular at Lake Alan Henry. Again, the
problem is the fluctuating lake level. At least two fishing piers should be developed on
U the lake, assuming such facilities can be designed in such a manner as to allow them to be
functional, given fluctuations in the water level.
Hiking Trails
Hiking trails ranked third among the day use items cited in the Turco study. And
while WLHA is of the opinion that they would be used extensively, the length and design
of such trails is a function of the terrain around Lake Alan Henry. These issues will be
addressed in the master planning phase of the assignment.
Picnic facilities
Picnic facilities are one of the most important day use features to be developed at
Lake Alan Henry, since persons coming for the day will want to have a place to leave
their picnic supplies and personal effects.
Given the weather in West Texas, especially the summer heat, WLHA
recommends that all picnic tables have sun roofs. Two types of shelters would be
appropriate: open air shelters consisting of a concrete pad, picnic table and roof; and
WLHA Study A19
6
screened in shelters. The latter are more likely to appeal to families with small children
requiring naps during the time that the family is at Lake Alan Henry.
The number of picnic shelters is, again, a function of the park's geography and
terrain. As a starting point, WLHA recommends 50 picnic sites be developed; however,
the master plan should allow for at least 50 more.
�+ Shade Pavilions
Shade is an important feature to be provided for reasons of health as well as
comfort. WLHA has previously recommended at least one pavilion capable of
accommodating up to 100 persons. Additional shade was recommended in association
with the picnic facilities, discussed above. These recommendations notwithstanding,
additional shade in some form should be provided as demand dictates.
Playgrounds
A small percent of those surveyed in the Turco report listed a desire to see
playgrounds at Lake Alan Henry. WLHA does not recommend a significant investment
in a "dry" playground for two reasons: (1) West Texas weather renders such facilities
impractical throughout much of the summer; and (2) the water features previously
discussed are thought to be a better alternative.
SUPPORT FACILITIES
In support of the recommended overnight and day use facilities, certain support
facilities will be required. These are discussed below.
The Entrance Gate
The first feature that a visitor to Lake Alan Henry will see is the entrance to the
ark. Accordingly, this area should be well -designed to project a positive image. At the
P g Y� g P J P g
entrance, there should be a gate house large enough to protect one or two gate attendants
from the weather. During the busy times of the year, these attendants would collect
!' WLHA Study A20
ii
admission fees, assign RV and camping spaces and attend to any other matters involving
fees and assignments.
The Registration Office\Park Store
During much of the year, traffic to Lake Alan Henry will be relatively light and
staffing of the gate- house may not be justified. During that period, registration and
admissions can be handled at a registration office, which WLHA assumes would be
located in a park store. Initially, the park store could function in a number of roles,
including general merchandise sales, bait shop, fuel sales and laundry. As the park
develops, it may be necessary to disperse certain functions to other locations. For
example, at some point, it may be desirable to have more than one location for laundry
facilities.
Restrooms
Except for those RVs that are self-contained, restrooms will be needed for all
other park attendees. In this analysis, restrooms are taken to include showers and
lavatories, as well as commodes and urinals.
The number of sets of restroom fixtures must comply with State of Texas health
codes. Beyond that, however, a sufficient number of clean and attractive restroom
facilities is necessary to satisfy park attendees. Moreover, the Alan Henry project has the
opportunity to provide state of the art facilities. For example, the provision of unisex
shower and changing rooms would be appreciated by families with small children.
Parking
Last, but certainly not least, is the need for parking. Insufficient parking can
create a number of problems, including congestion, parking in areas not intended for
parking and turning away potential attendees. For these reasons, in estimating parking
requirements, it is best to error on the side of too many spaces.
'M°" WLHA Study A21
W
eA+
In estimating parking requirements for Lake Alan Henry, WLHA assumed that all
overnight facilities would have on -site parking at the ratio of one space per site. Thus,
parking would only be needed for day use visitors, including picnickers, fishermen and
hikers. Picnickers are assumed to require 1.2 spaces per table, while fishermen launching
boats are assumed to require 2.0 spaces per launch. Thus, assuming a total of 100 picnic
4;
tables at build out and 100 launches on a busy day, picnickers would require 120 spaces,
while fishermen with vehicles and boats would require 200 spaces. Not included in these
figures are hikers, fisherman fishing from the bank and others not specified. To
accommodate future demand, WLHA recommends that the master plan allow for 600
parking spaces, with 400 spaces developed for Phase 1.
t`
WLHA Study A22
t,
1W
Section VI
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF RECOMMENDED
LAKE ALAN HENRY IMPROVEMENTS
This section of the report presents a financial analysis of the improvements
recommended for development at Lake Alan Henry. Included are estimates of revenue,
.� net operating income and warranted capital investment.
OVERNIGHT FACILITIES
Table 6 presents WLHA's estimates of income for the initial phase of
development of overnight facilities proposed for Lake Alan Henry. In deriving estimates
of income, WLHA estimated occupancy rates for each category of overnight facilities to
arrive at estimated rentals. Further, for each category, estimated rentals are applied to
" assumed rental rates to derive estimated revenue. Next, estimated operating expenses are
r"' subtracted from estimated revenue to yield net operating income. Net operating income
for all categories of overnight facilities totals $236,000.
PARK STORE
Table 7 presents WLHA's estimates of sales and income at the proposed park
store. As shown, park store sales are assumed to derive from two sources: overnight
guests and day visitors. For overnight guests, WLHA has estimated sales to equal 25
percent of lodging revenue, as shown in derived from Table 6. This ratio is consistent
with industry norms. As shown, revenue from overnight guests is estimated at nearly
$179,000.
The number of day visitors to Lake Alan Henry will depend on a number of
factors that are still unknown. These include the types of day use facilities available,
whether the fishing is good in the lake, etc. For purposes of analysis, WLHA has
assumed that the first phase of development at Lake Alan Henry will include 50 picnic
tables, which will accommodate 3.5 persons per table, or 175 persons on peak days and
'"" WLHA Study A23
350 persons on a peak weekend. Further, weekends are assumed to account for 80
percent of weekly usage, yielding 438 persons per week. Over a 12-week summer, then,
picnickers are estimated to total 5,250. Finally, the summer is estimated to account for
two-thirds of annual use, yielding annual picnickers of 7,836.
Other day visitors will include fishermen, hikers and others who simply wish to
visit the lake. WLHA has assumed that these visitors equal the number of picnickers, so
that total day visitors to the park are estimated to be 15,672. Assuming these visitors to
spend $2.00 per capita at the park store yields sales of $31,344. Further, adding this
figure to the spending of overnight guests brings store sales up to $210,080.
