MEMORIAL PARK
Master Plan 2015 Executive Summary
cover image: MIR
MEMORIAL PARK
Master Plan 2015 Executive Summary
Client Group
Commitments from three entities, Memorial Park Conservancy (MPC), Houston Parks and Recreation Department (HPARD) and Uptown Houston Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (Uptown Houston) comprise the funding and decision-making structure for the Master Plan.
HPARD sees Memorial Park as an important part of the Houston Parks System. The HPARD system has nine signature parks, including Memorial. Within this municipal parks system, Memorial Park is an important large park for wilderness use, active recreation, and golf within the I-610 loop. HPARD owns the land that comprises Memorial Park, and currently does most park maintenance.
The Memorial Park Conservancy (MPC) is a private non-profit organization whose mission is to restore, preserve and enhance Memorial Park for the benefit of all Houstonians, today and tomorrow. MPC works in close partnership with Houston Parks and Recreation (HPARD) and now Uptown Houston and focuses on conservation, improving park amenities, supporting park maintenance, advocacy for and maintenance of Memorial Park. Incorporated in 2000, MPC has delivered multiple improvements to Memorial Park with HPARD, including most recently the planting of 90,000 seedlings, 500 acres of invasive control work and construction of the Running Trails Center. The MPC Board in 2012 secured approval from HPARD to create a new long range Master Plan for Memorial Park.
The annexation of Memorial Park by Uptown Houston in 2013 created a critical funding source for much needed long-range planning in the park and allowed for expenditure of capital improvement projects.
Design Team
The project began in June of 2012. In September of 2013, Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects was selected to lead the design efforts. After an eight month research phase, the team moved on to programming and design, with the planning process reaching completion April 2015. The design team has worked extensively with the public, clients, and consultants during the research, programming, and design phases of the master plan. An ongoing public input process solicited feedback about existing conditions and the proposed design of the park. Client feedback from MPC, HPARD, and Uptown Houston has helped steer the master plan.
A large team of local and national professional consultants has been engaged to guide the research necessary to produce a design that takes into consideration the park’s complex technical aspects. Input from these sources has been critical to the team’s understanding of the park, the generation of the guiding principles, the development of the proposed plan, and the ongoing refinement from feedback received throughout the process.
Design Lead/Landscape Architecture Thomas L. Woltz Jeff Aten Sara Myhre Alissa Diamond Samantha Dabney
Christopher Woods Jeremy Jordan Jennifer Jessup Sandra Nam Cioffi David Lepage
Civil Engineering Environmental Consulting Public Space Management and Design Cultural Resources and Public Process Planning Public Relations Wayfinding and Signage Bike Park Design Soil Science Consulting Traffic Engineering Historical Consulting Forestry Consulting Lighting Design Videography Graphic and Web Design Golf Course Design Consulting Social Media Consulting Land Surveying Visualization and Rendering Visualization and Rendering Drone Photography
Tim Popa Breck Gastinger Fraser Stuart Beth Lazen Sandy Rice
Andrea Hawkes Tommy Solomon Daniel Irving
6
Approved by City Council on April 1, 2015 Motion Number 2015 0215
Thank You
Mayor Annise Parker Houston City Controller Ronald C. Green Council Members Brenda Stardig Jerry Davis Ellen Cohen Dwight Boykins Dave Martin Richard Nguyen Oliver Pennington Ed Gonzalez Robert Gallegos Mike Laster Larry Green Stephen Costello David Robinson Michael Kubosh C.O. “Brad” Bradford Jack Christie
Memorial Park Steering Committee Andy Icken Chris Knapp Ed Wulfe Jim Porter Kendall Miller Louis Sklar Martin Debrovner Mindy Hildebrand Philip Schneidau Rick Dewees Russell Windham Steve Jenkins Steve Lerner Houston Parks and Recreation Department Joe Turner, Director Abel Gonzales Clifford “Chip” Perry (General Services Department) Dee Howell Estella Espinosa Erika Madison Gail Brown Jason Harsh Jay Daniel Julie Blum Kenneth Allen Lisa Johnson (General Services Department) Luci Correa Mark Ross Rick Dewees Sonya Ellis TJ Marks City of Houston Al Hoang Alvin Byrd Amy Peck Andrew Burks Andy Icken Brooke Boyett Daniel Santamaria Dave Bonem Debbi Elliott-Griffith James Koski Ja’Nae Winfield Janice Evans Jay Roberts Jerry Peruchini Joaquin Martinez John Moss Karen Haller Laura Spanjian Lauren Laake Maria Irshad Matt Brollier Melissa Noriega Patrick Walsh Sallie Alcorn Sandra Strachan Sheena Childs Stella Pereira Traci Elsner Valerie Luna Wanda Adams Memorial Park Conservancy Adam Newar Anita Smith Anne Vance Averil Brannen Bass Wallace Cara Rudelson Casey Doherty Chalon Fontaine Chris Knapp Chuck Carlberg Dena Prasher Dennis Johnston Gary Moss Greg Armstrong Jamie Hendrixson Jim Dougherty Jim Porter (Chairman) John Paukune Katy Emde Kerry Goelzer Madeleine Hussey Maggie Brown Margaret Pierce (Secretary) Marilyn Van Way Meg Murray Michael Grasley Mindy Hildebrand (Vice-Chairman) Nelsy Gomez
Nicholas Butler Odette McMurrey Mace Philip Schneidau Randall Grace Rupal Shah Russell Adams Russell Brown (Treasurer) Russell Windham Shellye Arnold (Executive Director) Stephen Costello Steve Gibson Steve Jenkins Suzanne Landau Terri Thomas Wendy Hines Uptown Houston Betsy Kirkgard Bob Ethington Delia Mizwa Dot Cunningham Duane Hale Dwayne Flowers Greg Noble Janice Harris John Mooz John R. Breeding (President) Jonathan Zadock Judson Robinson III Katie McDonough Kendall Miller (Secretary) Lauren Anderson Lisa Simon Louis Sklar Lyndsey Peterson Martin Debrovner (Chairman) Marvin Kaplan Mary Catherine Miller Natchaya Wanissorn Patty Bender Rachel Beeton Robert Taube Rod Smith Sarah Avila Sarah Newbery (Project Director) Shannon Daniels Stephen Wood Steve Lerner Todd Casper EcoTech Panel Allen Malone - Texas A&M Agrilife Extension Service Cassidy Johnson - Rice University Chalon Fontaine - MPC Conservation Chair Chris Adams - AEL Cin-Ty Lee - Rice University Debbie Markey - Houston Arboretum and Nature Center Dee Howell - City of Houston Diana Foss - Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Don Gray - Memorial Park Conservancy Emily Manderson - Houston Arboretum and Nature Center Evan Siemann - Rice University Evelyn Merz - Sierra Club of Houston George Guillen - Environmental Institute of Houston (U of H Clearlake) Jaime Gonzalez - Coastal Prairie Partnership, Katy Prairie Conservancy Jed Aplaca - HPARD Lan Shen - Native Plant Society Lee Fitzgerald - Texas A&M Agrilife Extension Service Marc Reid - Houston Wilderness Michael Merritt - Texas A&M Forest Service Nancy Grieg - Cockrell Butterfly Center Houston-Museum of Natural Science, Rice University Richard Gibbons - Houston Audubon Society Steve Hupp - Bayou Preservation Association Trevor Rubenstahl - Houston Arboretum and Nature Center Victor Cordova - City of Houston Volker Rudolf - Rice University Process Support and Consultants AEL Alan Krathaus - Core Design Studio Alex Hogrefe - Hartness Rendering Alyse Yeager - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Alyson Goulden, Sherwood Design Engineers Amy Brook - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Amy Kaufman Andrew Hartness - Hartness Rendering Anne Sharpe Art League Houston Ashley Pearce - DPWPR Ashley Small - Medley, Inc Baxter Spann - Finger Dye Spann Inc. Bayou Bend Collections and Gardens
7
Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Brandon Volk - Sherwood Design Engineers Brian Courcelle - Fazio Design Brian Goad - Susan Turner Associates Brittney Davis - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Bry Sarte - Sherwood Design Engineers Caroline Dawson - DPWPR Carolyn White - HCFCD Carrithers Studio Cassie Stinson - Boyar Miller Attorneys at Law Charles Penland - Walter P Moore Chris Adams - AEL Chris Boswell - Sherwood Design Engineers Chris Thayer - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Core Design Studio Dancie Perugini Ware Public Relations Dancie Ware - DPWPR Dave Kelly - Gravity Logic Delicia Harvey - Carrithers Studio DesignWorkshop Desiree Liu - ETM Dinnis Lee - Hunt Design Edwin Friedrichs - Walter P Moore Eldorado Ballroom & Project Row Houses Emad Hasan - The Lighting Practice Emily Morishita - Hunt Design ETM Associates Fazio Golf Course Designers, Inc. Fiona McGettigan - Core Design Studio Gary Tinterow - Museum of Fine Arts, Houston Haille Carter - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Hartness Rendering Helen Diemer - The Lighting Practice High School for the Performing and Visual Arts Houston Arboretum and Nature Center Hunt Design Jacob Rustin - AEL James Vick - SWA Jason Loiselle - Sherwood Design Engineers Jay Beatherage - AEL Jay Hoelle - Hartness Rendering Jeff Dunn - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Jennifer Peek - Walter P Moore Jenny Janis - Sherwood Design Engineers Jessica Stanley - Sherwood Design Engineers Jimmy Galvez - Sherwood Design Engineers John Carrithers - Carrithers Studio John Welch - Susan Turner Associates Josiah Cain - Sherwood Design Engineers Joy Bailey Bryant - Lord Cultural Resources Keith Morgan - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Kevin Shanley - SWA Kinder Baumgardner - SWA Lamar High School Lauren Griffith - Lauren Griffith Associates Lee Lupher - Lupher LLC Lillian Knoerzer - The Lighting Practice Lindsay Martin Lord Cultural Resources Mark Bonsignore - Sherwood Design Engineers Mark Brian - AEL Marta Fredericks - DPWPR Matt Neuman - AEL Matthew Baker - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Matthew Gorgol - Carrithers Studio Medley, Inc. Mia Rosensaft - The Lighting Practice Michaela Williams - DPWPR Mike Fu - Sherwood Design Engineers MIR Moody Park Community Center Natalie Hall - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Nelson Byrd Woltz Nick Musso - Susan Turner Associates Odile Coindreau Newberg - Spanish At Last Prentiss Darden - Sherwood Design Engineers Priya Sircar - Lord Cultural Resources Randy Odinet - Walter P Moore Rasmus Jantzen - Lord Cultural Resources Rebecca Leonard - Design Workshop Rob Cocquyt - Gravity Logic Shanon Mathis - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Susan Alford - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Wayne Hunt - Hunt Design William Proctor - Berg-Oliver Associates, Inc. Scott McCready - SWA Sebastian Civarolo - Core Design Studio Sherwood Design Engineering Simone’s on Sunset St. Theresa Catholic Church Steve Albert - Sherwood Design Engineers Steve Harris Photoraphy Steve Timms - Houston Golf Association Susan Turner - Susan Turner Associates Susan Turner Associates SWA T. Logan Fazio - Fazio Design Ted Silberberg The Lighting Practice The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston Tim Peterson - SWA Tim Marshall - ETM Tom Baucus - Sherwood Design Engineers Tom Pro - Gravity Logic Walter P Moore White Oak Conference Center Citizen, Group, and Technical Consultants Ann Hamilton A.J. Mistretta Afton Oaks Civic Club Alene Haehl Allan Reyes Allie Sweeney Amanda McMillian Ampy Bouchey Andi Young Ann Reed Ann Taylor Anna Helm Anne Olson
Arlington Court Association Inc. Art League of Houston Asian American Chamber of Commerce Aurora Picture Show Avalon Place Civic Association Bart Brechter Bayou City Art Festival Bayou City Outdoors Bayou Club Bayou Land Conservancy Bayou Preservation Association Becky Pate Benjamin Marshall Bering Omega Community Services Bike Barn Bike Houston Bill Rustam Brad Klein Brandt Mannchen Bridget Samuel Buffalo Bayou Park Buffalo Bayou Partnership Buffalo Field Archery Club Cameron Phillips Camp Gladiator Camp Logan Memorial Civic Club Carol Caul Carter Smith Center for Houston’s Future Chip Place Chris Brown Chris Cornell Chris Thayer Christof Spieler Coastal Prairie Partnership Crestwood Garden Club Crestwood/Glen Cove Civic Association Dan Havel Darryl Rosenfeld Daughters of the Republic of Texas David Andrew Deborah January-Bevers Dennis Greer Diane Barber Diverse Works Doreen Stoller Doreen Stroller Dr. Deborah Irabor Dr. Stephen Klineberg Dr. Stephen Linder Endangered Species Media Project Eric Covert Eric Henao Frank Karbarz Frank Levy Garden Club of Houston Gary Foster Gary Mangold Geoff Carleton Greater Houston Off-Road Biking Association Gulf Coast Cycling Association Guy Hagstette Hannah Waggett Harris County Department of Education Harris County Flood Control District Harris County Historical Commission Hermann Park Conservancy Hispanic Health Coalition Holly Amerson Houston Area Association for the Education of Young Children Houston Area Road Runners Association Houston Area Trail Runners Houston Arts Alliance Houston Association of Independent Schools Houston Athletic Rugby Club Houston Audubon Society Houston B-Cycle Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau Houston Croquet Club Houston FIT Houston Flying Disc Houston GeoCaching Society Houston Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Houston Historical Commission Houston Livestock Show & Rodeo Houston Marathon Foundation Houston Museum of African American Culture Houston Parks Board Houston Polo Club Houston Public Library Houston Striders Houston Tomorrow Houston Ultimate Frisbee Houston Wilderness Houston Women’s Soccer Association Houstonians Futbol Club Indo-American Chamber of Commerce Interfaith Ministries Jack Lyons James G. Rodriguez James Neff James Rowland James Simmons Janet Wagner Jason Fuller Jay Barksdale Jeffery Hildebrand Jen Powis Jennifer Hazelton Jennifer Schwartz Jim Blackburn Joe Blanton Joe Carey Joe Hood Joel Cowley John Truong John Wilburn Jonathan Glus Jonathan Shear Jose Rayo Joy Wright
Judy Tuttle-Wurth Justin Silhavy Karlo Martinez Kate Hood Kathleen Vossler Kathy Lord Katy Butterwick Katy Prairie Conservancy Keely Everett Keith Cunningham Kelly Howard Kelly Kindred Kenny Friedmann Kinder Institute for Urban Research - Rice University Kristi Cancelmo Lamar High School Leadership Council Latino Giving Foundation Lauren Biggs Lauren Fuller Lauren Santerre Leroy Shafer Linda Buchman Linda Gorski Lisa Pace Logan Beck Louis Aulbach Madison Place Townhomes Association Magnolia Grove Civic Association Marcus Jennings Mark Worscheh Marley Lott Martha Long Matt Tyler Matthew Lennon Memorial Park Hunters Merrily Quincoces Michael Ereli Michael Klein Michael Payne Michael Pernateau Michael Skelly Mike VanDusen Native Plant Society of Texas Native Prairies Association of Texas Neil Bremner Old Sixth Ward Orlando Sanchez Outdoor Nature Club Pam Heard Pam Moore Patricia Osborn Patrick Jankowski Patty Roberts Paul Hesson Paul Hobby Peter Brown Pierce Bush Rama Musa Rega Waggett Regina Garcia Reginald Adams Renee Rivellini Rice Military Civic Club Rice University Rico Torres River Oaks Chamber Orchestra River Oaks Garden Club River Oaks Property Owners Inc. Rob Goyen Roger Boak Roger Moore Roksan Okan-Vick Ron Morgan Runner’s High Club Russell Fishbeck Saints Baseball Samantha Morgan Sarah Pool Save Our Forest Sean Wade Shelley Kennedy Sierra Club- Houston Group Sierra Club- Lone Star Chapter Sonia Stabinsky Spencer Wheat Spring Branch Independent School District Sr. Damien Marie Savino St. Luke’s Health Charities Stephen Linder Steven Vealey Super Neighborhood 22 Suzanne Menn Tamara Gallagher Texas A&M University Texas Archeological Society Texas Campaign for the Environment Texas Forest Service Texas Geocaching Association Texas Parks and Wildlife Department The University of Texas Tom Bacon Tom Dornbusch Tom Gall University of Texas School of Public Health Unviersity of St. Thomas Urban Land Institute US Lacrosse: Houston Chapter USA FIT Van Smith Vested in Aging Vietnamese Chamber of Commerce Wade Morehead Wendy Wilkinson West End Civic Club Westwood Grove William Rub Winford Adams Woodcrest Neighborhood Civic Association YMCA of Greater Houston
CONTENTS
1 Project Background...................................10
4 Site Systems...................................................70
Project Impetus........................................................12 Memorial Park Within Houston’s Park System...12 Pre-drought Aerial.............................................13 Post-drought Aerial............................................13 Master Planning Process.........................................14 Timeline.............................................................14 Project Structure................................................15
Circulation and Parking...........................................72 Road Network....................................................72 Transit System...................................................72 Proposed Parking..............................................73 Trail System.......................................................73 Traffic........................................................................74 Trails: Typologies.....................................................76 Major Throughways...........................................76 Primary Pathways..............................................77 User Trails..........................................................78 Materials..................................................................80 Plantings..................................................................82 Riparian.............................................................82 Barrancos and Riparian Edges.........................84 Pine-Hardwood Forest......................................86 Pine-Hardwood Savannah.................................88 Native Prairie.....................................................90 Wet Prairie-Savannah.........................................92 Plant Palette.......................................................94 Stormwater Systems...............................................98 Ecological Stormwater Management Plan........98 Water Reuse Plan..............................................99 Signage and Graphics...........................................100 Lighting..................................................................101 Maintenance and Operations................................102 Main Entrances......................................................104 Focus Areas...........................................................106 Land Bridge, Running Center and Timing Track.............................................106 Bayou Wilds.....................................................108 Southern Arc Trail Sections.............................110 Bayou Wilds Trailhead.....................................116 Eastern Glades................................................118 Tennis, Fitness and Natatorium.......................120 Sports Complex...............................................122 Golf Course.....................................................124 Memorial Groves.............................................126 Cycle Track and Trails.....................................128 Old Archery Range (OAR)...............................130 Hogg Bird Sanctuary.......................................132
2 Site Analysis...................................................16 History......................................................................18 Pre-Settlement...................................................18 Early Settlement 1830s-1915.............................18 Camp Logan Era 1917-1919.............................18 Era of Park Establishment 1919-1930s..............20 1930s-Present...................................................20 Summary of Research and Conclusions...........20 Ecology....................................................................22 Restore Resiliency and Diversity.......................22 Existing Park Ecology........................................22 Transition to Diverse Ecological Corridors........23 Existing Vegetation............................................24 Design Analysis and Overall Strategies..................26 Reconnect.........................................................26 Limit Impact.......................................................27 Organize Program.............................................27 Guiding Principles...................................................28
3 Master Plan Design....................................30 Labeled Master Plan................................................32 Master Plan Renderings..........................................35 Land Bridge Over Memorial Drive.....................35 Bayou Wilds and Southern Arc Trail..................36 Eastern Glades..................................................38 Memorial Groves...............................................42 View of Typical Savannah Landscape From Observation Tower.............................................46 Kids’ Cycle Loop and Playground.....................48 Seymour Lieberman Trail...................................50 Sports Complex.................................................52 Cycle Track........................................................54 Running Center and Timing Track.....................56 Park Entrance at I-610 and Woodway Drive......58 Park Entrance at Memorial Drive East With Eastern Glades Beyond.....................................60 Bayou Wilds Pedestrian Trails Within Restored Savannah...........................................................62 Bayou Overlook on the Southern Arc Trail........64 Hogg Bird Sanctuary Walking Trails..................66 Mountain Biking Trail.........................................68
5 Conclusions..................................................134 6 List of Appendices....................................136
Project Background ·
10
1
Project Background
image: Houston Metropolitan Research Center
11
Project Background · Project Impetus
12
Project Impetus Memorial Park is the largest public park within the I-610 loop. It is widely used for both passive and active recreation. The recent drought decimated the existing pine-dominant canopy in the park, creating a massive public outcry with the loss of the woodland setting
cherished by many Houstonians. This event created an opportunity to reevaluate the long-term planning strategy for Memorial Park.
Memorial Park Within Houston’s Park System
Beltway 8
I-69
I-45
I-610
I-10
I-10
225
I-69
I-45
288
Legend HPARD Signature Park HPARD Public Park Major Highway Waterway MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
13
Pre-drought Aerial
2010 source: Google
Post-drought Aerial
2014 source: Lupher LLC
Master Planning Process Timeline The project began in June of 2012. In September of 2013, Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects (NBW) was selected to lead the design efforts. After an 8 month research phase, the team moved on to programming and design, with the planning process reaching completion in April 2015.
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
MPC + Uptown Houston + HPARD Interview Process
DEC
2014 JAN
2014 2015 FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
Programming & Public Input
Design Team Selection
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
Master Planning
Guiding Principles Presentation
Public Input & Research
OCT
Master Plan Presentation
2013
Public Meeting Initial Design Concepts
Project Background 路 Master Planning Process
14
Open House #8 Final Proposed Plan: Memorial Park Tomorrow- A Place for all Houstonians
Project Kick-off Site Reconnaissance Information Gathering
Open House #8 Spaces and Places: How will it look?
Open House #1 Open House #2
Open House #7 Organizing the Site: What Goes Where?
Open House #3
Open House #6 A Story of the Park: People in NatureInitial Design Concepts Open House #4 Open House #5
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
15
Project Structure The design team has received input from multiple sources during the research, programming, and design phases of this master planning effort. An ongoing public input process has solicited public comment from over 3,000 participants on both existing conditions in the park and on the design of the park as proposed by the design team. Client input from MPC, HPARD, and Uptown Houston has helped steer the design efforts. A wide team of local and national professional and volunteer consultants has been engaged to guide the research necessary to produce a design that takes into account the complex technical aspects of the park’s planning. All three of these input sources have helped generate the principles that guide the master plan design.
Memorial Park Conservancy Houston Parks and Recreation Department Uptown Houston
NBW
CLIENT INPUT
Berg Oliver (Ecology)
BergOliver Oliver (Ecology) (Ecology) Berg
John (Soils) Jacob andJacob Associates (Soils) John Jacob (Soils) Hunt Design (Wayfinding) Hunt Design (Wayfinding) Sherwood Design Engineers (Civil Engineering) Hunt Design (Wayfinding) Sherwood Design Engineers Suzanne Turner Associates (History) The Lilghting PracticeEngineers (Lighting) (Civil Design Engineering) Sherwood Associates (O&M) SusanETM Turner Associates (History) (Civil Engineering) Ecotech Panel The Lighting Practice (Lighting) Fazio Design (Golf) Susan Turner Associates (History) Walter P Moore (O (Traffic) ETM Associates & M) The Lighting Practice (Lighting) Lupher, LLC (Surveying) Advanced Ecology (Forestry) ETM Associates (O & M) Gravity Logic (Trails)
PUBLIC INPUT
RESEARCH
PUBLIC INPUT
RESEARCH
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
GUIDING PRINCIPLES Reconnect...
the land, waterways, trails, people, and memories.
Consolidate...
compatible uses together in appropriate areas.
Restore...
the ecology of the park and our connection to it.
Enhance...
the overall park experience and its amenities.
Tend...
the land and our cultural history and maintain balance through responsible management.
16
2
Site Analysis
17
Site Analysis · History
18
History Pre-Settlement The site on which Memorial Park sits is part of the Western Gulf Coastal Plain. The land formed during the last two million years through riverine deposition from the ancient analogues of today’s Brazos River. The formation of Buffalo Bayou, which borders the south side of the park, is a much more recent geological event. At the height of the last ice age, about 18,000 years ago, sea level was about 200 feet lower than it is currently. Most of the streams that drain the Upper Gulf Coast, including Buffalo Bayou, were formed at this time. Also at this time, due to cooler conditions, most of Metro Houston would have been enveloped in forest. As conditions warmed with the retreat of glaciers, these
forests were reduced to remnants along waterways like Buffalo Bayou, and the area’s vegetation became mostly dominated by marshes and prairies. A 1944 aerial photograph of the site is an early picture of the site’s vegetation, and reflects this gradation from forested areas along the bayou to a transitional savannah to the north, and larger swaths of prairie farther away from major waterways. Before the arrival of European settlers, the Houston area was inhabited by various groups of native peoples, including the Tonkawa, Akokisa and Karankawa. These people may have reinforced the natural fire regime of lightning strikes that maintained open prairies with
prescribed burning of useful lands. Boundaries between these native groups would likely have been very fluid, as all these tribes moved actively about the region depending on the availability of food, the power of each of the tribal leaders, and other cultural influences. These cultures were primarily hunter gatherers who traveled seasonally within the region. The Spanish arrived in Texas, establishing missions elsewhere in the region throughout the 18th century, but the Houston area was largely uninhabited by Europeans until the early 19th century.
