Arlington Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan (PROS Plan) by Arlington Parks and Recreation Department

PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN 2 0 2 0

U P D A T E

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

he Arlington Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan (PROS Plan) is a key component of the City’s vision for the Arlington community. The PROS Plan recommends a vision and an action plan that directly supports Arlington’s Comprehensive Plan, 99 SQ Miles: A Vision for Arlington’s Future. 99 SQ Miles: A Vision for Arlington’s Future: “Arlington is a beautiful, clean, safe and fun place widely recognized as the most desirable location in North Texas to live, learn, work and do business. It is a diverse community where residents want to stay, businesses thrive and to which visitors and our children want to return.”

99 SQ Miles: A Vision for Arlington’s Future Goals and Strategies: VA LU E O U R N EIG H B O R H O O D S

GRO W O UR BUSIN ESSES

1. Strengthen our community by embracing

1. Elevate Arlington’s competitive positioning in the

our diversity, engaging our residents and

region to capture a larger share of high-wage,

empowering our neighborhoods.

high-impact growth.

2. Create places where people want to be.

2. Rejuvenate and transform key economic centers

3. Maintain and enhance neighborhood quality of life and appearance. 4. Continue to support investment in the city’s education system.

into vibrant destinations. 3. Create amenities and assets that will secure Arlington’s position as a major activity hub in North Texas.

5. Deliver city services in a fiscally responsible manner. 6. Provide a mix of quality housing for a diverse

PROTECT O UR RESO URCES

population.

1. Preserve natural areas and public open spaces.

7. Preserve the city’s historic resources and

2. Conserve natural resources and energy.

community landmarks of recognized significance. DEVELO P O UR L AN D 1. Promote land use patterns that reflect a mix of GE T ARO U N D

integrated community uses.

1. Maintain a roadway system that provides

2. Encourage appropriate redevelopment and

efficient access to all parts of the city.

reinvestment that creates lasting value.

2. Provide a variety of transportation options.

3. Increase the visual appeal within and around residential and commercial developments and along city corridors.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Acknowledgments ARLINGTON CITY COUNCIL Mayor �� Jeff Williams District 1 �� Helen Moise District 2 �� Raul Gonzalez District 3 �� Marvin Sutton District 4 �� Andrew Piel District 5 �� Dr. Ignacio Nuñez District 6 �� Ruby Faye Woolridge District 7 ........ Dr. Victoria Farrar-Myers District 8 ....... Dr. Barbara Odom-Wesley CITY MANAGER Trey Yelverton PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD Place 1 �� Ronald Smith Place 2 �� Steve Kerr - Chair Place 3 �� Alex Godina Place 4 �� Ethan McDaniel Place 5 �� Dr. Russell Gamber Place 6 �� Brandon Utterback Place 7 �� Clete McAlister Place 8 �� Vacant Place 9 �� Kyle Fields Place 10 �� Nicole Lewis

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR Lemuel Randolph SPECIAL THANKS TO THE ARLINGTON PARKS MASTER PLAN COMMITTEE: Glenn Troutman (Chair) Laura Capik Grace Darling Martha Dent Kevin Donovan Susan Eaves Lynn Healy Carole Hoyer Peggy James Jim Maibach Cliff Odom Kyle O’Neal Sue Phillips Sandra Sanchez Dara Wandel Alvin Warren Anne Weydeck

Table of Contents

FOREWARD

DIRECTOR’S MESSAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

OUR VISION

THE ANALYSIS

THE PLAN

The Master Plan Process ..................................... 12

Strategies for Success.......................................... 43

Master Plan Goals................................................. 15

Connectivity and Equity........................................ 43

Major Issues and Opportunities........................... 16

Quality Facilities.................................................... 44

Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment........... 18

Healthy Lifestyles................................................. 44

Arlington Parks: Then and Now............................ 18

Environment and Nature....................................... 45

Our Changing City Economy................................. 23

Community and Character.................................... 45

What Our Citizens Think....................................... 25

Recreation Facility Development Model............... 48

Benchmarking Arlington’s Parks........................... 26

Funding Our Future............................................... 52

What’s in Our Parks?............................................. 29

The Big Picture...................................................... 54

Needs Assessment Summary.............................. 32

North Sector.............................................. 34

West Sector............................................... 35

East Sector................................................ 36

Central Sector............................................ 37

Southeast Sector....................................... 38

Southwest Sector...................................... 39

PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS Citywide Projects and Initiatives.......................... 59 Projects by City Subarea....................................... 60 Plan Fulfillment..................................................... 72 Conclusion............................................................ 74