To arrive at the park store's net operating income, WLHA has assumed that the
cost of sales (including utilities) and labor equals 65 percent of sales, or $136,552. Thus,
net operating income is estimated at $75,528.
TOTAL INCOME AT LAKE ALAN HENRY,.
Table 8 presents a summary of income accruing to facilities at Lake Alan Henry.
The figure for overnight facilities was derived from the analysis presented in Table 6,
while the park store figure is from Table 7. In addition to these two figures, WLHA has
assumed that day visitors would be charged an entry fee of $4.00 per person, which
would generate $62,688. As shown, income from all sources is projected to total
$372,257.
Finally, WLHA has calculated the level of debt that the proposed facilities could
support, were net income used to finance their development. Typical bond financing
would have a debt service constant of approximately 10.5 percent. Applying this number
to estimated income yields a level of supportable debt of just over $3.5 million.
' WLHA Study A24
Table 6
ESTIMATED INCOME FROM OVERNIGHT
FACILITIES PROPOSED FOR LAKE ALAN HENRY
Camping
Group
RV Park
Campground
Cabins
Pavilion
Number of Units
125
100
10
1
Potential Rentals
45,625
36,500
3,650
365
Estimated Occupancy
35%
35%
50%
20%
Estimated Rentals
15,969
12,775
1,825
73
Rental Rate
$
25
$ 15
$ 60
$ 200
Estimated Revenue
$
399,219
$ 191,625
$109,500
$14,600
Operating Expense Ratio
75%
75%
30%
20%
Estimated Operating Expenses
$
299,414
$ 143,719
$ 32,850
$ 2,920
Net Operating Income
$
99,805
$ 47,906
$ 76,650
$11,680
Source: William L. Haralson & Associates, Inc.
WLHA Study A25
Table 7
ESTIMATED PARK STORE SALES
Overnight Guests @ 25% Of Lodging Revenue
Day Visitors @ $2.00 Per Capita ($2.00 X 15,672)
Total Park Sales
Less Cost of Sales and Labor (65%)
Net Operating Income
Source: William L. Haralson & Associates, Inc.
WLHA Study
$ 178,736
$ 31,344
$ 210,080
$ 136,552
$ 73,528
A26
Table 8
SUMMARY OF INCOME
AT LAKE ALAN HENRY
Overnight Facilities
Park Store
Entree Fees (15,672 X $4. 00)
Total Income
2361041
$ 73,528
$ 6208
$ 3729257
Supportable Debt Service (1) $ 395459304
(1) Assuming a debt service constant of. 105
Source: William L. Haralson & Associates,, Inc.
WLHA Study A27
w
APPENDIX B
FACILITY OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
RECOMMENDATIONS
for the
SAM WAHL RECREATION AREA
at
Lake Alan Henry
Prepared for the City of Lubbock
by
Greenspace Management, Inc.
Arlington, Texas
April 2001
W"
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
INTRODUCTION .................... ......... ........
3
Recreational Facilities .....................................
3
Support Facilities ........................................
4
Strategy...............................................
5
II STAFFING .............................................
6
III OPERATING EXPENSES ............ .... .............
8
Projected Annual Expenses ................................
8
IV CAPITAUSTART-UP PURCHASES ........................
11
Equipment Needs.......................................11
Maintenance Facility .....................................
12
Additional Facilities ......................................
13
V CONCLUSION.........................................14
F"
r■e
Section
INTRODUCTION
In order to provide the City of Lubbock with a comprehensive look at the
maintenance and operations of the Sam Wahl Recreation Area at Lake Alan Henry,
Schrickel, Rollins and Associates, Inc. retained the services of Greenspace
Management, Inc. to review elements of Phase I facilities. Included in the review are
the following areas.
'- RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
'/2 to 1 Acre Swimming Beach with Imported Sand
Assumptions
• No lifeguard
• Small bath house with restrooms
• 5 Picnic tables with individual shelters
• Trash receptacles
• Signage
Boat Launch and Dock - Existina
Assumptions
• Parking for 400 cars
• Trash receptacles
• Signage
• Provide for general clean-up and repair
Group Picnic Area with Restrooms
Assumptions
• Pavilion for 100, with two large grills
• 25 Picnic tables
• Trash receptacles
• 10 Picnic tables with individual shelters
9 Signage
• One acre irrigated turfgrass and 10 shade trees
100 RV Camping Spaces with Water and Electrical Hook-ups
Assumptions
Trash receptacle for every four spaces
• Group sanitary dump station (assume connection to on -site treatment
facility)
and large trash receptacle
B3
N
e■,
• Paved 20' x 40' parking pad at each of the 100 sites
• Restroom/shower building
Signage
110 Multi -use Campsites including Parking Spaces, Tent Pad, Picnic Table, Fire Pit or
Barbecue and 15 Primitive Campsites
Assumptions
• 2 Restroom/shower buildings
• Trash receptacle for every 4 multi -use sites
• Two picnic areas, each with 10 individually sheltered picnic tables with
grills
• Signage
Two Miles of Natural Surface Trails with Two Overlooks
Assumptions
• Trash receptacles at two trail heads
• 10 benches
• Signage
SUPPORT FACILITIES
Entry Facility with Control Area, Office, Storage, and Restroom
Assumptions
a3
• May be used as public reception/interpretive/sales area
• Communication facilities
Office equipment
• Gates and operating motors/controls
• 1h acre irrigated turfgrass and native tree plantings
Maintenance Building/Shop/Storage Yard
Assumptions
• All equipment for routine maintenance and repair needs to be stored on
site because of park's remote location
• Water treatment and sewage treatment facilities may be located here
Two Staff Residences for Phase I
Assumptions
• Park Superintendent Residence
• Assistant Superintendent Residence
• Irrigated turfgrass and three shade trees for 1/4 acre site (includes building
footprint)
Parking pad
B4
• Exterior storage building
• Picnic tables
STRATEGY
The Master Plan developed for Sam Wahl Recreation Area by Schrickel, Rollins
and Associates, Inc. is similar to that of a state park or public natural area. Maintained
areas are kept to a minimum, amenities are limited to beach areas, picnic areas and
camping facilities. In order to insure that costs for this type of facility were accurate,
Greenspace Management, Inc. enlisted the assistance of professionals familiar with the
operations of the state parks and natural areas. Their input provided insight into the
unique requirements of this facility.