Early Settlement 1830s-1915 In 1821, Spain ceded control of the region to Mexico. Settlers from the United States and Germany began moving into the Houston area, seeking cheap land and improved economic opportunity. Houston became a key entry point for German settlers arriving in Texas, some of whom stayed in the Houston area, and many more who moved to the hill country north of Houston. As part of this wave of migration, the Reinermann family of Oldenberg, Germany arrived in Texas in the winter of 1834. They moved inland to the Houston area, and the family applied for a land grant in 1835. A portion of this land would eventually become Memorial Park. Around the same time the Reinermann family was arriving to Houston, major changes were occurring in the region. In 1836, Sam Houston routed Santa Anna’s forces at the Battle of San Jacinto, separating Texas from Mexico. Santa Anna burned most of Harrisburg, the main settlement in the area at the time, just south and east of Houston’s ultimate location. Complications in the settlement of the land deterred the enterprising Allen Brothers from purchasing land there, and they
instead purchased land further to the north, and founded the City of Houston. In 1845 Texas joined the United States, spurring another influx of American immigrants to Houston. Key to the development of Houston was its centrality as a transit hub for the region. Buffalo Bayou served as a major route for transportation of cotton and other agricultural products between the state’s vast interior hinterlands and ocean-borne transport lines departing via the Gulf of Mexico. On the Memorial Park site at the Old Archery Range, archeological study has revealed that this part of the park site was used for a large brick kiln complex, charcoal manufacturing, and a plant nursery and orchard. These types of uses would have been common all along Buffalo Bayou, as the waterway was both a transportation route and a locus for industrial development in the Houston Area. Later road and railroad networks reinforced Houston’s position as a main shipping hub for the region. In the late 19th century, investors built Eureka Mills and Eureka Junction just north of the current location of Memorial
Park. This facility, adjacent to the Houston and Texas Central Railway, served as a combination sawmill, woolen mill, and cotton mill. This junction at Eureka Mills served as a place where raw goods from the agricultural interior of Texas were unloaded, transformed through manufacturing processes, and reshipped for sale elsewhere. At the turn of the century, further events in the region spurred Houston’s growth. A major hurricane devastated Galveston in 1900, pushing most shipping further inland to Houston. In 1901, a huge discovery of oil at Spindletop marked the dawn of the petrochemical industry. Also in the early 20th century, as Houston’s residential core expanded, a main rail line running through the newly developed Montrose neighborhood was closed, and the Eureka Cutoff, which currently bisects the Memorial Park site, was constructed. At this point, the site that would later be Memorial Park became linked to major east-west and north-south rail networks that connected to most of the continental United States.
Camp Logan Era 1917-1919 In 1917, The United States entered World War I. As the war had been in progress for three years in Europe, America’s late entry necessitated quick mobilization and training for the war effort. Houston won a contract to build one of thirty-two training centers planned throughout the country. The site for Camp Logan was chosen for lease due to its rural nature and its proximity to existing rail lines that provided easy transportation
of construction materials, supplies, and soldiers for the camp. During the camp’s existence, tens of thousands of National Guard soldiers trained for campaigns in France. On the site, extensive grading and clearing occurred to enable better drainage, sanitation and use for training. Large temporary tented encampments housed soldiers-in-training, and most communal buildings were hastily erected timber structures. After
the end of the war in 1918, a portion of the land became a hospital for convalescing and injured soldiers who returned from Europe. At that time, a nine-hole golf course was constructed adjacent to the hospital for outdoor recreation and recovery. By 1919, most of the buildings had been salvaged for other construction projects, leaving behind few physical traces of Camp Logan.
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
source: American Memory Project MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
19 Native Societies
1944 Aerial Photo
Area Not Available
source: Google Earth
source: Ancient Houstonians, James L. Glass and Ray Olachia, 2010
There now stands a small monument in Memorial Park that recognizes this chapter in the history of Camp Logan and the City of Houston.7 After this incident, construction of the camp resumed in earnest. Documentation for the condition of the landscape prior to its development as Camp Logan is scant, but the “Completion Report of Camp Logan, Houston, TX,” written by W. P. Rothrock, Capt., Engineers, U.S.R Constructing Quartermaster, in January, 1918, provides insight about some site conditions as well as difficulties encountered by the
source: Southern Pacific Railroad in Eastern Texas, David M. Bernstein Tower 13 at Eureka Junction
source: (O.W. Gray & Son, 1887-1888. Courtesy: Library of Congress. G4031p ct000559 http://hdl.loc.gov. There now a small monument in Memorial Park thatofrecognizes this chapter inand the the history of Figure 17: stands By 1887, Houston is connected to the Gulf Mexico at Galveston Columbia the Brazos loc.gmd/g4031p.ct000559m, accessed 01/30/2014). contractors working to build temporary housing and associated structure (mostly on tents) for troop 7 River, east to New and inland to San Antonio, Austin, Dallas, and various other points serving as Camp Logan and the Orleans, City of Houston. By 1887, Houston is connected to the Gulf of Mexico at Galveston and the Columbia on the Brazos connections and transshipment points. (O.W. Gray & Son, 1887-1888. Courtesy: Library of Congress. G4031p training. from the report “The camp proper andand remount are situated River, eastExcerpts to New Orleans, and inlandfollow: to San Antonio, Austin, Dallas, various station other points serving south of 01/30/2014). ct000559 http://hdl.loc.gov.loc.gmd/g4031p.ct000559m, After this incident, construction of the camp resumed in earnest.accessed Documentation for the condition of as connections and transshipment points.
the intersection of the Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railway and the Houston and Texas-Central Railway”
theside landscape priorthat to itsalso development as Camp Loganof is scant, “Completion Camp of cotton that was A business developed was that cottonbutoilthe and meal. ForReport everyofpound
(Rothrock, 1).TX,” The intersection of the Capt., regional TexasU.S.R railway connected this system with the interior of Logan, Houston, written by W. P. Rothrock, Engineers, Constructing Quartermaster, in
cleaned and carded, there was a yield of two pounds of seed. Two of the largest cottonseed mills and oil
January, 1918, provides about as the well United as difficulties encountered by thethe transport of people and the country and oninsight further tosome the site Eastconditions Coast of States, expediting
presses were south of Chaney Junction, or Junction Tower 14 on the Galveston Houston and San contractors working to build temporary housing and associated structure (mostly tents) for troop
supplies directly to the site.
Antonio Railroad. This line went“The south through theremount city andstation connected withsouth the Houston and Texas training. Excerpts from the rail report follow: camp proper and are situated of the intersection the Missouri-Kansas-Texas and the Houston (http://www.epperts.com/1fa/BB74.htmo, and Texas-Central Railway” Central, whichofwas the other large rail Railway line serving Houston (Rothrock, 1). The intersection of the regional Texas railway connected this system with the interior of accessed 09/30/2014). the country and on further to the East Coast of the United States, expediting the transport of people and supplies directlytime to the site.cotton production was at its peak, the clearing of land for lumber (which enabled At the same that
the increase in cotton acreage) was occurring with timber as a commodity in high demand in other parts of the United States. William Brady in Glimpses of Texas, Its Divisions, Resources, Development, and Prospects, noted that:
40
Figure 30: This map showing connections to Houston and the interior demonstrate the interconnectedness of source: Figure 30: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Missouri%2C_Kansas_and_Texas_Railway_ This map showing connections to Houston and the interior demonstrate the interconnectedness of system_map_%281918%29.svg, 01/28/2014. oneofofthethe railroad systems as Houston ofaccessed 1918. Houston with an arrow pointing to the intersection of the one railroad systems as of 1918. is shown with is an shown arrow pointing to the intersection of the railways to the interior and theand connecting line further and south to Galveston. railways to the interior thetoconnecting linethe further south to Galveston. This map showing connections Houston interior demonstrate the interconnectedness of one of http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Missouri%2C_Kansas_and_Texas_Railway_system_ma the railroad systems as of 1918. Houston is shown with an arrow pointing to the intersection of the railways http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Missouri%2C_Kansas_and_Texas_Railway_system_ma p_%281918%29.svg, 01/28/2014.line further south to Galveston. to the interior andaccessed the accessed connecting p_%281918%29.svg, 01/28/2014. 7
Marguerite Johnston, journalist and author, who wrote for the Houston Post for many years, gives a very detailed account of the mutiny incident in her book, Houston, the unknown city, 1836-1946, pp 200-204. 7
source: STA Figure 18: This map shows the different junctions, towers, and connecting lines of the railroads in the Memorial Park area. This map shows the different junctions, towers, and connecting lines of the railroads in the Memorial Park area.
Marguerite Johnston, journalist and author, who wrote for the Houston Post for many years, gives a very detailed account of the mutiny incident in her book, 65 Houston, the unknown city, 1836-1946, pp 200-204.
65
The closing of Chaney Junction and the transfer of traffic to the tracks intersecting at Eureka Junction placed the majority of railway traffic away from residential neighborhoods and out of the core of the city as it existed at the time. Constructed in 1914, “the H&TC built a 9-mile connecting line south from Tower 13 to West Junction on the Sunset Route. This provided an alternate route for trains on the Sunset Route to access downtown Houston” (http://www.towers.txrrhistory.com/013/013.htm, accessed 9/30/2014). This rail line became the major point of entry for construction materials, troops, supplies, and ammunition when the United States declared war on Germany in 1917. Spurs were quickly added to park railway cars and for a munitions drop-off in the Eureka Junction area.
Further information can be found in the appendix with Suzanne Turner Associates’ complete study.
Site Analysis · History
20
Era of Park Establishment 1919-1930s The late 19th century and early 20th century saw the rise of park and city planning in the United States. In the context of widespread urban development and industrialization in the country’s urban centers, municipal decision-makers began to see parks as essential components of city infrastructure, to provide relief from the density of commercial and industrial zones. As early as 1866, an article in the first Houston city directory noted: ”our city needs adornment; our people to be treated not merely as money-making machines, but as social, moral and intellectual creatures. Now is the time for suitable locations for public squares, places of resort for the people…where something can be seen to relieve the monotony of brick walls and crowded business highways. Provisions for the cultivation of a taste for the beautiful in city improvements have entered largely into the municipal legislation of all the large cities of the world.” Major public parks in other cities, including the design of Central Park by Frederick Law Olmsted in 1858 became the standard for planning such park spaces. In Houston, local planning efforts mirrored these national trends. In 1912 the Houston Board of Park Commissioners hired Arthur Coleman Comey to make recommendations on the future of Houston
development. The resulting report, Houston: Tentative Plans for its Development was the first planning document to be written for Houston. In this comprehensive plan, Comey described his recommendations for the development of a comprehensive parks system in Houston, centering around the acquisition of land along the city’s three major bayous and a connecting ring of park space that would link “parked” waterways. Comey also recommended the acquisition of larger forest reservations along the bayous, “to be maintained in a wild state, to which the people can go for excursions and get away entirely for hours at a time from the city...” At the same time, the Hogg family, who made their fortune with oil discoveries on family land and early investment in Spindletop and other early Texas oilfields around the turn of the century, were gaining influence in Houston. In 1910, the heirs to the Hogg fortune, siblings Ima, and Mike Hogg moved to Houston and became involved in civic life there with their brother Will. In the early 1920s, the Hoggs and their associates invested in areas for residential development west of Downtown along Buffalo Bayou.
At the same time, park advocate Catherine Emmott was lobbying Mayor Holcombe and others for the creation of a large forest park at the site of the former Camp Logan. In 1923 and 1924 the Hogg brothers and Henry Stude, operating as Varner Realty, bought over 1500 acres of former Camp Logan land. In May of 1924, they sold this land to the City of Houston with a $50,000 donation for the formation of Memorial Park. The Hogg family was careful to include reversionary clauses in each deed as they sold land to the city for Memorial Park to protect its use for park purposes only. Soon after, the city of Houston commissioned the Kansas City Landscape Architecture firm of Hare & Hare to design a preliminary plan for Memorial Park. This plan shows several features that would eventually become part of the park’s current form, a golf course, general play area (baseball, etc), a clubhouse and garden, bridle paths and woodland walks.
1930s-Present In the days since the establishment of Memorial Park, many changes have occurred on site. Some unfolded substantially as planners had foreseen. For instance, during the 1930s, WPA funding allowed for the construction of the 18-hole golf course, designed by renowned golf course designer John Bredemus. The 1942 donation by the Weiss Family of the land now called the Archery Range expanded the park’s boundary to the west. However, many new factors unforeseen by the park’s early planners have influenced the land. By the early 20th century, major flooding had become a problem along Buffalo Bayou, due both to increased impervious development in the watershed, and close proximity of structures to the city’s bayous. A major flood in 1935, where Buffalo Bayou reached over 50 feet above its normal level was the last straw, and Harris County Flood Control District was established by the Texas Legislature in 1937. Construction of major flood control structures at Barker and Addicks Reservoirs west of Memorial Park were completed by 1946, and since that time Buffalo Bayou’s water flow has been artificially regulated by these structures to prevent major flooding. Interventions
like these dams and later channelization of other waterways in the Houston area sparked public debate about large-scale flood control structures that continues to this day. Another major factor in the modern development of Memorial Park has been the rise of the automobile during the 20th century. Memorial Park was founded during the heyday of the city’s street car system, which in the 1920s provided easy transport between newly established suburbs and the downtown area. By 1940, the Houston Electric Company ended streetcar service, and busses and cars were the main modes of transportation. In 1942, a new plan showed Memorial Parkway as one of three parkways that would connect Downtown to the city’s outskirts. Soon after in 1955, Houston’s Major Thoroughfare and Freeway Plan became the first official plan to include the freeway system. Road development according to these plans divided Memorial Park in ways that could not have been anticipated by early planners. Memorial Drive is now a major road bisecting the park from east to west, and Interstates I-610 and I-10 are now serving as major barriers between the park and surrounding neighborhoods.
No one in the 1920s could have planned for the explosion of demand for active recreation facilities in urban park spaces. Additions of ball fields and other recreational facilities at the Memorial Park site have moved forward in an opportunistic way, without much comprehensive planning with regard to the siting of facilities. Because of later efforts to develop park property (proposals have included a Presbyterian University, the Astrodome, a restaurant, and oil wells), Ima Hogg, the last surviving member of the Hogg family, shortly before her death in 1975, asked her friends Sadie Gwin Blackburn and Terry Hershey to form an organization to protect the park from development and inappropriate uses. It started out as the Memorial Park Advisory Committee, and later became the Memorial Park Conservancy, which is the current form of this protective organization.
Summary of Research and Conclusions Every great city hopes to have a carefully designed, beautifully maintained, and well-used green space that contributes to the community’s health and well-being. Houston has one of the nation’s best and biggest. In determining the future of Memorial Park, it is important to be clear about exactly what makes the place so special, so that the master plan both safeguards and celebrates the characteristics and features of the park’s history and ecology that distinguish it and give it value. Each of the layers of occupation adds to the site’s contributions to and reflections of Houston’s urban development. The successive occupancy of Native Americans, early European settlers, and Camp Logan has the potential to be further revealed through archaeology, thus filling in some of the gaps in the history of this landscape’s evolution. Beginning as a place of early settlement, it shifted to a productive agricultural, horticultural, and industrial landscape, to a military training camp, and finally a great park.
elevate the quality of the urban environment through excellence in planning and design. The master plan takes its cues from the structure of the plan by Hare & Hare and embraces this legacy. Each moment in the landscape’s story contributes to Memorial Park of today. In order to maximize the landscape’s capacity to represent this rich heritage, the approach of rehabilitation is recommended; this means that the historic character that survives should be retained, while making alterations necessary for the landscape to continue to meet the needs of today’s users. Memorial Park’s cultural imprint and ecological systems have been challenged by a near-century of urban expansion, the population’s passion for open space, and natural disasters. The process of further planning for the park should involve the careful coordination of both cultural and natural systems so that both are allowed to survive and prosper.
Memorial Park is also distinguished as an outstanding example of the kind of parks that were designed during the progressive era, when civic leadership sought to
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
21
Proposed Park System for Houston. Arthur G. Comey, Landscape Architect. 1912.
Figure 27: “Proposed Park System for Houston. Arthur G. Comey, Landscape Architect. 1912. (Comey, 22) .
Included in the Comey report for Houston were several photographs of landscape character in the area. Two of these are shown below.
Preliminary Plan for Memorial Park – Houston – Texas. Hare & Hare Landscape Architects. Courtesy: University of Missouri Archives, Kansas City, MO.
Figure 32: “Preliminary Plan for Memorial Park – Houston – Texas. Prepared for the Board of Park Commissioners by Hare & Hare – Landscape Architects & City Planners,” nd – Courtesy: University of Missouri Archives, Kansas City, MO.
71
59
source: NBW Site photo
source: Slotboom, Oscar F. the 2003. freeways: historical and visualPark journey. Houston, TX: self- 274). Figure 24: This image shows 610Houston West Loop lookinganorth with Memorial on the right. (Slotboom, published. www.HoustonFreeways.com
source: NBW Site photo
This image shows the 610 West Loop looking north with Memorial Park on the right.
Figure 24: This image shows the 610 West Loop looking north with Memorial Park on the right. (Slotboom, 274). Planning in Houston It is useful to circle back around and look at Houston through the lens of city planning in the United States, and the efforts that various Houstonians made to shape the city for the benefit of citizens and businesses. Although Houston has no general planning authority in the same fashion as most other cities
Planning Houston in the United States, thatin does not mean that there have not been a great deal of planning efforts, and also plans that have been implemented over time. The initial layout of the city itself was an exercise in
Further information can be found in the appendix with Suzanne Turner Associates’ complete study.
orienting the initial neighborhoods in proximity to Buffalo Bayou, which was the primary Itplanning, is useful to circle back around and look at Houston through the lens of city planning in the United
States, and the efforts that various Houstonians made to shape the city for the benefit of citizens and
Site Analysis · Ecology
22
Ecology Restore Resiliency and Diversity Summary Over the last 10 years the site and surrounding area have experienced two major natural catastrophic events: 2008 Hurricane Ike and several years of extreme drought. These events caused the decline and mortality of a significant portion of the forest community within the park. The goal of this evaluation is to provide a current baseline of the park ecology/habitat and develop a resilient plan for restoration and park development and management. Memorial Park is located within the Gulf Prairies and Marshes Vegetation Area of Texas. Prairies were common features in Texas and Harris County. Harris County’s prairies were altered by settlements, agricultural practices, fire suppression, and the lumber industry. Logging operations cut pines and hardwood forests and planted Loblolly Pine trees. From an historical perspective, the subject property was likely to have been a tall grass prairie with a narrow riparian corridor along Buffalo Bayou. The prairie would have included grasses such as Big Bluestem, Little Bluestem, Indian Grass, Eastern Gammagrass, Gulf Muhly, and Florida Paspalum. Isolated stands of Post Oak motts are typically found within such a prairie landscape. Memorial Park’s historical riparian corridor along Buffalo Bayou is likely to have been populated with a mix of Bald Cypress, Southern Magnolia, Loblolly Pine, and Post Oak trees with prairie interspersed in pine openings and extending northward in greater dominance. “Pinery” areas present on-site would have been isolated examples of the pineywoods vegetation area of east Texas. The “pinery” areas served as seed sources for the Loblolly Pine trees that initially dominated and succeeded in the prairie. The 1930 historical aerial photograph (see graphic below “Historic Condition: 1930 Aerial Photograph”) reveals that approximately 55% of the subject tract was moderately forested closest to the bayou, becoming more prairie/savannah in its character as the complex traveled north and west. Habitats naturally progress through several stages of predominance as they age and mature. Currently, Memorial Park would be classified in the Pineywoods Vegetation Area of Texas. Today the forest canopy is dominated by loblolly pine, post oak, willow oak, water oak, and elms. The pine trees are mature, or near maturity, and are declining in vigor. The post oaks remain dominant in the fairways of the golf course and within the Picnic Loop area. In other areas of the park, the post oaks are being overgrown by taller canopy trees. Investigative work commenced with the review of historic aerials, topographical data, a soil survey, and previous studies conducted on the site. Additionally, the
review of current on-site topographical and hydrological characteristics suggests the natural processes in or near potential wetlands and waters may have been artificially enhanced or deprived by man-induced alterations. Aerial photography was used extensively in the evaluations made on the subject property. A variety of sources were used to provide photographic coverage of the area, including large-scale infrared photographs, color photographs, and black and white photographs. Historical aerials from 1930, 1944, 1976, 1989, 1995, 2002, 2009, and 2014 were reviewed and analyzed. Each was reviewed and compared against the color photograph from 2014 and infrared photography from 1995 and 2009 to determine preliminary “rough” delineation pattern of Affected versus Unaffected areas (see graphic below “Existing Condition: Areas Affected by Drought and Hurricanes”) for further field investigation. The intent of this exhibit is to indicate areas within the park that have been drastically impacted by vegetative loss resulting from Hurricane Ike and the following long term drought to assist in the determination of management and restoration needs and prioritization. Unaffected areas are those that appear to remain in a similar vegetative state as described in past studies. Affected areas are those that exhibit drastic changes in vegetative cover, diversity, or mortality from these natural disasters. Topographical data from 1922, 1946, 1955, 1966, and LIDAR from 2001 were also evaluated in a similar manner. This analysis assists in the understanding of past agrarian alterations to the drainage patterns on the site that may have altered the habitats and hydrologic regimes within the site itself. Prior to site reconnaissance activities, the USDA Web Soil Survey of Harris County, Texas was reviewed to determine the types of soils that would most likely be present on the subject property. Specifically, the soils were identified as Aldine very fine sandy loam, AldineUrban land complex, Aris fine sandy loam, Atasco fine sandy loam, Bissonnet very fine sandy loam, Gessner loam, Midland silty clay loam, Midland-Urban land complex, Nahatche loam and Vamont-Urban land complex. Studies predating and postdating Hurricane Ike and were reviewed. The 1938 Thesis by Marguerite Fitzgerald, An Ecological Study in Memorial Park; the 2002 Assessment of the Forest Health and Management by the Texas Forest Service, and the 2011 Forest Management Plan by Advanced Ecology were reviewed to further understand what Memorial Park “was” prior to conducting site reconnaissance.
Existing Park Ecology HISTORIC CONDITION: 1930 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH, LOOSELY FORESTED
Findings A cursory site reconnaissance was conducted to confirm the evaluation efforts of the document review and to evaluate the general current conditions of the site. This site work was conducted throughout the summer of 2014 to further review and document vegetative communities and dominant species, stability of riparian areas, identification of unique features to be preserved and protected, drainage alterations, and the status of the restoration commenced in 2011. This effort identified three vegetative complexes throughout the park: pine and hardwood mixed forest, savannah, and prairie. The locations of these complexes, the species composition within them, and overall health were further refined with data collected in the fall of 2014. Using an established grid system, over 300 locations were field surveyed, assigned Geographic Positioning System (GPS) points, and sampled. The number of trees greater than 3 inches Diameter at Breast Height (DBH), species composition, herbaceous and shrub density and composition, and invasive species were identified. Using this data vegetative complexes were refined using the following composition criteria: prairie: 5-10 trees per acre with an 80% herbaceous and 20% shrub understory, forest: 100-150 trees per acre with an understory of 25% shrub and 25% herbaceous; and savannah: 50 trees per acre with 20% shrub and 70% herbaceous understory (see graphic to right “Understanding Forest, Savannah, and Prairie). Based on the criteria listed above, much of the site currently qualifies as a pine-hardwood savannah. Isolated pockets of hardwood motts were identified interspersed with prairie. The site evaluation indicates a distinct connection of soil chemistry and hydrology with the vegetation makeup. The vegetative complexes identified and species’ dominance identified during site reconnaissance were compared to the general location of loamy versus sandy soil complexes on the site. Based on the desktop review and several site reconnaissance studies conducted in the current assessment of Memorial Park, improvement and creation of six habitat restoration vegetative complexes will be the final goal of this plan. These six vegetative complexes are as follows: 1) Pine-Hardwood Forest, 2) Pine-Hardwood Savannah, 3) Wet Prairie/Savannah, 4) Native Prairie, and 5) Barrancos and Riparian Edges, and 6) Riparian. Based on the detailed analysis performed, it is apparent that the site contains a healthy native grass and woody seed bank in the soil. This has been most apparent in the review of a site that, while dramatically impacted by the loss of mature trees by drought, is recovering and beginning to reveal a native herbaceous understory
EXISTING CONDITION: AREAS AFFECTED BY DROUGHT AND HURRICANES
USGS 0
500 1,000
2,000 Feet
source: Berg Oliver Associates This historic image reveals that the park was at most 55% forested near the Bayou and more savannahlike further north at this time. From this point until the droughts and hurricane of the early 2010’s, the park became nearly entirely forested because of changing management regimes.
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
SCALE: 1”=3000’
SCALE: 1”=3000’
source: Berg Oliver Associates Berg Oliver’s preliminary assessment reveals forested areas in the park that were negatively impacted by Hurricane Ike in 2008 and consecutive years of extreme drought in the early 2010’s.
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Legend Unaffected Areas Affected Areas
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
23
Transition to Diverse Ecological Corridors EXISTING CONDITIONS: HABITAT TYPE
UNDERSTANDING FOREST, SAVANNAH AND PRAIRIE WOODLAND WOODLAND 100-150 trees/acre 100-150 trees/acre 25% shrubs 25% shrubs 25% herbaceous 25% herbaceous
SAVANNAH SAVANNAH
PRAIRIE PRAIRIE
50 50 trees/acre trees/acre 20% 20% shrubs shrubs 70% 70% herbaceous herbaceous
5-10 5-10 trees/acre trees/acre 20% 20% shrubs shrubs 80% 80% herbaceous herbaceous
source: NBW with Berg Oliver A forest, savannah, and prairie are distinguished by the density of vegetation at all layers.
The park’s vegetation has changed from a dominant composition of forest to savannah. While this marks a radical shift from the past 50 years, it is beginning to resemble a place the Karankawa, the park’s native inhabitants, would have known: a landscape more resilient to fluctuating weather patterns and hospitable to many types of fauna.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: VEGETATION COMPOSITION
source: Berg Oliver Associates Berg Oliver’s early study of the site indicates the areas of particular plant communities.
