Members of the McLean Citizens Association board of directors are expressing fears that an out-of-turn amendment proposed by the Park Authority could lead to some nature parks being turned into athletic fields in the future. The policy plan amendment, which is scheduled to be discussed this month, not only reclassifies some park land but also eliminates and condenses the categories available to label the parks.
Nearly 10 percent of the land in Fairfax County is owned, in stewardship, by the county, so accountability for how those lands are used is important to the citizens. “Every citizen has a stake in this, every single one,” said MCA member Frank Crandall.
Crandall contends that Park Authority officials are intent on passing the changing and “this is essentially the train charging down the track.”
Dranesville district representative for the Park Authority Kevin Fay counters that the changes are necessary for them to better serve the community with the lands in their possession. “We had too many categories. It is not an effort to modify things so that ball fields can be added in. It’s just to get a better handle on the parks we have,” said Fay.
“We are streamlining and updating our parks policy. There is no hidden agenda associated with it,” Fay said.
While some residents believe more ball fields are in order to meet the growing demand for soccer and baseball fields, few people agree on where to place those fields and when it is appropriate to turn an open green space into an athletic field. Parks, such as Lewinsville Park in McLean, have ball fields but still provide gardening facilities and areas of open space in the heart of the community.
MCA MEMBERS said that they have not had sufficient time to examine the amendment, which is 37 pages long, to determine its implications. MCA member Paul Wieland said, “We just didn’t have time to go through all the pages.” Crandall said his evaluation of the amendment reveals to him that it, “grants way too much flexibility in how you classify parks and the usage on the land. It looks like it, to a significant degree, runs counter to what the citizens said in the [needs assessment] survey.”
Fay said that except for the MCA, “there has not been a tremendous amount of comment along those lines elsewhere in the county."
AT A RECENT Great Falls Citizens Association meeting, however, the executive board expressed dismay at the direction the Park Authority was heading with this amendment and vowed to join forces with MCA to fight the proposal. The GFCA joined in, according to one member, because it’s possible that a park, such as Riverbend, which is now classified as a “nature” park, could be reclassified and some day turned into a mixed use park that contains soccer fields as well as trails.
“That’s not likely,” Fay said. “The whole goal of the amendment is to bring the policies more closely in line,” he said.
Some at MCA object not only to the proposal within the amendment but also to the speed at which the county is seeking to change the policy. Wade Smith with MCA, said, “I think this is an example of something we’ve seen too much of from the county, when they put something out and move on it quickly. There’s a reason they do that,” he said.
“The main point, real point, is that these things come out and they give you two weeks and say we are going to vote. This thing is fairly significant for them to do this with,” Smith said.
THE PARK AUTHORITY has deferred the decision on the proposed amendment until March 16th. The MCA board unanimously resolved to not only ask for more time but to also request that public workshops be held so that residents could fully comprehend the implications of the changes before a decision was made. Fay said, “I don’t think that is necessary at this time.”
Wieland said, “The Park Authority in the last couple of years has tried to ram through things that are not in the best interest of the people in this county,” and cautioned that more time to evaluate the long term potential of the changes was necessary to prevent that from happening.