Evaluation of the facilities and programs outlined in Phase 1 of the Master Plan
provided sufficient information to develop staffing needs and a capital equipment
budget. In addition, an operating budget was formulated for annual operations. These
cost estimates are based on assumptions for the type of supplies and equipment
generally needed for an operation of this type. Salaries, benefits and costs unique to
the City of Lubbock budget process may vary slightly.
IW
Section II
STAFFING
Due to the nature of this facility, it is assumed that the park will be open to the
public 365 days per year in order to serve travelers, particularly those driving RV's.
Staffing will be needed for a variety of tasks on a seasonal basis. Entry facility duties,
administrative tasks, maintenance of irrigated turf, edges of roadways, RV pads, and
camping areas will make it essential to staff both full time and seasonal employees. It
is vital that the staff is equipped with skills necessary for successful operation in the
areas of management and security. In order to provide adequate coverage on a daily
basis it was determined that the following full time and seasonal staff would be
necessary. Job titles specific to the City of Lubbock may vary. Personnel selected for
these positions will need to have the skills unique to the operation of this type of park.
It is recommended that recruiting for the positions include soliciting of job applicants
from Texas Tech University, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Lower Colorado River Authority
and private nature and RV parks. Persons who secure these professional positions will
likely come from the state or national park system. Necessary skills and suggested
salaries are based on job descriptions and salary structure of the TPWD.
Park Manager— Performs duties of Park Peace Officer. Full time, resides at park year
`round. Performs administrative, managerial, professional and highly technical duties.
Minimum Education: Bachelors Degree in Park Administration, Natural Resource
Management or related field. Starting salary (suggested): $31,220 / year.
.•� Assistant Park Manager — Full time, resides at the park year round. Assists Park
Manager in performance of administrative, managerial, professional and technical
duties. Recommend two-year degree or minimum 30 hours of post graduate course
.� work in Park Administration, Natural Resource Management or related field. Starting
salary (suggested): $24,500 / year.
Park Ranger — Full time, resides outside of the park. Performs variety of duties
including but not limited to routine maintenance of buildings, mowing, coordinate
events, revenue collection, accounting, licensing sales, etc. Minimum qualifications:
^° High school diploma or GED and two years experience in maintenance of facilities,
program management, etc. Starting salary (suggested): $19,500 / year.
Account Clerk — Full time, resides outside of the park. Performs variety of duties
including but not limited to revenue collection, accounting, licensing sales, acts
customer service representative, performs accounting duties, handles payroll, HR
matters, etc. High school diploma or GED and two years experience in bookkeeping,
accounting, customer service, etc. Starting salary (suggested): $15,700 / year.
Seasonal Employees — It is recommended that the park maintain extended hours
during the peak months of operation, typically March through October. Increased
maintenance of the park and operational hours of the entry facility will result in the need
forthese additional employees. Three employees will be needed for six months, March
B6
through September. An additional three employees will be needed for three months,
June through August. These employees may be used as supplemental maintenance
or entry facility staff, or may perform a combination of the two depending upon skill sets
and education. These employees will live outside the park. In order to attract seasonal
staff to this remote location, it is recommended that the City offer an hourly rate of
approximately $6.91. Total cost is $43,7801 year.
Numbers of staff recommended is based on anticipated number of users
provided by the Haralson report. Actual usership of the facility will create historical
documentation for continuing review of needed staff.
LIM
Section III
OPERATING EXPENSES
The operating expenses listed are typical of park facilities. Fees such as lease
of office equipment or vehicles and equipment (from City Information Technology
and/or Fleet departments) are not included.
PROJECTED ANNUAL EXPENSES
Personnel Costs
Salaries $ 90,900.00 FTE (4)
Seasonal Staff $ 43,781.00 PTE (3-6)
.� FICA $ 8,350.00
Medicare $ 1,885.00
Health $ 12,000.00 at $3000 each FTE
Sub -Total $156,916.00
Operating:
Professional Fees
$
1,200.00
Funds for registrations, vehicle and fire
extinguisher inspections, license
renewals, etc.
Postal Services
$
250.00
Funds for the purchase of postage
stamps.
Printing and Binding
$
1,500.00
Funds necessary to cover cost of printing
park information.
Staff Uniforms
$
1,000.00
Four full time pants/shirts/jackets,
rainwear, rubber boots, etc.
Staff Shirts
$
300.00
Staff shirts for part-time staff (6) @
$50.00 each
Office Supplies
$
1,500.00
Printer paper, pens, folders, etc.
Other Supplies
$
5,000.00
Consumable supplies such as paper
towels, cleaning chemicals
Botanical Supplies
$
2,000.00
Insecticides, herbicides, hand tools, etc.
Equipment Maintenance $ 8,000.00 Labor and parts for repairs to vehicles,
equipment, etc.
Facility Maintenance $10,000.00 Repair to Structures, boat ramp,
r restriping of parking lot, etc.
Fuels and Lubricants $ 4,000.00 Gasoline, diesel, oils for vehicle, mowers,
equipment, etc.
PPE recurring $500.00 Replacement personal protective
equipment
Minor Equipment $1,000.00 Replacement hand tools, string trimmers,
rakes, etc.
B8
Utilities:
Travel/Training
Sub -Total
Electricity
Telephone
Water
Waste Disposal
Sub -Total
Projected Total
$ 2,000.00 Educational training for full-time staff
$ 38,250.00
$ 20,000.00 100 RV sites, 3 restrooms with showers,
1 bathhouse and entry facility.
$ 1,800.00 Local service and long distance
services.
$ 2,400.00 Assuming potable water and sewage
treatment is on site.
$ 5,000.00 For garbage contract and/or landfill
fees
$ 29,200.00
$224,366.00
TABLE 1
Operating Budget for
Sam Wahl Recreation Area
Utilities
13%
Supplies
17%
Salaries
21%
Salaries FTE
49%
On going operational costs for the Sam Wahl Recreation Area include the following:
• Salaries and Benefits for full time employees are approximately 49% of total costs.
• Salaries for part time employees are responsible for approximately 21 % of total
costs.
• Supplies will account for approximately 17 % of total budget.
• Utilities for the entry facility and maintenance facility will account for approximately
13% of total funding.
:•
M
A
r : At a 4% rate of inflation over the next five years, Sam Wahl Recreation Area
may recognize a budget increase in accordance with the table below.