SCALE: 1”=3000’
source: Berg Oliver Associates
Legend Forest Savannah Prairie
VISION: DIVERSE ECOLOGICAL CORRIDORS
SCALE: 1”=3000’
SCALE: 1”=3000’
source: NBW with Berg Oliver Associates
Legend Mature Mixed Well-Drained
Larger vegetative patches and ecological corridors will create improved habitat for wildlife, more diverse experiences throughout the park, and ecosystems that are more able to withstand Houston’s highly variable weather patterns.
Legend Riparian Forest Riparian Edge & Barranco Forest
Pine-Dominant
Pine-Hardwood Forest
Hardwood-Dominant
Pine-Hardwood Savannah
Native Prairie
Native Prairie
Poorly Drained
Wet Savannah and Pairie Naturalized Golf Course Bog Areas Ponds and Stream Corridors
of Little Bluestem and Bushy Bluestem simply by the removal of tree slash. This natural recovery offers a simplified management system for habitat restoration. Recommendations for the development and long term management of these areas primarily involve annual use of herbicides, limited mowing, and physical removal of invasive species with some additional planting of desired native species specific to each habitat restoration vegetative complex. The Pine-Hardwood Forest, Pine-Hardwood Savannah, and Wet Prairie-Savannah will require substantial invasive plant removal and the continued removal of slash left from the impacts of the drought. Existing native vegetation will be allowed to naturally regenerate in the removal areas. Plantings of desirable native species will occur in areas of extensive invasive removal. The Native Prairie is proposed in a newly created location of the land bridge. Hence this location will
require extensive planting of desirable species. Management will be performed by monitoring the introduction of invasives and other opportunistic species and removing them at an early stage. Mowing biannually after establishment is recommended. The Barrancos and Riparian areas will be designated as preservation areas where limited invasive plant removal will occur, but the existing native vegetation will be allowed to naturally regenerate in the removal areas. Planting will only be needed in areas with extensive invasive species removal. With proper invasive removal and successful planting of native vegetation over the next ten years, the proposed habitat restoration vegetative complexes should mature and grow into a resilient, self-sustaining ecosystem capable of withstanding future environmental challenges. While continued invasives control and other maintenance will be required in perpetuity to allow the site to continue to function as a healthy ecology, investments of time
and resources will be smaller after restoration types are established. Prior to final construction plan approval and commencement of improvements within the park, each proposed modification will require evaluation under Section 404 Clean Water Act permits for unavoidable impacts to waters and wetland resources. Initial evaluations of these resources suggest low to moderate quality per the Hydrogeomorphic Model. Due to the water quality of Buffalo Bayou and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Watershed Protection Plan guidance, opportunities to restore and enhance these resources on-site exist and may meet the Section 404b(1) and Final Mitigation Rule guidelines.
Further information can be found in the appendix with Berg Oliver Associates’ complete study.
Site Analysis · Ecology
24
Existing Vegetation Advanced Ecology, Ltd. (AEL) was engaged by Nelson Byrd Woltz (NBW) to organize and complete a multiphased forest inventory of specific areas within Memorial Park. The following is a progress summary of work-todate, outlined by phase, detailing the results.
within the first few weeks of April, 2015 and this phase should be completed by the end of May 2015. No completed data outputs are therefore available for this phase. The final report will be added to the master plan and made available after completion.
Phase 1: Urban Forest Inventory This phase includes a 100% inventory of individual trees considered to be within general openings and maintained areas of the Park. The designated areas include the mowed areas (established fire buffers), the Memorial Park Golf Course, Memorial Drive esplanades, ball fields and the picnic area.
Phase 2: Hogg Bird and Archery Range In November 2014, AEL completed a 100% inventory of the trees considered to be the dominant overstory component and/or “relic” trees within the areas referred to as Hogg Bird Sanctuary and Archery Range. The two areas are approximately 42.3 acres combined. Each tree’s location received a GPS point and was measured for species, diameter (0.1 inch accuracy), crown coverage and current condition. Notes regarding management needs were also made as part of the data collection. Each tree was further categorized as one of the following:
Each tree’s location will be marked with a Geographic Positioning System (GPS) point and attributes such as species, diameter (0.1 inch accuracy), crown coverage, current condition, and management recommendations noted as needed. A picture of each tree will be taken and joined to the GPS marker.
• Native non-invasive species (Pine, Oak, Elm, Sycamore, Ash, Sugarberry)
While the data collection for this phase has begun, operations were put on hold due to normal leaf loss in the Fall 2014. AEL is scheduled to re-commence work
• Native invasive species (Cherry Laurel, Yaupon) • Exotic invasive species (Ligustrum, Golden Raintree, Camphor, Japanese Privet, Crape Myrtle)
Hogg Bird Sanctuary Findings: There were a total of 119 individual trees collected with diameters that ranged in size from approximately 10 inches to 39 inches at Diameter Breast Height (DBH). DBH measurements were taken at 4.5 feet above the ground. The average diameter was approximately 19 inches. Approximately 14 separate species were noted in the overstory. 98% of these trees measured were considered to be native and non-invasive to Memorial Park. The remaining 2% in the overstory is considered to be an exotic invasive. Archery Range Findings: There were a total of 191 individual trees collected with diameters that ranged in size from approximately 9 inches to 40 inches DBH. The average diameter was approximately 19 inches. 15 separate species were noted in the overstory. Of these, 92% measured were considered native and non-invasive to Memorial Park, with the remaining 9% considered native invasive (1%) or exotic invasive (8%) (See graphics below). In addition to the 100% overstory forest inventory measurements, 1/20th acre midstory and understory plots were also completed within both areas.
HOGG BIRD SANCTUARY FINDINGS natives: 4.0% EXISTING CONDITION: DOMINANCE OF INVASIVES IN UNDER- AND MIDSTORY natives: 4.0% exotic invasives natives: 4.0% exotic invasives
EXISTING CONDITION: OVERSTORY LOCATOR MAP
Legend Exotic Invasive Native Invasive
exotic invasives native invasives
Native
native invasives
native invasives
understory species < 12’ understory species < 12’ natives
native understory species < 12’ natives invasives native invasives
source: Advanced Ecology, Ltd.
natives exotic invasives
native invasives
AEL’s studies of Hogg Bird Sanctuary and the old Archery Range (OAR) demonstrate a high number of invasive plant species, particularly in the understory. The remainder of Memorial Park remains to be studied for the Master Plan, and work will recommence in April, 2015. This initial work may serve as an indicator of the types and densities of invasive plant species existing throughout the park.
exotic invasives
exotic invasives
midstory species 12’ - 25’ midstory species 12’ - 25’ midstory species 12’ - 25’
natives natives
natives
overstory species > 25’ overstory species > 25’ source: Advanced Ecology, Ltd. with NBW
overstory species > 25’
Memorial Park - Hogg Bird Sanctuary
Memorial Park - Hogg Bird Sanctuary
Midstory Species Composition
Understory Species Composition
+/- 14 acres EXISTING CONDITION: MIDSTORY
+/- 14 acres EXISTING CONDITION: UNDERSTORY
Six - 1/20th acre plots
Six - 1/20th acre plots Species Cherry Laurel Holly Yaupon * Ligustrum‐ spp. *Golden Raintree Maple‐ Boxelder * Camphor Ash ‐ Green *Oleander‐ spp. Elm ‐ Winged Sugarberry Sumac ‐ Shining Elm ‐ Slippery
Stems Per Acre 1,776.67 306.67 166.67 46.67 43.33 36.67 30.00 26.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 3.33 2,456.67 * Percent Exotic Invasive: 9.36 %
Percent Composition 72.32% 12.48% 6.78% 1.90% 1.76% 1.49% 1.22% 1.09% 0.27% 0.27% 0.27% 0.14% 100%
Species * Ligustrum‐ spp. * Golden Raintree Cherry Laurel Maple‐ Boxelder * Plum ‐ Japanese Redbay Redbud
Stems Per Acre 43.33 16.67 6.67 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 80.00
Percent Composition 54.17% 20.83% 8.33% 4.17% 4.17% 4.17% 4.17% 100%
* Percent Exotic Invasive: 79.17 % Stem Specifications Diameter at breast height (DBH): 3.0 ‐ 5.9 inches Total Heights: 12 ‐ 25 feet source: Advanced Ecology, Ltd.
Stem Specifications Diameter at breast height (DBH): < 3.0 inches Total Heights: < 12 feet source: Advanced Ecology, Ltd.
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
25
Approximately 12 plots were established within the Archery Range and approximately 6 plots within the Hogg Bird Sanctuary. This equates to approximately 1 plot per 2.5 acres. Measurements taken include the understory and midstory. Understory Tree Measurements Understory tree measurements were conducted on all trees with an approximate total height of less than 12 feet and a DBH of less than 3 inches. All trees that fell within the plot boundaries and met these parameters were counted and species determinations were made and tallied. Other than count and species, no other measurements for each tree were made. An ocular estimate of herbaceous cover within the plot was also noted (see graphics “Existing Condition: Understory” for both Hogg Bird and Archery below and on facing page). Midstory Tree Measurements Midstory Tree Measurements were conducted on all trees with an approximate total height of 12 to 25 feet
and a DBH of 3 inches to 5.9 inches. Individual tree measurements included a species determination, diameter (1 inch accuracy) and total stem height in feet (see graphics “Existing Condition: Midstory” for both Hogg Bird and Archery below and on facing page). Percentages were calculated of native, native invasive and exotic invasive species present in both the understory and midstory for both areas. The primary purpose of this process was to provide data that would assist with future vegetative management and planning as part of the Master Plan.
medium or small) and total height were measured as well. The purpose of this assessment was strictly for maintenance and “Hazard Tree” removal planning. 14 linear miles of trails were assessed that included the Green Ridge, Hogg Woods, Logan Woods, Reynolds Woods and West Ridge areas. There were a total of 1,038 trees inventoried. (See Graphic below: “Hazard Tree Assessment”)
Phase 3: Hazard Tree Assessment – Park Trails In October 2014, AEL completed a 100% inventory of “Hazard Trees” located within twenty (20) feet of either side of a publicly utilized trail within Memorial Park, and as approved by Memorial Park Conservancy. Hazard trees were classified on the ground as “Dead Standing” or “Dead Fallen” (only if across a trail). Each tree was marked with a painted blue spot and a GPS point for location. An ocular estimate of diameter (large,
natives:
OLD ARCHERY RANGE natives: 0.25% FINDINGS 0.25% DOMINANCE OF INVASIVES IN UNDER- AND MIDSTORY EXISTING CONDITION: natives: 0.25%
exotic exotic invasives invasives exotic invasives
EXISTING CONDITION: OVERSTORY LOCATOR MAP
Legend Exotic Invasive Native Invasive Native
native invasives native invasives native invasives
understory species < 12’ understory species < 12’ understory species < 12’ natives natives
source: Advanced Ecology, Ltd.
nativesexotic invasives exotic invasives native invasives exotic invasives native invasives
Although native tree species persist in the upperstory, a predominance of invasive species in the understory and midstory will prohibit the establishment of native seedlings.
native invasives
midstory species 12’ - 25’ midstory species 12’ - 25’ midstory species 12’ - 25’ exotic exotic invasives invasives exotic invasives
natives natives natives
overstory species > 25’ overstory species > 25’ overstory species > 25’ source: Advanced Ecology, Ltd. with NBW
Memorial Park - Archery Range Understory Species Composition
Memorial Park - Archery Range Midstory Species Composition
29 acres 29 acres EXISTING CONDITION: +/UNDERSTORY CONDITION: MIDSTORY Phase III - Dead (Hazard) Tree InventoryEXISTING Data (Primary Trails) +/-
Area Map Label Category Diameter Height Latitude Longitude Twelve - 1/20th acre plots Twelve - 1/20th acre plots Green Ridge 1 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 15 29.764979 -95.436231 Green Ridge 2 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 15 29.764954 -95.435817 Species Stems Per Acre Percent Composition Species Stems Per Acre Percent Composition Green Ridge 3 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 15 29.764928 -95.436444 Cherry Laurel 2,677 56.41% * Ligustrum ‐ spp. 85 49.04% Green Ridge 4 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 20 29.764833 -95.436477 Holly Yaupon 1,238 26.10% Cherry Laurel 32 18.27% Green Ridge 5 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 15 29.764813 -95.436472 *Japanese Privet 575 12.12% Maple ‐ Boxelder 13 7.69% Green Ridge 6 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 20 29.764807 -95.436467 *Ligustrum ‐ spp. 232 4.88% Sugarberry 12 6.73% Green Ridge 7 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 25 29.764695 -95.435811 * Crape Myrtle 12 0.25% * Crape Myrtle 5 2.88% Green Ridge 8 Dead Standing Medium (12"-18") 40 29.76468 -95.436449 Ash ‐ Green 5 0.11% Mulberry ‐ Red 5 2.88% Green Ridge 9 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 20 29.764672 -95.436459 Elm ‐ Slippery 2 0.04% 3 1.92% Green Ridge 10 Dead Standing Small (12"-) Ash ‐ Green 30 29.764591 -95.436792 Sugarberry 2 0.04% Elm ‐ American 3 1.92% Green Ridge 11 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 20 29.764526 -95.43599 Maple ‐ Boxelder 2 0.04% 3 1.92% Green Ridge 12 Dead Standing Large (18"+) Elm ‐ Slippery 25 29.764514 -95.435968 Magnolia 3 1.92% Sumac ‐ Shining 2 0.04% Green Ridge 13 Dead Standing Medium (12"-18") 45 ‐ spp. 29.764365 -95.436033 2 0.96% Green4,745.00 Ridge 14 Dead100% Standing Small (12"-) American 20 Beech 29.764363 -95.433535 2 0.96% Green Ridge 15 Dead Standing Small (12"-) * Golden 20Raintree 29.764354 -95.43606 ‐ spp.29.764325 -95.433186 2 0.96% * PercentGreen ExoticRidge Invasive: 17.25 16 % Dead Standing Small (12"-) Hickory20 2 0.96% Green Ridge 17 Dead Standing Small (12"-) Holly Yaupon 12 29.764319 -95.433281 2 0.96% Green Ridge 18 Dead Standing Large (18"+) Hornbeam 15 ‐ American 29.764298 -95.433563 100% Green Ridge 19 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 10 29.764296 -95.433394 173.33 Green Ridge 20 Dead Standing Large (18"+) 65 29.764181 -95.434058 Stem Specifications * Percent Exotic Invasive: 52.88 % 21 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 20 29.764171 -95.433978 Diameter at breast height (DBH):Green < 3.0 Ridge inches Green Ridge 22 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 40 29.764156 -95.433736 Total Heights: < 12 feet Green Ridge 23 Dead Standing Large (18"+) Stem Specifications 50 29.764146 -95.433779 source: Advanced Ecology, Ltd. Diameter height-95.433898 (DBH): 3.0 ‐ 5.9 inches Green Ridge 24 Dead Standing Medium (12"-18") 40 at breast 29.764145 Green Ridge 25 Dead Standing Medium (12"-18") 40 29.764115 Total Heights: 12 ‐ 25 feet-95.433719 Green Ridge 26 Dead Standing Medium (12"-18") 70Advanced 29.76411 -95.43372 source: Ecology, Ltd. Green Ridge 27 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 45 29.764101 -95.435801 Green Ridge 28 Dead Standing Medium (12"-18") 30 29.764087 -95.433544 Green Ridge 29 Dead Standing Medium (12"-18") 20 29.764082 -95.433535 Green Ridge 30 Dead Standing Large (18"+) 60 29.764071 -95.43576 Green Ridge 31 Dead Standing Small (12"-) 25 29.764066 -95.434245 Green Ridge 32 Dead Standing Medium (12"-18") 70 29.764063 -95.433696 Green Ridge 33 Dead Standing Medium (12"-18") 60 29.764062 -95.433555
HAZARD TREE ASSESSMENT Area Description Green Ridge Hogg Woods Logan Woods Reynolds Woods West Ridge Total
No. of Trees 315 142 59 96 426 1,038
source: Advanced Ecology, Ltd.
Maps and tables detailing the individual tree measurements, species, attributes, numeric identifiers, and locations can be found in the appendix with Advanced Ecology Ltd.’s complete study.
Site Analysis · Design Analysis and Overall Strategies
26
Design Analysis and Overall Strategies NBW undertook analysis of existing conditions, and made several observations on site organization that have informed the team’s approach to siting major park elements.
Reconnect EXISTING CONDITIONS: DIVIDED PARK
Legend Site rails and roads Adjacent roads Buffalo Bayou
8
7 6
23 1
9
2
19
10
17 21
18
15
3
7
5
20
22 12
16
14
25
4
11
13
SCALE: 1”=2000’
source: NBW diagram Over time, the park has been divided into many discontiguous parts by additions of roads, program areas, and other features. As a result, the park currently functions as a series of small and disconnected park spaces.
VISION: RECONNECTED PARK
Legend Site rails and roads Adjacent roads Buffalo Bayou
SCALE: 1”=2000’
source: NBW diagram The master plan proposes reconnecting as many of these disparate park pieces as possible to allow it to function as one large, contiguous space.
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
27
Limit Impact EXISTING CONDITIONS: IMPACTED PARK
VISION: LIMIT FUTURE IMPACT TO THOSE AREAS ALTERED BY DEVELOPMENT
SCALE: 1”=3000’
source: NBW diagram
SCALE: 1”=3000’
source: NBW diagram
Legend
Areas shown colored in this diagram have been impacted by man-made grading, roads, program features, and clearing activities.
Previously Impacted areas
Water features
Legend
The master plan proposes limiting major development to areas already altered by past development, and protecting areas of cultural significance, including areas of Camp Logan remains, Houston Arboretum and Nature Center, and the WPA-era golf course.
Previously Impacted areas
Buffalo Bayou
Organize Program EXISTING CONDITION: PROGRAM AREAS SMALL AND FRAGMENTED
SCALE: 1”=3000’
SCALE: 1”=3000’ SCALE: 1”=3000’
source: NBW diagram
source: NBW diagram In the park’s current configuration, program areas are small and fragmented. Trail use areas to the south and west sides of the park are repeatedly interrupted by ball fields and the large picnic loop. Active recreation features are scattered in several parts of the park.
VISION: COHESIVE PARK PROGRAM AND EXPERIENCES
Legend Active recreation Urban Wilderness (trail use) Arboretum and Nature Center Picnic Area
The master plan proposes consolidating program areas to clarify the park’s organization and to provide continuous park experiences. Trail use areas are consolidated to the south and west sides of the park. Active recreation is clustered in the northeast, where light and sound from major roads are more compatible with large-scale recreational use. Picnic grounds are dispersed throughout the site, and major cultural and historical resources are interpreted through landscape spaces.
Legend Active recreation Relocated active recreation Urban wilderness (trail use) Dispersed picnic areas Historical Resources Arboretum and Nature Center
Guiding Principles
Site Analysis · Guiding Principles
28
source: existing site photo
Restore
Consolidate
Tend
Restore the ecology of the park and our connection to it.
Consolidate compatible uses together in appropriate areas.
Tend the land and our cultural history, maintaining balance through responsible management.
• See the park’s current state as an opportunity. The drought and hurricane of recent years have cleared the site of vulnerable vegetation.
• Group similar program uses in the park together to enhance the experience of different aspects of the park and to reduce user conflict.
• Strengthen and build upon the cultural, historical, and ecological assets of Memorial Park that differentiate it from Houston’s other parks.
• Design landscape types for the site’s climate, soils, and the maintenance capabilities of the park administration by using intrinsic ecologies to ensure future resilience.
• Orchestrate circulation in the park to improve safety for all users.
• Build a park framework for future generations with adaptive systems that will withstand time, increased use, and variable weather patterns. • Maintain the park’s character into the future.
• Make the park inviting by creating gateways and marking paths and amenities to facilitate self-guiding and understanding of the place. • Maximize social opportunities that allow Houstonians to engage with each other in meaningful ways. • Construct and improve existing amenities that fit the character, use, and scale of the site. Follow the regional vision of Houston Parks and Recreation.
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Adopt and sustain management practices that complement the ecological position and features of iconic indigenous species. • Design a park that has a positive impact on the neighborhoods and the city by collecting, storing, and re-using storm water, improving water quality, and using alternative energy. • Maintain a record of biotic and abiotic ecological factors to track available quantifiable data to support and influence management practices.
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
29
Reconnect
Enhance
Reconnect the land, waterways, trails, people, and memories.
Enhance the overall park experience and its amenities.
• Enable external access to the park –new connections will allow for increased park use, and improved safety in getting to the park on foot, wheelchair, bike, bus, or car.
• Maintain and enhance existing programmatic uses in the park including active recreation, wildernessbased trail use, and Houston Arboretum and Nature Center.
• Bridge the park’s internal divisions to expand usable park space and enhance its existing character.
• Preserve and interpret elements of the cultural and natural history. In so doing, empower future generations in the continued management of urban landscapes.
• Provide opportunities for consolidation of habitat areas. • Link water networks, allowing them to function as a complete system.
• Make space for users to discover, learn about, appreciate and enjoy the flora, fauna and water systems of Memorial Park and the region. • Interpret and engage multiple cultural narratives that are relevant to Houston’s diverse population.
30
3
Master Plan Design
31
Master Plan Design · Guiding Principles
32
PLACES
ENTRANCES
1. Land Bridge
A. West Memorial Drive
2. Running Center and Timing Track
B. Woodway and I-610
3. OAR
C. Washington/Wescott
4. Living Bridge (existing)
D. Arnot
5. Hiking and Equestrian Trails
E. East Memorial Drive
6. Cycle Track
F. Pedestrian Entrance to OAR
7. Polo Practice Field (existing)
G. Pedestrian/Bike Entrance Under I-610
8. Memorial Groves
H. Pedestrian/Bike Access Under Railroad
9. Rugby Pitch
J. Pedestrian/Bike Access Over I-10
10. Volleyball Courts
K. Pedestrian Access at Blossom
11. Soccer Field/All Weather Field
L. Hogg Bird Sanctuary Entrance
12. Softball Fields
M. Bridge to Bayou Bend
13. Baseball Field
N. Pedestrian/Bike Access Over Railroad Tracks
14. Croquet Court 15. Golf Practice 16. Club House (existing) 17. Golf Course 18. Tennis Center 19. Fitness Center 20. Natatorium 21. Eastern Glades 22. Maintenance Area/Memorial Park Conservancy Headquarters 23. Hogg Bird Sanctuary 24. Bayou Wilds Trailhead 25. Bayou Quiet Area 26. Bayou Wilds 27. Ponds 28. Seymour Lieberman Exercise Trail 29. Bayou Access Boat Launch 30. Bridge Over East Barranco 31. Apache Grove 32. Nicole’s Way 33. Bush Grove 34. Endowment Grove 35. Houston Arboretum and Nature Center 36. Refurbished Equestrian Tunnels
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
J 9
7
10
11
12 12
27 8
C
14 27
N 15
13 6 34 5
A
16
27
33 32
27
18
27
19 5
20 D 36
17 31 27 21
4
K
36 2
1
28 B
30 24
E
29 22
35
26
3 L F 23 25
G
M
H
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
SCALE: 1”= 800’
Master Plan Renderings Land Bridge Over Memorial Drive
image: MIR
35
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
36
Bayou Wilds and Southern Arc Trail
image: MIR
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
37
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
38
Eastern Glades
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
39
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
40
Eastern Glades
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
41
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
42
Memorial Groves
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
43
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
44
Memorial Groves
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
45
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
46
View of Typical Savannah Landscape From Observation Tower
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
47
Master Plan Design · Master Plan Renderings
48
Kids’ Cycle Loop and Playground
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
49
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
50
Seymour Lieberman Trail
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
51
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
52
Sports Complex
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
53
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
54
Cycle Track
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
55
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
56
Running Center and Timing Track
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
57
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
58
Park Entrance at I-610 and Woodway Drive
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
59
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
60
Park Entrance at Memorial Drive East With Eastern Glades Beyond
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
61
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
62
Bayou Wilds Pedestrian Trails Within Restored Savannah
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
63
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
64
Bayou Overlook on the Southern Arc Trail
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
65
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
66
Hogg Bird Sanctuary Walking Trails
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
67
Master Plan Design 路 Master Plan Renderings
68
Mountain Biking Trail
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
69
70
4
Site Systems
71
Site Systems · Circulation and Parking
72
Circulation and Parking
Road Network Legend Traffic Signal Stop Sign Traffic Circle Maintenance Road Two Lane Road Four Lane Road Six Lane Road Six Lane Road Subterranean One Way Traffic Two Way Traffic
source: NBW diagram The master plan proposes reconfiguration of much of the site’s vehicular circulation network to allow connection between previously discontiguous parts of the park. Memorial Drive west of the railroad track is realigned to give more space to trail use in the northwest quadrant. The Memorial Loop Road North and East have been
SCALE: 1”=2000’
relocated to consolidate central spaces of the park. A traffic study analyzing potential impacts from proposed road realignments within the park has been completed.
Transit System Legend Bus hub B-Cycle station Bike parking Pedestrian connections Proposed 15 min bus route Existing 15 min bus route Existing 30 min bus route Existing 60 min bus route Existing Bus stops
source: NBW diagram Harris County Metropolitan Transit Authority is currently reconfiguring bus routes to serve as a grid-based system, with changes to go into effect in June 2015. Their goal is to create easier point-to-point access between all parts of the city. Many lines will have increased frequencies, and weekend service will be as frequent as weekday service, benefiting weekend park users.
