DRAFT PLAN NOTE: This presentation is a working document, and some - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

PUBLIC SPACES MASTER DRAFT PLAN NOTE: This presentation is a working document, and some recommendations or ideas may have evolved or changed based on continued discussions and additional analysis. POPS POPS Advis dvisory Committee Committee Meeting 1 October 0 October 05, 5, 2017 2017

AGENDA DRAFT Introduction & Project Schedule Introduction & Project Schedule 15 mi minutes s  Summary of f Community F Feedback ck 30 m 0 minut inutes  Speci cific I Items s fo for Further D Disc scussion 20 m 0 minut inutes  Next ext St Step eps 20 m 0 minut inutes  2

SCHEDULE DRAFT WE ARE HERE 3

JULY 13-15 PUBLIC MEETINGS DRAFT 4

PRELIMINARY DRAFT  Online nline f feedback ga gathe thered July uly 1 11 to to Augus ugust t 31 DRAFT 5

DRAFT SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY FEEDBACK 6

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK- SUMMARY  398 online comments  Over 430 comments via email  Over 290 comments during July public meetings DRAFT 7

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK- THEMES (GENERAL)  Online co commenting tool- transparent, but slow, cumbersome, time intensive DRAFT  Docu cument o organization- introduction is lengthy; the context section should be rearranged; the layout could be simplified; executive summary would be helpful; national trends section could be condensed  Park Park ac acre reag age & & own wners rship- what is counted as parkland? (e.g., G-W Parkway, APS land/buildings) *All themes and quotes are captured from the public feedback, and are not recommendations at this time. 8

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK- THEMES (SPECIFIC) Le Level of l of Servic ice ( (LO LOS)  methodology/maps need to be clarified & simplified; impact of trends on LOS  LOS & Casual Use Spaces  Sports Commission- increase recommended standards for diamond and rectangular DRAFT fields The LOS "heat maps" are confusing and not Do these calculations factor in whether necessarily intuitive to understand. Same a sport is declining or increasing in goes for the tables. They are valuable tools popularity, or only whether the but I am concerned that they can be easily population will increase? If a sport is misinterpreted. I would recommend a more declining in popularity faster than the detailed explanation of how one is created, population is increasing, shouldn’t there maybe step by step in an illustrative be a declining LOS in the future? example. 9 *All themes and quotes are captured from the public feedback, and are not recommendations at this time.

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK- THEMES (SPECIFIC) Trails ils  Overall positive feedback, especially on “inner” & “outer loops”; “learning loop”; improving trail signage & reducing conflict DRAFT  Recreational vs. commuter use of trails  POPS & Bike Element of MTP  Hiking trails (need vs. impact on natural resources) As a long time resident of Arlington and avid cyclist, HOORAY for more bike trails and protected lanes and bike-friendly planning! 10 *All themes and quotes are captured from the public feedback, and are not recommendations at this time.

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK- THEMES (SPECIFIC) Cas Casual al Us Use Spac ace  Overall positive feedback on the recognition of this type of open space; LOS; definition (fields, school ground, natural resources, paved areas, etc.) DRAFT Make a better use of rooftops, they can be casual use spaces too. Only include spaces that have Provide amenities minimal man made (e.g. movable elements . seating) that promote socializing; *All themes and quotes are captured from the public feedback, and are not recommendations at this time. 11

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK- THEMES (SPECIFIC) Synthetic C c Conversion/ on/Li Light ghts  Support & disagreement; impact of lights on surrounding residential properties; separate synthetic turf from lighting; synthetic turf & health impact DRAFT  Suggestions: create criteria for field conversion; develop a list of priority candidates for conversion; develop clear lighting standards; better explain the relation between LOS and proposed conversions Consideration must be given to character of Making recreation areas neighborhood- whether Why not address more accessible is our lighted + urban or dark "need" by converting responsibility. Increase and quiet & impacts on existing lighted turf turf fields and lighting. neighbors' quality of life. fields to synthetic? 12 *All themes and quotes are captured from the public feedback, and are not recommendations at this time.