APPENDIX (documents available upon request)

7. The City of Arlington, Texas: Skate Park Master Plan

1. Comprehensive Plan, 99 SQ Miles : A Vision for Arlington’s Future

8. The City of Arlington, Texas: Hike and Bike System Master Plan

2. Socioeconomic Profile Update: New 2018 US Census American Community Survey (5-year Estimates), City of Arlington, TX

9. Arlington, Texas: Indoor Recreation Center Assessment

3. Household Executive Summary

10. Great Parks: The Foundation of a Great Community: The City of Arlington 2004 Park, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan

4. PROS Survey Results by Sector

11. 2008 Supplement to the 2004 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan

5. Trust for Public Land, 2019 City Park Facts: Arlington, TX 6. APRD Marketing Plan: 2019 Update

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

A Dream City with a Gold Medal Parks and Recreation Department By Lemuel P. Randolph, Director of Parks and Recreation

In 2018 the Arlington Parks Recreation Department was awarded the Gold Medal for Excellence in the field of parks and recreation management. This is the parks and recreation industry’s preeminent award and is a testament to the priority that city leaders, a talented staff and engaged citizens established years ago for the American Dream City’s parks and recreation facilities and services. Our parks and recreation system is a reflection of the

Beginning with the departments VISION:

community’s long held values and support for parkland,

‘A vibrant city that enjoys a high quality of life

green space, and healthy lifestyles. This system of parks,

through great parks and exceptional recreational

trails, open spaces, recreation facilities and programs is a

opportunities.’

major contributor to Arlington’s growing national reputation and the result of sustained community support and investment. Starting with Meadowbrook Park nearly 100 years ago, the City of Arlington has promoted a high quality of life championed by the parks and recreation department. The parks, recreation and open space master plan is the periodic process that we use to re-calibrate goals and objectives for the future growth of facilities and services.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

…and focused through our MISSION: ‘Providing quality facilities and services that are responsive to a diverse community and sustained with a focus on partnerships, innovation and environmental leadership.’ ...…via dialogue with community stakeholders, development of a facility and program inventory, input through focus groups, professional staff analysis and commissioned

survey results, these 2020 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES have been identified. • Connectivity and Equity • Quality Facilities • Healthy Lifestyles • Environment and Nature • Community and Character • Partnerships and Engagement As a public park and recreation agency it is critical that facilities and services are open and accessible to all residents and visitors. This concept, known in the industry as Social Equity, is one of the three pillars of the parks and recreation profession alongside Health and Wellness, and Conservation. Social Equity is defined as the concept that all people, no matter the color of their skin, age, income level or ability have access to programs, facilities, places and spaces that make their lives and communities great. This master plan will achieve an important balance. It must protect and maintain existing assets, while anticipating the needs of future generations; it must be bold, but also recognize the fiscal realities of our current environment and it must protect and foster access for the entire community, regardless of ability, origin, income or age. The Arlington Parks Recreation and Open Space Master Plan is the culmination of fifteen months of public outreach, five years (2014-2019) of direct input from City Council and three voter approved park bond elections (November 2014, November 2017, November 2018). The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, Parks Master Plan Committee, Park Bond Committee, City Bond Committee, community members, and user groups toured every park facility, approved the relative emphasis on various categories of needs (renovation/development/acquisition) and identified and established funding priorities. Conversations with invested stakeholders will continue as we work together to accomplish the ambitious but necessary steps to ensure the parks and recreation system continues to enhance the lives of Arlington’s citizens.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Executive Summary The Arlington Parks and

Another important building block of

where they will have the greatest

Recreation Department is on a

a community is its system of parks

impact, the park system could detract

strategic course in helping to

and public spaces. Most would agree

from the community’s efforts to

that our current system is good, if not

improve its quality of life and create a

great, and an important reason why

sense of place.

