Therther ther there is aThere is a ne place that s TITLE

Brazos Transit District Site Location

5882 U.S Highway 59 North, Lufkin, TX 75901

BTD Maintenance Facility

Feasibility Study May 2021

[Page Left Blank Intentionally]

2 | Page

Executive Summary Brazos Transit District (BTD) is a transit agency that currently provides transportation services to sixteen counties in Central and East which covers approximately 13,000 square miles. BTD was founded in 1974 and has been operating fixed routes, ADA paratransit and demand and response services since. In the past six years, BTD’s fleet miles have grown by 37,499 miles. This growth also means that the vehicles need maintenance done from time to time. The existing maintenance facility in is located at 202 S. Pan American Drive, Livingston, Texas. The site is approximately 2-acres and currently services 41 vehicles which includes transit buses, shuttles and demand response vehicles. The site contains a 14,000 square foot building and shop. There is a small office space and break room as well. The facility services BTD’s paratransit and demand response vehicles that are providing transportation to Diboll, Lufkin, Huntsville, and Nacogdoches. There is approximately 41 vehicles, however that number can variate since many of them might retire and new ones might be purchased as years progress. BTD has analyzed different existing conditions of the maintenance facility to understand if a new location is needed. The agency inspected the current facility by looking into what updates have been done at the location with the FY 2019 5339 discretionary award and if it is enough space for an expanding transit system. Other aspects such as travel distance, time and cost from the existing location to the service cities helped to determine the need for a new maintenance facility. BTD has recognized a need to acquire a new location to propose a new maintenance facility. BTD has created a feasibility study to determine the magnitude of acreage and costs in developing on a new site. The study provides information about the existing and proposed locations, land use, environmental concerns, zoning, platting and cost projections.

3 | Page

Table of Contents Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3

Introduction………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………6

Growth Scenario.………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………8

Site Mythology…………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………….…8

Scenario………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………..…10

Site Analysis…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………….………10

Land Use and Zoning Regulations……………………………………………………………………………………………….…………12

Order of Magnitude Cost Estimates……………………………………………………………………………………………………….12

Environmental Site Assessment…………………………………………………………………………………………………….………15

Vehicle and Mileage…………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………..…16

Findings and Next Steps…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………18

List of Tables Table 1 Existing Livingston Facility Costs….…………………………………………………………………………..……7

Table 2 Summary of Potential Sites………………………………………………………………………………………..…11

Table 3 Proposed Development Costs………………………………………………………………………………………14

Table 4 Proposed Vs. Existing Facility Miles/Time………………………………………………………………….….25

Table 5 Livingston Facility Gasoline Usage…………………………………………………………………………..……26

Table 6 Livingston Facility Mileage……………………………………………………………………………………………26

List of Figures Figure 1 Distance and Time for Existing Facility Vs. Proposed………………………………………………….…26

List of Appendices Appendix A Lufkin Site information and Maps ………………………………………………..………………………..……29

Appendix B Engineer/Firm Inventory……………………………………………………………………………………………...30

Appendix C PTN Transit Facility Pipeline …………………………………………………………………………………………31

4 | Page

Appendix D Environmental Site Analysis Site Photos/Maps……………………………………….……………………32

Appendix E Tax Plat & Metes/Bounds ……………………………………………………………………………….……………40

Appendix F Historical Aerial Photos……………………………………………………………………………………………..…44

Appendix G Historical Topographies ………………………………………………………………………………………………53

Appendix H Environmental Site Analysis Database Report……………………………………………………….……..58