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
SCALE: 1”=2000’
The master plan proposes a more frequent bus route be introduced along Memorial Drive, and that added stops at major park destinations will allow better access to park features. The plan envisions that where feasible, bus stops be paired with B-cycle stations to allow easy transition from public transit to on-site bicycle use.
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
73
Proposed Parking Legend 338 spaces 20 spaces
292 spaces
To Remain Existing
177 spaces
Proposed
120 spaces 20 spaces 54 spaces 22 spaces 185 spaces
83 spaces
274 spaces 34 spaces 234 spaces
28 spaces
76 spaces 75 spaces
90 spaces 90 spaces
11 bus spaces 81 car spaces
274 spaces
48 spaces
56 spaces
128 spaces
106 spaces
SCALE: 1”=2000’
source: NBW diagram Dispersed parking lots provide improved access to park activities. Parking along Memorial Loop Road is eliminated, allowing for two way traffic and a more park-like feeling. Discrete parking areas now provide access to all parts of the site. The proposed parking design provides a more than 30% increase in parking capacity. (Amended per public input review with client group and design team, 03/25/2015.)
Trail System Legend Throughways Primary Circulation Pathways Southern Arc Trail Seymour Lieberman Trail Cycle Track Natural Surface Trails Natural Surface Trail Areas
Bayou Boat Route
source: NBW diagram The master plan proposes an improved trails network that addresses serious safety and maintenance issues in the existing trail system. The plan proposes several solutions. First, an extensive multi-use trail system connects to major roads and surrounding neighborhoods outside the park as well as to all major use areas of the park. The plan also separates the many trail users on the site into different areas of the park connected by this multi-use trail network. The Seymour Lieberman Trail is expanded to 3 miles. A cycle loop is
SCALE: 1”=2000’
added in the northwest portion of the park to accommodate cyclists who currently use the picnic loop. A quarter mile timing track is introduced next to the existing Trails Center. The current system of natural surface mountain biking trails are improved and expanded, while pedestrian trails are provided in the more sensitive areas in the Old Archery Range, the Houston Arboretum and Nature Center, and proximate to the Bayou on the south side of the park and in Hogg Bird Sanctuary.
Traffic Modeled Impact of Master Plan on Traffic As part of the Memorial Park Master Plan, Walter P Moore was engaged to conduct a traffic study to determine the impact of the proposed master plan improvements at Memorial Park, including the realignment of E. Memorial Loop Drive, the realignment of Memorial Drive west of the Memorial Drive-Woodway Drive split, and the reconfiguration of the E. Memorial Loop at N. Memorial Loop intersection. The improvements include Memorial Loop Dr. becoming two-way for its entire length and the addition of a roundabout on Memorial Dr. just east of the intersection with I-610.
on major roadway links and turning movement counts during peak periods at primary intersections that may be impacted by modifications to the park roadways. Four analysis scenarios were modeled using traffic analysis software. The scenarios are described below: Adjusted Existing Conditions – This scenario includes existing 2015 conditions such as traffic signal timings and lane configurations. The existing counts were adjusted to increase the movements that access the park by 80% to account for a seasonal variation.
Proposed Conditions – This scenario uses existing traffic signal timings, but updates the background traffic volumes with an additional 30% growth to account for the parking increase in the proposed master plan. The model also updates the alignment and lanes configurations as shown in the proposed master plan. The proposed lane configurations at Memorial Dr. and E. Memorial Loop assume a standard 150’ eastbound left turn bay and a westbound right turn bay that is comparable in length to the existing right turn bay. The proposed condition also includes a roundabout east of I-610 on Memorial Dr.
Methodology In order to perform the traffic study, historical traffic counts in the area were reviewed. In addition, new traffic count data was collected at key locations in November 2014 and March 2015. This included 24-hour counts
Background Conditions – This scenario uses existing traffic signal timings and lane configurations, but includes traffic volumes with a 1% background growth in addition to the seasonal adjustment factor.
Proposed Mitigation – This model uses the proposed volumes and updated alignments and lane configurations shown in the proposed master plan, but also updates the intersection signal timings.
PROPOSED: AREAS OF TRAFFIC STUDY
Legend
Stop Sign Included in Study
. Dr
Traffic Circle Included in Study
orial
Lo op
Traffic Signal Included in Study
em
Site Systems · Traffic
74
N
Two Lane Road Included in Study
.M
I-610
E. M e
m
Six Lane Road Included in Study or
ia l
rial Dr. Memo
One Way Traffic
Lo o
p
Two Way Traffic
Dr.
Walter P Moore selected areas of potential concern at proposed intersections and roadways to determine any impact the Master Plan would have on traffic.
Crestwood Dr.
Frontage Rd. / W Loop N. Service Rd.
Four Lane Road Included in Study
Memo rial D r.
SCALE: 1”=2000’
source: NBW diagram
The results of the analysis provide three measures to determine if any significant impacts will occur. These three measures are: Intersection Level of Service – Results of the capacity analyses are reported in standard level of service (LOS) format, with the most favorable conditions being designated as LOS A and the poorest conditions indicated by LOS F. Intersection level of service is based on the amount of delay that each vehicle encounters at a given intersection. Transportation agencies generally consider operations at or above LOS C to be acceptable. In more dense areas, operations at or above LOS D may also be considered acceptable during peak traffic hours. Queue Length – Results of the analysis provides the
a level similar to background conditions, indicating that maximum estimated queue lengths at an intersection. This means the maximum number of vehicles that will be that there will be minimal impacts to traffic operations at these intersections. As shown, some of the intersections stacked up on each approach when getting a red signal will require mitigation, primarily the re-timing of the traffic indication. This measure is important to consider to Table 1: Intersection signals. Level of Service (delay in seconds/vehicle) – Morning (AM) Peak Hour make sure that vehicles do not queue into the adjacent Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Proposed w/ Mitigation intersection. A A B Memorial at At the roundabout, the intersection will operate n/a at Level E. Memorial Loop 12.1 8.6 8.7 of Service F due to vehicles stacked up from the IH 610 Travel Time – Results of the analysis also provide the A A B Memorial at n/a This stacking would occur whether the amount of time required to travel a designated distance, Crestwood frontage road. 11.6 9.6 9.8 roundabout is in place or not. The low level of service is including time through an intersection. A A E. Memorial Loop at n/a n/a not due to the roundabout design and will only impact N. Memorial Loop 5.1 7.9 the area to the north. E D E small parking Memorial at the traffic accessing Results Summary n/a IH 610 NB Frontage Road 54.0 55.6 55.8 As can be seen in the Intersection Level of Service tables D D D Memorial at and figure, during both the morning (AM) and evening n/a IH 610 SBatFrontage Road 46.8 40.9 42.2 (PM) peak hours, all intersections are able to operate Memorial at Roundabout
n/a
n/a
B 12.4
n/a
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE (DELAY IN SECONDS/VEHICLE) Table 1: Intersection Level ofHour Service (delay in seconds/vehicle) – Morning (AM) Peak Hour Morning (AM) Peak Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Proposed w/ Mitigation A A B Memorial at n/a E. Memorial Loop 8.6 8.7 12.1 A A B Memorial at n/a Crestwood 9.6 9.8 11.6 A A E. Memorial Loop at n/a n/a N. Memorial Loop 7.9 5.1 D E E Memorial at n/a IH 610 NB Frontage Road 54.0 55.6 55.8 D D D Memorial at n/a IH 610 SB Frontage Road 40.9 42.2 46.8 B Memorial at n/a n/a n/a Roundabout 12.4
Table 2: Intersection of Service Afternoon (PM)Level Peak Hour(delay in seconds/vehicle) – Evening (PM) Peak Hour Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Proposed w/ Mitigation E C C C Memorial at E. Memorial Loop 26.0 26.8 56.4 27.4 B B B Memorial at n/a Crestwood 15.8 16.4 18.1 B E E. Memorial Loop at n/a n/a N. Memorial Loop 40.7 10.3 F E E E Memorial at IH 610 NB Frontage Road 71.4 73.9 128.8 60.1 F E E E Memorial at IH 610 SB Frontage Road 58.4 60.8 97.8 56.4 F F Memorial at n/a n/a Roundabout 85.5 85.5
Intersection operations will not decline when the E. Loop shifts closer to Crestwood. Signal timings will need to be modified at IH 610 to allow for additional traffic volumes on Memorial Drive. No modifications is necessary at locations with ‘n/a’ in the ‘Proposed w/ Mitigation’ column.
source: Walter P Moore
source: Walter P Moore
Table 1 and 2: Intersection operations will not decline when the E. Loop shifts closer to Crestwood. Signal timings will need to be modified at IH 610 to allow for additional traffic volumes on Memorial Drive. No modifications is necessary at locations with ‘n/a’ in the ‘Proposed w/ Mitigation’ column.
Table 2: Intersection Level of Service (delay in seconds/vehicle) – Evening (PM) Peak Hour Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Proposed w/ Mitigation E C C C Memorial at E. Memorial Loop 26.0 26.8 56.4 27.4 MEMORIALMemorial PARK CONSERVANCY 2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN B B B at n/aEXECUTIVE SUMMARY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT Crestwood 18.1 15.8 16.4 UPTOWN HOUSTON B E E. Memorial Loop at n/a n/a
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
75
INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE COMPARISON Queue Lengths While queuing was reviewed on all approaches to the intersections in the study, the critical location for queue length is on Memorial Dr. at the E. Memorial Loop Rd. and Crestwood Dr. intersections. The proposed re-alignment shifts the E. Loop approximately 500’ to the east reducing the distance between the E. Loop and Crestwood to approximately 900’. As can be seen in the Maximum Queue Length tables and figures during both the AM and PM peak hours, the maximum queue length for all scenarios is less than half of the proposed distance between E. Memorial Loop Dr. and Crestwood Dr. along Memorial Dr.
Table 3: Maximum Queue Length Comparison – Morning (AM) Peak Hour Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Eastbound at Crestwood 209’ 231’ 271’ Queue Length (feet) # of Vehicles 10 12 14 Westbound at E. Memorial Loop 341’ 321’ 409’ Queue Length (feet) # of Vehicles 17 16 20
source: Walter P Moore
MAXIMUM QUEUE LENGTH
Travel Times Travel times along Memorial Dr. were reviewed to determine if there would be any additional travel time due to congestion. The re-alignment of Memorial Dr. will add approximately 0.2 miles of length, which will account for the majority of increase in travel time.
Available Space 900’ -
As can be seen in the Travel Time Comparison table during both the AM and PM peak hours, the increase in travel time is due primarily to the increase in travel distance. As indicated, the traffic signal timings at the I-610 interchange will need to be adjusted to mitigate any increase in travel time in the PM peak hour.
900’ -
Afternoon (PM) Peak Hour
Table 4: Maximum Queue Length Comparison – Evening (PM) Peak Hour Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Eastbound at Crestwood Queue Length (feet) 222’ 221’ 206’ # of Vehicles 11 11 10 Westbound at E. Memorial Loop Queue Length (feet) 407’ 420’ 456’ # of Vehicles 20 21 23
Available Space
Summary of Findings The following is a summary of the key findings for the three areas of Memorial Park that have roadway modifications as part of the proposed master plan.
900’ 900’ -
Memorial Dr. at Crestwood Dr. and E. Memorial Loop Rd.: Table 3 and 4: Queue lengths (number of cars waiting at a red signal indication) were reviewed to make sure that vehicles will not back up between the E. Loop and Crestwood into the adjacent intersection. The maximum number of vehicles expected onlyrealignment of E. Memorial Loop Dr. does • will The take of half of the available length between the two intersections. not impact operations at the Memorial Dr. and Table 5: Travel Time Comparison – Morning (AM) Peak Hour Crestwood Dr. intersection. Intersection Proposed w/ Difference • Vehicles on Memorial Dr. between E. Memorial Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Mitigation Loop Dr. and Crestwood Dr. will not spill back into Westbound (including IH 610 interchange) Legend adjacent intersections. 150 n/a + 25 secs Travel Time (seconds) 122 125 There is very little difference in queue • The E. Memorial Loop Dr. at Memorial Dr. 0.8 0.8 1.0 n/a + 0.2 mi DistanceExisting (miles) Adjusted Eastbound (including IH 610 interchange) length when comparing scenarios. As intersection will require turn bay improvements and Background can be seen, the vehicles between the 113 Crestwood n/a will + 19 secs Travel Time (seconds) 95 proposed94E. Loop and signal timing adjustments. Proposed source: Walter P Moore
Table 3: Maximum Queue Length Comparison – Morning (AM) Peak Hour source: Walter P Moore Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Eastbound at Crestwood 209’ 231’ 271’ Queue Length (feet) # ofPeak VehiclesHour 10 12 14 Morning (AM) Westbound at E. Memorial Loop 341’ 321’ 409’ Queue Length (feet) # of Vehicles 17 16 20
Table 4: Maximum Queue Length Comparison – Evening (PM) Peak Hour Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Eastbound at Crestwood 222’ 221’ 206’ Queue Length (feet) # of Vehicles 11 11 10 Westbound at E. Memorial Loop 407’ 420’ 456’ Queue Length (feet) # of Vehicles 20 21 23
Distance (miles) Available Space
0.8 not impact 0.8the other1.0intersection. n/a
+ 0.2 mi
•
E. Memorial Loop Dr. at N. Memorial Loop Dr. With a two-way stop control intersection, queues Proposed w/ Difference can be minimized with turn bay improvements at the Mitigation intersection. Available Space SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 188 - 20 secs 900’ Memorial Dr. Realignment east of I-610 n/a + 0.2 mi The following is a summary of the key findings for the three areas of Memori • The realignment of Memorial Dr. will add less than of the proposed master plan. 112 + 18 secs 30 seconds of travel time between the Memorial 900’ n/a + 0.2 mi Loop Dr. and the I-610 intersection during both peak hours. Memorial at Crestwood and E. Memorial Loop Walter P Moore source: 900’ Table 5 and 6: The increase in travel time along the Memorial Drive re-alignment is only due to the added length of approximately • The I-610 interchange with the northbound and 0.2 miles. Table 4: Maximum Queue Length Comparison – Evening (PM) Peak Hour The realignment of E. Memorial Loop does not impact o southbound frontage roads will require signal timing Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Available Space intersection. 900’ at Crestwood adjustments. Eastbound - Queue Length (feet) 222’ 221’ 206’ 900’ Vehicles on Memorial Drive between E. Memorial Loop # of Vehicles 11 11 10 intersections.
Table900’ 6: Travel Time Comparison – Evening (PM) Peak Hour Intersection Existing Background Proposed Table 3: Maximum Queue LengthAdjusted Comparison – Morning (AM) Peak Hour Adjusted Existing Background Proposed WestboundIntersection (including IH 610 interchange) 900’ at Crestwood Eastbound 519 Travel Time (seconds) 160 208 - Queue Length (feet) 209’ 231’ 271’ 0.8 0.8 1.0 Distance (miles) # of Vehicles 10 12 14 Eastbound (including IH 610 interchange) Westbound at E. Memorial Loop 117 Travel Time (seconds) 93 94 Queue Length (feet) 341’ 321’ 409’ Available Space 0.8 0.8 1.0 Distance (miles) # of Vehicles 17 16 20
Table 3 and 4: Queue lengths (number of cars waiting at a red signal indication) were reviewed sureLoop that vehicles will not Westbound at toE. make Memorial back up between the E. Loop and Crestwood into the adjacent intersection. The maximum number of vehicles expected will only 407’ Queue Length (feet) take of half of the available length between the two intersections. Table 3: Maximum Queue Length Comparison – Morning (AM) Peak Hour
Legend
420’ 456’ 900’ # of Existing Vehicles 20 21 23 Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Available Space Table 5: Intersection Travel Time ComparisonAdjusted – Morning (AM) Peak Hour EastboundIntersection at Crestwood ProposedBackground w/ Difference Proposed Table 3 and 4: Queue lengths (number of cars waiting at a red signal indication) were reviewed to make sure that vehicles will not 209’Existing Background 231’ 271’ 900’ Queue Length (feet) Adjusted Mitigation Proposed back up between the E. Loop and Crestwood into the adjacent intersection. The maximum number of vehicles expected will only # of 10 12 14 -take of half of the available length between the two intersections. Westbound (including IH 610 interchange) source: Walter P Vehicles Moore Westbound at Time E. Memorial Loop 150 n/a + 25 secs Travel (seconds) 122 125 Table 5: Travel Time Comparison – Morning (AM) Peak Hour Queue lengths (number of cars waiting at a red were the available 341’ 321’ 409’ 900’ number Queue Length(miles) (feet) 0.8 0.8signal indication) 1.0 n/a + 0.2 mi of vehicles expected will only take up half ofProposed Distance Intersection w/ Difference reviewed to make sure that vehicles will not back up between the E. length betweenAdjusted the two intersections. Existing Background Proposed # of Vehicles 17 16 20 Eastbound (including IH 610 interchange) Mitigation Loop and Crestwood into the adjacent intersection. The maximum Travel Time (seconds) 113 n/a + 19 secsIH 610 interchange) 95 94 Westbound (including 0.8 0.8 1.0 n/a Travel Time + 0.2(seconds) mi Distance (miles) 150 n/a + 25 secs 122 125 Table 4: Maximum Queue Length Comparison – Evening (PM) Peak Hour 0.8 0.8 1.0 n/a + 0.2 mi Distance (miles) TRAVEL TIME COMPARISON Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Available Space Eastbound (including IH 610 interchange) Eastbound at Crestwood Afternoon Peak Hour Table 6: Travel(PM) Time Comparison – Evening (PM) Peak Hour 113 n/a + 19 secs Travel Time (seconds) 95 94 222’ 221’ 206’ 900’w/ Queue Length (feet) Intersection Proposed Difference The increase in travel time along Adjusted Existing Background Proposed 0.8 0.8 1.0 n/a + 0.2 mi Distance (miles) the Memorial Drive re-alignment # of Vehicles 11 11 10 Mitigation is only due to the added length of Westbound (including IH 610Loop interchange) at E. Memorial approximately 0.2 miles. Travel (seconds) 160 208 519 188 - 20 secs 407’ 420’ 456’ 900’ QueueTime Length (feet) Table 6: Travel Time Comparison – Evening (PM) Peak Hour Distance (miles) 0.8 1.0 n/a- Intersection + 0.2 mi # of Vehicles 20 210.8 23 Proposed w/ Difference Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Eastbound (including IH 610 interchange) Mitigation Travel Time4:(seconds) 93 of cars waiting94at a red signal117 112reviewed + 18 secs Table 3 and Queue lengths (number indication) were to make vehicles will not Westbound (including IHsure 610that interchange) back up between the E. Loop and Crestwood into the adjacent intersection. The maximum number of vehicles expected will only Distance (miles) 0.8 0.8 1.0 n/a Travel Time + 0.2(seconds) mi 519 188 - 20 secs 160 208 take of half of the available length between the two intersections. 0.8 0.8 1.0 n/a + 0.2 mi Distance (miles) Morning (AM) Hour Table Table 5: Travel TimePeak Comparison – Morning (AM) Peak Hour 5 and 6: The increase in travel time along the Memorial Drive re-alignment Eastbound is only due (including to the added length of approximately IH 610 interchange) Proposed w/ Difference 0.2 Intersection miles. 117 112 + 18 secs Travel Time (seconds) 93 94 Adjusted Existing Background Proposed Mitigation 0.8 0.8 1.0 n/a + 0.2 mi Distance (miles) Westbound (including IH 610 interchange) Travel Time (seconds) 122 125 150 n/a + 25 secs Table 5 and 6: The increase in travel time along the Memorial Drive re-alignment is only due to the added length of approximately Distance (miles) 0.8 0.8 1.0 n/a 0.2 miles. + 0.2 mi Eastbound (including IH 610 interchange) Travel Time (seconds) 95 94 113 n/a + 19 secs Distance (miles) 0.8 0.8 1.0 n/a + 0.2 mi
Walter P Moore source:
Table 6: Travel Time Comparison – Evening (PM) Peak Hour Intersection Adjusted Existing Background Westbound (including IH 610 interchange) Travel Time (seconds) 160
208
Proposed
Proposed w/ Mitigation
Difference
519
188
- 20 secs
The E. Memorial Loop at Memorial intersection will requ adjustments.
E. Memorial Loop at N. Memorial Loop
With a two-way stop control intersection, queues can be intersection.
Memorial Realignment east of IH 610
The realignment of Memorial will add less than 30 secon and the IH 610 intersection during both peak hours.
The IH 610 interchange with the northbound and southb adjustments.
Interim Review Only Document Incomplete: Not intended for permit or construction Engineer: Jennifer L. Peek, P.E. P.E. Serial No. 90254 Date: April 6, 2015 Walter P. Moore and Associates, Inc. TBPE Firm Registration No. 1856
Further information can be found in the appendix with Walter P Moore’s complete study.
Site Systems · Trails: Typologies
76
Trails: Typologies The proposed trail typologies of Memorial Park have been designed to facilitate mobility throughout the park, improve user experiences, and promote safety. Connectivity to and access throughout Memorial Park will be expanded with additional commuter friendly paths connecting to adjacent neighborhoods. Routes will be completed along both sides of Memorial Drive on the south side of Woodway Drive, and new connections will be added to the north and south. Concrete commuter paths will tie to existing sidewalks both inside and outside the park. Crushed stone pathways will provide all weather and ADA accessible surfaces throughout the park. On the north side of the park, primary circulation pathways of crushed stone will provide all weather and ADA accessible surfaces throughout the park. On the southern side of the park, the multi-functional Southern
standards for design and sustainability will be utilized on all natural surface hiking and biking trails to reduce standing water, erosion and maintenance costs. Natural surface trails will still be periodically closed by the parks department during inclement weather to reduce deterioration.
Arc Trail will provide an armature to the Bayou Wilds, ADA access to the restored ecologies of the southern area, and much needed emergency service routes. As an armature the trail will provide structure to an otherwise disorienting precinct of the park. The core arc connotes an inner rarefied wilderness and its bridges and on-grade surfaces move users through the diverse ecologies of the southern wilds.
The existing Seymour Lieberman Exercise Trail will continue to function as a resource for runners of all ages and will be lengthened to three miles. The trail will connect seamlessly to multi-use trails over the Land Bridge providing easy access to the Running Trail Center and Timing Track.
Trails and pathways designated for specific user groups will reduce user conflict and improve experience as surfaces become customized to their specific group. Mountain bike trails will be designed to the geometry and speed of bikes while hiking trails will take into account movement by foot. Graphic and visual cues will alert users to the proper use of these trails and elements placed at the head of trails will discourage improper use. Boardwalks and raised surfaces will be used to protect sensitive ecologies and frequently wet areas. Trail
The Cycle Track in the northwest quadrant will provide a home for the many road cyclists currently appropriating the paved surface through the existing picnic loop.
Major Throughways: Connecting to the Park THROUGHWAYS (8.9 MILES)
SCALE: 1”=2000’
The throughways will be the major arteries of the park facilitating the largest amount of non-vehicular traffic. Typically 16’ wide with a concrete surface, these pathways allow multiple kinds of users to move through the park and beyond.
designed use
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
77
Primary Pathways: Connecting Within the Park PRIMARY CIRCULATION PATHWAYS (4.5 MILES)
designed use
SCALE: 1”=3000’
The primary circulation pathways allow access to the interior of Memorial Park as well as providing smaller scale connections to adjoining neighborhoods. Typically 12’ wide with a crushed stone surface and curb edge these pathways provide an accessible surface for multiple user groups.
SOUTHERN ARC TRAIL (2.4 MILES) designed use
The Southern Arc Trail is the orienting and structuring device of the Bayou Wilds. It is typically 12’ wide, crushed stone surface and does not have a curbed edge to minimize impact to the ecologies. Timber frame bridges, boardwalks, and overlooks span the barrancos and bayou edge.
SCALE: 1”=3000’
Site Systems · Trails: Typologies
78
User Trails: Experiencing Spaces Within the Park SEYMOUR LIEBERMAN EXERCISE TRAIL (3.0 MILES) designed use
SCALE: 1”=3000’
This trail will maintain its current character, with a finely crushed stone surface and curb designed to facilitate primarily jogging and exercise activities.
CYCLE TRACK (1.75 MILES) designed use
SCALE: 1”=3000’
This loop will be paved with asphalt, have a width of 24’ and be used by cyclists, designed to accommodate users moving at different speeds. The buffer of planting around the edges will be widened at some points to ensure a safe distance between users and potential hazards.
HIKING TRAILS (5.4 MILES) designed use
SCALE: 1”=3000’
The hiking trails of Memorial Park are primarily located within the riparian portion of the park. These trails will not allow mountain bikes and will provide access to scenic elements of the riparian forest and barrancos. These paths will be natural surface trails typically 2’-3’ wide allowing for a more rugged experience within the park. MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
79
BIKING TRAILS (7.4 MILES) designed use
SCALE: 1”=3000’
The mountain bike trails will be for mountain bikers only and largely one directional. Varying the designed speed and width (2’-3’) of the trail will accommodate a range of skill levels. Cleared existing surface will be used when possible and appropriately reinforced where necessary. In some places boardwalks and bridges will be used to cross erosion prone areas.
MULTI-USE TRAILS (5.1 MILES) designed use
The multi-use trails will accommodate a range of user groups. Trails will be typically 4’ wide with a more even terrain and improved surface than the hiking and biking trails.
SCALE: 1”=3000’
Site Systems · Materials
80
Materials The proposed material palette for designed elements at Memorial Park evokes the geology, industrial history and vernacular materiality of Houston and Memorial Park. Expressed in both contemporary and traditional ways, the master plan seeks to use this material palette to link the diverse aspects of the park into a unique and cohesive design language. Texas limestone and native Texas Cordova limestone or ‘Shellstone’ are regionally sourced stone types used extensively throughout the state and are synonymous with grand scale in Texas architecture –both San Jacinto Monument and Houston City Hall were built from ‘Shellstone.’