define Arlington as a pre-eminent city, providing an exemplary, safe environment in which to live, learn, work and play.

they choose to live here. Arlington has invested wisely in its park system

There are significant challenges to be

over the years, and this has directly

met. Park funding opportunities, from

contributed to the growth of this

general obligation bonds and grants,

community.

are not expected to be available at the

Arlington is not a suburb anymore,

levels they once were. Suitable land

it is a city, and the strengths that

What Arlington needs and what our

for new parks is rapidly disappearing

made it such a desirable location in

citizens want is a community with a

as the city approaches build-out. New

the recent past still exist. From our

“sense of place.” By “sense of place”

facilities are needed while the existing

central location, outstanding public

we mean many things, but primarily we

park system has reached an age where

school systems and rapidly expanding

mean that our community embodies a

re-investment is desperately needed.

university to our well-known name as

fun, attractive and vibrant atmosphere

the home of Six Flags Over Texas, AT&T

that is appealing to both residents and

While these are serious challenges,

Stadium, Globe Life Park and soon to

visitors, and that encourages new and

there are also many opportunities that

open Globe Life Field, the Parks Mall,

diverse businesses to locate here.

can help the Department. Arlington

The Highlands, and General Motors,

citizens have consistently expressed

this city has the building blocks from

The development and redevelopment

their support for park funding. They

which to continue positioning itself

of the city’s park system can play a key

have also demonstrated a strong

as the “community of choice” in the

role in stimulating this effort. However,

interest in volunteering to improve our

Metroplex.

without implementing strategic policies

parks. The Department’s important

to focus our limited resources in areas

role in improving neighborhoods and

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

attracting and retaining businesses is

systemwide goals and objectives.

Even under an assumption that the

also becoming increasingly apparent

This effort was undertaken to develop

Parks and Recreation Department will

to city leaders as they formulate

a long-range vision with guidelines

receive additional funding from future

solutions to the community’s many

and strategies to guide everyday

bond elections, the Plan’s priority

challenges.

management decisions over the next

projects cost more than what will likely

ten years. The Master Plan helps to

be available. Additional funding, to

Devising a long-range vision for the

define our vision for “great parks and

address needed capital repairs could

park system and identifying potential

exceptional recreation opportunities,”

include development fees, grants,

solutions to our challenges involved a

outlining a set of themes, goals, and

or creatively encouraging private

process of information gathering and

strategies for success that should

investment and partnerships, among

decision making known as “master

drive our decision making and annual

others.

planning.” This strategic planning

work planning efforts. These goals and

process has given the Department an

strategies, intended to ensure citizen

By applying the vision, strategies,

opportunity to reflect and respond to

satisfaction, are based on the themes:

ideas and priority projects that

our changing environment.

• Connectivity and Equity

evolved from the master planning

• Quality Facilities

process, the Arlington Parks and

The master planning process involved

• Healthy Lifestyles

Recreation Department can continue

many opportunities for public input

• Environment and Nature

to demonstrate itself as a leading

including a citywide survey, public

• Community and Character

provider of park and recreation

meetings and the involvement of

• Partnerships and Engagement

services in the region and nation.

a council-appointed committee. It

Most importantly, this opportunity,

also involved research related to

With these major areas of focus, the

if taken, will greatly enhance the

benchmarking with other communities,

Plan also addresses the need to be

City of Arlington as a preeminent

setting and applying park standards,

creative in the development of new

city, providing an exemplary, safe

inventorying and analyzing our

and alternative funding sources to

environment in which to live, learn,

existing assets, and developing new

help the Department achieve its goals.

work and play.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

Great Parks: Our Vision for Today and for Tomorrow Great parks are places where people want to be. Well-

gathering venues for large community events as well as for

designed parks, with a strong sense of place, can be

small family birthday parties…and they do so much more.

integral and enduring parts of the city where diverse groups

The PROS Master Plan is intended to help today’s leaders

of people congregate and interact. They are a nucleus of

and community members make sound and fruitful decisions

social activity where citizens feel ownership and take great

that will help the community maintain and enhance our

pride in their parks. They add significantly to the overall

system of urban recreational assets and opportunities for

wellbeing of the community, improving real estate values

years to come. The Master Plan details the breadth and

and nurturing community identity.