5 | Page

Introduction Brazos Transit District (BTD)’s existing Operations and Maintenance facilities is located at 202 S. Pan American Drive, Livingston, Texas and it was purchased in 2000. This location services approximately 41 vehicles and has an area of 2-acres. The structure situated on the property is approximately 14,000 square feet. The facility services transit buses, paratransit vehicles and staff vehicles. The vehicles are fueled off site. BTD has procured eight new vehicles that are expected to arrive in May-June of 2021. To the north, east, and west of the lot is commercial and industrial developments. To the south is the Living World Church. For the past couple years, the condition of the maintenance facility has become an issue. This location has experienced flooding, paving and structural issues that continually limit BTD’s ability to work efficiently. The driveway area and parking lot is impervious which has caused stagnant water puddles during rainfall, and erosion on the ground. Due to this and the property having only one ingress and egress the weight of the buses have caused potholes to form. Overall, the paving condition has weakened. Since the existing property has constantly needed updates, BTD has not had the opportunity to expand the current site. Constant maintenance on the building puts pressure on the time and costs associated with production. The site has issues with flooding and potholes within the pavement. The building itself also has structural issues. The BTD Operations and Maintenance facility needs the building to be painted, fix ceiling paneling, replace the roof, redesign the gutters and reconstruct the bathroom to be ADA accessible. Over the years, the painting of the building, the ceiling tile replacements, and roof replacement was completed for the structure. However, the bathroom is currently not ADA accessible. The location also has insufficient drainage and has developed potholes within the pavement. Issues with the building itself and the surrounding land has been continuous. With the FY 2019 5339 Discretionary Award, BTD is intending to update the facility in 2021. The rollup doors to the building, trim and carpet are needing to be replaced. The building will also be repainted and new a/c systems will be installed. The glass storefront to be removed and replaced with sheetrock interior and metal exterior. The award will also be used to repave the parking lot. The following costs shown in Table 1 are associated with the existing Livingston facility. The property was purchased for $254,000 back in 2000. The table shows the updates and renovations needed in order for the Livingston facility to be compliant with city and ADA regulations. The total cost for updates that needs to be done to the Livingston site is approximately $268,656.

6 | Page

Table 1: Existing Livingston Facility Costs

After the updates are completed, the structure of the Livingston facility will not be adequate for the increasing fleet for maintenance and existing lot space. Even though updates are going to be done to the building, the physical lot itself cannot be expanded since there are existing property owners owning the adjacent lots. This does not provide BTD the opportunity to purchase nearby land to potentially expand the paving structure there. Which does not provide enough space for the fleet. BTD has realized that the location itself is not centralized and does not provide for easy access to the highways for the vehicles that service Lufkin, Diboll and Nacogdoches. BTD currently provides ADA paratransit and fixed route services in Lufkin, Nacogdoches and Diboll. In Lufkin there is the purple and blue route, with the Orange BTD started providing flag-stop fixed-route service and demand response service in the Lufkin-Diboll area in 1988. Jennings Station was built and became BTD’s Lufkin hub in 2006. In 2007, BTD began operating the Charlie Wilson Veterans Administration shuttle. The routes in the area were modified back in 2018 and the modifications consisted of which streets and direction the bus was traveling. The first route being the Diboll bus that travels from Lufkin to Diboll. The other two routes are the Purple and Blue which have a headway time of about an hour. The Diboll route operates on a fifty-minute headway. Nacogdoches consists of a Blue Loop A, Blue Loop B, Red Loop A, and Red Loop B route. The Loop A routes have a headway of one hour, while the Loop B routes has a half hour headway. Currently, BTD has a maintenance shop in Bryan and Livingston. The Bryan location services the fleet in Bryan and College Station and the Livingston location services buses that are in the East Texas Counties in our service area which include: Montgomery, San Jacinto, Liberty, Walker, Polk, Trinity, , Anderson, Angelina (City of Lufkin) and Nacogdoches (City of Nacogdoches). The Livingston maintenance facility repairs vehicles that are in a larger services area. The total area for the three cities combined is 67.17 square miles.