Table 2
Effects of Inflation on Budget
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
$224,336 $233,309 $242,641 $252,347 $262,440
I:
Section IV
CAPITAUSTART UP PURCHASES
Prior to opening the park, maintenance equipment and building furnishings will
be required. Due to the remote nature of the facility, it is recommended that equipment
purchased for proper maintenance and operation of the facility include the following:
CAPITAUSTARTUP EQUIPMENT NEEDS
Equipment Quantity Amount Extension
Truck, 1/2 ton, extended cab, short bed
1
$
17,500.00
$
17,500.00
Truck, 1/2 ton, regular bed
2
$
16,000.00
$
32,000.00
Kubota -type Tractor with attachments; i.e.,
1
$
42,000.00
$
42,000.00
front-end loader, backhoe, box
blade, auger, shredder
Utility Vehicle; i.e. John Deere Gator
1
$
9,000.00
$
9,000.00
Trailer, utility, 16 foot, with ramps
1
$
1,200.00
$
1,200.00
Mowers, riding, diesel, 60" front mowing
2
$
10,000.00
$
20,000.00
deck
Pushmowers, self-propelled, finish mower
2
$
350.00
$
700.00
Weedeaters/string-line trimmers
2
$
250.00
$
500.00
Pole saw, tree -trimmer, gasoline
1
$
300.00
$
300.00
Chain saw
1
$
200.00
$
200.00
PPE- Personal Protection Equipment; per
9
$
100.00
$
900.00
person, hard hats, eye and hearing
protection, gloves, safety vests, chaps,
etc.
Welder/generator, electric arc and
1
$
1,500.00
$
1,500.00
acetelyene
Sub -Total
$
125,800.00
Entry Facility
Office Furniture; desks, chairs, tables, file
1
$
3,000.00
$
3,000.00
cabinets, book cases, etc.
Computer/printers, admin/registration, etc.
3
$
2,200.00
$
6,600.00
Office equipment; calculators, answer
1
$
1,000.00
$
1,000.00
machine, fax machine, copy machine,
misc. supplies, etc.
Telephone system
1
$
2,000.00
$
2,000.00
Radio, base station
1
$
400.00
$
400.00
Radios, mobile for vehicles
3
$
300.00
$
900.00
Radios, walkie talkie
3
$
500.00
$
1,500.00
Sub -Total
$
15,400.00
PROJECTED TOTAL
$ 141,200.00
M.
PIR
W
N
It is assumed that furniture for employee housing will be provided by employee
living in these quarters.
In summary, the budget for the first year of operation at Sam Wahl Recreation
Area will be similar to the budget figures below.
Annual Costs for Facility Operation $ 224,366.00
Capital/Startup Costs 1 st Year $ 141,200.00
Anticipated Costs for First Year of Operation $ 365,566.00
MAINTENANCE FACILITY
The park will require a maintenance facility to house all equipment listed in the
capital needs budget. Due to the remote location of the compound and the potential
for vandalism from park patrons or others, it is recommended that all equipment and
supplies be kept inside, under lock and key. The building outlined below may vary
depending upon final design elements of Phase I.
Maintenance Compound Requirements
Dimensions: 2400 s.f. = 40' x 60'
Restrooms with shower: 180 s.f. = 9' x 10' x 2
Break room: 160 s.f. = 10' x 16'
• Includes refrigerator, bar for microwave, hand sink
• Locker bank area
• 110 V power in each wall
• HVAC
Maintenance equipment storage area: 1610 s.f.
• Roll up doors both sides
• Radiant heaters
• Air hose above bay area
• Emergency eye wash/shower
• Utility sink
• Floor painted with impervious coating
• Floor drain for hosing down area — to sewer
• Bollards (4" steel) at entry on both sides of roll up doors
• Fluorescent lighting
• Fiberglass panels in roof for use as sky lights
Maintenance Shop: 300 s.f. = 15' x 20'
• Minimum two sets of 110 V outlets on each wall
• 1-220 V outlet
B12
• Telephone line
• Fluorescent lighting
Staff office: 150 s.f. = 15' x 10'
• Inside maintenance area
• 110 v power in each wall
• Telephone line
• Fax/modem line
• Fluorescent lighting
• HVAC
Storage Area
• Chain link fence wall to interior of building
• 5 ft. gate (2)
• Fluorescent lighting
• Air compressor
ADDITIONAL FACILITIES
Pole Barn
This structure would be used for storage of heavy equipment such as tractors,
large trucks and loaders. A portion of this area should be set aside for fertilizer storage
and chemical storage locker.
Materials Storage
To prevent loss of material from wind and rain, it is recommended that storage
in the form of concrete bins is provided for topsoil and swimming beach sand (if
stockpiled).
Chemical Storaae Locker
A separate facility is required for storage of pesticides. It must have secondary
containment in case of spill accident, and two-hour fire walls. Size is dictated by the
amount of product the superintendent maintains in stock. Just -in -time inventory
techniques will help to reduce the size of the building.
PIM
to
r
Section V
CONCLUSION
The recommendations in this document will provide the minimum requirements
for maintenance and operation of the Sam Wahl Recreation Area. Any deviation from
the amenities planned for Phase I could result in a change in staffing and equipment
requirements. If the City of Lubbock modifies the plan of scheduled amenities, further
analysis will be required.
Appendix C
Recreational Facility Needs and Attitudes
at Lake flan Henry
Public Opinion Survey Questionnaire
SANfUEL W. Wiv--m RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN ■ DRAFT 8/01
APPENDIX:
SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE
PROJECT 2300301 RAYMOND TURCO & ASSOCIATES APRIL 2000
MY NAME IS AND I'M WITH THE SUNRAY RESEARCH GROUP. OUR SURVEY
THIS EVENING IS ABOUT RECREATION IN YOUR COMMUNITY. I WAS WONDERING `IF I
COULD TAKE A FEW MINUTES OF YOUR TIME TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS?
r^*
AREA AREA I . . . . . . 1
AREA II . . . . . . 2
AREA III . . . . . . . 3
SEX MALE . . . . . . . . . 1
FEMALE . . . . . . . . 2
1. FIRST, HOW LONG HAVE YOU LIVED AT YOUR PRESENT LOCATION?
UNDER 1 YEAR . . . . . 1
2 - 4 YEARS 2
5 - 7 YEARS . . . 3
8 - 10 YEARS . . . . . 4
OVER 10 YEARS . . . . 5
REFUSE TO ANSWER 6
2. HOW OFTEN DO YOU VOTE IN CITY -RELATED ELECTIONS, SUCH AS CITY COUNCIL
OR CITY BONDS?