depth of how Arlington’s parks and related facilities enrich

Arlington’s parks and recreation system developed into a vibrant network of diverse parks and facilities as a direct result of decades of work, leadership, and investment by community members and leaders.

the lives of the people who call our city home. Our parks reflect our values. We meet the needs of people—from all walks of life and backgrounds—who live here, whether it’s for a place to watch a concert or fireworks show, play soccer, go on a nature hike, do water aerobics or simply socialize at a dog park. And we want to keep meeting those needs for decades to come.

The city’s parks and recreation system is a major

This 10-year master plan has been developed for the

community asset that repays those investments every day.

purpose of providing the Department with a roadmap to

The system enhances Arlington by increasing property

ensure that we make the best decisions for the future. As

value, improving neighborhoods, families and community

we allocate our limited resources, we must promote the

members; and enhancing lives and job performance as

City’s health and well-being to the greatest extent possible

individuals exercise, play and relieve stress.

and strengthen the partnership between the Department and the people of Arlington. By investing wisely in our parks

Arlington currently faces many challenges. At this point

system, our goal is to make life better - physically, socially

in its history, more than ever before, the citizens of

and economically.

Arlington must make important choices about how to re-invigorate their community. From attracting business

As with any comprehensive planning process, the

investment to championing great neighborhoods, the

community was highly involved in the development of the

Parks and Recreation Department has a pivotal role in this

Master Plan through public meetings, open houses and

effort. Parks enhance neighborhoods. They offer learning

stakeholder meetings. A citizen household survey was

opportunities and support child development. They attract

conducted that helped to prioritize and identify the issues

regional and national tournaments that improve our local

that needed to be addressed in the Master Plan and to

economy, preserve our natural and cultural heritage,

support the key recommendations to act on over the next

enhance personal health and well-being, provide social

10 years.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Besides providing an inventory of the facilities, properties and programs and an analysis of use and demand, the Master Plan documents the extensive public and stakeholder input obtained throughout the master planning process. This community input provides a framework for confirming core values and goals. The synthesis of information, public feedback, and measurable and definable goals and objectives can help the community act and invest in the parks and recreation system in a rational, systemwide approach that aligns with community priorities. The following methodologies were used to develop the plan.

DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS This process included a full analysis of the current demographics for the City of Arlington, with data mined

The Analysis

and analyzed from U.S. Census, projections provided by the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI – a national professional demographics and population projection agency), and from the City’s Planning and Development Services Department. The demographic analysis provides an understanding of the population characteristics of the Arlington Parks and Recreation Department (APRD) participatory base. This analysis demonstrates the overall

The Master Plan Process

size of the total population by specific age segment, race

INITIAL PLANNING

the residents through household income statistics.

and ethnicity, and economic status and spending power of

Parks and recreation planning is ongoing in the City of Arlington, but there is a more formal process involved in

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

completing a master plan. A new master planning process

A critical and ongoing part of the Master Plan is the

is typically initiated when the assumptions and priorities

community engagement process, which is necessary

established in the previous plan need to be revisited. This

to effectively deliver a community-oriented park and

is usually because of changes such as economy, shifting

recreation system. In order to meet the needs of residents

demographics, new technologies or recreation trends, or the

and users of the system, the Master Plan was developed

City’s operating environment.

through a robust and varied customer input process. This process ensures that recommendations for the Master

A project team comprised of key City parks and recreation

Plan have an external customer focus. It also helps APRD

management staff guided this project. This team provided

in better delivering on resident needs and having a clear

input throughout the planning process and participated

understanding of their interests.

in project team meetings throughout the course of the project. This collaborative effort has created a plan that

Citizen Advisory Committee

incorporates local knowledge and institutional knowledge

The City Council appointed a 20-member Citizen Advisory

that only community members and city employees can

Committee to provide direct citizen involvement in the

provide.

process. This group, comprised of Park Board members,

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

planning sector members, interested citizens and park

residents about their use of APRD programs and facilities.

planning staff met 33 times over a period of approximately 15

Questions were designed to reveal priorities for parks,

months to provide input to the new Master Plan.

recreation, open space activities, improvements, and funding.