7 | Page

Growth Scenario There are opportunities for BTD in growing within the county level. The population of Angelina County is projected to increase 18% between 2010 and 2040. Angelina and Nacogdoches Counties both have more zero-vehicle households than any other county in the region based on 2014 data. The county also contained 21% of the region’s veteran population in 2014. The Coordinated Plan indicates that there are fifty-two major employers. All other neighboring counties in the region have fewer major employers. The Coordinated Plan quantifies transit service needs for each county in the region using a Transit Needs Index that reflects five demographic characteristics. According to this, there is a moderate need for transit within the county. However, as employers and population continue to grow, there will be more opportunities to expand transit in the location. BTD is exploring many service opportunities that incorporate improvements in technology and service. This includes micro-transit opportunities and establishing fixed bus stop locations within the three communities. A transit mobility study was conducted for all three locations to determine bus stop locations and potential improvements to the routes to make sure the public needs are met. These bus stops will be located in Lufkin, Nacogdoches and Diboll that will incorporate a sign and possibly a shelter. There have been sixty-one potential bus stops identified for the Lufkin and Diboll Routes, and approximately one hundred and one bus stops for Nacogdoches. In addition, there will be route updates and a connector route between Lufkin and Diboll added as well. The bus schedules are also being updated which will cause the buses to run hourly. The expansion and bus stop implementation can affect the maintenance of the vehicles as well. With these changes it was important for BTD to find a closer location to these communities to allow easy access for efficient service. When determining the location of the proposed maintenance facility, it was important to look into the distance and miles being traveled by the vehicles, along with other site methodology aspects. Site Methodology BTD used a site screening process to help determine the location of the maintenance facility and its opportunities. The decision to develop a maintenance facility was made after tracking the growth of BTD’s East Texas fleet since 2000. Several properties were looked into when deciding where to develop the facility. For this process TxDOT has requested to provide the preliminary findings for the construction of a transit maintenance facility. A preliminary Space Area Program (Appendix A) was created to estimate what a new facility for BTD will consist of. This helped to determine the amount of lot space BTD will need when looking for a property. Once a preliminary acreage of 10-20 acres for a facility was determined based on the Space Area Program (Appendix A), an area of interest was looked into. Since the maintenance facility will provide service to BTD fleet in Lufkin, Nacogdoches and Diboll, it was important for the facility to be in or near these cities. Location was the next aspect to look into. It was a general screening of properties located between the service cities, 8 | Page met size requirements; had no known environmental issues, supported fueling on site, and located in an area that could be fully-secured for safety and security with fencing for fueling and overnight parking. Once a budget for a purchase price was determined for land acquisition and a site was found that matched the total acreage needed, outside of the city limits of Lufkin. Planning research was then done in regards to the zoning and limitations to the land. The property is outside of the city limits of Lufkin, which does not restrict the property to a certain use. No major building and construction requirements exist, due to its location. Some planning aspects that were considered are: Planning  Possibly located outside of city limits, and outside of the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction to ensure proper development on site  Located in an area zoned for light industrial and heavy commercial sites  Does the property have to be platted to building a maintenance facility?  Are there any title / boundary problems that need to be resolved?  What steps / approvals are necessary regarding the property prior to requesting a building permit. Engineering  Does a drainage plan have to be conducted?  Does the current landscaping plan need to be modified or do we need to start over?  Is there existing water, sewer, and electricity on the property?  Do the existing structures on the property have a value to us?  Does an Environmental Site Assessment Phase II need to be conducted?  Located near an arterial street with adequate capacity to handle increased traffic due to the development of the facility  Located between Lufkin and Nacogdoches to ensure easy access for fleet traveling to and from both cities  Limited or no environmental issues  Minimized deadhead cost  Minimum traffic control improvements  A suitable size to develop an efficient facility design Once the above was determined, BTD had periodic executive team meetings to discuss the development. The President/CEO, John McBeth; Deputy CEO/General Manager, Wendy Weedon; Grants and Reporting Coordinator, Alivia Youree; and Director of Planning and Development, Taslima Khandaker, would meet. BTD has done previous land acquisitions for maintenance facilities and transit facilities in the past. The President/CEO and Deputy CEO/General Manager understand the process and timeline to construct a facility as well. A previous facility was constructed in The Woodlands and Bryan with the direction from the President/CEO and Deputy CEO/General Manager. The

9 | Page

previous projects have been stable and experienced growth throughout the years. With each project, a best-case scenario is created for each BTD vision. Scenario: 15-18 Acres Based on discussions with the Directors and the Operations team, BTD considered a scenario that can accommodate up to 50 vehicles. This scenario would alleviate congestion and turn around spacing for vehicles as well. The new site would accommodate the needs for administration, maintenance and a possible retention pond. The agency was looking into what needed to be developed on the site as well as any challenges that may present itself when constructing a brand-new facility. These challenges include safety, security, paving and the effects on the transit, design issues such as drainage or existing culverts. The site screening process did not include contacting property owners. It was a general screening to determine costs of the site. To identify any environmental issues on the final potential site, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted. The ESA focused on hazardous materials on the property and had shown that there were none present. Based on what was needed for the site, BTD decided the following were critical characteristics and features: Appendix A, provides a detailed breakdown of the space planning requirements for this type of facility. The following is a summary of the findings: The facility would service approximately 50 vehicles and require a retention pond. Approximately 1.7 acres would be dedicated to a retention pond. The Maintenance Building would require 14,024 sq. feet and include office areas, break room, repair bays, shop storage and a parts room. The Fuel Island and Bus Wash Building and lanes would require 6,400 sq. feet. Storage Area, would be approximately 551 sq. feet. Circulation/landscape/setback/stormwater would require 148,104 sq. feet. Total sq. feet is 196,313 sq. feet or 5 acres. The search included sites that are currently listed for sale, publicly-owned, or areas that have similar zoning compatible with maintenance uses. Site Analysis Potential sites in Lufkin and in between Lufkin and Nacogdoches were identified. The initial screening investigated vacant land or land with small structures, that were industrially-zoned or outside of city limits. With this, three potential locations were identified. Table 2 is a summary of the potential sites.