ALWAYS . . . . . . 1
OFTEN . . . . . . . . 2
SELDOM . . . . . . . . 3
NEVER . . . . . . 4
NO OPINION . . . . . . 5
!�^ 3. LET'S TALK ABOUT RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES THAT YOU MAY HAVE
PARTICIPATED. IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS, HAVE YOU OR ANYONE IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD
YES NO DON'T REM
A) VISITED A PARK OR PARK FACILITY IN LUBBOCK 1 2 3
B) GONE CAMPING AT A STATE CAMPGROUND 1 2 3
C) PARTICIPATED IN BIRD WATCHING ACTIVITIES 1 2 3
D) GONE FISHING AT AN AREA LAKE 1 2 3
E) PARTICIPATED IN A BOATING OR OTHER LAKE -RELATED 1 2 3
ACTIVITY ON AN AREA LAKE
F) HIKED ON A TRAIL OUTSIDE OF THE CITY 1 2 3
G) PARTICIPATED IN A NATURE CLASS OR PROGRAM 1 2 3
H) BICYCLED ON A TRAIL OUTSIDE OF THE CITY 1 2 3
4. APPROXIMATELY 65 MILES SOUTHEAST OF LUBBOCK, NEAR POST, TEXAS, IS LAKE
ALAN HENRY, WHICH IS OWNED BY THE CITY OF LUBBOCK AND SERVES AS A
SUPPLEMENTARY WATER SOURCE FOR PEOPLE IN THE AREA. PLEASE TELL ME, IN THE
PAST YEAR, HAVE YOU VISITED THE LAKE FOR ANY BOATING, CAMPING OR NATURE
ACTIVITY? IF YOU ARE UNFAMILIAR WITH LAKE ALAN HENRY, PLEASE TELL ME THAT
ALSO.
,.� YES . . . . . . . . . 1
NO 2
DON'T REMEMBER . . . . 3
A
UNFAMILIAR . . . . . . 4
. ,•LV t:..... "._ '%iasr i?»A'GCT ai::i"a ur'^,•.�_ �..i. ..v.....a - :'..'S:u..xfi55v3N.s:'a:.r�ti .">i2"...i.Y•Grm s..:.s:::St.su sY.v.,.:a,...i .zflc._a, 'rsavxa�� ..T '?. ,�:Y '
5. THE CITY
OWNS A 600 ACRE SITE AT THE LAKE
AND IS LOOKING AT PROVIDING
RECREATIONAL
FACILITIES. HOW STRONGLY WOULD
YOU SUPPORT OR OPPOSE THE
CITY
CONSTRUCTING
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AT THAT
LOCATION?
STRONGLY SUPPORT . .
. 1
SUPPORT . . . . . .
. 2
OPPOSE . . . . . . .
. 3
STRONGLY OPPOSE
4
NO OPINION . . . . .
. 5
6. (IF OPPOSED)
PLEASE TELL ME WHY YOU WERE
OPPOSED TO CONSTRUCTING
FACILITIES AT
LAKE ALAN HENRY?
7.
THE CITY OF LUBBOCK IS CURRENTLY IN THE
PROCESS
OF
DEVELOPING A
RECREATIONAL PLAN FOR THE LAKE ALAN HENRY AREA. PLEASE
TELL
ME HOW
LIKELY
OR
UNLIKELY YOU WOULD BE TO VISIT LAKE ALAN
HENRY AND
PARTICIPATE IN
THE
FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES IF THEY WERE AVAILABLE
. . . .
VL
L
U
VU
NO
A)
BIRD WATCHING
1
2
3
4
5
B)
CAMPING
1
2
3
4
5
C)
HIKING OR BIKING
1
2
3
4
5
D)
SHOOT ON A SHOOTING RANGE
1
2
3
4
5
E)
OFF -ROAD BICYCLING
1
2
3
4
5
F)
HORSE RIDING ON EQUESTRIAN TRAILS
1
2
3
4
5
G)
FISHING
1
2
3
4
5
H)
RENT A BOAT OR JETSKI
1
2
3
4
5
I)
USE THE BOATRAMP
1
2
3
4
5
J)
SEND YOUR CHILDREN TO A DAYCAMP
1
2
3
4
5
K)
RENT A CABIN FOR A VACATION
1
2
3
4
5
L)
GO ON A NATURE WALK
1
2
3
4
5
M)
MOTORCROSS
1
2
3
4
5
N)
SHOP AT A LAKESIDE MARINA
1
2
3
4
5
8. LET ME READ YOU A LIST OF POSSIBLE ITEMS THAT COULD BE CONSTRUCTED ON
THE SITE. PLEASE TELL ME HOW STRONGLY YOU WOULD SUPPORT OR OPPOSE
CONSTRUCTING THE FOLLOWING ITEMS AT LAKE ALAN
HENRY
. .
. .
VL
L
U
VU
NO
A)
BIRDING AREA OR BIRD WATCHING FACILITIES
1
2
3
4
5
B)
NATURE HIKING TRAILS
1
2
3
4
5
C)
EQUESTRIAL TRAILS
1
2
3
4
5
D)
PAVED WALKING OR BIKING TRAILS
1
2
3
4
5
E)
SHOOTING RANGE
1
2
3
4
5
F)
CAMPGROUNDS THAT CAN BE USED BY MOTOR
1
2
3
4
5
HOMES AND OTHER VEHICLES
G)
A DEVELOPED CAMPSITE, INCLUDING
1
2
3
4
5
CAMPING SITES AND FACILIITES
H)
A PRIMITIVE CAMPSITE, WHERE PEOPLE
1
2
3
4
5
CARRY IN AND OUT THEIR OWN SUPPLIES
I)
MOTORCYCLE OR OFF -ROAD CYCLING TRAIL
1
2
3
4
5
M)
SHADE PAVILION FOR GROUP ACTIVITIES OR
1
2
3
4
5
FAMILY REUNIONS
N)
A DAYCAMP AREA
1
2
3
4
5
0)
A MARINA
1
2
3
4
5
P)
PLAYGROUNDS
1
2
3
4
5
Q)
PICNIC AREAS
1
2
3
4
5
R)
FISHING PIERS
1
2
3
4
5
S)
AN AMPHITHEATER
1
2
3
4
5
T)
RESTROOM/SHOWER FACILITIES
1
2
3
4
5
VL
L
U
VU
NO
U)
A LODGE OR OTHER HOTEL FACILITIES
1
2
3
4
5
. , V)
A CONFERENCE CENTER
1
2
3
4
5 r
W)
AN ADDITIONAL BOAT RAMP
1
2
3
4
5
X)
A SWIMMING BEACH
1
2
3
4
5
9. FROM THE LIST I JUST READ, WHAT WOULD YOU CONSIDER TO BE THE MOST
IMPORTANT RECREATIONAL FACILITY TO CONSTRUCT AT LAKE ALAN HENRY?