Stone features communicate the grand scale and permanence of Memorial Park especially at the major entrances and thresholds to the park. Weathering steel, stainless steel, zinc finished metals and concrete evoke a connection back to the railroad, Houston’s industrial past, and familiar vernacular forms in the region The use of site-harvested pine, hardwoods and locally sourced gravels will also draw on local vernacular for many pedestrian and trail related site elements.
WEATHERING STEEL Possible integration into signage and graphics, raised planters, handrail posts, building veneers and sculptural elements
TEXAS CORDOVA LIMESTONE ‘SHELLSTONE’ Site walls, park entrances and thresholds, freestanding kiosks, graphic markers, building veneer and sculptural elements
TEXAS LIMESTONE Site walls, park entrances and thresholds, freestanding kiosks, graphic markers, building veneer and sculptural elements
BOARD FORM CONCRETE Transition zones: Linking park and highway overpass and building construction/ veneer and possibly stormwater management controls
SITE HARVESTED LUMBER Boardwalks, bridges and trail signage + building construction/ interiors and veneer
STAINLESS STEEL AND ZINC FINISHED METAL Handrails, raised planters, signage + building interiors and veneer
Material Palette MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
81
Weathering Steel
Texas Cordova Limestone â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Shellstoneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;
Texas Limestone
Board Form Concrete
Site Harvested Lumber
Stainless Steel and Zinc Finished Metals
Site Systems · Plantings
82
Plantings Riparian
RESTORED ECOLOGY LOCATOR PLAN
The riparian corridor, identified by its adjacency to Buffalo Bayou, its steep banks, and its occasional floodplain benches, is one of the most distinct places within Memorial Park both experientially and ecologically. The Bayou is a reminder of this area’s connection to something larger; narrow trails through dense vegetation are a refuge (in a bustling city) to people and wildlife. The soil in these areas is fragile and critical to plant health and stability. The riparian corridor of Memorial Park is at once a fragile ecosystem and a treasured experience of immersion in nature for many visitors. It is critical to strike a balance between providing limited access and protecting the fragility of this landscape. This stretch of undeveloped bayou, free of encroaching buildings and other man made features is both a key ecological resource and an opportunity to educate and interpret Houston’s riverine landscapes.
A
SCALE: 1”=3000’
Legend Riparian Forest
TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION
64 ft.
48 ft.
Juncus rowmerianus / Black Needlerush Eleocharis montana / Knotty Spike-Rush Tridens strictus / Long-Spike Tridens 32 ft. Panicum hemitomon / Maidencane Scirpus pungens / American Bullrush Scirpus validus / Soft-stem Bullrush
16 ft.
Salix nigra / Black Willow Sambucus canadensis / Elderberry
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Platanus occidentalis / American Sycamore Quercus phellos / Willow Oak Quercus pagoda / Cherrybark Oak Acer negundo / Box Elder
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
83
Restored Riparian Description
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Condition: The cool, dense shade from the diverse mix of trees creates the unique character of the bottomland forests of the bayou. However, invasive species currently dominate the understory, obscuring views, crowding out native plants, and stifling the rich biological diversity of a healthy forest. The soil is markedly sandier. Coupled with the controlled water flow from Barker’s and Addicks Reservoirs, the river banks are steep, unstable, and highly erosive. A lack of grasses and shrubs at the water’s edge is evident because of unstable banks from altered flow. Vision: A dense mature mixed bottomland hardwood forest will continue to dominate the majority of the riparian corridor (Populus deltoides, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Platanus occidentalis, Quercus phellos, Q. pagoda, Q. texana, Fraxinus caroliniana, Diospyros virginiana, Nyssa sylvatica, with some Pinus
Sambucus canadensis / Elderberry Agarista populifolia / Florida Hobblebush Bidens alba / Romerillo
VISION
taeda). Invasives will be removed, allowing for a more transparent, healthier, and diverse understory. The forest floor on shallower slopes will be loosely populated with ferns (Lorinseria areolata, and Onoclea sensibilis). Limited shade-tolerant and water-loving grasses and other perennials (Elymus Canadensis, Dichanthelium dichotomum var. ensifolium, and Chasmanthium sessiliflorum, Desmanthus illinoensis, Hymenocallis liriosme, Iris virginica, Eupatorium serotinum, Mitchella repens L., Lobelia cardinalis, and Erigeron philadelphicus, Tripsacum dactyloides, Dichanthelium dichotomum var. ensifolium, and Chasmanthium sessiliflorum), perennials (Hymenocallis liriosme, Iris virginica, Eupatorium serotinum, Mitchella repens L., Lobelia puberula, and Erigeron philadelphicus) and select shrubs (Indigo miniata, Sambucus canadensis, Bidens albaaristosa, and Agarista populifolia) will be re-established.
On the banks approaching and adjacent to the water’s edge, obligate and facultative wetland grasses (Equisetum, Elocharis montana, Juncus rowmerianus, Tripsacum dactyloides, Tridens strictus, Paspalum floridanum, and Panicum hemitomon) will become more dense, providing critical cover, nesting habitat, and forage for wildlife. Shrubs and understory canopy trees will serve a similar purpose and help stabilize slopes (Betula nigra, Celtis laevigata, Cyrilla racemiflora, and Crataegus opaca). This area will not have a regular understory management regime, but it will require a regular regime of invasive species control. Dead wood will be left undisturbed, standing or fallen, for wildlife habitat, except where it encroaches on trails and program areas, or proving a risk to people.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica / Green Ash Celtis laevigata / Sugarberry or Sugar Hickory Carya texana / Black hickory
Dryopteris marginalis / Common Wood Fern Lorinseria areolata / Chain Fern Onoclea sensibilis / Sensitive Fern
Quercus texana / Texas Red Oak Persea borbonia / Red Bay Betula nigra / River Birch
Bidens alba / Romerillo Eupatorium serotinum / Boneset Callicarpa americana / Beautyberry
Site Systems · Plantings
84
Barrancos and Riparian Edges
RESTORED ECOLOGY LOCATOR PLAN
The barrancos,“ravines” in Spanish, that carve into an otherwise flat landscape are a defining feature of Memorial Park. Three major barrancos drain site water to the bayou with their origins in higher, flatter zones of the site. In the southern portions of the park, these waterways are often quite deep and incised. While in the northern reaches, they often diminish to shallower stream channels. Sandwiched between the riparian corridor and in most cases pine-hardwood forests, their characteristics are a combination of the two. Steep slopes, deep shade, welldrained sandy soil, and transitional plants define these areas of the park. Unstable slopes and frequent flooding necessitate grade-separated pedestrian crossings (boardwalks or bridges) in barrancos and at sensitive riparian edges.
C
SCALE: 1”=3000’
Legend Barranco and Riparian Edge Forest
TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION
80 ft.
Acer negundo / Box Elder Betula nigra / River Birch Persea borbonia / Red Bay Asimina triloba / Pawpaw Crataegus marshallii / Parsley Hawthorne Cyrilla racemiflora / Swamp Titi
64 ft.
Ulmus alata / Winged Elm Crataegus mollis / Downy Hawthorne Platanus occidentalis / American Sycamore
48 ft.
32 ft.
16 ft.
Lorinseria areolata / Chain Fern Dryopteris marginalis/ Common Wood Fern Onoclea sensibilis / Sensitive Fern MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Chasmanthium latifolium / Inland Sea Oats Dichanthelium dichotomum / Delicate Panicum Tridens strictus / Long-Spike Tridens NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
85
Restored Barranco and Riparian Edge Description
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Condition: The upper reaches of the riparian corridor and the barrancos that stretch into the park are crisscrossed by bike and pedestrian trails, exacerbating an already unstable soil condition, and overrun by invasive species in the mid- and understory. Vision: At this edge where the well-drained slope nears the terrace flats and the dense forest from the bayou begins to open up, trees transition to hardwood and pine species that can withstand periods of drought and inundation. Overstory canopy trees (Acer negundo, Liquidamber styraciflua, Magnolia grandiflora, Pinus taeda and echinata, Ulmus alata, and Quercus michauxii and nigra) and understory trees (Asimina triloba, Cornus drummondiisp., Diospyros virginiana, Carpinus
VISION
caroliniana, Crataegus drummondii and marshallii) will become dominant features of this landscape as understory invasives are cleared out, exposing the unique character of these trees. On average, the ground plane will consist of 25% shrubs and 25% herbaceous plants. This loose and scattered shade-tolerant shrub layer will provide wildlife habitat and forage and stabilize these sandy and highly erosive slopes (Agarista populifolia, Callicarpa americana, Phlox divaricata, Rubus trivialis). The establishment of a native shrub palette will be important for when invasives are removed to minimize disturbance.
With more pine straw and leaf litter on the forest floor and dappled sunlight, only certain grasses and other perennials (Chasmanthium latifolium and sessiliflorum, Elymus virginicus, Paspalum plicatum, and Eupatorium perfoliatumserotinum, Mitchella repens L., and Dryopteris marginalis), and ferns (Dryopteris marginalis, Lorinseria areolata, and Onoclea sensibilis) will thrive here.
Liquidamber styraciflua / Sweetgum Nyssa sylvatica / Black Tupelo Ulmus crassifolia / Cedar Elm Carpinus caroliniana / American hornbeam Gleditsia triacanthos / Honey Locust Populus deltoides / Cottonwood Quercus michauxii / Swamp Chestnut Oak Quercus nigra / Water oak Celtis laevigata / Sugarberry or Sugar Hickory Salix nigra / Black Willow Fraxinus caroliniana / Carolina Buckthorn Crataegus opaca/ Mayhaw
Paspalum floridanum / Florida Paspalum Juncus rowmerianus / Black Needlerush Panicum hemitomon / Maidencane
Dichanthelium dichotomum / Delicate Panicum Panicum anceps / Beaked Panicum Paspalum plicatulum / Brownseed Paspalum
Site Systems · Plantings
86
Pine-Hardwood Forest
RESTORED ECOLOGY LOCATOR PLAN
When the invasive thicket is removed, the pinehardwood forests will have a very different character than they do now. Instead of appearing like an impenetrable mass, they will be filled with light and air between the trees with occasional groupings of shrubs and a low, native understory. These areas within Memorial Park will be ideal for both people and wildlife. The canopy of the existing mature trees are ideal bird habitat. A restored understory and midstory will become better habitat and forage for wildlife. Carefully designed trails will allow people to experience select areas within the forest.
F
SCALE: 1”=3000’
Legend Pine-Hardwood Forest
TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION 86
Quercus alba / White Oak Quercus falcata / Southern Red Oak Quercus prinus / Chestnut Oak Carya ovata / Shagbark Hickory Carya illinoensis / Pecan Morus rubra / Red Mulberry MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
Agarista populifolia / Florida Hobblebush Leucothoe populifolia / Florida Leucothoe Itea virginica / Sweetspire
Mitchella repens L. / Partridgeberry Eupatorium serotinum / Boneset Onoclea sensibilis / Sensitive Fern
Quercus falcata / Southern Red Oak Quercus alba / White oak Quercus stellata / Post Oak
Catalpa bignonoides / Southern Catalpa Crataegus texana / Texas Hawthorn
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
87
Restored Pine-Hardwood Forest Description
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Condition: The steep sandy slopes of the bayou and barrancos give way quickly to the flat broad terrace of Memorial Park. Other disparate patches of pine-hardwood forest have become established across the site over the past 100 years. The vegetative composition of this forest is currently a jumbled mix of incredibly dense invasive species in the understory that physically and visually obscure pine and hardwood trees. Many trees were badly damaged during the recent drought and hurricane. Vision: These woods will range in density from 150 trees per acre closest to the riparian corridor to 100 trees per acre on the edges that border savannah. The
Tilia caroliniana / Carolina Basswood Sassafras albidum / Sassafras Celtis occidentalis / Hackberry Callicarpa americana / Beautyberry Symphoricarpos orbiculatus / Coral Berry Rubus trivialis / Dewberry
VISION
dominance of either pine or hardwood trees will depend on the type of soil. Pine-dominant woods (Pinus taeda and Pinus echinata to be established) will be scattered with motts of dry-mesic hardwoods (Carya spp.; Quercus alba, Q. falcata, Q. virginiana, Q. prinus and Q. stellata; Morus rubra; Celtis occidentalis; Sassafrass albidium; Liquidambar styraciflua, Catalpa bignonoides and Tilia caroliniana).
Desmanthus illinoensis, Conoclinium coelestinum, Dryopteris marginalis, and Mitchella repens L.). Grasses will be diverse in species and follow a similar form and distribution as perennials (Tripsacum dactyloides, Elymus virginicus L., Chasmanthium sessiliflorum, Muhlenbergia capillaris, Schizachyrium scoparium, Panicum virgatum) as will ferns (Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Kuhn var. pseudocaudatum, Dryopteris marginalis).
On average, the ground plane will consist of 25% shrubs and 25% herbaceous plants. Shrubs will tend to be loose in structure and planted in odd groupings of 3-5 (Agarista populifolia, Callicarpa Americana, Rubus trivialis). Perennials will be planted similarly and en masse (Amsonia illustris, Cooperia drummondii,
Clearing of brush on a bi- or triennial basis will be necessary in this landscape to keep the forest floor open and to keep hardwoods from becoming too dense. A rigorous invasive species management regime will be necessary.
Amsonia illustris / Showy Blue Star Cooperia drummondii / Rain Lilly Quercus prinus / Chestnut Oak Quercus stellata / Post Oak Quercus virginiana / Southern Live Oak
Pinus taeda / Loblolly Pine Pinus echinata / Short-Leaf Pine Andropogon ternarius Michx. / Splitbeard BluestemOats Muhlenbergia capillaris / Gulf Muhley Schizachyrium scoparium / Little Bluestem
Site Systems · Plantings
88
Pine-Hardwood Savannah
RESTORED ECOLOGY LOCATOR PLAN
Although unfamiliar to Memorial Park in recent decades, the pine-hardwood savannah that was once a dominant feature of this area will become the park’s defining ecological type. Clusters of pines and hardwoods known as “motts” of varying sizes will dot an understory of native grasses and forbs. The presence of more sunlight will allow for the development of specimen trees, ones that become sculptural characters in the landscape. When dead standing wood and invasives are removed and a more open overstory is created, an existing dormant seedbank of native species will emerge and thrive. The tawny grasses and full canopied trees of the savannah will become the iconic landscape type of Memorial Park.
D
SCALE: 1”=3000’
Legend Pine-Hardwood Savannah
TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION
48 ft.
32 ft.
16 ft.
Pinus echinata / Short-Leaf Pine Pinus taeda / Loblolly Pine Baccharis halimifolia / Eastern False Willow Crataegus texana / Texas Hawthorn
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
Gaillardia pulchella / Indian Blanket Desmanthus illinoensis / Illinois Bundleflower Asclepias verticillata / Whorled Milkweed Sorgastrum nutans / Yellow Indiangrass Andropogon ternarius Michx. / Splitbeard Bluestem Schizachyrium scoparium / Little Bluestem
Agrostis hyemalis / Spring Bentgrass Briza minor / Little Quaking Grass Panicum virgatum / Switchgrass
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
89
Restored Pine-Hardwood Savannah Description
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Condition: Over the past 60 years, most of the flat terrace of Memorial Park has become densely forested. Before this time, or that of Camp Logan or the Reinermanns, a coastal prairie with pine-hardwood savannahs would have dominated this landscape. The recent drought and hurricane were destructive forces to the trees that had grown since then; however, their clearing effect has left a prairie-savannah ecology that would have been familiar to the Karankawa, some of the early inhabitants of this area. While some patches have been cleared, others still have standing dead wood, dead brush, and invasives that require thinning, clearing, and grubbing. Vision: The pine-hardwood savannah of Memorial Park will become one of its most defining landscape typologies. It will be the intersection of the rich native
VISION
prairie with clusters of pine trees and hardwood motts. The tree palette will typically mirror the pine-hardwood forest with the occasional addition of Carya illinoinesis (the state tree of Texas) and Juglans nigra. Long views through the grasslands will punctuate otherwise loosely wooded areas. On average, there will be about 50 trees per acre grouped in clusters, leaving significant open areas. Shrubs will comprise 20% of the ground plane while herbaceous plants will comprise 70%. The grasses and forbs in this complex will resemble those in the prairie in their diversity, type, and distribution. Grasses (Sorgastrum nutans, Schizachyrium scoparium, Panicum virgatum, Muhlenbergia capillaris, Elymus virginicus L., Briza minor, Agrostis hyemalis) and perennials (Erigeron philadelphicus, Mimosa strigillosa, Chanaecrista fasciculata, Cooperia drummondii,
Desmanthus illinoensis, Digitaria cognata, Gaillardia pulchella, Asclepias logiflora and verticillata, Mimosa nuttallii, Phlox drummondii, Rudbeckia hirta, Indigo miniata, and Salvia azurea) will be tolerant of periods of both drought and inundation. They will require bi-annual mowing (or burning if possible) as well as regular invasive species control. These areas are not intended to be occupied like lawns. While occasional foot traffic is anticipated, paths winding through them with small gathering areas are how they will be experienced.
Briza minor / Little Quaking Grass Leptochloa dubia / Green sprangletop Chasmanthium sessiliflorum / Longleaf Uniola
Mimosa strigillosa / Powderpuff Mimosa nuttallii / Nuttallâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Sensitive-Briar Phlox drummondii / Drummondâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Phlox
Quercus stellata / Post Oak Quercus prinus / Chestnut Oak Tilia caroliniana / Carolina Basswood
Rudbeckia hirta / Black-eyed Susan Salvia azurea / Blue Sage Erigeron philadelphicus / Daisy fleabane
Elymus virginicus L. / Virginia Wildrye Panicum virgatum / Switchgrass Sorgastrum nutans / Yellow Indiangrass
Site Systems · Plantings
90
Native Prairie
RESTORED ECOLOGY LOCATOR PLAN
Existing patches of native prairie in Memorial Park are thriving in the CenterPoint utility easement and around Memorial Drive. These patches will be expanded and become the geographic center and the heart of the park. Stretching across the contours of the land bridge, lower vegetation will afford views that have never been seen before in this part of Houston. With a diverse mix of grasses and forbs, the expanded prairie complex will be beautiful year-round and important habitat for nesting birds and other small animals, reptiles, and insects.
D
SCALE: 1”=3000’
Legend Native Prairie
TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION
Quercus virginiana / Southern Live Oak Quercus alba / White oak Quercus falcata / Southern Red Oak 48 ft. Rudbeckia hirta / Black-eyed Susan Salvia azurea / Blue Sage Amsonia illustris / Showy Blue Star
32 ft.
16 ft.
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
91
Restored Native Prairie Description
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Condition: The existing areas of the park maintained as native prairie adjacent to Memorial Drive and the utility easement will remain and continue to be maintained as this habitat type. In other areas where prairie will be restored, the landscape is either overrun by invasive shrubs that occlude the presence of native grasses or is recently cleared after the loss of trees. Vision: The prairie landscape of the West Gulf Coastal Plain is the dominant typology in this ecosystem. The area earmarked to be restored to a prairie is centered around land bridge. It will connect to H.A.N.C.’s restored prairie and spread southward toward the bayou and north along the railroad in sections.
VISION
There will be only 5-10 trees per acre, such as Juglans nigra, Quercus virginiana and Q. falcata, that will be the same dry-mesic species of both the savannah and pinehardwood forest. Oaks will be the dominant species, and the lack of competition for sunlight will allow them to grow to full size and form, making them sculptural treasures of the park. Their maintenance will be critical for this reason. Shrubs and flowering perennials (Indigo miniata, Coreopsis lanceolata, Desmanthius illinoensis, and Dalea purpea) primarily along trails, roadsides, and the railroad will take up 20% of the ground plane and will provide excellent habitat for butterflies for the public to view. 80% of the ground plane will be grasses and other forbs. The species makeup and maintenance regime
Panicum virgatum ‘Cloud Nine’ / Cloud Nine Switchgrass
Pinus echinata / Short-Leaf Pine
Schizachyrium scoparium / Little Bluestem Andropogon virginicus / Broomsedge
Pinus taeda / Loblolly Pine
Sorgastrum nutans / Yellow Indiangrass Andropogon ternarius / Splitbeard Bluestem Schizachyrium scoparium / Little Bluestem
for this complex will be similar to those in the savannah grassland (specifically Andropogon geradii, Panicum virgatum, Schizachrium scoparium, and Sorgastrum nutans.) Within the native prairie, Bouteloua curtipendula will be established, as it is the state grass of Texas. Standing and fallen dead wood, when not a threat to people, will be left for wildlife habitat. People will experience this landscape on foot, on bike, and car with long views through grasses and to distant savannahs.
Asclepias verticillata / Whorled Milkweed Asclepias longifolia / Florida Milkweed Gaillardia pulchella / Indian Blanket Agrostis hyemalis / Spring Bentgrass Briza minor / Little Quaking Grass Panicum virgatum / Switchgrass Elymus virginicus L. / Virginia Wildrye Leptochloa dubia / Green sprangletop Sorgastrum nutans / Yellow Indiangrass
Site Systems · Plantings
92
Wet Prairie-Savannah
RESTORED ECOLOGY LOCATOR PLAN
Seasonally wet areas will be a feature of Memorial Park as long as it is flat, its clayplan soil horizon remains, and Houston receives 50 inches of rain per year. Outside of high use areas, wetlands and frequently ponded areas can be beautiful and unique landscape typologies. They are critical to certain plant and wildlife species and provide a natural means of temporarily storing stormwater on the site.
D
SCALE: 1”=3000’
Legend Wet Savannah Wet Prairie
TYPICAL RESTORATION SECTION 48 ft.
32 ft.
16 ft.
Rhexia mairiana L. / Meadowbeauty Lythrum alatum / Lance-Leaf Loosestrife Lobelia puberula / Downy Lobelia
Sabal minor / Dwarf Palmetto
Panicum anceps / Beaked Panicum Dichanthelium dichotomum / Delicate Panicum Tripsacum dactyloides / Eastern Gama Grass
Quercus texana / Texas Red Oak Betula nigra / River Birch Nyssa sylvatica / Black Tupelo
Eleocharis montana / Knotty Spike-Rush Panicum hemitomon / Maidencane Juncus rowmerianus / Black Needlerush
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
93
Restored Wet Prairie-Savannah Description
EXISTING CONDITIONS
VISION
Existing Condition: There are a number of seasonally and perennially wet areas within the park. Their state and official designation remain unknown during the master plan process. Further exploration of these areas for any design work will be necessary.
detention. They could also be used for educating the public about the function and importance of wetlands and wet areas and their place in Texas ecology. Boardwalks and interpretive areas may intersect with or traverse these landscape types.
Vision: Wet prairie and savannahs, like jurisdictional wetlands, are critical to wintering and migrating wildlife as places to nest, rest, and forage as well as to general ecosystem function. These areas flood seasonally. They will be important for naturally-occurring stormwater
They have different soil and water properties, and because of this, their vegetation varies from that of dry areas. They contain more facultative (FAC) and facultative wetland (FACW) forbs and grasses (Panicum anceps, Paspalum plicatulum, Paspalum floridanum,
Taxodium distichum / Bald Cypress Nyssa aquatica / Water Tupelo Paspalum plicatulum / Brownseed Paspalum Tridens strictus / Long-Spike Tridens Paspalum floridanum / Florida Paspalum
Elocharis montana, Scirpus pungens, Scirpus validus, eg.) and can harbor trees and shrubs that donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t mind wet feet (Taxodium distichum, Platanus occidentalis, Nyssa aquatic and sylvatica, Quercus texana, eg.) The structural characteristics of both the wet savannah and wet prairie will resemble their dry counterparts in number of plants per acre.