10 | Page

Table 2: Summary of Potential Sites Site #1 is a privately owned site that is 17 acres and is located outside of the city limits of Lufkin. However, this property is situated between Lufkin and Nacogdoches. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) service could be a possibility; however, a diesel generator would suffice. CNG is considered to be an alternative fuel. This location has access to major arterial streets such as U.S Hwy 59 and FM 2021. The current land use is industrial, greenspace, and a small portion is used for residential. The nearest gasoline source would be on site. Site #2 is a privately owned site measuring to 30.1 acres and is located within the city limits of Lufkin. The existing zoning for the property is PUD, Planned Unit for Development, however the lot itself consists of agriculture and undeveloped land. This property has access to U.S Hwy 59, but the egress and ingress of the lot is very narrow. The nearest fueling site is 1.01 miles from the site. Site #3 is a privately owned site that totals to 3.5 acres. This is located in the city limits of Lufkin, and is designated for commercial zoning purposes. There is currently a commercial warehouse that is used as a body shop on the property. This location is approximately 246.47 meters from a gasoline source. The entrance to the property is on Denman Avenue. This site had shown no opportunity to establish a gasoline source on the site. Due to the size of the property and nearby commercial sites, this would not be a efficient area. The management team of BTD found Site 1 to be feasible. This location followed majority of the critical characteristics and factors for a maintenance facility. The proposed location of the maintenance facility is located on 5882 US Highway 59 North, Lufkin, TX. This is a 17-acre plot of land that is located within Angelina County. There are currently two structures on the premises: a bay storage and storage house. The facility will be a new building that will be used to service a 41-vehicle fleet for BTD. This design will incorporate a 2-story building designed for 5 drive through bays. The conceptual design will consist of a 5,000 square foot shop and a 2,000 square foot office space. There is an existing two bay shop located on the property that will be converted and used for office space.

11 | Page

BTD plans to extend the driveway and incorporate a bridge above the culvert to help the paving condition for ease of ingress and egress. This site is a privately owned site that is 17 acres, located outside of the city limits of Lufkin, TX. This property has perfect access to the major arterial street and an extended driveway. This property does not have zoning regulations since it is outside of the city limits. The current land use is for commercial and industrial uses. The surrounding land uses are industrial and commercial. There were little or no environmental concerns on the property based upon the Phase I Environmental Site assessment. Additional environmental analyses will need to be conducted, due to the sites close proximity to natural resources. Land Use and Zoning Regulations The 17-acre property itself and the adjacent properties are located outside of the Lufkin city limits, as well as outside of the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). The properties surrounding 5882 U.S HWY 59 are residential, with one property being commercial. This location incorporates a construction company next to 5882 U.S HWY 59, Lufkin, TX. The areas north, east, south and west of the property being acquired is mostly covered with green scaping and vegetation, with industrial or residential building in between. Angelina County’s regulations in regards to subdivisions were established in 2006. The regulations state that if the property owner is wanting to divide the same in two or more parts, then the owner is required to plat. Since the property is not being divided, not plat is required. The property does not lie in the Extra Territorial Jurisdiction of any incorporated town; thus, the ordinance does not apply. Since the property is located outside of city limits and outside of the ETJ no platting or zoning requirements exists. There are no designated permitted uses, building requirements or setbacks on this 17- acre tract of land. If BTD decides to plat the property, it would solely be for the purpose of establishing a survey and combining all three tracts of land into one. This is not required at this time. Order of Magnitude Cost Estimates The purpose of the magnitude of cost estimates is to provide cost information on the various processes in regards to the construction of a maintenance facility. The services and funds sought will include all services to program and build the facility. The order of magnitude costs provides an estimate to complete the planned conceptual scope for a facility. The site acquisition cost includes the market value of the property, costs associated with the real estate transaction, agency fees and broker fees if applicable. The costs below are all estimates. An informal survey was conducted. In order to develop these amounts, BTD surveyed various contractors, relators, architects and surveyors to understand the general amounts of what it will take to develop the maintenance facility. A contact list was created that contained nearby engineering firms, surveyors and independent engineers (Appendix B). A conceptual design was explained to them and

12 | Page

the firms were able to give a ballpark estimate. After putting together, the prices, a separate list was created to obtain prices for an environmental site assessment phase I. After received the quotes from the surveyors, BTD decided the timeframe and pricing that was given by Ray McKim was the most competitive. His cost for a Phase I report was $2,100. Below is an estimate of items that are included in hard cost and soft costs. Hard Cost Items Include:  Land Acquisition  Mobilization, general conditions  Site work and site development  Facility utility services  Facility structures and roadways  Facility systems  Facility finishes Soft Cost items include:  Project Planning and Development  Environmental Site Analysis  Cost Estimating  Program Management  Permitting services and fees  Design services  Construction Management services The following is a summary of the costs related to the representative conceptual site. The costs include the 30% contingency and the environmental site assessment is included within the land acquisition cost.

