Park and Open Space: LAPP Dance Part Two

Loyal readers of this blog may recall that I have written before about waiting for the release of Arlington County’s Land Acquisition and Preservation Policy, recently re-christened as the Parkland/Open Space Acquisition and Preservation Plan or “POSAPP.” Seven-years in the making, the draft POSAPP is now available on the web.

The county has asked the public for comments before Nov. 5, 2012 so if you want your voice heard sooner rather than later, you will need to send your comments before the deadline to Bethany Heim at bheim@arlingtonva.us.

By way of background, POSAPP originated as Priority 2 in the county’s Public Spaces Master Plan, adopted by the Arlington County Board on Dec. 10, 2005. (For comparison, in December 2005, Barack Obama was just finishing his freshman year in the United States Senate). The master plan set a goal to “develop a land acquisition policy.”

While many in the park and open space community -- including the author of this blog -- may have comments regarding numerous parts of the POSAPP, I would like to raise with my readers an overarching policy question: should the county commit itself to maintaining the current ratio of parkland and open space to population as the county continues to grow?

According to Arlington’s “Profile 2012,” the numbers speak for themselves.

The county had 212,800 residents on July 1, 2012. By 2020, the number of Arlingtonians is expected to reach 233,400, a growth of almost 10%. How can we meet the park and open space needs of our growing population?

One way to do so is to set a county policy of keeping our ratio of parkland and open space to population the same in 2020 as it is in 2012. According to the POSAPP, that ratio is now 7.9 acres per 1,000 residents. (County Staff has promised to explain the methodology behind this number in the next draft of the POSAPP). Although the POSAPP acknowledges that “a growing community will strive to acquire additional parkland to keep pace with this measure,” the POSAPP stops far short of setting this as a goal.

What do you think? Should the county commit itself to maintaining the current ratio of parkland and open space to population as the county continues to grow? The deadline for public comments is just around the corner!

Comments (4)

Comment Feed

Postings

The last posting by "Kristine" sounds very similar to the public comments made over the years by Jim Hurysz. Accordingly, I do not intend to respond to comments made on this blog unless the posters use their full names.

Mike Nardolilli 211 days ago

Too Many People...Too Little Space

WHY do non-residents make almost all the 'planning' decisions for Arlington residents? WHY does Arlington have to be an 'infill redevelopment opportunity' for every REIT in America? WHY do Arlington residents who want to protect the suburban character of our county get pushed aside, called names, and even defamed by 'community leaders' who rubber stamp whatever plans are put in front of them by County Staff who live outside the County? WHY do the local print media and news blogs go along with this behavior?

Kristine 212 days ago

Parkland & Open Space

I hope that Kristine and all those who are interested in this subject will review the Parkland/Open Space Acquisition and Preservation Plan and submit comments prior to November 5, 2012. The more specific the better!

Mike Nardolilli 212 days ago

Too Many People....Too Little Space

Virtually all the 'planning' decisions in Arlington are made by non-residents, whether County Staff or REITs, developers, etc. The senior planning decision makers and the County Board are all at retirement age. They have little incentive to make Arlington a livable suburb. Their 'vision' is to pack as many people and vehicles into Arlington as possible, to the extent residential streets will be blocked off and used as 'linear parks' and "festival streets'. Community and recreation centers on the County's borders, including open space playing fields, are already heavily used by non-residents. Neighborhoods like Fairlington, Lyon Village, and Lyon Park are being used as open space by residents of adjacent infill communities where there is no open space.

What was formerly neighborhood parkland is being paved for multi-use recreation by a sports and recreation bureaucracy who are almost all non-residents.

Although County Government is spending tens of thousands on promoting a 'car free diet' for Arlington residents it is also approving site plans with 400, 500, and 700 parking spaces so non-residents can commute to and from work in Arlington, one per vehicle.

Bottom line, those who are 'planning' Arlington's future will not suffer the consequences of their flawed 'vision' for Arlington. Arlington was not designed to be a city, making Arlington a city will have a profound negative impact on the future quality of life here.