Persea borbonia / Red Bay Crataegus opaca / Mayhaw Fraxinus caroliniana / Carolina Buckthorn Scirpus validus / Soft-stem Bullrush Scirpus pungens / American Bullrush
Site Systems 路 Plantings
94
Plant Palette * F=Forest, R=Riparian, S=Savannah, P=Prairie, WP= Wet Prairie, B=Barranco
OVERSTORY TREE PALETTE Obligate Upland (UPL)
Catalpa bignonioides | Southern Catalpa F
Juglans nigra | Black Walnut S, P
Quercus prinus | Chestnut Oak F, S, P
Quercus stellata | Post Oak F, S, P
Tilia caroliniana | Carolina Basswood F, S
Carya illinoensis | Pecan F, S, P
Carya ovata | Shagbark Hickory F, S, P
Celtis occidentalis | Hackberry F, S, P
Morus rubra | Red Mulberry F, S, P
Quercus alba | White oak F, S, P
Quercus falcata | Southern Red Oak F, S, P
Quercus virginiana | Southern Live Oak F, S, P
Sassafras albidum | Sassafras F, S
Acer negundo | Box Elder R, B
Diospyros virginiana | Common Persimmon F, R, B
Gleditsia triacanthos | Honey Locust R
Liquidamber styraciflua | Sweetgum R, B
Magnolia grandiflora | Southern Magnolia F, R, B
Nyssa sylvatica | Black Tupelo R, B
Pinus taeda | Loblolly Pine F, R, WP, B
Populus deltoides | Cottonwood R
Quercus michauxii | Swamp Chestnut Oak F, R, B
Quercus nigra | Water oak R, B
Ulmus alata | Winged Elm R, B
Ulmus crassifolia | Cedar Elm R, B
Pinus palustris | Long-Leaf Pine F
Betula nigra | River Birch R, B
Celtis laevigata | Sugarberry or Sugar Hickory R
Fraxinus pennsylvanica | Green Ash R
Platanus occidentalis | American Sycamore R, WP, B
Persea borbonia | Red Bay R, WP, B
Quercus laurifolia | Laurel Oak F, R
Quercus pagodifolia | Swamp Red Oak R
Quercus phellos | Willow Oak F, R
Quercus texana | Texas Red Oak R, WP
Facultative Upland (FACU)
Facultative (FAC)
Facultative Wetland (FACW)
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
95
OVERSTORY TREE PALETTE (CONTINUED)
* F=Forest, R=Riparian, S=Savannah, P=Prairie, WP= Wet Prairie, B=Barranco
Nyssa aquatica | Water Tupelo R, WP
Taxodium distichum | Bald Cypress R, WP
Obligate Wetland (OBL)
Salix nigra | Black Willow R, B
No Wetland Designation
Carya texana| Black Hickory F
Pinus echinata | Short-Leaf Pine F, S, P, B
UNDERSTORY TREE PALETTE Facultative (FAC)
Asimina triloba | Pawpaw F, R, B
Carpinus caroliniana | American Hornbeam F, R, B
Cornus drummondii | Rough-Leaf Dogwood R, B
Crataegus marshallii | Parsley Hawthorne R, B
Crataegus mollis | Downy Hawthorne R, B
Facultative (FAC) Continued
Facultative Wetland (FACW)
Obligate Wetland (OBL)
Crataegus texana | Texas Hawthorn F, S
Cyrilla racemiflora | Swamp Titi R, B
Crataegus opaca | Mayhaw R
Fraxinus caroliniana | Carolina Buckthorn R
Rubus trivialis | Dewberry F, B
Symphoricarpos orbiculatus | Coral Berry F, B
SHRUB PALETTE
Facultative Upland (FACU)
Baccharis halimifolia | Eastern False Willow F, S, P
Callicarpa americana | Beautyberry F, B
Indigofera miniata | Indigo R, S, P, B
Ilex vomitoria | Yaupon F
Morella cerifera | Wax Myrtle F
Facultative (FAC)
Agarista populifolia | Florida Hobblebush R, F, B
Facultative Wetland (FACW)
Ilex decidua | Deciduous Yaupon F
No Wetland Designation
Itea virginica | Sweetspire F
Leucothoe populifolia | Florida Leucothoe F
Sambucus canadensis | Elderberry R, WP, B
Bidens alba | Romerillo R
Site Systems 路 Plantings
96
GRASS PALETTE
* F=Forest, R=Riparian, S=Savannah, P=Prairie, WP= Wet Prairie, B=Barranco
Obligate Upland (UPL)
Facultative Upland (FACU)
Bouteloua curtipendula | Side Oats Grama S, P
Andropogon ternarius Michx. | Splitbeard Bluestem F, S, P
Schizachyrium scoparium | Little Bluestem F, S, P
Sorghastrum nutans | Yellow Indiangrass S, P
Facultative (FAC)
Agrostis hyemalis | Spring Bentgrass S, WP
Briza minor | Little Quaking Grass F, S
Chasmanthium latifolium | Inland Sea Oats F, B
Chasmanthium sessiliflorum | Longleaf Uniola F, R, B
Dichanthelium dichotomum var. ensifolium | Delicate Panicum F, R, WP
Elymus virginicus L. | Virginia Wildrye F, S, WP, B
Muhlenbergia capillaris | Gulf Muhley F, S, P, WP
Panicum anceps | Beaked Panicum S, WP
Panicum virgatum | Switchgrass F, S, P
Paspalum plicatulum | Brownseed Paspalum P, WP, B
Tripsacum dactyloides | Eastern Gama Grass F, R, WP
Andropogon gerardii | Big Bluestem P, WP
Elymus canadensis | Canada Wildrye R, S, P
Polygonum spp. | Smartweed WP
Facultative Wetland (FACW)
Paspalum floridanum | Florida Paspalum R, WP, B
Obligate Wetland (OBL)
Tridens strictus | Long-Spike Tridens R
Eleocharis montana | Knotty Spike-Rush R, WP
Juncus roemerianus | Black Needlerush R, WP
Obligate Wetland (OBL) Continued
Panicum hemitomon | Maidencane R, WP
Scirpus pungens | American Bulrush WP
Scirpus validus | Soft-stem Bulrush WP
Hydrolea ovata | False Fiddleleaf WP
No Wetland Designation
Leptochloa dubia | Green sprangletop R, WP
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
97
FORBS PALETTE
* F=Forest, R=Riparian, S=Savannah, P=Prairie, WP= Wet Prairie, B=Barranco
Obligate Upland (UPL)
Facultative Upland (FACU)
Coreopsis lanceolata | Lanceleaf Coreopsis S, P
Asclepias verticillata | Wholred Milkweed S, P, WP
Chamaecrista fasciculata | Partridge Pea S
Cooperia drummondii | Evening Rain Lily F, S, P, WP
Phlox divaricata | Woodland Phlox R, F, S, B
Rudbeckia hirta | Black-eyed Susan S, P
Digitaria cognata | Carolina Crabgrass S, P
Desmanthus illinoensis | Illinois Bundleflower R, F, S, P
Conoclinium coelestinum | Blue Mist Flower F, S, P, WP
Erigeron philadelphicus | Daisy Fleabane R, S, WP
Eupatorium serotinum | Boneset F, R, S, B
Mimosa strigillosa | Herbaceous Mimosa / Powderpuff S, P
Bidens aristosa | Bur Marigold R, B
Lobelia cardinalis | Cardinal Flower R, F, S, WP, B
Lobelia puberula | Downy Lobelia R
Rhexia mariana L. | Maryland Meadowbeauty WP
Hymenocallis liriosme | Spider Lilly R
Iris virginica | Southern Blue Iris R, B
Lythrum alatum var. lanceolatum | LanceLeaf Loosestrife R, WP
Mimosa nuttallii | Nuttallâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Sensitive-Briar S, P
Phlox drummondii | Drummondâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Phlox S, P
Facultative Upland (FACU) Continued
Mitchella repens L. | Partridgeberry R, F, B
Facultative (FAC)
Asclepias longifolia | Longleaf Milkweed S, P, WP
Facultative Wetland (FACW)
Amsonia illustris | Showy Blue Star F, WP
Obligate Wetland (OBL)
Hibiscus grandiflorus | Swamp Rosemallow WP
No Wetland Designation
Dalea purpurea | Purple Prairie Clover S, P
FERNS PALETTE
Facultative Upland (FACU)
Dryopteris marginalis | Marginal Wood Fern F, B
Facultative Wetland (FACW)
Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Kuhn var. pseudocaudatum | Southern Bracken Fern F
Equisetum | Horsetail Rush R, B
Obligate Wetland (OBL)
Onoclea sensibilis | Sensitive Fern R, B
Woodwardia or Lorinseria areolata | Chain Fern R, B
Site Systems · Stormwater Systems
98
Stormwater Systems
Ecological Stormwater Management Plan
source: Sherwood Design Engineers
Extensive site improvements planned for Memorial Park provide an opportunity to cleanse stormwater through low impact water quality design features, planned in conjunction with new roadways, parking lots, and other facilities. Features will work to slow stormwater drainage, filter runoff from hard surfaces and provide a portion of the stormwater detention volume required by local regulators. The remaining balance of the detention requirement will be provided in the site’s proposed new ponds, expansion of existing ponds, or proposed new detention specific areas, depending on the location in the park. The primary element of stormwater quality enhancement will be bio-swales designed to capture and detain the first flush runoff from the site area served. These bio-swales will filter runoff using either appropriate vegetation or engineered media designed to remove runoff pollutants. In some locations, open bio-swales will be replaced with rock filled swales to allow foot traffic to conveniently pass over the swale. Utilizing an extensive bio-swale network, the following stormwater goals will be met: Overall Stormwater Goals: • Treat at least the first inch of stormwater runoff from all hard surfaces using bio-swales, bio-retention, rain gardens, or permeable pavements. • Manage stormwater drainage using low impact development techniques to maximum extent. • Design irrigation systems to utilize harvested storm water • Maintain and enhance ecological systems using the stormwater drainage system
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
Bio-swales are typically designed with a storage volume sufficient to treat the first inch of runoff that enters the swale. Soil berms placed at intervals along the swale force ponding to occur allowing water treatment to take place. The treated water is then discharged from the swale in less than a day. Larger flow rates are designed to be conveyed above the treatment volume and over the berms. Discharge from the treatment cells and any overflow will be directed to the primary storm drainage system or barrancos. The physical geography of Memorial Park consists of large flat areas which pond after a rain event. Within the site’s natural geography, the primary storm drainage path is along one of the barrancos and into Buffalo Bayou. Slowly, the park’s ponded areas drain toward these barrancos. This natural system of drainage takes place over a longer period of time than a man-made system of drainage pipes and concrete channels. By using bio-swales to slow and treat runoff from impervious surfaces, constructed drainage systems can more closely mimic the park’s natural stormwater patterns. Rain that falls on impervious surfaces in the park will either filter through a network of bioswales or other stormwater BMPs into the barrancos, or be collected in a harvesting pond for reuse as irrigation water.
Legend Existing Natural Drainage Pathway Proposed Stream/Drainage Pathway Bio-Swale/BMP Network I-10 Pond - Stormwater Water Quality and Harvesting Proposed Expanded or New Ponds - Stormwater Harvesting and Detention Possible Areas for Stormwater Detention without Harvesting
The proposed system of low impact development management features functions to improve stormwater water quality, maintain and improve ecological systems, and reduce demand of potable water for irrigation.
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
99
Water Reuse Plan
Golf Course Water Reuse Golf Course Water Reuse Golf Course Water Reuse Total IrrigationArea Area 110 Acres Total Irrigation == 110 Acres Total Irrigation Area = 110 Acres SCENARIO 1 GC 1 SCENARIO 1 GC 1 SCENARIO 2 GC 1 SCENARIO 2 GC12 GC GC 2 SCENARIO 3 GC 1 SCENARIO 3 GC12 GC GC23 GC GC 3
WATERSHED AREA WATERSHED 113 ACRES AREA 113 ACRES WATERSHED AREA WATERSHED 113 ACRES AREA 42 ACRES 113 ACRES 42 ACRES WATERSHED AREA WATERSHED 113 ACRES AREA 42 ACRES 113 ACRES 230 ACRES 42 ACRES 230 ACRES
STORAGE PONDS 1 % IRRIGATION DEMAND AND 2 PONDS 1 %FROM STORMWATER STORAGE IRRIGATION DEMAND 6.5 ACRES 48% STORMWATER AND 2 FROM 6.5 ACRES 48% STORAGE PONDS % IRRIGATION DEMAND 1, 2 AND PONDS 3 STORMWATER STORAGE %FROM IRRIGATION DEMAND ACRES 1,6.5 2 AND 3 FROM STORMWATER 3 ACRES 54% 6.5 ACRES 3 ACRES 54% STORAGE PONDS % IRRIGATION DEMAND 1, 2 AND PONDS 3 STORMWATER STORAGE %FROM IRRIGATION DEMAND ACRES 1,6.5 2 AND 3 FROM STORMWATER 3 ACRES 6.5 ACRES 100% 3 ACRES 100%
Sports Water Reuse BallfieldComplex Water Reuse Sports Complex Water Reuse Total Irrigation == 12.5 Acres Total IrrigationArea Area 12.5 Acres Total Irrigation Area = 12.5 Acres WATERSHED SPORTS COMPLEX SPORTS COMPLEX
WATERSHED AREA WATERSHED AREA 45 ACRES 45 ACRES
STORAGE POND STORAGE POND 1.8 ACRES 1.8 ACRES
Eastern Glades Water Reuse Eastern Glades Water Reuse Total Irrigation 11.3 Acres Eastern GladesArea Water=Reuse Total Area==11.3 11.3 Acres Total Irrigation Irrigation Area Acres EASTERN GLADES EASTERN GLADES
WATERSHED AREA WATERSHED AREA 90 ACRES 90 ACRES
STORAGE POND STORAGE POND 3 ACRES 3 ACRES
% IRRIGATION DEMAND STORMWATER %FROM IRRIGATION DEMAND FROM STORMWATER 50% 50%
% IRRIGATION DEMAND STORMWATER %FROM IRRIGATION DEMAND FROM STORMWATER 75% 75%
source: Sherwood Design Engineers
The water reuse strategy for Memorial Park includes a series of measures that will be taken to allow for the harvesting of stormwater runoff for irrigation use. The harvested water will be utilized to reduce the need for city potable water. Collection of stormwater runoff will be included in the construction of new site improvements with the runoff directed to either new or existing harvesting ponds. These ponds will also serve as stormwater detention systems. Water harvesting will take place within a designated range between the pond’s normal high and low water levels (the freeboard). Detention will be provided above the harvesting zone. Water Reuse Strategy for Memorial Park Golf Course The largest water consumer within Memorial Park is the city-owned golf course. The Memorial Park public golf course is a popular, historic course operated under the direction of Houston’s Parks and Recreation Department. Maintenance of the golf course includes an ongoing effort to minimize use of potable water. Irrigation is limited to watering the fairways, greens, tee boxes, and portions of the roughs. Areas outside of these locations are not watered using irrigation. On an annual basis, about 110 acres of the course is irrigated using about 59 million gallons of city potable water. The irrigation system pump draws water from a golf course pond. This is an existing pond (which will be expanded) shown as Pond 1 in the Exhibit. Makeup water is added to the lake from a city potable water line. The water reuse strategy for providing harvested rainwater for the Memorial Park golf course consists of three steps to be taken to offset increasing portions of the potable water demand. The scenarios below are presented in the order of greatest benefit to cost as follows:
Scenario 1 – GC 1 Watershed Expand two existing golf course ponds and interconnect the two ponds to function as a single irrigation source, redirect the existing storm sewer system to discharge into the ponds, and design new Memorial Park improvements upstream of the ponds to tie into the storm sewer system which drains to the ponds. The two existing ponds would be expanded from 3.7 acres to 6.5 acres of water surface with a harvesting freeboard of 3 feet. The 113 acre drainage area and pond storage volume will provide sufficient harvested rainwater to achieve about a 48% reduction in potable water use for an average rainfall year. Scenario 2 – GC 1 and GC 2 Watersheds Construct a third golf course pond and interconnect it to the other two ponds constructed in Scenario 1 to function as a single irrigation source, redirect other elements of the storm sewer system to discharge into the new pond, and design Memorial Park improvements upstream of the new pond to tie into the storm sewer system that drains to the pond. The new pond would have 3 acres of water surface with a harvesting freeboard of 3 feet. The additional 42 acre drainage area and third pond storage volume will provide sufficient runoff to increase the harvested water system to achieve about a 54% reduction in potable water use for the combined three pond system for an average rainfall year. Scenario 3 – GC 1, GC 2, and GC 3 Watersheds In addition to Scenarios 1 and 2, capture the pumped flow from a stormwater lift station located at the northwest corner of the park adjacent to I-10, excavate a new 3 acre constructed wetland pond on the west side of the rail line to serve as a stormwater treatment system, construct a pump station at the pond, and direct pumped water to the three pond system via a pressure
main passing under the rail line. The water discharged at the existing lift station serves a 230 acre watershed. The constructed wetland pond will include a series of 1-2 foot deep planting zones with wetland plants designed to remove sediment and nutrients before discharging to an open water zone for collection. The harvesting freeboard for this new pond will be 1 foot or less. This new rainwater watershed area along with the new 3 acre pond combined with the three pond system constructed in Scenarios 1 and 2 will provide 100% of the irrigation needs of the golf course for an average rainfall year. Water reuse strategies for the golf course will be reviewed in conjunction with future master planning efforts. The sizes and locations of ponds may be revised. Water Reuse Strategy for the Sports Complex Harvesting rainwater is a strategy that can also be used in the area proposed for the Sports Complex. A 45 acre watershed can be directed to a new 1.8 acre surface area pond to offset about 50% of the irrigation requirement during an average rainfall year. The new pond will have a harvesting freeboard of 2 feet. Water Reuse Strategy for the Eastern Glades Irrigation needs within the Eastern Glades can also utilize harvested rainwater. A 90 acre watershed can be directed to the new 3.8 acre surface area pond to offset about 75% of the irrigation requirement of this area during an average rainfall year. The new pond will have a harvesting freeboard of 1.5 feet.
Further information can be found in the appendix with Sherwood Design Engineers’ complete study.
70'-6"
Signage and Graphics 44'-0"
100
1" 15'-12
10'-0"
16'-0" 7'-0"
9'-6"
7'-0"
MEMORIAL PARK
7'-0"
MEMORIAL PARK
1" 44'-72
16'-0"
Site Systems · Signage and Graphics
24'-0"
• • 12'-0" • • • •
16'-0"
1'-0"
5'-0"
15'-0"
16'-0"
MEMORIAL EAST
L0.0
10'-0"
0
9'-0"
9'-5"
10'-11"
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
8'-0"
4
7'-0"
15'-0"
8
15'-0"
20'-0"
70'-6"
40'-0"
16
13'-7"
91'-0" 15'-0"
MEMORIAL PA R K
M E M O R I A L PA R K
1924
AQUIRED 1924
15'-0"
16'-0"
MEMORIAL PARK
10 - Primary Site ID Inscribed Square
15'-0" 15'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0"
13'-7"
ELEVATION VE EAST ENTRANCE
16'-0"
30 - Primary Area ID
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" 310 East Market Street e Charlottesville ANCE m VA 22902 ESTRIAN ENTRANCE
16'-0"
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" OBSERVATION TOWER
4'-0" Area ID 38 - Tertiary
12'-0" 35 - Secondary Area ID
Parking Only
No Parking
WOMEN
MEN
WOMEN
MEN
WASHINGTON / WESTCOTT ENTRANCE - LOOKING SOUTH 60 - Lot ID
50 - Building ID
L0.0
20'-0"
70 - Amenities ID
80 - Parking Stall ID 85 - ADA Stall ID 88 - No Parking ID
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
90- Restroom ID Plaque (ADA)
Bayou Wilds Trails Buffalo Bayou Family Play Area
T 434.984.1358 F 434.984.4158 www.nbwla.com
Family Ride Day
L0.0
ELEVATION ARNOT JoinENTRANCE us March 20th ELEVATION BLOSSOM PEDESTRIAN ENTRANCE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" EXIT
Sports Complex Memorial Groves
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
PRECEDENT: SOUTHERN ARC TRAIL
Day Use Parking Only
Golf Course
No Vehicles Past This Point
Watch for Pedestrians
Family Ride Day
24'-0"
No Parking on Memorial Loop Road
Event Parking
PRECEDENT: SOUTHERN ARC TRAIL
11'-0"
120 - Event Information
125 - Event Information Large Banner
11'-0"
16'-0"
130 - Primary Motorist Regs 135 - Secondary Motorist Regs
5'-0"
110 - Primary Info Panel 115 - Secondary Info Panel
15'-0"
100 - Primary Vehicular Directional 105 - Secondary Vehicular Directional 108 - Tertiary Vehicular Directional
24'-0"
204'-0"
March 20th
9'-6"
MOTORIST
4
3rd Annual
nce Concepts March 11, 2015
En
140 - Movable Info. 40'-0"
Seymour Lieberman Trail 15 miles
MEMORIAL EAST
Softball Fields
Playing fields are by reservation only.
LEGEND
Picnic Area Bike Wash Restrooms
Park Information
Please contact the reservation office to secure a playing time and for information M-F at 555-123-4455
Parking
LEGEND
Upcoming Events
Trails Playground
MEMORIAL PARK MEMORIAL PARK 160 - Primary Orientation Map
170 - Area Info. 180 - Changeable 190 - Blade Directional Info. Panel
with map
198 - Secondary Ped. Directional
210 - Trail Info. 215 - Trail Marker
220 - Primary Reg Panel 225 - Area Specific Regs
Yellow-Billed Cuckoo
Wood Thrush
230 - Warning Panel 235 - Operations Panel 238 - Sensitive Habitat 1” = 40’
12’ natural surface trail
0’
20’
40’
200'-0" 80’
Railroad
I-610 / Katy
13'-7"
0’
cker
ded
r Glass
Nuthatch
SE
l
you
Ba
Trai
/ Katy
n Arc
Buffalo
I-610
text
Map
l Des
tion
Crest
40’ 20’
0’
B: Sou
the rn
Arc
400’
200’
Mem
al natur 12’ ce trail surfa
800’
0’
ign
400’
orial
200'-0"
40’
Dr.
Tra il
p xt Ma
il & Tra
De sig
n
B
2
Buffalo
L0.0
Co nte
4
Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects
204'-0" 204'-0"
MEMORIAL DRIVE EAST ENTRANCE - PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE IN DISTAN 800’
1” = 0’
400’
200’
400’
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE CLIENT SUMMARY DATE 11'-0"
0
1” =
248 - Interp. label (freestanding) Katy 0/
& Trai
ch
d Nuthat
Heade
Brown-
80’
1” =
B
Sec
Con
BRONZE SITE MAP
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT PROJECT UPTOWN HOUSTON Houston Memorial Park
ther
70'-6"
Hawk
iled
Red-Ta
80’
40’
40’ D 20’ ATE 0’ MIN EDRed-tailed Hawk -DO MIX AND PINE Dr. ODL rial WO Memo
1” =
Cuckoo
Thrush
Kite
8
3/13/15
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS70'-0" 40'-0"
SHEET TITLE
16
Sign Types
4'-0"
TRAIL
ARC
ippi
Mississ
d
HERN
Lizard
Slende
N CTIO
Wood
twoo
eaded Brown-H
SOUT
B: Sou
Billed
Yellow-
D
247 - Interp. label (on railing)
tion
Summe d Kite
w-Taile
& life AND Wild Zon es: ODL cal WO logi ED Eco MIX E to PIN
Sec
Woodp
r Tanage
Bunting
Swallo
AINE L-DR WELED MIX ODLAND WO
Snake
Cres
ED INAT D -DOM MIXE D PINE DLAN WOO
Red-He
Bunting
Painted
rn Scarlet
l natura 12’ e trail et surfac Targ
246 - Interp. horizontal
Indigo
Thrush
Northe
& life s: D DLAN et Wild Zone Targ ogic al D WOO Ecol to MIXE PINE
CAMP LOGAN
ecker
Cuckoo
r
Wood
4'-0"
Lizard
d Woodp
aded
illed
Yellow-B
AINE L-DR WEL D D MIXE DLAN WOO
Snake
pi Kite
d Hawk Red-tailed Hawk Red-Taile
you
Glass
Mississip
Ba
AR
CTION
oad
Bayou
HERN
IL SE
Railr
SOUT
C TRA
wood
History of Memorial Park
245 - Interp. Memorial Groves
800’
Pileate
Summer Kite
D
Slender
Railway
240 - Story Poles Interp.
400’
ecker
Woodpe
Tanager
Bunting
Tailed Swallow-
Scarlet Northern
Timeline of the park’s history
4
200’
Woodpe
Red-Hea
Bunting
Painted
91'-0"
I-61
ad
Railro
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
alo B
cker
Pileated
Indigo
Buff
1” = 400’
Context Map & Trail Design
Bayous, Roads, and Railroads
11'-0"
INTERPRETIVE
20'-0"
Summer Tanager
WELL-DRAINED MIXED WOODLAND
Brown-Headed Nuthatch
B
source: Hunt Design DISTANCE
CA 91106
Red-Headed Woodpecker
MEMORIAL EAST
2b SITE- LOOKING MAP DWAY ENTRANCE TOWARD 610
ELEVATION
Pileated Woodpecker
Painted Bunting
Swallow-Tailed Kite
Red-Tailed Hawk
Section B: Southern Arc Trail
8'-6"
15'-0"
INTERPRETIVE
11'-0"
Southern Trail
200 - Bulletin Board Kiosk
Indigo Bunting
Slender Glass Lizard
Memorial Dr.
EARLY TRAVEL
8'-0"
Please stay on trail
Mississippi Kite
PINE-DOMINATED MIXED WOODLAND
PINE to MIXED WOODLAND
8'-6"
BRONZE SITE MAP
SOUTHERN ARC TRAIL SECTION
Target Wildlife & Ecological Zones:
13'-7"
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" L0.0L0.0 SCALE: =1/8" 1'-0" 191 - Blade Directional 195 -1/8" Primary Ped. Directional 199 - Path Ped. Directional L0.0 SCALE: = 1'-0"
162 - Primary Orientation Map Inset 165 - Secondary Orientation Map 168 - Tertiary Orientation Map
Sensitive Habitat
Sloping area ahead. Use caution on trail.
16'-0"
7'-0"
7'-0"
155 - Entrance Map
Northern Scarlet Snake
CAUTION
BLOSSOM PEDESTRIAN 5 4 4WOODWAY ENTRANCE - ENTRANCE LOOKING TOWARD 610 BLOSSOM PEDESTRIAN ENTRANCE
15'-0"
RANCE - PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE IN DISTANCE
/8" = 1'-0"
20'-0"
Legend
150 - Primary Info. Panel
7'-0"
Picnic Area
ABOUT THE PARK
8'-0"
7'-0"
Equestrian Area Please enjoy the park responsibly.