Public Open Houses

EXISTING INVENTORY/OPPORTUNITIES

APRD hosted five public meetings at various locations

A major step in the master plan process was to examine the

throughout the city in conjunction with City Council Town

inventory of existing public parks and specific recreation

Hall Meetings to review progress from the 2004 Great Parks

facilities such as playgrounds, tennis courts and ballfields.

Master Plan, and gather feedback on citizen’s wants and

This inventory is continuously updated to reflect changes in

needs. The primary goals of these events were to:

city parks. Results of the inventory analysis appear in this

• Provide the public with a greater understanding of the

Master Plan as charts, maps and tables. In addition, existing

challenges facing APRD.

park, recreation and open space opportunities were identified

• Provide a forum for the public to share their priorities for

throughout the city. This information is a critical source in

preserving our parks legacy.

establishing citywide and subarea recommendations and is

• Engage in a city-wide dialogue about APRD’s future.

also documented in narrative and graphic form throughout the

Following the Citizen Advisory Committee’s work, a series

Master Plan.

of three open houses were held to present the Master Plan’s proposed strategies and project recommendations. All eight

PARK AND FACILITY STANDARDS

public meetings followed a similar format. After introductions,

Standards are crucial to the development of needs and

an APRD presentation highlighted the progress since the

recommendations. Park and recreation facility standards

adoption of the 2004 Great Parks Plan, issues and challenges

were developed using information collected from a variety of

facing APRD, and opportunities to advance the parks and

sources, including:

recreation system for decades to come. The meetings were

• The National Recreation and Park Association;

structured to encourage community discussions, and staff

• The Trust for Public Land;

recorded participants’ ideas, priorities, and concerns.

• Staff input on service demands and facility usage; • Other related City plans, guidelines and regulations; and

COMMUNITY SURVEY FINDINGS

• An inventory of amenities owned by The University of Texas

APRD conducted a citizen household survey as part of the

at Arlington (UTA) and school districts (to explore partnering

master plan update process. This work allowed the survey

opportunities in areas where there is insufficient park land).

to be tailored to issues of strategic importance to effectively plan the future system. The purpose of the survey was to help

This aspect of the needs assessment was a largely

establish priorities for the future development of parks and

mathematical process of applying the City’s established

recreation facilities, programs, and services within Arlington.

standards to existing and projected populations. A standards-

The survey was administered in public meetings and via

based needs assessment was developed for the city as

the internet. The goal was to obtain a total of at least 800

a whole and for each of the 12 park planning subareas.

completed surveys. This goal was far exceeded, with 1,247

Standards were used to highlight any present shortfalls in

surveys completed over a six-week period.

parks and recreation facilities. These same standards were then projected for future populations in 2030, when Arlington

This survey is important to developing proposals for the

is projected to reach build-out.

Master Plan, as it provides some insight into what is important to current residents about parks and recreation.

NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND PRIORITIZATION

APRD designed the survey to gather representative feedback

The final assessment and prioritization of needs was not

from a mix of customers, stakeholders and Arlington

simply a matter of mathematics, however. Accurately

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

assessing needs is one of the fundamental parts of a

APRD’s Capital Improvement Program guidelines prioritize

planning process. Informed by data about the situation and

the maintenance of current assets over the development of

environment, timely and appropriate decisions need to be

new facilities. The community, through the planning process,

made about how to meet the community’s demand with a

indicated strong support for this concept of prioritization.

supply of the right mix of services. Demand is derived from

Based on current economic conditions, revenue and

multiple sources: community engagement, research on trends,

expenditure projections, funding is not sufficient to maintain

findings from benchmark communities and related research.

all existing system assets and build new park and recreation

Supply is informed by policy guidance, organizational

facilities unless comparable trade-offs occur.

structure, available resources and other factors. As such, conducting a needs assessment requires a synthesis of a

Development of any new facilities will require additional

wide array of inputs that ultimately yield valuable information

funding if existing deficiencies are expected to be improved.

about how to establish Level of Service (LOS) standards.

