The Reston Station Area Athletic Field Situation Gets Worse

The County Parks staff is making up standards that cut the need for athletic fields in Restons urbanizing areas by more than 90 percent. Terry Maynard, RCA Representative to the Reston Task Force The County Parks staff is making up standards that cut the need for athletic fields in Restons urbanizing areas by more than 90 percent. A month ago, I wrote a post here on the urban parks wasteland envisioned for Reston as developers are given the go ahead to more than double building density around Restons Metrorail stations. Part of that development envisions adding up to 44,000 new residents, including some 4,000 to 6,000 kids. The latest draft Planthe final draft before this Plan goes to the County Planning Commission for a hearing and its endorsement calls for adding as few as three athletic fields of any type for those residents. If you share my concern that this proposal is unacceptable for Reston, this Tuesday evenings meeting of the Reston Task Forcewill be the last time you will have to tell the task force you believe Reston deserves better. The task force intends to endorse the draft Plan at that meeting. Anyone may speak for a few minutes in the public input portion of the meeting at its outset. The meeting is at RA Headquarters Conference Center, 7PM, Tuesday, October 29, 2013 . Worse, new language calls for, Enhancements to and redesign of nearby . . . Reston Association fields to increase capacity . . . for serving the increased athletic field needs in Reston. (See p. 78 of Version 10 of the draft plan.) That means the 60,000 of us who live in Reston are being asked to provide our privately-owned and annually paid for athletic fields to serve the needs of 44,000 new residents. Do you think that will lead to further overcrowding of Restons existing athletic fields? Do you suspect that may not be consistent with what the County provides elsewhere? Do you think Restonians will pay for the bulk of these enhancements and redesigns? Do you think that is fair? The math behind this limited addition to Restons parks and athletic fields is twisted. It undercuts Restons commitment to extensive open space and recreational facilities. In particular, it makes Restons urban dwellerslike their counterparts in Tysonssecond-class citizens. And Restonians will probably pay for the privilege of reducing their park and recreation access. Warning: The rest of this post looks at the details and gets a bit wonkish. First, a look at park space. The Countys Urban Parks Framework, an appendix in the Countys policy plan for parks and recreation, makes a point of justifying about one-third as much overall park space for the Countys urban residents as its suburban residents, including Reston. The suburban standard is five acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents; the urban one is 1.5 acres of parkland for every 1,000 1

residents topped with a one-acre dollop of space for every 10,000 employees. In Reston, the County suburban standard would lead to about 270 acres of parkland in the station areas. The urban standard leads to 95 acres in Restons station areas. The result is that less than six percent of the total Reston station area space will be devoted to parks. By comparison, New York Citys Manhattan Borough, the most densely populated, most densely employed, and most valuable piece of urban real estate in the United States, has more than 19% of its land devoted to parks and recreation. Now for a look at athletic fields. The same County policy plan for parks and recreation, updated just five months ago with the Urban Parks Framework, sustains a Population-based Countywide Service Level Standard (pp. 21-22) for all types of park-based facilities from playgrounds to athletic fields to equestrian parks. It does not distinguish between urban and suburban standards. Applying that standard to the population being projected for Restons station areas for impact analysis purposesa number about ten percent less than permitted under the proposed plan--dictates a requirement for 35 athletic fields in Restons station areasmore than ten times the number that the Countys draft plan sees as adequate. Four weeks ago, a Park Authority memorandum provided guidance to the Planning staff noted that Restons station areas have a 25 athletic field net need using suburban service level standards. (Emphasis added) So there it is: A unilateral Park Planning Staff decision that countywide standards apply only to suburban areas. This distinction has not been approved by the Park Authority Board, the County Planning Commission, or the Board of Supervisors. Moreover, I dont know where the other 10 athletic fields are in the station areas (I am aware of none) that would meet cover the difference between the 25 identified here and the 35 gross athletic field official countywideor newly characterized suburbanstandard. The memorandum goes on to state that Restons adjusted urban need is for only twelve athletic fields. Thats half the net need and one-third the countywide standard. So, the latest draft plan says A goal of adding capacity equivalent to twelve athletic fields serving Reston should be achieved . . . In general, 4.5 million square feet of mixed use development generates the need for one athletic field. One has to turn to Tysons planning to find out where that 4.5 million SF standard came from. It turns out that, in the Tysons planning process, the developer-dominated task force agreed to allow 25 athletic fields to be built there with a planned total mixed use development of 113 million SF by 2050. Then they created a standard ex post facto by dividing the latter by the former. Voila! One athletic field per 4.5 million total SF. It is not based on residential population needs; its based on square footage of profitmaking, tax-generating development. The Plan reduces that number of athletic fields by 20% to account for more limited population projections (80,000 residents) than the Plan permits (100,000). Nonetheless, using that bewildering standard, Tysons will have one athletic field for every 4,000 residents while Reston will have one field for as many as 16,000 residents in its station areas. 2

That so-called Tysons standardlike the Park Authoritys new interpretation of countywide facility standards as suburban standardshas not been approved by the County Parks Authority Board or the Planning Commission, much less "adopted" by the Board of Supervisors. In fact, the Parks staff says the Board was not briefed on it until two years after the Tysons Plan was approved by the Board of Supervisors. Instead, the Park Authority staff has established an unexamined, unapproved athletic field standard for urban dwellers that treats them as second-class citizens, andin so doinglimits the Countys need to invest in Reston parks and recreation. So what is the correct number of athletic fields for Restons potential 56,000 urban residents have--35, 25, 12, or 3? Apparently, it all depends on which so-called standard the County Parks staff chooses to apply. Right now, three athletic fields for Restons station areas suits the County just fine even if the only adopted standard calls for 35. Once again the County is trying as hard as it can to avoid investing in Restons parks and recreation infrastructure despite the communitys commitment to open space, parks, and recreation. This despite the fact that the County parks strategys first land acquisition objective is Use adopted service level standards and land acquisition criteria to guide parkland acquisition for recreation usage. Instead, the County expects the citizens of Reston to pick up the responsibility--the space, the facilities, and the tab--through either Reston Association or the local Reston Community Center small tax district. In the meantime, the County provides adequate park space and facilities for most of the rest of the County using our property tax dollars. This draft Plan athletic field proposal for Restons station areas, indeed, the Reston urban parks planning in general, is unacceptable. It stands in stark contradiction to Restons values, including the Planning Principles in the draft Reston Plan. It assures second-class status for tens of thousands of prospective Reston urban residents. It guarantees that Restonians will see their privately-held open spaces and athletic fields overrun by new residents. It means, once again, that Restonians will be picking up the tab for a core County responsibility. If you share my concern about the prospective shortfall parks and recreation facilities for Reston station areas and its community-wide impact, I strongly urge you to come to Tuesday evenings Reston Task Force meeting7PM, Tuesday, October 29th, Reston Association headquarters and state your concerns. In particular, if you are a member, coach, or administrator of a sports team or league in Reston, I urge you in the strongest possible terms to make the case for needed additional athletic fields at this meeting. We will not right this wrong without strong public input at this late date. This will be the last chance for the community to make its case to the task force for better parks and recreation in Restons station areas. The task force plans to vote to endorse the draft Plan at its Tuesday meeting. It will then go to a hearing of the Fairfax County Planning Commission on November 13, 2013. For the moment, the County Board of Supervisors has a hearing scheduled for December 3, 2013, and, according to Supervisor Hudgins, intends to approve the Plan early next year