13 | Page

Land Acquisition Cost Land Purchase Price $437,500 Buyers Fees $157 Environmental Studies $2,100 Total (Rounded) $439,757

Preliminary Scope of Work Cost 5,000 SF shop & 2,000 SF Office Space, site wor $2,617,250 Deceleration Lane (If required by TxDOT) $90,000 Fire Sprinkler (If required by code review) $55,000 Construction Contingency-10% $276,225 TOTAL $3,038,475

Probable Indirect Costs Owner Contingency 5% $150,000 Basic Service Fee: Architectural/Structural $288,000 Site Surveys/Utility Investigations $15,000 Geotechnical Investigation $7,500 Other ADA Review Misc Consultants $5,000 Construction Materials Testing $15,000 Movable Furnishings $25,000 Misc. Shop Equipment $35,000 Security Equipment & Cameras $12,500 A/V Equipment $7,500 Data and other low voltage $10,000 Signage & Graphics $7,500 Utility Extensions: Power, Sewer, Water $100,000 TOTAL $678,000 Table 3: Proposed Development Costs

The land purchase price for the property located outside of Lufkin was $437,500. The initial asking price of the property was $599,000 and was listed for about 600 days. To develop the property there will be a building constructed with its main purpose being a maintenance facility. Portion of the lot will be paved, striped and a driveway will be extended and widened to access Highway 59 from the property. The total cost estimate for the new facility is $4,156,232. However, this value may change based on the architectural firm that is chosen to complete the project and if TxDOT requires any deceleration lanes.

14 | Page

Environmental Site Assessment During the process of the ESA Phase I, the current and historical site, area data, and usage was secured through courthouse records, interviews with current land tenants, if any, and/or well operators, if applicable, plus the review of aerial photographs, and other readily available public documents. In order to obtain data sets, public records or databases pertaining to the subject property and properties within a 1-mile radius of the site was reviewed in order to identify: local geological, hydrogeological and soil characteristics; generators of hazardous waste, usage and storage of hazardous chemical, registered and leaking petroleum storage tanks, and past chemical spills; environmental permits, violations of environmental statutes, and the status of remediation efforts. A site visit was done to conduct a visual inspection, review of aerial photographs and maps, and interviews with knowledgeable parties were performed in order to identify specific areas of environmental concern on-site or within close proximity of the site. Specific areas of concern assessed were: evidence of surface contamination, storage of and leakage of waste materials and raw process chemicals, abandoned drums, fuel and waste oil storage tanks, PCBs, and the potential migration of pollutants onto or off of the property. The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted on July 7, 2020. Appendix D shows the current conditions of the property. The assessment verifies if any of the following has occurred: Operations that may have produced hazardous waste; Underground storage tanks that may be located on the property, and their condition; Any industrial processes subject to federal or state regulation that may be present or have been in the past; If the owner/operator of the site has been subjected to an enforcement action at any time in the past; Whether adjacent owners have been subject to an enforcement of action or an environmental lawsuit; Whether asbestos has been previously removed or if the site has had previous demolition or renovation; and whether PCB’s are on the property or in the vicinity of the site being assessed. The property is located on 5882 U.S Highway 59 North, Lufkin, Texas, being 17.0 acres of land, more or less, consisting of three tracts out of the V Michelli Survey A-29, Angelina County, Texas. See tax plat and the deed with metes and bound description provided for the report in Appendix E. The property is outside the city limits of Lufkin and not subject to city or county zoning ordinances. There are three storage buildings, a barn and shed with fenced pastures. The site is in a rural, forest land setting. The subject has been used previously for raising livestock. There is existing exposed ground cover consisting of native trees, shrubs, grasses, forbs, and weeds (Appendix F). No significant staining of the soil was observed. There is currently one water well on the site which is located on the north end. No open water well bores or abandoned bores were observed. The property is not currently located in a 100-year flood plain. There is a dry creek for drainage on the west side and a driveway built up for road access to the highway. The existing vegetation and geology are not distressed and shows slight sloping to steep drained soils. Soil values and environmental values are shown in Appendix G. The site