The Master Plan, which identifies areas for further investigation, clarifies that development of new facilities

As noted above, multiple inputs were combined to develop an

should not occur without additional funding or comparable

overall inventory of the City’s parks and recreation needs. This

trade-offs. At the same time, APRD must respond to the

analysis explored local, state, and national trends with regard

community’s values related to recreation programs and

to City parks and recreation service delivery. Existing City and

activities by providing adequate facilities and programs

regional plans were reviewed to determine commonalities

accessible to the entire community that meet those

and to provide guidance. Because available resources must

needs. In order to meet the Master Plan goals of focusing

also be taken into consideration, it was necessary to prioritize

programming on health and wellness and ensuring programs

overall needs into a listing of projects that can realistically be

are accessible to all community members, APRD will need

accomplished over the next 10 years. Prioritization began with

to shift service delivery and resource allocation as well as

the gathering of public input as specified above. This input

implement best practices in program life cycle management

was then refined based on the knowledge and experience of

and evaluation.

APRD staff into a list that identified the most pressing needs for each City subarea. The subarea project priorities were

PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS & ACTION PLANS

then combined to yield a total picture of Arlington’s parks and

Based upon this general philosophy, the Action Plan identifies

recreation needs.

specific projects that, taken together, will produce these sought-after results by strategically investing in APRD’s

The process identified gaps in services as it applied

resources. The final section of the Plan, entitled “Project

to neighborhood parks, as well as where gaps exist in

Recommendations,” spells out in detail APRD’s priority

recreation centers and aquatic facilities across the City.

projects and initiatives, both citywide and within specific

The process used a series of demographic maps which

subareas of the City.

identified missing land and recreation facilities, based on the values the community stated is important to meet. The

The recommended projects shown in this Master Plan

maps demonstrate gaps and highlight areas where amenities

range in scope from those that are very site specific, with

and parks should be located along with land acquisition

localized impact, to those that affect the entire city. Like

opportunities to support those needs.

previous plans, this Master Plan offers recommendations for neighborhood, linear, community and city parks. It also offers

FUNDING

recommendations for some exciting new types of parks, as

With a current infrastructure maintenance backlog, difficult

well as a discussion of existing and potential revenue sources

trade-off decisions must be made by APRD about how

for funding the Master Plan’s implementation.

to manage and operate facilities and provide programs.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

Master Plan Goals

Based on input from the community and City staff, six themes were established to guide development of this Master Plan. Corresponding goals are listed below, and a later section of this Plan describes how these goals will be fulfilled through the strategies for success and priority projects identified through the planning process. CONNECTIVITY AND EQUITY

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURE

• Provide an open space system that physically connects

• Preserve and protect Arlington’s natural environment

people with parks and other centers of activity across

and native ecosystems.

the City.

• Design and maintain parks and facilities to achieve

• Provide parks and diverse recreational opportunities

environmental sustainability.

that are equitably distributed and accessible across

• Foster opportunities for environmental education.

Arlington.

COMMUNITY AND CHARACTER QUALITY FACILITIES

• Provide places where people can interact and

• Design and maintain facilities to a high-quality standard.

build community.

• Appropriate resources in a manner which favors

• Create a park and recreation system that will improve

reinvesting and enhancing existing facilities.

the physical form and image of the City.

• Continually improve the safety and security of parks and recreation facilities.

PARTNERSHIPS AND ENGAGEMENT • Develop partnerships to promote ownership in the

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES

park system and greater efficiencies in programming,

• Provide a variety of recreational facilities and programs

acquisition, maintenance, and development.

to meet changing needs and priorities.