10. THE CITY IS ALSO STUDYING POSSIBLE HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES ON LAKE
ALAN
HENRY. HOW INTERESTED OR NOT INTERESTED DO YOU
THINK YOU WOULD BE IN
THE
FOLLOWING . . . .
VI I U VU
NO
A) PURCHASING A VACATION HOME
1 2 3 4
5
B) RENTING A CABIN
1 2 3 4
5
C) PURCHASE A PRIVATE HOME
1 2 3 4
5
D) PURCHASE A CONDOMINIUM OR TOWNHOME
1 2 3 4
5
E) RENT AN APARTMENT
1 2 3 4
5
!"*
11. HOW STRONGLY DO YOU SUPPORT OR OPPOSE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AT LAKE
ALAN HENRY?
STRONGLY SUPPORT .
. . 1
SUPPORT . . . . .
. . 2
OPPOSE . . . . . .
. . 3
STRONGLY OPPOSE .
. . 4
NO OPINION . . . .
. . 5
12. ANY HOUSING CONSTRUCTED ON THE SITE WILL LIMIT THE POSSIBLE
RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES. HOW STRONGLY WOULD
YOU SUPPORT HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES, KNOWING THAT UP TO.ONE-HALF OF THE PROPERTY COULD GO
TOWARDS RESIDENTIAL HOUSING?
STRONGLY SUPPORT .
. . 1
SUPPORT . . . . .
. . 2
o.
OPPOSE . . . . . .
. . 3
STRONGLY OPPOSE .
. . 4
NO OPINION . . . .
. . 5
13. ANY RECREATIONAL FACILITIES CONSTRUCTED AT LAKE ALAN HENRY ARE
PRESENTLY PLANNED TO BE FINANCED THROUGH UTILITY BILLS, AS WELL AS USER
FEES. IF FUNDS FROM THOSE SOURCES WERE NOT ADEQUATE TO FINANCE THE ENTIRE
PROJECT, HOW STRONGLY WOULD YOU SUPPORT OR OPPOSE THE FOLLOWING FINANCING
METHODS . . . .
SS S 0 SO NO
A) AN INCREASE IN WATER RATES 1 2 3 4 5
B) A BOND ELECTION 1 2 3 4 5
C) INCREASED FEES FOR PEOPLE WHO USE 1 2 3 4 5
THE FACILITIES
14.
HOW LIKELY OR UNLIKELY WOULD YOU
BE TO
VISIT RECREATIONAL
FACILITIES
AT
LAKE ALAN HENRY, BASED ON PAYING
EACH
VISIT?
VL
L
U
VU
NO
A)
UNDER $5.00
1
2
3
4
5
B)
$5.00 - $10.00
1
2
3
4
5
C)
$10.00 - $15.00
1
2
3
4
5
D)
$15.00 - $20.00
1
2
3
4
5
ate+ E)
$20.00 - $25.00
1
2
3
4
5
0
15. IF LUBBOCK WAS GOING TO DEVELOP A FACILITY AT LAKE ALAN HENRY, BASED
ON YOU OR YOUR HOUSEHOLD'S OWN INTERESTS, WHAT TWO OR THREE THINGS WOULD
YOU DEFINITELY WANT THE PARK TO INCLUDE? (PROBE ONCE: WHAT ELSE?)
1.
2.
s•, 3.
16.
I'M GOING TO READ YOU A LIST OF STATEMENTS.
PLEASE
TELL ME HOW
STRONGLY YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH EACH . . . .
SA A
D SD
NO
A)
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT RECREATIONAL
1 2
3 4
5
FACILITIES SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED AT
LAKE ALAN HENRY
B)
IT'S IMPORTANT TO IMPROVE RECREATION IN THE
1 2
3 4
5
COMMUNITY, INCLUDING LAKE ALAN HENRY
C)
IF FACILITIES WERE CONSTRUCTED, LAKE
1 2
3 4
5
ALAN HENRY WOULD BECOME TOO COMMERCIAL
D)
I BELIEVE THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE ABLE
1 2
3 4
5
TO EFFECTIVELY PLAN THIS PROJECT
E)
I WOULD SUPPORT PAYING HIGHER WATER RATES
1 2
3 4
5
IF NECESSARY, TO CONSTRUCT CAMPGROUNDS AND
OTHER RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AT LAKE ALAN HENRY
F)
I WOULD NOT DRIVE THE 65 MILES TO GET TO
1 2
3 4
5
LAKE ALAN HENRY
G)
WHATEVER IS DECIDED, WE MUST PROTECT THE
1 2
3 4
5
HABITAT AND WILDLIFE IN THE AREA
H)
THE CITY COULD DEVELOP THE LAKE AS A TOURIST
1 2
3 4
5
ATTRACTION AND BRING IN ADDITIONAL REVENUES
OR FEES FROM PEOPLE WHO USE THE FACILITIES
I)
CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES AT LAKE ALAN
1 2
3 4
5
HENRY WOULD IMPROVE LUBBOCK'S QUALITY OF LIFE
17.
THESE LAST FEW QUESTIONS ARE JUST FOR CLASSIFICATION
PURPOSES.
WHICH
OF
THE FOLLOWING AGE GROUPS DO YOU COME UNDER?
LESS THAN 25 YEARS
1
26 - 35
YEARS ....
2
36 - 45
YEARS ....
3
46 - 55
YEARS ....
4
56 - 65
YEARS ....
5
OVER 65
YEARS . .
. . 6
REFUSED
TO ANSWER
. . 7
18.
PLEASE TELL ME IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF
18 AT HOME
(IF
YES:
IN WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING GROUPS DO THEY COME UNDER?
NO CHILDREN
. . .
. . 1
UNDER 6
. . . . .
. . 2
6 - 12
. . . . . .
. . 3
13 — 18
. . . . .
. . 4
REFUSE
TO ANSWER .