15 | Page

allows for drainage which flows into a dry creek adjacent to the frontage road. Excess movement of drainage is aided by an existing culvert next to the west property line. There are no quantities of chemicals, hazardous materials, radioactive materials, and asbestos levels shown on the Lufkin site. A plastic gallon drum was observed on the site with contents unknown. However, this item was carefully disposed of off-site by the property owner. The existing creek and potential flood levels of the property located on 5882 U.S Hwy 59 is being considered with the potential site development. The creek and flooding of the site will be mitigated by the construction of a pipe arch single culvert that will be reinforced by concrete material and a small driveway for egress and ingress. In conclusion, there are no violations of any federal, state, or local hazardous substance regulations on this site. These existing conditions will be further considered during the NEPA process. The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is shown that no additional mitigation is needed for hazardous materials on the site. Vehicle and Mileage The travel time, distance and deadhead costs were another consideration to look into operating costs. Our current fleet and maintenance crew travels approximately 49.8 miles from Lufkin to the existing facility in Livingston, Texas, and about 71 miles from Nacogdoches. The proposed site is only a distance of 7.1 miles to Lufkin and 14.1 miles to Nacogdoches. Since the location is closer to the cities that are being serviced by BTD, the cost of towing and maintenance cost would decrease. Be centrally relocating the maintenance facility, BTD will experience a more efficient fleet and a decrease in labor costs. The distance and miles being traveled by the vehicles or maintenance employees has been determined to be inefficient. This becomes an inconvenient and inefficient, because BTD will have to spend half a day shuttling buses back and forth to be serviced. If there is an issue that needs immediate attention, the mechanic is on the road an hour and a half minimum just to get to the bus that needs servicing. There are also instances where the bus may have to be towed back to the maintenance facility, which is an additional expenditure for BTD. The gasoline usage for the fleet is a cost to BTD since the majority of the vehicles have to travel from Lufkin and Nacogdoches to be serviced at the Livingston site. The facility is already operating above maximum capacity with the 41 vehicles, not considering future vehicle additions.

To Lufkin To Nacogdoches Existing Facility Miles 49.8 71 Proposed Facility Miles 7.1 14.1 Existing Facility Time 58 71 Proposed Facility Time 11 15 Table 4: Proposed Vs. Existing Facility Miles/Time

16 | Page

Existing Facility Vs. Proposed Facility

Proposed Facility Time 11 15

Existing Facility Time 58 71

Proposed Facility Miles 7.1 14.1

Existing Facility Miles 49.8 71

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

To Lufkin To Nacogdoches

Figure 1:Distance and Time for Existing Facility Vs. Proposed

In order for BTD vehicles in Lufkin and Nacogdoches to be serviced, the buses will have to travel to the Livingston location or a maintenance employee will travel to the bus itself. Lufkin is approximately 50 miles in distance from the maintenance facility and Nacogdoches is about 70 miles. This has affected the operating expense and the vehicle miles traveled for each fleet. With the fleet growing by 2021 there is a need to establish a maintenance facility that is closer to the serviceable cities. BTD recognizes that in order to be prepared for the possible future expansion of transit and services, this facility would have to be located in Lufkin, TX, in order for production to be sustainable. Jan-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Apr-19 May-19 Jun-19 Jul-19 Aug-19 Sep-19 Oct-19 Nov-19 Dec-19 TOTAL Fixed 2,615.32 2,540.86 2,601.38 2,589.20 2,561.60 2,698.45 2,827.39 2,857.95 1,716.92 3,020.00 2,296.00 2,537.00 30,862.07

D&R 4,503.26 4,371.38 4,632.57 4,663.36 5,648.37 4,957.54 6,135.30 7,017.73 4,421.97 6,670.00 5,560.00 5,162.00 63,743.48 Table 5: Livingston Facility Gasoline Usage Jan-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Apr-19 May-19 Jun-19 Jul-19 Aug-19 Sep-19 Oct-19 Nov-19 Dec-19 TOTAL Fixed 32,516 31,420 28,991 26,036 30,531 25,450 33,488 43,071 39,789 39,003 43,903 32,586 406,784

D&R 31,391 28,932 31,931 31,012 31,173 30,561 34,897 33,819 30,500 35,505 28,802 32,443 380,966 Table 6: Livingston Facility Mileage In 2019, the BTD Livingston facility had serviced vehicles with a gasoline fuel usage of 30,862.07 gallons for the fixed routes and 63,743.48 gallons for the demand response vehicles. For that year, there were a total of 406,784 miles traveled for the fixed buses and 380,966 for the demand and response. The vehicles used for the fixed routes, have more travel miles than the demand and response service notated in 2019. The amount of

17 | Page

gasoline fuel usage for the fixed and demand response service has steadily increased apart from a slight decrease from April to June.