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK- THEMES (SPECIFIC) Dog Parks & s & Dog R Runs  Increase maximum size for dog runs to 10,000 SqFt (currently- 7,500 SqFt); optimal size for dog parks should be 30,000 SqFt; use more DRAFT natural materials (e.g., grass, dirt); existing dog parks & RPA There is no mention if these standards are for new dog parks only or that existing dog parks would be grandfathered to the Reevaluate current zoning existing standards when to allow Dog Runs to be they originated. I have observed that provided on private land natural turf and sod is the with public easements. best surface for dog parks. 13 *All themes and quotes are captured from the public feedback, and are not recommendations at this time.

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK- THEMES (SPECIFIC) Natura ral R Resourc rces es  more detailed actions are needed; preservation and expansion of natural resources should be priority; support for NRMP & UFMP updates; impact of development on natural resources should be minimized DRAFT Trees rees  loss of tree canopy; impact of private development; removal of mature trees We appreciate the plan’s recognition that the community prioritizes the preservation of natural areas and the Though the PSMP talks a lot tree canopy of the county and commend about the value of trees, it the inclusion of specific actions calling provides NO MEANINGFUL for expansion of natural areas in high PROTECTIONS for Arlington's density corridors and promoting the remaining tree canopy planting, preservation and maintenance of canopy trees. (UFC) 14 *All themes and quotes are captured from the public feedback, and are not recommendations at this time.

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK- THEMES (SPECIFIC) Land Acq Acquisition General support for additional 30 acres over 10 years; future acquisitions  should include balance between recreational & natural resources/casual DRAFT use spaces; disagreements about privately owned public spaces; ensure appropriate funding Strongly agree with adding at least 30 acres of new public space. Even distribution throughout County should be Is there a plan for acquiring priority, not economic funds to purchase additional development. acreage? 15 *All themes and quotes are captured from the public feedback, and are not recommendations at this time.

DRAFT SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION 16

SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION Based ed o on the f e feed eedback rec ecei eived ed, ther ere a e are  several ral are areas as th that n at need furt rther d r discussions: o Casual Use Space DRAFT o Natural Resources/Trees o Level of Service o Synthetic Turf Conversion & Lighting o Land Acquisition 17

SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION Cas Casual al Us Use Spac ace What to include in this document vs. what will be done as an  DRAFT implementation step (post-adoption)? o Definit itio ion- Inclusion of fields, school grounds, natural resources, paved areas? o Princ inciple les f for or De Desig ign o LOS LOS & & Mappin pping- Implementation Step  Ad Additional p public e engagements i in November/December 18

SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION Cas Casual al Us Use Spac ace- Principles fo for D Desi sign Casual use spaces shall be: DRAFT FLEX EXIBLE OPEN OPE • flexibly designed to enable multiple types of • unobstructed or minimally obstructed (e.g., casual use minimal fencing) equipped with features that encourage use • usable and occupiable • (e.g., benches, picnic tables, and walking available to the public, at least at specified times • paths) visible from surrounding areas • DELIBER ERATE E GREE GR EEN intentionally designed, rather than leftover, • host to substantial natural features, trees, • spaces vegetation, and/or grass marked by visible signage • 19

SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION Natu atural ral Re Resources/Trees  Review/clarifications/strengthening of specific draft recommendations DRAFT  Establish timeline for UFMP & NRMP updates  Additional public engagements in November/December 20

SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION Lev evel el o of Ser Servi vice e  How did we get to the recommended standards?  Needs assessment will be updated every 5 years DRAFT  Additional public engagements in November/December Amenity Level of Service Unit Current Peer Typical Survey Recm. Med. Pri. Std. 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ Diamond Fields (includes ½ combination fields) each 5,153 4,107 6,000 Low 6,000 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ Tennis Courts (includes half courts) each 2,408 3,768 4,000 Medium 3,000 1/ 1/ 1/ Picnic Areas each 4,924 N/A 6,000 Medium 5,000 1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ Rectangular Fields (includes ½ combination fields) each 4,180 3,643 6,000 Medium 4,200 1/ 22,156 1/ 12,000 1/ 20,000 Volleyball Courts each N/A Low 21