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
L0.0
10'-0"
9'-0"
Crestwood
ELEVATION
Sports Complex
LEGEND
Welcome to Memorial Park
PEDESTRIAN
10'-0" 9'-0" Southern Trail
ou
4'-0"
"
Bayou Wilds 4 miles
Memorial Groves
LEGEND
LEGEND
ay
VE EAST ENTRANCE
BAYOU WILDS TRAILS
BAYOU WILDS TRAILS
12'-0"
Seymour Lieberman Trail 15 miles
Bayou Wilds 4 miles
MEMORIAL PARK
15'-0"
2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0"
11'-0"
PEDESTRIAN
WELCOME TO MEMORIAL PARK
4'-0"
0"
Day Use Parking Only
204'-0"
1
2'-0" 2'-0" 40 - Activity ID
20'-0"
Running Center Memorial Groves
MOTORIST
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
7'-0"
Memorial Park
C A P E ECTS
L0.0
Lot 1
10'-0"
9'-0"
7'-0 20'-0"
70'-6"
Wash SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
10'-0"
0"
L0.0
MEMORIAL DRIVE WEST ENTRANCE
ion IDENTIFICATION UTH COTT ENTRANCE–LOOKING SOUTH
9'-0" 70'-6"
ARNOT ENTRANCE BLOSSOM PEDESTRIAN ENTRANCE A4
Softball Field
7'-0"
16'-0"
Playground
Ded. 1999
9'-5" 9'-5" 12'-0" 10'-11" 10'-0" 10'-11"
16'-0"
Memorial Groves
Dedication Name Area
Mayor Jim McConn
25 - Secondary Site ID Inscribed Small
ELEVATION ARNOT ENTRANCE 200'-0" ELEVATION BLOSSOM PEDESTRIAN ENTRANCE Bike 200'-0"
35
9'-6"
7'-0"
MEMORIAL PARK
7'-0"
10'-0"
IDENTIFICATION
1'-0"
5'-0"
Eon
MEMORIAL PARK
AQUIRED 1924
1" 15'-12
20'-0"
n/8" = 1'-0"
10'-0"
22 - Secondary Site ID Inscribed Medium
13'-7"
COTT ENTRANCE - LOOKING SOUTH COTT ENTRANCE–LOOKING SOUTH ORIAL DRIVE WEST ENTRANCE 24'-0"
20 - Secondary Site ID Inscribed Large
18 - Primary Site ID Dimensional Letters
M E M O R I A L PA R K
10'-0"
4'-0"
15 - Primary Site ID Inscribed Horizontal
AQUIRED 1924
7'-0"
7'-0"
IDENTIFICATION
MEMORIAL PARK
4'-0"
2'-0"
8'-0"
M E M O R I A L PA R K
AQUIRED 1924
1'-0"
44'-0" 8'-0"
M E M O R I A LPARK PA R K MEMORIAL
1'-0"
AQUIRED 1924 IN HONOR OF THE WORLD WAR I SOLDIERS TRAINED AT CAMP LOGAN
1'-0" 5'-0"
IDENTIFICATION
16'-0"
24'-0"
44'-0" 70'-0"
9'-6"
r ent
91'-0"
Further information can be found in the appendix with Hunt Design’s complete study.
Sign Types DRIVE EAST ENTRANCE - PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE IN DISTANCE
RIAN ENTRANCE
40'-0"
5'-0"
5'-0"
1'-0"
10'-0"
4'-0"
15'-0"
16'-0"
11'-0"
7'-0"
7'-0"
11'-0"
4'-0"
11'-0"
7'-0"
The plan is organized into four categories of signs: Improved synergy with the City of Houston 44'-0" Identification, Motorist, Pedestrian and Interpretive. Improved overall visitor experience 4'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 1 WASHINGTONOrganizing / WESTCOTT ENTRANCE - LOOKING SOUTH the signs in this way allows for easier location Improved presentation at trailheads 20'-0" L0.0 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" planning, message sequencing and ultimately, simpler Improved trail signage procurement and implementation. Reduction of visual clutter 4 Better presentation of rules and regulations MEMORIAL PARK L0.0 Identification – Signs that identify the park, internal destinations and amenities Signage Principles This sign plan identifies and defines all types of signs and Three overarching principles have guided the planning 204'-0" Motorist – Signs to direct and inform drivers in and other graphics needed to help the park function for the and design of the sign plan for Memorial Park: INGTON / WESTCOTT ENTRANCE - LOOKING SOUTH around the park, including in many instances, cyclists thousands of visitors each day. Included are designs and /8" = 1'-0" standards for signage for drivers, pedestrians and cyclists Identity – consistently identify the park itself at the Pedestrian – Signs to direct and inform40'-0"pedestrians in and for all the unique physical areas and amenities of the vehicular and pedestrian entrances as well as the many and around the park and on trails, including regulatory park. internal destinations and amenities with a unified visual information language and design approach. Also included are signs and related elements for Interpretive – Signs and other elements to provide interpretive signage to present the many stories of 24'-0"Access – provide tools for self-guiding throughout the historical and other information to supplement park visits Houston Memorial Park. These stories may include such park in vehicles, on foot and by bicycle. Make the park topics as park and area history, flora and fauna, ecology, understandable and usable with clear operational signs The signs are shown in comparable silhouette illustrations and geology to enrich a visit to the park. and regulatory information. with sign type code numbers and color-coded to the sign MEMORIAL PARK PARK location plans. Representative signs from each category Benefits40'-0" of the Sign Plan as part of the MEMORIAL Master Plan Reveal – tell the many stories of the park through are shown with dimensions and notes on materials and The many elements of the sign plan combine to provide interesting and accessible interpretive8'-6" displays. sign-making techniques. substantial benefits for the park visitor and to the park itself: Design Approach MEMORIAL EAST 8'-6" Each of the types of signs in the program has been designed to visually integrate with the overall design • Sense of welcome and arrival 8'-0" 15'-0" 13'-7" approach of the park itself. A limited set of materials, • Statement of park identity DWAY • ENTRANCE LOOKING TOWARD 610 type fonts and colors have been selected to complement More effective vehicular and pedestrian wayfinding 70'-6" /8" = 1'-0" the landscape, hardscape and other master plan design • Improved visitor circulation to all areas 200'-0" elements. Each element, from the smallest regulatory • Improved presentation of visitor destinations and sign to the major entrance pieces reflects the design 204'-0"204'-0" activity choices philosophy of the master2plan. MEMORIAL DRIVE EAST ENTRANCE - PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE IN DISTAN • Continuity with master plan design elements DISTANCE
As part of the Master Plan, this comprehensive plan for signage in Houston Memorial Park has been prepared to 16'-0" UTH communicate with park visitors. Signs are a major visitor 1" 15'-12 interface in any park and reflect both the park and city 10'-0" 7'-0" image. Each message is9'-0"the park’s ‘voice’ and as such is 20'-0" ANCE an opportunity to speak with clarity while expressing the park’s values and character. ESTRIAN ENTRANCE
40'-0"
SHEET #
5.0
5 OF 53 91'-0"
Lighting Memorial Park is one of the most popular parks in the City of Houston. Encompassing almost 1,500 acres, the park is heavily used and offers opportunities for recreational activities such as running, walking, hiking, biking, golf, tennis, swimming, various team sports, and picnicking. Lighting is required to make the park functional during evening hours. The extensive site improvements planned for Memorial Park provide the opportunity to reconsider the way the park is lighted – to create a cohesive lighting approach that enhances safety and user comfort, provides visual cues for wayfinding and supports the environmental stewardship goals of the Houston Parks and Recreation Department. Lighting should be provided for all areas where activity is encouraged and/or anticipated after dark. This includes vehicular roadways, such as Memorial Drive and Memorial Loop Drive, pedestrian and running trails, such as Seymour Lieberman Trail, sports and recreation areas, parking areas and picnic zones. Lighting levels should be matched to the intended activities. This master plan and design guidelines present criteria for luminaires, lighting sources and illuminance quantities. The criteria are based on recognized best practices for lighting that maximize energy efficiency and minimize environmental impact.
Overall Lighting Plan
101
The most critical function of lighting in Memorial Park is to enhance safety and visibility at night. Enhanced safety is achieved by providing adequate light levels while minimizing shadows and contrast. Additional components include good color rendering and appropriate lighting fixture placement, optics and shielding to minimize disability glare. In addition to enhancing visibility and security, lighting is an important tool for improving wayfinding within the park. By separating roadway and pedestrian lighting into two distinct lighting systems, dividing active recreational areas from ‘wilderness’ areas, and accenting specialty areas and park features, lighting can clarify paths of circulation and highlight destinations. Specific luminaire and pole types are recommended within this master plan for each unique area to reinforce wayfinding. Sustainable lighting solutions will help to ensure that future generations can continue to enjoy Memorial Park and its amenities. This includes providing adequate light to ensure safety without over-lighting and using efficient, low wattage, long life sources, such as LED. The planned improvements for Memorial Park, including the segregation of active areas - like sports fields - on the north side, from wilderness areas on the south side,
create the opportunity for providing higher lighting levels for activity areas, while minimizing lighting in wilderness areas, thereby mitigating the potential negative effects of artificial lighting on wildlife and insects. A plan for long-term maintenance is critical to reaping the ongoing benefits of high quality lighting systems. This master plan recommends standardizing lighting fixture types for various applications and using LED sources for their long life and efficiency. These strategies will minimize maintenance and operations costs. However, by separating pedestrian lighting from roadway lighting, a smaller proportion of the new park lighting (road way lighting only) will be maintained by CenterPoint. Because of this, it is recommended that lighting maintenance for all other lighting be done by an outside maintenance contractor to handle burn-outs, group relamping and other maintenance issues. This will allow park staff to concentrate on other needs while ensuring that lighting systems remain in good working order, and that properly skilled personnel with the right equipment provide lighting maintenance.
Further information can be found in the appendix with The Lighting Practice’s complete study.
LEGEND LEGEND
ACTIVE PEDESTRIAN PAT
ACTIVE PEDESTRIAN PATHS
MEMORIAL GROVES
MEMORIAL GROVES
VEHICULAR ROADWAYS
VEHICULAR ROADWAYS PARKING AREAS
PARKING AREAS
BLOSSOM & ARNOTBLOSSOM MULTI-USE SPACE & ARNOT MUL SPORTS RECREATION
SPORTS RECREATION
CYCLE, RUNNING & PUMP TRACKS
CYCLE, RUNNING & PUM
LANDBRIDGE/TUNNEL
LANDBRIDGE/TUNNEL
source: The Lighting Practice
Maintenance and Operations
Site Systems · Maintenance and Operations
102
Table 1: Eco Counter (11/17/2014 – 3/16/2015) The counts for November and March represent only half of the full month
Table 2: Landscape Types and Trails by Percentage
Visitor Counts Memorial Park (MP) has never performed a comprehensive visitor count. Visitors to the park’s recreational facilities, such as the tennis center, pool, ballfields and golf course are tracked; however, trail use has never been officially monitored. The ballfields are the most frequently used recreational facilities in the park, accounting for over 150,000 visitors annually. The pool, tennis center, and fitness center together bring in another nearly 60,000 visitors. In order to get a better understanding of how many additional users visit the park, ETM purchased and installed a counter on the Seymour Lieberman Trail (SLT) in November of 2014. This counter will remain in place for one year to help Memorial Park Conservancy (MPC) tabulate the number of visitors using the SLT annually. During the four (4) month period between installation and mid-March 2015, more than 414,000 individuals, with an observed discrepancy of -10%, were counted, which represents an average usership of 100,000/month (Table 1) excluding recreational facility usage. The Trust for Public Lands estimates a total annual usership at 3.2 million for MP. Methodology and Landscapes The first critical step for understanding the implication of the master plan on future maintenance needs was to define the landscape types proposed in the master plan. ETM and Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects (NBW) identified restoration (natural) areas, recreational features (ballfields, sports fields, etc.), trails, and other park facilities (restrooms, playgrounds, etc.) that will need to be maintained. Altogether, nineteen (19) distinct landscape types and six (6) trails/connection systems were identified (Table 2). Annual maintenance tasks were then developed for each landscape type, along with an estimated number of hours needed for maintenance of one (1) unit of each landscape type. The task hours required per unit were then multiplied by the total number of units for each landscape type. This allowed ETM to determine an estimated total number of hours needed for annual maintenance of MP (Table 3).
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
Existing Management and Maintenance Houston Parks and Recreation Department (HPARD) is currently the primary manager of MP. HPARD provides the following:
• Park maintenance • Maintenance of the golf course • Facility management -- Pool -- Tennis Center -- Ballfields • Permitting of sports facilities MP sits within HPARD’s Memorial District which includes MP and 30 other smaller parks. Over time, due to budgetary restraints, there has been a dramatic reduction in staff and financial resources. Currently, HPARD spends about $500,000 annually for maintenance in MP. Memorial Park Conservancy (MPC) The mission of the MPC is to preserve, restore, and enhance MP for the enjoyment of all Houstonians, today and tomorrow. Founded in 2000, MPC aspires to implement principles of exceptional park management and stewardship in a successful public-private partnership with HPARD. MPC advances this mission through the following areas of focus:
• Conservation, including reforestation and site preparation, watering and irrigation, invasive species control, wildlife conservation, soil conservation, and fire protection zones • Amenity design, construction and maintenance, including new trails, trail maintenance, new buildings and construction, commemorative plaques and pavers • Community involvement and education, including volunteer conservation and forestry work, community events, newsletters and social media, and advocacy for Park needs • Leading an informed long-range master plan in 2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
collaboration with HPARD and the Uptown Houston, with the goals of restoring the habitat and a healthy ecosystem to the park, upgrading existing amenities, addressing unmet community needs, elevating the Park to a nationally recognized, award-winning park, and honoring human and natural history • Executing current projects, including ongoing forestry care and preparation, construction of the Running Trails Center with an onsite Conservancy office, SLT refurbishment and daily park maintenance Today’s dense understory is a result of the gradual evacuation of many important ecological functions such as grazing by large mammals and naturally induced grass fires. These regimented disturbances have historically worked in symphony to create and maintain vegetative composition. The human manipulation of land surrounding the park through the development of the city, combined with a deliberate lack of human intervention in land management ultimately created a profound disruption to the natural forest succession— creating a weak and vulnerable environment. 2011 was the driest year and second hottest on record in Houston, creating another ecological disturbance. At that time the forest/savannah/prairie ecosystem was almost entirely composed of single-age closed canopy forest with little to no natural regeneration occurring. In addition to the drought, Hurricane Ike (2008) caused significant damage, which in turn stimulated an abnormally severe pine bark beetle infestation. The lack of biodiversity, coupled with the density of the canopy, left this ecosystem particularly vulnerable to the stresses of these routine natural disturbances. In addition to this, growing concerns about potential forest fires emerged. Working in partnership with HPARD since 2012, MPC has: • Initiated fire hazard mitigation • Removed thousands of dead trees
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
103
Table 3: Example of Maintenance and Task Hours by Landscape Type
• Implemented a site preparation program treating over 500 acres of invasive plant species, and • Planted approximately 105,000 seedlings and trees
These additional tasks could be accommodated by increased in-house staffing levels, contracted services, or a combination of both, as well as by a continued reliance on the City to perform certain services.
The cost of these efforts has totaled nearly $2 million. At present, MPC is primarily focused on improving the health of the natural systems of the park. This is an important area of focus as the natural areas make up more than 60% of MP. Beginning in FY 2016, MPC intends to transition fundraising efforts to focus on maintenance and park care, marking a transition from funding special projects, which will instead be a component of a forthcoming master plan capital campaign. Given the limited budget provided for maintenance in the park, allocating these funds should make a significant difference in the park user experience and in the long-term health of the park’s natural resources. ETM recommends an expanded role for MPC in the maintenance of MP beyond a focus on the natural areas to also include: Natural Resource and Green Space Support • Invasive species control • Hazard tree removal • Stump grinding • Gardens maintenance • Brush hog / transition zone maintenance • Spot watering • Mulching of landscaped areas • Irrigation maintenance • Maintenance of seasonal flowers at entrances • Turf maintenance (mow, blow and edging) Sanitation Services Supplemental trash removal, restroom cleaning Site Amenities Maintenance • Site furnishings care (kiosks, benches, fire pits, picnic tables, exercise equipment) • Power washing, paint touchups/ repainting • Paths/sidewalks maintenance
Park Management General Park Management Goals The overarching goals of any effective management strategy are:
• To develop new sources of consistent revenue and build on existing ones
• To develop an entrepreneurial managerial spirit • To develop and implement a unified management structure that will coordinate all maintenance and operations • To ensure consistent, high quality maintenance standards and service delivery • To instill a long-term sense of ownership and stewardship among park staff, stakeholders and users. Implementation of the master plan will be phased over a number of years in conjunction with a partnership model between HPARD and MPC. Taking into account the anticipated increase in costs to maintain MP, as well as the inadequate spending by HPARD at present, other funding sources will need to be considered in order to ensure adequate funding for maintenance and operations of MP as the master plan is implemented. The master plan provides an opportunity to improve MP, revisit how the park is maintained, and evaluate current and future roles for MPC. Continued fundraising for implementation of the master plan will be dependent on protecting previous capital expenditures. HPARD will likely continue to see a reduction in resources to maintain MP. MPC will need to assume a larger role for maintenance and should begin moving in that direction sooner rather than later. Expansion of current in-house efforts with more staff and contracted services will help to deliver additional maintenance.
As MPC assumes a larger role in O+M, it will continue HPARD’s progressive strategy of supporting urban parks by mobilizing philanthropic efforts in order to oversee maintenance and operations. It will be important that HPARD continues to provide support at or near existing levels. It is not unusual for non-profits to grow over time and assume a greater role in park maintenance. As master plan projects are completed, MPC and HPARD will need to determine the maintenance needs for these projects, how services are delivered and by whom. The assumption in this report is that MPC will continue to assume a greater role in park maintenance, and as an organization, MPC will need to grow over time in order to take on the additional maintenance responsibilities. Additional staff and more contracts with outside contractors will be needed to ensure delivery of services. Organizational growth will not be limited solely to increased maintenance efforts. Administrative and operational staffing levels will, more than likely, increase over time to both support increased maintenance efforts, and to meet new administrative and operational opportunities for MPC. Additionally, decisions regarding operations of the Natatorium and Tennis Center, and perhaps the golf course, will need to be made and operational strategies developed for these facilities. Funding for increased O+M will be a challenge and all potential resources of revenue will need to be examined. MPC and HPARD are currently working to develop a plan. ETM has been engaged to analyze and develop cost assessment, so as fundraising begins, maintenance and operations costs can be incorporated.
Further information can be found in the appendix with ETM’s complete study.
Site Systems · Main Entrances
104
Main Entrances Main Entrances Plan
The master plan proposes walls and signs at all major pedestrian and vehicular entries to the park. These thresholds will serve to reinforce the park’s identity within the city and to more explicitly mark the park’s boundaries. East entrances at Memorial Drive, Arnot, and Washington/Westcott are designed in a more traditional language of signage, with large stone walls and pillars and letters inscribed in stone to reference the era of the park’s founding. Entries on the west side of the park take on a more contemporary language to reflect the more modern context of the surrounding neighborhoods on that side.
Washington/Westcott West Memorial
Arnot
Woodway Blossom East Memorial
EAST MEMORIAL DRIVE ENTRANCE
Section looking west into the park from Crestwood MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
105 WOODWAY ENTRANCE
Artist's Rendering at I-610 and the Old Archery Range
Section looking east toward I-610 from the Old Archery Range
Section looking east into the park
WASHINGTON WESTCOTT ENTRANCE
Section looking southwest into the park
ARNOT ENTRANCE
BLOSSOM ENTRANCE
WASHINGTON WEST ENTRANCE
Section looking west into the park
Blossom Entrance looking west into the park
Site Systems · Focus Areas
106
Focus Areas
Land Bridge, Running Center and Timing Track
Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
The design for this area builds upon the momentum of the newly constructed Running Trail Center and Living Bridge near the intersection of Memorial Drive and the railroad. The biggest feature in this area is the large land bridge, which spans over the park’s most divisive feature, Memorial Drive. Both the native prairie and savannah ecology and the multiuse trail network will span over the road at this location, creating a moment where park users can cross the highway without interacting with traffic. Adjacent to the land bridge is the existing Running Trail Center and a proposed pavilion. A quarter mile timing track to the southeast would be located in the woods to provide a quiet experience for runners.
Sports Complex
Tennis Center
Cycle Track and Trails
Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area Hogg Bird Sanctuary
OAR
Trailhead Bayou Wilds
Land Bridge Running Center and Timing Track
1. Living Bridge (existing) 2. Land Bridge
6. Pavilions
3. Memorial Groves
7. Timing Track
4. Paths (natural surface)
8. Parking
5. Running Trail Center (existing)
9. SLT 8
3
9
RENDERING 1
8 5 2 8
6
7
4
1” = 250’
PLAN - LAND BRIDGE AND RUNNING CENTER
0’
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
125’
250’
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
500’
107 ARTIST’S RENDERING: LAND BRIDGE
ARTIST’S RENDERING: RUNNING TRAIL CENTER
PRECEDENT PROJECTS
Nike headquarters’ woodland track, Beaverton, OR
Path in a prairie complex
Wildlife bridge, Bukit, Timah, Singapore
Site Systems · Focus Areas
108
Bayou Wilds Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
The areas south of Memorial Drive and east of the railroad track are in large part reserved for trails use. Entry and access to the Bayou Wilds is provided from the Bayou Wilds Trailhead just south of Memorial Drive. From this point, users can connect to the site-wide multi-use trail system that passes through this zone to either enter the Bayou Wilds or cross under a bridge at Memorial Drive to the north side of the site. The Southern Arc Trail is the major spine throughout the south side of the site, its arcing geometry serving as an orienting landmark in the wooded zones of this natural area. Mountain bike trails traverse mostly the areas outside the Southern Arc Trail, while hiking trails inhabit the more sensitive bayou edges and barrancos south of the arc. Travel along these trails is punctuated by two observation towers, one near the Bayou Wilds Trailhead, and one on a plateau to the west with good views to the Bayou and to surrounding landscape features.
Sports Complex
Tennis Center
Cycle Track and Trails
Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area Hogg Bird Sanctuary
OAR
Trailhead
Bayou Wilds Land Bridge
Running Center and Timing Track
1. Parking 2. Bayou Wilds Trail Heads
5. Hiking Trails (natural surface)
3. Southern Arc Trail (natural surface)
6. Mountain Bike Trails (natural surface)
4. Buffalo Bayou
7. Observation Towers
1 2
2
5
3
7
6
4
8
1” = 250’
PLAN - BAYOU WILDS TRAILS
0’ 250’ 500’ 0’ 125’ 250’
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
1000’ 500’
109 ARTIST'S RENDERING: BAYOU WILDS' SOUTHERN ARC TRAIL
ARTIST'S RENDERING: MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAILS
ARTIST'S RENDERING: BAYOU OVERLOOK
ARTIST'S RENDERING: BAYOU WILDS HIKING TRAILS
Southern Arc Trail Sections White Ibis
Spiny Softshell Turtle
Wintering grassland bird that lives on wet bayou mud flats.
This iconic bird prefers grassy flats of wet areas. Its cousin the White-Faced Ibis is a Threatened species with similar habitat.
Lives along the bayou and prefers slow moving water and sandy or muddy bottoms.
American Pipit
Red-Eared Slider Turtle
River Otter
Sedge Wren
Lives at the water’s edge and is regularly seen in the Houston Nature Center and along Buffalo Bayou.
Wintering grassland bird that lives on wet bayou mud flats.
BAYOU EDGE
Mammal that lives along bayou banks with sufficient vegetative coverage and in the water.
12’ boardwalk SECTION A: RIPARIAN FOREST SOUTHERN ARC TRAIL IN RESTORED BAYOU ECOSYSTEM WITH HIKING AND EDUCATION AREAS
Mississippi Kite Raptor that lives year-round in mixed, often open woodlands and eats insects in flight.
PINE-HARDWOOD FOREST
Red-Tailed Hawk
Brown-Headed Nuthatch
Raptor that lives year-round in mixed open woodlands and eats small mammals, birds, and reptiles.
Year-round Pine forest species that eats seeds.
12’ natural surface trail SECTION B: PINE-HARDWOOD FOREST TO RIPARIAN EDGE FOREST SOUTHERN ARC TRAIL IN RESTORED PINE ECOSYSTEM WITH SENSITIVE HIKING AND BIKING TRAILS Section Key
Crestwood
eeway
Memorial Dr.
Railroad
I-610 / Katy Fr
Site Systems · Focus Areas
110
B
Buff alo Bayou
Legend Riparian Forest Riparian Edge & Barranco Forest
1” = 600’ 0’
300’
600’
1200’
A
Pine-Hardwood Forest Pine-Hardwood Savannah Native Prairie
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wet Savannah and Pairie
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
Naturalized Golf Course Bog Areas
111
MATURE MIXED BOTTOMLAND FOREST
Prothonotary Warbler
Southern Bald Eagle
Bird that migrates to these swampy woodlands to breed in the summer. Eats insects and snails.
Raptor that lives in large deciduous or mixed-pine woodlands and nests in January/February in tall trees along the water’s edge.
Five-Lined Skink
Strecker’s Chorus Frog
Amphibian that prefers decaying wood habitat along the river’s edge and wet areas.
Amphibian that prefers moist woodlands near the water.
Big Brown Bat
This species is highly adaptable and forages in variety of habitats including forests, open fields, rivers and streams.
4’-0” natural surface hiking trail
1” = 40’ 0’
20’
Orchard Oriole
House Wren
Migrating bird that prefers open woodlands and pastures with scattered trees.
Bird that nests in tree cavities and prefers open forests, forest edges, and areas with scattered grass and trees.