Findings and Next Steps

The following section provides a preliminary feasibility study that helped to determine the general “order of magnitude of acreage and costs” of developing a maintenance facility for BTD. The magnitude of cost total was approximately $3,716,475 for the construction of the facility, including all scopes of work. This study also provides BTD with information for this type of facility if opportunities present itself to purchase future developments. The findings are based on transit industry standards from the Federal Transit Association (FTA), Circular 5010.1E and the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), APTA-BTD-BMF-RP-001-11 to determine initial requirements. To determine initial space requirements, BTD used the APTA Maintenance Facility Design Calculator. The initial total site requirement based on the document was 4.7-5.7 acres. This document was used to set the preliminary stages to determine variables for the Space Area estimates (Appendix A). Even though the existing property is 17 acres, BTD plans to use any extra non-developed land as green space to preserve the agricultural state in the area. BTD found this important, since the location is in close proximately to ponds, Kurth Lake, and the Angelina National Forest. The green space would be used as an permeable surface and would catch runoff. This would aide in decreasing the amount of runoff going onto the highway from the property. This information can be used in the future by BTD. The findings are based on industry and development standards. Any additions to the property would not significantly alter the estimated acreage needed. This study does not commit BTD to any action, but prepares the agency for future planning and expansion options. Scenario:  10-17 acres  45 fleet vehicles  48 parking spaces  23,744 square feet maintenance building  14,405 square feet for fuel and bus wash area  21,659 square feet for parking spaces and exterior circulation  551 square feet for a storage purpose  Access to major arterial streets, outside of city limits BTD will continue to follow the Public Transportation Division PTN Transit Facility Pipeline (Appendix C) in order to finalize the project. Currently, BTD is in the planning and scoping phase. The agency has created a tentative time line to contract the execution of the maintenance Facility, shown below:

• May, 2020 – Property purchased

18 | Page

• July 2020 – Environmental Survey Assessment Phase I conducted • August 2020 – Begin feasibility study • July 2021 – Release RFP for A&E • August 2021 to February 2022 – Complete Design • November 2021– (30% of Design) • December 2021- Complete CE Checklist • March 2022 – Solicit Bids • June 2022 – Acquire building permits • July 2022 – Ground Breaking • July 2023 – Project Completion Date The study concludes that the BTD Livingston facility does not have the means to expand the area which does not meet the need or long-term goals of: expansion of the bus fleet; saving travel time, and costs of the fleet; and integrating easy access to existing services in the Lufkin, Diboll, and Nacogdoches area. Relocating the site would minimize deadhead miles and transit operating costs. It is also convenient access to major arterials as well. The new facility would also reduce overhead and future maintenance costs. The agency will also obtain environmental clearance by submitting the environmental findings to FTA for the proposed project. The final plan of action would be to authorize and direct BTD staff to continue with the project development process including the required architecture and engineering studies, and continue to follow the transit facility pipeline.

19 | Page

APPENDIX A: LUFKIN SITE INFORMATION AND MAPS

Space Space Programs Area Description Remarks Standard Staff Space Area MAINTENANCE Office Areas Lead Mechanic 12 x 15 1 180 Private office CopyFile Area 8 x 10 1 80 Copier, fax station, and printer Conference Room 12 x 16 192 Mechanic Office 12 x 20 1 240 Private office Maintenance Counter/ w computer 8 x 10 80 Window to Maintenance Supervisor Office Lobby 8 x 10 80 Fare Box Storage and Counting Room 8 x 10 80 Chair/Table Storage 12 x 20 240 Support Areas Lunch/Break Room 18 x 24 432 Men's Restroom 16 x 26 416 3 toilet fixtures Women's Restroom 16 x 26 416 3 toilet fixtures Data/Communication Room 12 x 20 240 Custodial Closet 8 x 10 80 Storage for cleaning materials Repair Bays Chassis Wash 20 x 50 1,000 Vertical lift flush with floor Chassis Wash Equipment Room 12 x 18 216 Van Lift Bays 12 x 30 360 Above ground platform lifts Van Flat Bays 12 x 30 360 Parts Cleaning Area 16 x 24 384 Steam Cleaning and Parts Cleaning Equipment Tire Shop/Bay Tire Storage 12 x 3 36 100 bus tires on tire carousel Tire Bay 10 x 16 160 Inground self-contained one post hydraulic lift Shop/Storage Areas Existing Structure 40 x 60 2,400 Existing Structure Add-On 60 x 80 4,800 Common Work Area 16 x 24 384 Storeroom Parts Counter 10 x 12 120 Parts Storeroom/Battery Storage 40 x 80 3,200 Mezzanine 20 x 40 800 Tool Crib 10 x 10 100 Lube/Compressor Room 16 x 32 512 Subtotal 17,588 Circulation 35% 6,156 TOTAL MAINTENANCE 23,744