. . 5
ii
19. ARE YOU, OR
IS A MEMBER OF YOUR FAMILY, ACTIVE IN THE FOLLOWING
ORGANIZATIONS?
IF YOU'RE NOT ACTIVE, TELL ME THAT ALSO.
s�
NATURE CONSERVANCY
1
GUN CLUB . . . . . . .
2
AUDUBON SOCIETY . . .
3
DUCKS UNLIMITED . . .
4
SIERRA CLUB . . . .
5
LOCAL NATURE CLUB . .
6
OTHER . . .
7
�^
NOT ACTIVE . . . . . .
8
THAT'S THE END
OF OUR SURVEY BUT COULD I CHECK TO SEE IF I DIALED THE
CORRECT NUMBER.
I DIALED AND COULD I HAVE YOUR FIRST NAME_,
ONLY IN CASE MY
SUPERVISOR HAS TO VERIFY THIS
INTERVIEW?
THANK YOU AND HAVE A NICE EVENING.
Milk
CALLER INI.
SHEET NUMBER ZIPCODE SURVEY LENGTH
f
1
i
I
i
i
s
}
m
Appendix D
Examples of Campsite Layout
The following campground layouts are provided for planning purposes,
in response to the high interest in camping facilities expressed by
Lubbock citizens in the public opinion survey. Because of its varied
terrain and vegetation, the Sam Wahl Recreational Area could
accommodate several of these layouts within the park. (These plans
should not be used as construction drawings.)
SAIMUEL W. W FIL RECREATIONAL AREA MASTER PLAN DRAFT 8/01 DI
en+
This campground is intended for family campers who favor tents or tent trailers.
The individual sites or located around a rest room building designed to serve the
eight campsites.
0' 10' 20'
L I
Figure D-1
Back -in, Daisy Campground
Courtesy:
The Park Practice Program
U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
1
I
I
1
D2
This arrangement causes minimal site disturbance and provides excellent screening
between sites. This design offers both "spur" and "pull -off' sites; generally,
however, the spur type is preferable if space permits since it removes the camping
activity from traffic. Terrain features may not always permit such spurs to be built.
Lea- Large Sp..I..n T"..
25-70' Clearing
0' 50'
L I I I 4 1
®Tobla��}
Barrier �''i F�i'traplace
Pa1-1
Tent Space
jZ� rb.ge Can
Or4rinp Surface 12' i6
Gravel Pad to Fit Tree Openings
and Contour.. M..h— Passible.
Figure D-2
Pull -off Camp Sites
Courtesy:
The Park Practice Program
U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
D3
•" This layout is suitable for all types of overnight camping. It provides all of the
dimensions and spatial relationships required to design a campground on level or
moderately sloping ground. Utility connections may be provided. All sites have the
capacity for trailers as well as space for a 12' by 16' tent pad. The exact size and
shape of the use pad should vary with the topography and vegetation. The optional
parking lot adjacent to the restroom may be used for visitor parking or for extra
' users' vehicles.
0"Full
�f
IV X,5
•t9/1 ^', ...�+�0�•' . f � O �a'aE�y„L�jy � r� !"
,ww v �j �'.t'';.aJ,.%ice j� f•'' Q .� �� ((� �4'�GJ°�w.Q�(•�"�: �4 3 � g�1.`„
mow+
r-
Figure D-3(a)
Linear Camp Layout
�a
Courtesy:
Derign, A publication of the Park Practice Program
National Park Service and National Recreation and Park Association
�, D4
These individual sites are designed to fit into the layout on the previous page.
\Z
O \
/ \ / UTILITY PAD
ou
45* BACK IN DOUBLE SITE
A
RIGHT SIDE OF ROAD
rIS-R
60
_0_NE._WAY
89,
BACK IN
PULL THROUGH
Li.... Como L.y.., (—ti... 4) 0-5712
AAA
/sAl
Figure D-3(b)
Linear Camp Site Layouts
Courtesy:
De ign, A publication of the Park Practice Program
National Park Service and National Recreation and Park Association
e� D5
In this arrangement each pull -through site has its own grassy area, which may serve
as a patio for the recreation vehicle or as a tent site. Note that the traffic pattern,
designed for the benefit of towed recreation vehicles, enters on the inside of the left
next to the island and exits on the outside road in a clockwise circuit. Or, it may be
made to enter on the outside road on the right in a counterclockwise circuit, exiting
on the inside road at the lower left. This design requires a relatively level area of
land.
o-
0 6.00 0
�} 0
9.00 o
0 5.00 0
0 0
10.00
0 4.00 o J
�O 0
O
11.00 O
0 3.00 0
OC. 12.00 0 __
0 2.00 0
0 �0
o£ 13.00
1.00 0
0 0
14.00
0' 100' 10
Lr 111 ,1� ''. �10'
Figure D-4
Pull -through Trailer Campground
Courtesy:
The Park Practice Program
U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
.D.1 - DG
I
Y
i
This compact arrangement is another example of a pull -through campground. It is
of limited width, suitable for a peninsula, canyon, or ridge. Each unit occupies 1800
square feet, yielding approximately 24 units per acre. Each unit enjoys an
unobstructed view, but there is no space for screening between units.
Figure D-5
20-Degree Angle Campground
Courtesy:
The Park Practice Program
U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
�• D7
This campsite is another arrangement suitable for an elongated situation. The larger
areas could accommodate rest rooms or a playground. Circulation in this plan must
"^ be counterclockwise to permit the recreational vehicle door to face the half-moon
shaped plot adjacent to each pull -through.
o• aI
t Figure D-6
Trailer Unit
Courtesy:
The Park Practice Program
rook . U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
.p% D8
This arrangement provides minimal facilities for tent camping.
/ For Future D... lopme.t 1 1
� II
#s~. I Wahr. wars.
Bathhouse 8 Toilets
w.t.r ��►
!� • rr
y
r - R.ar.arlo. Asa I r
WOjer
ESA
m
Ri+ r
Figure D-7
Minimum Facility Campground Layout
Courtesy:
The Park Practice Program
l�••I U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
�• D9
This campground provides 364 sites in a variety of configurations.
In the first section, it provides 44 condominium sites for extended visits. (Figure
8(c)). Next to the condominiums are 55 overnight, pull -through trailer sites. A
swimming pool in this central location does not disturb the destination campers on
the far ends of the campground.