Slender Glass Lizard
40’
80’
RIPARIAN EDGE FOREST
Legless diurnal reptile that lives in open woodlands. It eats insects, rodents, and reptile eggs like the scarlet snake.
Pileated Woodpecker Year-round inhabitant of large deciduous and mixed pine woodlands. They nest in dead trees and rely largely on carpenter ants that live in dead and fallen trees.
Red-Headed Woodpecker This species has been in decline due to habitat loss. Like the pileated, they rely on dead trees and logs for habitat and forage. They eat insects, fruit, and seeds.
Painted Bunting Summer breeding bird that forages for insects and seeds and lives among dense shrubs and herbs at the woodland edge.
Yellow-Billed Cuckoo Summer breeding bird that lives in deciduous woodlands and eats caterpillars.
Wood Thrush Summer breeding bird that lives in deciduous woodlands and requires leaf litter in which to forage.
Swallow-Tailed Kite
1” = 40’ 0’
20’
Year-round raptor that forages and nests in the trees of woodlands, often in wet woodlands.
40’
80’ Summer Tanager This species migrates through Texas in the summer. It can be found in mixed riparian woodlands eating fruit and insects.
Indigo Bunting Woodland edge species that for forages insects and seeds and lives among dense shrubs and herbaceous layer.
Broad-Winged Hawk A woodland raptor that spends much of their time underneath the canopy of large deciduous or mixed forests. It eats mostly small mammals, amphibians, and insects.
Eastern Red Bat Fast flying bat that prefers forested habitats away from human activity.
Site Systems · Focus Areas
112
White Ibis
This iconic bird prefers grassy flats of wet areas. Its cousin the White-Faced Ibis is a Threatened species with similar habitat.
Sedge Wren Wintering grassland bird that lives on wet bayou mud flats.
BARRANCO
Red-Eared Slider Turtle
American Pipit
Lives at the water’s edge and is regularly seen in the Houston Nature Center and along Buffalo Bayou.
Wintering grassland bird that lives on wet bayou mud flats.
4’-0” natural surface hiking trail
12’ boardwalk
SECTION C: BARRANCO AND PINE-HARDWOOD FOREST SOUTHERN ARC TRAIL ON BOARDWALK THROUGH BARRANCO
Red-Tailed Hawk
Savannah Sparrow
Raptor that lives year-round in mixed open woodlands and eats small mammals, birds, and reptiles.
Wintering grassland bird that requires short to mid-size grasses.
PINE-HARDWOOD SAVANNAH
Henslow’s Sparrow Wintering grassland bird that thrives in tall savannah grasses or hardwood-pine woodlands.
Eastern Towhee Wintering woodland edge bird that lives and forages in a dense shrub layer.
4’-0” natural surface hiking trail
12’ natural surface trail
SECTION D: PINE-HARDWOOD SAVANNAH TO PINE-HARDWOOD FOREST SOUTHERN ARC TRAIL IN RESTORED SAVANNAH Section Key
eeway
Memorial Dr.
Railroad
Crestwood
I-610 / Katy Fr
D C Buff alo Bayou
Legend Riparian Forest Riparian Edge & Barranco Forest
1” = 600’ 0’
300’
Pine-Hardwood Forest
600’
1200’
Pine-Hardwood Savannah Native Prairie
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wet Savannah and Pairie
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
Naturalized Golf Course Bog Areas
113
Prothonotary Warbler
Evening Bat
Eastern Box Turtle
Bird that migrates to these swampy woodlands to breed in the summer. Eats insects and snails.
Lives at the forest’s edge along the water and can be found in mixed forest with grasslands.
Five-Lined Skink
Forest dwelling bat species that lives in tree hollows and behind loose bark. It prefers to forage along edges of mature forests, in clearings, and over waterways.
Horned Lark
Amphibian that prefers decaying wood habitat along the river’s edge and wet areas.
Bird that lives on bayou mud flats and in wet short grasses.
Common Snapping Turtle Snapping turtles generally prefer slow-moving fresh or brackish water and a soft muddy or sandy bottom.
Wood Stork
Migratory bird travels through Harris County to and from Mexico. It lives in shallow standing water and is a State Threatened species.
4’-0” natural surface hiking trail
1” = 40’ 0’
20’
40’
80’
40’
80’
Scissor-tailed Flycatcher This summer nesting bird prefers savannas with scattered trees and shrubs.
Loggerhead Shrike A summer breeding bird that thrives in open grassland mixed with shrubs, small trees, and short grasses.
1” = 40’ 0’
20’
114 Site Systems · Focus Areas
PRAIRIE
Short-eared Owl
Bachman’s Sparrow
Le Conte’s Sparrow Wintering grassland that bird thrives in more moist, open, dense grasses.
Wintering bird that lives in the grasses of sparse, dry, overstory savannahs.
Field Sparrow
Eastern Meadowlark
Wintering bird that lives in the grasses of sparse, dry, overstory of pinehardwood savannahs.
This wintering grassland bird is most common in native grasslands, prairies, and wet fields while singing from exposed perches.
Sprague’s Pipit
White-Tailed Hawk
A bird that winters in the open grasslands, nests on the ground, and eats small mammals.
Raptor that lives year-round in open canopy prairie and eats small mammals, birds, and reptiles.
Wintering grassland bird that breeds and lives in open grassland with no shrubs or trees.
4’-0” natural surface mountain bike trail (course)
12’ natural surface trail
SECTION F: NATIVE PRAIRIE AND WOODLAND EDGE TO PINE-HARDWOOD FOREST MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAILS IN PRAIRIE GRASSLAND AND SOUTHERN ARC TRAIL AT WOODLAND EDGE
Section Key Memorial Dr.
Railroad
I-610 / Katy Fr
Crestwood
eeway
F
Buff alo Bayou
Legend Riparian Forest Riparian Edge & Barranco Forest
1” = 600’ 0’
300’
Pine-Hardwood Forest
600’
1200’
Pine-Hardwood Savannah Native Prairie Wet Savannah and Pairie Naturalized Golf Course Bog Areas Ponds and Stream Corridors
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
115
White Throated Sparrow Requires the dense, diverse shrubs at woodland edges.
WOODLAND EDGE
Indigo Bunting Woodland edge species that forages for insects and seeds and lives among dense shrubs and herbaceous layers.
Eastern Towhee Requires the dense, diverse shrubs at woodland edges.
1” = 40’ 0’
20’
40’
80’
Site Systems · Focus Areas
116
Bayou Wilds Trailhead Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
This area is just south of Memorial Drive and east of the Land Bridge, roughly in the location of the existing picnic loop. This area is both a departure point for the extensive path network on the south side of the site and a recreation destination in its own right. A large parking lot at the north side of the complex allows for easy parking and drop off. Amenities in this area include picnic areas, trail heads, a pavilion/shelter, children’s biking loops, nature playground, an observation tower, and pump track all within a shaded setting. The trailhead’s central location allows users to experience a wide range of landscape types including wooded streams, open prairie, and restored savannah in close proximity to this trailhead.
Sports Complex
Tennis Center
Cycle Track and Trails
Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area Hogg Bird Sanctuary
Trailhead
OAR
Bayou Wilds Land Bridge
Running Center and Timing Track
1. Land Bridge
5. Trail Heads
9. Nature Playground
2. Parking
6. Pump Track
10. Climbing Walls
3. Pavilion
7. Childrens’ Biking Loop (natural surface)
11. Observation Tower
4. Picnic Areas
8. Childrens’ Biking Loop (hard surface)
12. Southern Arc Trail
1
2 5 5 4 3
4
9
8
6
7 10 12 11
1” = 250’
PLAN - BAYOU WILDS TRAILHEAD
0’
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
125’
250’
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
500’
117 ARTIST'S RENDERING: BAYOU WILDS TRAILHEAD
ARTIST'S RENDERING: LOOKOUT TOWER OVER SAVANNAH
ARTIST'S RENDERING: KIDS' BIKE LOOP
Site Systems · Focus Areas
118
Eastern Glades Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
The design of this area is a reinterpretation of the entry sequence proposed in the Hare & Hare plan, the first master plan for the park drafted in the 1920s. That plan proposed a formal garden space near the eastern edge of the park, and this plan proposes a series of formal landscape spaces. The glades are envisioned as two large spaces where the grass is mown, but existing trees are preserved to create a shady and quiet space for picnicking and other passive uses. Wide promenades around these spaces allow for pleasure walking and orientation. To the west of the garden spaces, the plan proposes a large pond that will be a visual amenity, providing views to water and a shelf planted with wetland plants across the water. It will also serve a practical purpose, holding stormwater to be used for irrigation in landscaped spaces.
Sports Complex
Tennis Center
Cycle Track and Trails
Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course
Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area Hogg Bird Sanctuary
OAR
Trailhead Bayou Wilds Land Bridge
Running Center and Timing Track
1. Eastern Glade 2. Eastern Glade
5. Parking
3. Pond Esplanade
6. Multi-use Trail
4. Pond and Cypress Grove
7. Seymour Lieberman Trail
7
5 6 4 3
1 2
5
5
6
5
6
1” = 250’
PLAN - EASTERN GLADES
0’
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
125’
250’
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
500’
119 ARTIST'S RENDERING: EASTERN GLADES
ARTIST'S RENDERING: EASTERN GLADES Proposed Entry and Gardens, golf course, and scenic roads by Hare & Hare Landscape Architects. Approved during the time of the park's founders.
Although many parts of the plan were never built, the proposed organization of spaces remains relevant and culturally significant.
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF GOLF COURSE
GENERAL PLAY AREA BASEBALL ECT.
GARDEN
NURSERY
PRIVATE PROPERTY
PRESENT PROPERTY LINE
ARTIST'S RENDERING: EASTERN GLADES BRIDAL PATHS & WALKS THROUGH NATIVE WOODS
RIVER OAKS COUNTRY CLUB
Hare & Hare Plan for Memorial Park
PRECEDENTS
Villa Borghese, Rome, Italy
Forsyth Park, Savannah, GA
Prospect Park, Brooklyn, NY
Site Systems · Focus Areas
120
Tennis, Fitness and Natatorium
Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
This area is proposed for the tennis, fitness center, and natatorium (indoor swimming facility). These facilities are separated from the adjacent neighborhoods by a thick planted buffer. They are served by a parking lot to the southwest.
Sports Complex
Tennis Center
Cycle Track and Trails
Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area Hogg Bird Sanctuary
OAR
Trailhead Bayou Wilds Land Bridge
Running Center and Timing Track
1. Parking
7. Seymour Lieberman Trail
2. Tennis Courts
8. Golf Course
3. Fitness Center
9. Dense Perimeter Planting
4. Natatorium (indoor swimming)
10. Haskell Street
5. Memorial Loop Drive
11. Arnot Street
6. Multi-use Trail
12. Crestwood Drive
6 5 7
8
2
10 3
9
1 4
1
11
9
1” = 250’
PLAN - TENNIS CENTER, FITNESS AND NATATORIUM
0’
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
12
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
125’
250’
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
500’
121
PRECEDENTS
Tennis court
Salinas Muni Aquatic Center, California
Beijing Aquatic Centre, China
Site Systems · Focus Areas
122
Sports Complex Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
Sports Complex
In the northeast sector of the park, the plan proposes creating a sports complex that will house all active team/group recreation sports facilities. This facility will have 1 rugby pitch, 2 volleyball courts, 1 soccer field, 1 baseball diamond, 5 softball diamonds, and 2 croquet courts, all in close proximity to parking. The plan also proposes a sound wall at the north edges to mitigate sound from the adjacent I-10 highway.
Tennis Center
Cycle Track and Trails
Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area Hogg Bird Sanctuary
OAR
Trailhead Bayou Wilds Land Bridge
Running Center and Timing Track
1. Softball Field
6. Croquet Court (existing)
2. Baseball Field
7. All Weather Field
11. Parking
3. Pond
8. Volleyball Court
12. Picnic Area
4. Driving Range
9. SLT
13. Rugby Pitch
5. Golf Clubhouse (existing)
10. Multi-use Trail
14. Sound Wall
11
8
14
13 7
1
11
11
1
11
1 12
6
3 1
1
4
2
5 3
9 3
3
10
1” = 250’
PLAN - SPORTS COMPLEX
0’ 150’ 300’ 200’ 400’ 0’ 125’ 250’
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
600’ 800’ 500’
123 ARTIST'S RENDERING - SPORTS COMPLEX
PRECEDENTS
Soccer field in a natural setting
Marina Park, Vildecans, Spain
Penn Park, Philadelphia, PA
Site Systems · Focus Areas
124
Golf Course Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
The Memorial Park Golf Course is the jewel of the Houston municipal golf course system and is one of the oldest components of Memorial Park, beginning as 9 holes in 1918 and expanding to the current 18 holes in 1936 as part of a re-design by John Bredemus. The Memorial Park Golf Course has hosted important tournaments over the years and some of golf’s greatest players have competed there. Expanding on and enhancing this legacy for generations to come will be an important part of any future golf course master plan. Golf courses and their associated infrastructure components – greens, tees, sand bunkers, drainage pipes, irrigation systems, cart paths, etc. – have limited life cycles and must periodically be replaced to ensure quality conditions and avoid unexpected (and more costly) fiscal expenditures when not properly planned for in advance. In this regard, the golf course was renovated and updated in 1994-1995 to address infrastructure improvements, ongoing maintenance and drainage issues, and incorporate design elements in keeping with the earlier course conditions. Given that 20 years have now passed since the last renovation, many of the course infrastructure items have come to (or exceeded) their expected useful lives and will be in need of replacement soon. This presents an excellent opportunity to conduct a golf course master plan process to address infrastructure and other needs as well as review design opportunities. The purpose of a golf course master plan is to conduct an extensive review of an existing course and entire facility in order to address current and long-term needs. Any master plan for the Memorial Park Golf Course will need to be conducted through the lens of not only the golf course, but also with regard to how the course integrates within and complements the overall Memorial Park facilities. Once the overall Memorial Park master plan has been approved, a comprehensive master plan process will be undertaken to properly and thoughtfully identify needs and opportunities at the golf course. A few areas of specific review that would take place when preparing a golf course master plan to include: 1. Incorporation of storm drainage requirements to meet park-wide goals for stormwater detention and treatment as outlined in the Memorial Park master plan. Utilize the golf course to increase stormwater runoff treatment and detention before runoff reaches Buffalo Bayou. a. Increase surface runoff on the golf holes and add more drainage catch basins to pick up water and transfer it to ponds and treatment areas. b. This will also help improve playing conditions on the golf course. 2. Review of options outlined in Memorial park master plan to reduce dependence on city water for golf course irrigation. This could include: a. Implementation of a pond and capture system to utilize storm runoff (offsite and onsite) to irrigate the golf course and reduce the amount of city water required. b. Installation of a modern, efficient irrigation system which better targets minimum watering requirements and is more efficient in water use and power requirements. c. Installation of soil monitoring devices throughout the golf course to measure moisture content, further allowing targeted irrigation of the golf course only when needed. d. Review options to reduce the overall acreage of irrigated golf turf without negatively impacting the playability of the golf course for the average golfer.
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
Sports Complex
Tennis Center
Cycle Track and Trails
Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area Hogg Bird Sanctuary
OAR
Trailhead Bayou Wilds Land Bridge
Running Center and Timing Track
3. Analysis of the capacity for the course and facility to once again host professional golfers and tournaments as well as recommendations to meet those needs. a. Overall course length/yardage b. Spectator movement and viewing areas c. Media requirements d. Areas for hospitality and sponsor opportunities e. Parking and logistics 4. Review of the existing tee yardages available for players to ensure the course remains fun and enjoyable for all golfers into the future. a. Review addition of a “U.S. Kids Course” type tee system for younger and beginning players. b. Review hole variety (yardage, direction, aesthetics, etc.) and propose improvements. c. Review course yardage with regard to professional tournament needs and propose any needed upgrades. 5. Expansion and improvement of the Practice Range (Range) and practice facilities as generally conceptualized in the Memorial Park master plan. a. The current Range is limited in utility (number of players and length) and not attractive with nets and poles needed for safety due to the limited size and length of the Range. b. Even so, the current Range is highly utilized and is a tremendous source of revenue for the golf course. c. Plans should be made to dramatically expand the Range tee area so that more players can practice at one time (more revenue) and the Range should be lengthened so players can simulate real-time practice and hit full shots. d. Teaching and lessons are an important component to the existing course and for helping to grow the game. Consideration should be given to creating a dedicated building and area specifically for teaching, lessons and clinics. This is another great revenue option for the course. e. Limiting or eliminating the need for poles and nets would be a positive impact.
6. Review of the existing Maintenance Facility. a. Is the existing facility sufficient to support longterm, quality maintenance of the golf course ? b. Review options to relocate the maintenance facility to be more convenient to public roads and eliminate the current situation where vehicles and deliveries must drive across golf holes. This is unsafe and a distraction to the experience. 7. Analysis of the ability of the golf course renovation to assist other non-golf park Master Plan projects. a. Review whether export fill material can be generated on the golf course by implementing stormwater treatment and detention areas and expanding existing natural topographic features into the golf course. b. If successful this export material could go to other park projects, thereby reducing costs for those other projects and reducing the number of delivery trucks and road wear to supply needed fill material to those projects. 8. Review opportunities to incorporate the overall park landscape concept throughout the golf course to tie the golf course in to the overall park landscape restoration theme. 9. Review opportunities to better highlight the natural topographic features (bayou and ravines) present on the south side of the course and integrate the golf course better into those features. a. Evaluate expansion of those natural features further into the golf course. Planning and study of the golf course as proposed here provides the opportunity to update and improve a beloved recreational asset in Memorial Park. While the golf course is currently well managed and very well used, further study would provide opportunities to both improve the user experience and further integrate the golf course into the ecological and spatial strategies proposed for the rest of park. The proposed master plan for Memorial Park does not preclude any of the studies outlined above that would occur in preparation of a golf course master plan. Study of the specific design areas as listed in this summary will only enrich the overall concepts outlined in the Memorial Park master plan.
f. A separate Short Game area with multiple practice greens should be explored to further enhance practice opportunities for users of the facility.
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
125
1. Existing Club House 2. Proposed Practice Range 3. Water Reuse Ponds 4. Existing Maintenance Area
2
1
3 3
3 4
5
PLAN - GOLF COURSE
1” = 250’ 0’ 200’ 400’ 0’ 125’ 250’
800’ 500’
Site Systems · Focus Areas
126
Memorial Groves Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
In the areas just east of the railroad track with the highest number of Camp Logan remnants, the plan proposes a series of memorial groves to honor the World War I soldiers who trained on-site. Existing concrete remains of Camp Logan structures would be preserved, as would large and healthy motts of existing trees. Access roads with parallel parking would be inserted in roughly the same alignments as Camp Logan-era roads, and picnic spots and shelters would be added to allow for small groups to congregate. The bulk of this area would be planted with rows of pine trees, to recall both the pine-dominated landscape of Camp Logan, and individual soldiers in formation standing at attention.
Sports Complex
Tennis Center
Cycle Track and Trails
Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area Hogg Bird Sanctuary
OAR
Trailhead Bayou Wilds Land Bridge
Running Center and Timing Track
1. Memorial Loop Drive
6. Large Group Picnic Area
2. Parallel Parking and Accessway
7. Existing Motts
3. Multi-use Trail
8. Memorial Groves Pine Planting
4. SLT
9. Golf Course
5. Picnic Areas
10. Railroad and CenterPoint Utility Easement
5 2
7
08 8
9 1 10 5
3 2
7
3
6 2
4
1” = 250’
PLAN - MEMORIAL GROVES PINE PLANTING
0’
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
125’
250’
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
500’
127 ARTIST’S RENDERING: A MEMORIAL GROVE
ARTIST’S RENDERING: MEMORIAL GROVES
PRECEDENTS
Pine grove
HISTORIC PHOTO, CAMP LOGAN
Hardberger Park picnic area, San Antonio, TX
Existing Camp Logan latrine foundation, Memorial Park
Site Systems · Focus Areas
128
Cycle Track and Trails Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
In the northeast portion of the site, the Master Plan proposes a re-alignment of Memorial Drive to the south and west to provide more contiguous space for trail use. In the resulting consolidated area is a one and three-quarter mile cycle track for road cyclists and criterion races. Within and around this cycle loop are a series of grade-separated pedestrian and equestrian trails. Along the west edge of this quadrant, a large parking area provides easy access to these trails, as well as to picnic pavilions at the edge of the space.
Sports Complex
Cycle Track and Trails
Tennis Center Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area Hogg Bird Sanctuary
OAR
Trailhead Bayou Wilds Land Bridge
Running Center and Timing Track
1. Parking
4. Multi-use Trails
2. Cycle Track
5. Memorial Drive
7. Existing Bayou Club Equestrian Facilities
3. Equestrian/Hiking Trails
6. Picnic Areas
8. Railroad and CenterPoint Utility Easement
7 1
5 3 4
6
3
8
1 6
2
1” = 250’
PLAN - CYCLE TRACK AND TRAILS
0’ 150’ 300’ 0’ 125’ 250’
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
600’ 500’
129 ARTIST’S RENDERING: CYCLE TRACK
PRECEDENTS
Central Park trail bridge, New York, NY
Equestrian trails
Hard surface cycle track
Site Systems · Focus Areas
130
Old Archery Range (OAR) Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
This area of the park was once an archery range, a market nursery and was mined for clay for brick making. Currently cut off from the rest of the park by major roads, OAR needs to be tied back into the park as a whole. A pedestrian bridge to this area of the park from the sidewalk on the west side of 610 will allow for a connection to both Uptown and to the borders of the Arboretum. A vehicular and pedestrian entry at Woodway will reinforce Memorial Park’s identity and the bayou boat launch will draw water enthusiasts to occupy this edge of the park and bayou both up and down stream. The direct connection to this navigable waterway points to the need for waterfocused education and program that could take the form of a boat-building workshop and small boat rental facility. This site’s location adjacent to Uptown and this more heavily developed bayou edge points toward program and land management strategies that could open the edge of this property to the bayou in ways unlike the southside of the park east of the railroad track or in the Arboretum. There could be more beachlike flats that could be used for recreation in ways similar to Buffalo Bayou Park while still restoring the riparian forest edges in many locations. Of all the areas of the park adjacent to the bayou, OAR appears to be the most heavily burdened by intense invasive species colonization. In this regard it will require some of the most intensive invasive removal regimes and replanting strategies.
Sports Complex
Tennis Center
Cycle Track and Trails
Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area Hogg Bird Sanctuary
Trailhead
OAR
Bayou Wilds Land Bridge
Running Center and Timing Track
1. Entrance off Woodway 2. Parking
5. Orientation Point
3. Bayou Access
6. Observation Tower
4. Pedestrian Bridge
7. I-610
1
3
2
5
7
06 6
4
4
4
1” = 250’
PLAN - OLD ARCHERY RANGE
0’ 150’ 300’ 0’ 125’ 250’
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
600’ 500’
131 PRECEDENTS
Lookout Tower, Tiree, Scotland
Birkshire Boardwalk, Stockbridge, MA
Precedents: youth boat building programs
Bronx River Alliance, Bronx, NY
Site Systems · Focus Areas
132
Hogg Bird Sanctuary Memorial Groves Rugby Pitch
The design proposes keeping existing parking and providing walking trails to allow access to the bird sanctuary. Ongoing work in this area by the Houston Garden Club and Rice University will provide new bird habitat and restoration of native plant species. In the future if HCFCD’s Demonstration Project proceeds it will be essential for these groups, and HPARD and MPC to devise a plan for the replanting of disturbed slopes with native vegetation conducive to creating bird habitat.
Sports Complex
Tennis Center
Cycle Track and Trails
Fitness Center/Natatorium
Golf Course Eastern Glades
Maintenance Area
OAR
Trailhead Bayou Wilds
Hogg Bird Sanctuary
Land Bridge
Running Center and Timing Track
1. Memorial Drive
4. Natural Surface Trails
2. Westcott St.
5. Restored Bird Habitat
3. Existing Parking Lot
6. Garden Club of Houston Project
1
6
2
4 5
3
4
1” = 250’
PLAN - HOGG BIRD SANCTUARY
0’ 150’ 300’ 0’ 125’ 250’
MEMORIAL PARK CONSERVANCY HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT UPTOWN HOUSTON
2015 MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NELSON BYRD WOLTZ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
600’ 500’
133 ARTIST'S RENDERING: HOGG BIRD SANCTUARY HIKING TRAIL
134
5
Conclusions
This master plan for Memorial Park is aspirational in its breadth and depth and will require the collaboration of private and public groups and individuals for the next 50 years or more. The preceding document and associated appendices present a vision for the park to be implemented over time through the discrete design and construction of multiple phased projects. This vision represents the collaboration of scores of people who dedicated their time and expertise to this creative design process. The goal of this master plan document is to provide a guide for Houston to reimagine and recreate a Memorial Park that honors the past and promotes the future of this great city.
135
136
6
List of Appendices
The appendices below are provided in digital format separately from this document and will be on file at HPARD. Nelson Byrd Woltz Site Atlas Sherwood Design Engineers Ecological Stormwater Management, Water Reuse and Existing Site Analysis Berg Oliver Environmental Ecological Evaluation ETM Associates, L.L.C. Operations and Maintenance Report Hunt Design Signage Master Plan Gravity Logic Bike Trail Assessment Suzanne Turner Associates Cultural Landscape Report Advanced Ecology Forest and Urban Resource Inventory Summary The Lighting Practice Lighting Master Plan and Design Guidelines Walter P Moore Traffic Study Lupher, L.L.C. Existing Conditions Survey Jacob and Associates Soil Survey