Space Space Programs Area Description Remarks Standard Staff Space Area FUEL/WASH Fuel Lane Fueling Positions (Gasoline & Diesel) 16 x 60 960 Two people to circulate the 40 opeational buses for fueling, check fluids, washing and interior cleaning Vacuum Equipment Room 20 x 20 400 Fuel Mangement Equipment Room 10 x 12 120 Van Cleaning Supply Storage Room 10 x 15 150 Lube/Compressor Room 12 x 20 240 Wash Lane Drive through Vehicle Wash 20 x 80 5 8,000 Reclaim/Support Equipment 20 x 40 800 Subtotal 10,670 Circulation 35% 3,735 TOTAL FUEL/WASH 14,405 PARKING & EXTERIOR Parking Areas Buses 10 x 30 45 13,500 Operations Non-Revenue Vehicles 10 x 20 2 400 Maintenance Non-Revenue Vehicles 10 x 20 200 Tandem Vehicle Parking Subtotal 9 x 18 1 162 Employee/Visitor Parking Areas Employee 9 x 18 6 972 Visitor 9 x 18 4 648 Disability Parking 9 x 18 1 162 Subtotal 16,044 Circulation 35% 5,615 TOTAL PARKING & EXTERIOR 21,659 STORAGE AREAS Emergency Generator 8 x 12 96 CNG Compressor and Tank Area Trash/Recycling Dumpsters 8 x 10 3 240 Canopy covered Hazmat Storage 6 x 6 36 Employee Areas Patio 6 x 6 36 Subtotal 408 Circulation 35% 143 TOTAL STORAGE 551 SPACE NEEDS PROGRAM SUMMARY Total Maintenance Area 23,744 Total Fuel/Wash 14,405 Total Parking/Exterior 21,659 Exterior Storage Areas 551 Circulations/Landscape/Setbacks 20% 148,104 Total SF 208,463 Total acres 4.79

20 | Page

APPENDIX B: ENGINEER/FIRM INVENTORY

Company Location ATM, ALL-Texas College Station Mapping&Surverying Bryan Land Surveying Bryan Carlomagno Surveying, Inc Bryan/College Station CEC Bryan/College Station Civil Engineering Consultants CME Testing and Engineering, INC College Station Cobb Fendly & Associates Houston David Evans and Associate, Inc College Station Davis Construction Lufkin Gessner Engineering College Station Goodwin-Lasiter-Strong Bryan/College Station Jacobs Engineering Group Inc College Station JBS Engineering & Environmental Bryan College Station Joe Orr, Inc Jones|Carter Engineering Bryan/College Station Kerr Surveying LLC Bryan KSA Lufkin Mc Clure & Browne Bryan/College Station Engineering&Surveying, Inc Partner Engineering Houston RSB Environmental Houston Stolz Engineering & Associates Lufkin Strong Surveying, LLC Bryan Terracon Consultants College Station Bryan/College Station Vaughn Construction

21 | Page

APPENDIX C: PTN TRANSIT FACILITY PIPELINE

22 | Page

APPENDIX D: ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ANALYSIS SITE PHOTOS/MAP

23 | Page

24 | Page

35 | Page

26 | Page

27 | Page

28 | Page

29 | Page

30 | Page

APPENDIX E: TAX PLAT/METES AND BOUNDS

Tax Plat

31 | Page

Metes and Bounds

32 | Page

33 | Page

34 | Page

APPENDIX F: HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOS

35 | Page

36 | Page

37 | Page

38 | Page

39 | Page

40 | Page

41 | Page

42 | Page

43 | Page

APPENDIX G: HISTORICAL TOPOGRAPHIES

44 | Page

45

46

47

48

Acronyms and Symbols ADA: Americans Disability Act APTA: American Public Transportation Association BTD: Brazos Transit District CEO: Chief Executive Officer CNG: Compressed Natural Gas ESA: Environmental Site Analysis ETJ: Extraterritorial Jurisdiction FTA: Federal Transit Association NEPA: National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 PUD: Planned Unit for Development

49