The area of primitive sites that has 20 units in each of four daisy -pinwheels, 19 sites
in each of six penta-pinwheels, five sites in one individual penta and six sites in one
individual daisy — a total of 205 sites. Each trailer site has the amenities found in
more conventional arrangements, yet leaving enough wooded areas surrounding each
camping cluster to enhance the campers' experience.
DAISY -PINWHEEL PENTA-PINWHEEL
r■!
w-
M�
uViAm
s e iWk AN
PerYing
GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN
Figure D-8(a)
Pinwheel Campground Layout
Courtesy:
The Park Practice Program
U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
D10
Feet
r
This layout is used as a "destination" campground and as such, offers the visitor all
the wooded atmosphere and natural environment he expects without being too
!"° demanding of the land in terms of space requirements.
4
1B'•0••
G'rba ge cons, 5 per circle min. 148
�r trast light�-
FF-- main
TTTT
�
Pored
y
C 3�
•`.
Approx.
os ^
3.66 S—�
LGA'' 2,041 eq•
Q•�Ab
ft. Per. sire
5.49
ti
(622'
\
meters)
C
,'
PARTIAL PLAN OF PENTA CAMPGR06ND
t Pot`b°eelrebl
CO
CENTER SECTION
y
S — Sewer
WE
W — Wet.,
E — Electric
Street light +4`/' /
// PARTIAL PLAN OF PINWHEEL OUTSIDE OF PEN TA
Figure D-8(b)
Penta Pinwheel Campground
Courtesy:
The Park Practice Program
U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
D11
i
Triangular grid pattern and utility hook-ups characterize "condominium"
campground, designed for extended stays by trailer owners.
SEW -- $-war, El—f6c and Water
Figure D-8(c)
Condominium Campground
Courtesy:
The Park Practice Program
U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
D12
I
Bibliography
Books
Deloney, James A.; Eley, Roxane; Dziekan, Kelly. 1990. 1990 TORP Assessment and
Policy Plan. Consumer Planning Section, Comprehensive Planning Section, Austin,
TX.
Harris, Charles W. and Dines, Nicholas T. Timesaver Standards for Landscape
Architecture: Desipna and Construction Data, 2nd Ed. 1998: McGraw-Hill
Publishing Company, New York.
Hodges, J. Windmills on the Llana Esctado Interpretation of an American
Landscape. Nff A Thesis. Lubbock TX: Texas Tech University.
Prewitt and Associates, Inc., Consulting Archaeologists. Cultural Resources
Management Plan, Dec. 1997.
Rutledge, Albert J. 1971. Anatomy of a Park. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.
Simpson, Benny J. 1988. A Field Guide to Texas Trees. Texas Monthly Press,
Austin, Texas.
. 2000-2001 Texas Almanac. 1998. The Dallas Morning News,
Dallas, Texas.
. Annotated County Lists of Rare Species, Rev. 1 / 11 /01. Texas
Parks and Wildlife.
Wasowski, Sally. 1998. Texas Native Plants. Texas Monthly Press, Austin, Texas.
Intemet
http://water.ci.lubbock.tx.us/lakealanhena.htrrd
FL MSS
(817) 649-3216 -(817) 640-8212 Metro- (817) 649-7645 Fax
Aerial Photograph Provided by. P L A T E 1
WILLIAMS-STACKHOUSE INC
m8P�MWX DKM SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA
SM AWON10, MAS 742-V
(M) 82443M A E R I A L PHOTOGRAPH
09.1,.E
DATE Of %407pptAVFM SEPfEhB6f 30, 1999
�Xlvf Xly, -�flt'lffil I
PAV
L& 7
LAI %-7
ry
p,
wr
17
,44
I WN-Irel"i
1W.
%07,
I 4ml,
)INK -i C.11,1ILM A. m
P,
NVA
gf
-A
3
Low""
Schrickel, Rollins and Associates, Inc.
Consuiranrs in Landscape Archi[ecWre • Engineering • Planning
1161 Corporate Drive west • Suite 200. Arrington, Texas 76006
(817) 649-3216 •(817) 640-8212 metro •(817) 649-7645 Fax
09.14.00
TOPOGRAPHIC
SLOPES
(s-20%)
T
NORTH
0 0o too rou ww
siwc tout w rEsr
PLATE 3
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA
SITE ANALYSIS
Schrickel, Rollins and Associates, Inc.
Consultants in '.an&Cape Architecture • Engineering • Planning
1161 Corporate Drive west • Suite 200 • Arlington. Texas 76M
(817) 649-3216 • (817) 640-8212 Metro . (817) 649-7645 Fox
0 VAO
I L I T Y
ABLE
E R 0 D A B L E
D A 5 L E
T
NORTH
0 MO we 400 {00
�rM1i w11[ M fQr
PLATE 4
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA
SITE ANALYSIS
..owmo» un�w sn.
u.v� oou.ry an satyr
Schrickel, Rollins and Associates, Inc.
Consultants in Landscape Architecure • Engineering • Planning
1161 Corporate Drive West • Suite 200 • ArIlr9ton, Texas 76006
(617) 649-3216 •(817) 640-8212 Metro •(817) 649-1645 Fax
09.14.0D
)S
MPACTED)
ITELY IMPACTED)
PACTED)
T
NORTH
�Z— r mi
PLATE 5
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA
SITE ANALYSIS
Schrickel, Rollins and Associates, Inc.
Consultants In Landscape Architecture + Engineering r Planning
1161 Corporate Drive West • Suite 2DD - Arlin&i , Texas 76DD6
(817) 649-3216 • (817) 640-8212 Metro • (517) 649-7645 Fox
PREWM aid AS500A ESQ TIC
CONgATINC A904MLOOM
ksm rEW
09.1400
ICES
T A T E
)MARK)
(SITE M E E T 5 S.AL
IESIGNATED AS SUCH)
ECORDED
T
NORTH
a wa roo Opp 090
rows roar r rw
PLATE 6
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA
SITE ANALYSIS
Schrickel, Rollins and Associates, Inc.
Consultants in Landscape .Architecture • Engineering • Planning
1161 Corporate Drive West . Suite 200 • Arlington, Texas 76006
(817) 649-3216•(817) 640-8212 Metro• (617) 649-7645 Fax
K14.0a
I n r
T
NORTH
be ps��
ri,w+�c i-- r —
PLATE 7
I T A B I L I T Y
iY
SAMUEL W. WAHL RECREATIONAL AREA
SITE ANALYSIS
V,
L B
W 91 YE R UYILITIES
TV
. A
Ink
v Q!,
K er AN,
IT:
, - ,