• Provide meaningful opportunities for public support,

• Leverage park system improvements to promote health,

input, and engagement.

wellness, and active living. 2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Major Issues and Opportunities The city’s park system is at a critical juncture, having grown rapidly over previous decades to keep up with the fast pace of residential development. In 1984, Arlington had 42 parks with 1,500 acres of park land. Today, the city has 99 parks with over 4,700 acres of park land. As the city nears build-out we, need to analyze where we are now in order to develop new strategies moving forward. One of the key considerations in the

Should expansion of the park system

Is there a middle ground - one that

development of this Master Plan is

continue? If so, how would it be funded?

would provide a balance re-investment

evaluating the transition from new

If expansion is needed, should it focus

in our aging infrastructure with key

development to meet the needs of

on acquisition of new property or the

land acquisition and targeted new

an expanding population, to new

development of existing park land?

development to meet the needs of the

development and redevelopment

Or both? And, would land acquired be

changing community?

focused on meeting specific

intended for active use, or passive use

recreational needs. The last such plan,

and preservation.

developed in 2004, was appropriately

To answer these critical questions and to develop an overall guiding vision

focused on a balance of development,

Should we focus on what we’ve already

for the park system, the department

renovation, and land acquisition.

built?

undertook an analysis of the major

However, circumstances have changed, and we must ask ourselves:

issues and opportunities facing What recreational needs are not being

Arlington and its parks and recreation

met in the community?

system. Following is a summary of findings.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

MAJOR ISSUES AND CHALLENGES Development trends • Urban development model • Redevelopment of multi-family housing • Downtown and UTA development

Shifting demographics • Senior population geographic location • Attraction of younger population

Transportation • Developing public transit • Modern transportation models

Delocalization of government • Increased state control • Diminishing funding flexibility • Decreased development restrictions

Land needs • Fewer available parcels suitable for parks • Suitable land increasingly expensive

Capital maintenance • Significant backlog • Lack of sustainable approach

Social equity • Cost recovery model • Diminishing City revenues • Capacity to serve expanded clientele • Increasing poverty level

OPPORTUNITIES • Community support of Parks and Recreation • Serve as an economic development catalyst • Champion active and healthy lifestyles • Foster partnerships to provide additional opportunities and efficiencies • Provide leadership on environmental and sustainability issues • Improve connectivity between parks and residential areas • Engage arts and culture initiatives • Health and wellness collaboration and partnerships

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Arlington Parks - Then and Now Arlington is the 48th largest city in the country, with a

Arlington has traditionally been a city of families, and

population of 392,462. According to the U.S. Census,

the city of today is no exception. 2010 census data

Arlington’s population has increased over 17 percent since

indicates that nearly 69 percent of city households are

2000, and while at a slower rate is projected to continue

family households. Arlington’s age distribution is currently

growing until it meets buildout. The growth of Arlington’s

dominated by ages 25-54, but the number of those 65

parks has paralleled the city’s growth and changing needs

and older is projected to grow faster than the general

in many ways. Only 30 years ago, in 1984, there were 42

population into the foreseeable future. The median age

parks with approximately 1,500 park acres. Starting about

for Arlington is 33.3 years, and is projected to climb into

that time, Arlington began a two-decade period of explosive

the 40’s presenting a significant demographic shift that

population growth. The Parks and Recreation Department

the Arlington Parks and Recreation Department needs

responded with an aggressive strategy to acquire and

to understand and adapt to given this group’s unique

develop park land to keep pace with this growth.

recreation preferences.

#52 #45

BAKERSFIELD OAKLAND

#49 #50 WICHITA

#51 #48

#47 #47

CLEVELAND

TULSA

#48 #50

ARLINGTON

#49 #51

NEW ORLEANS

#53 TAMPA

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

Avg Spent on Mortgage & Basics

ULATION BY AGE

The Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan

20 10

Percent of Income for Mortgage

BYI GENERATION A R L I NPOPULATION G TO N P O P U L AT O N B Y G E N E R AT I O N

area was also the 9th fastestgrowing area in the country for

20%

seniors aged 65 and older between 2000 and 2010, and Arlington’s 65 -74 population increased 47% since 2010. The 65 and older portion of the population exceeded 40 million in the 2010 Census and grew faster than the U.S. population as a whole between 2000 and 2010. Currently

4.7%

17.9%

19.5%

Greatest Gen: Born 1945/Earlier

Baby Boomer: Born 1946 to 1964

Generation X: Born 1965 to 1980

10%

Arlington’s median age in 2018 was 33.1, up from 30.7 in 2000.

<$5

10 percent of the nation’s population is over 65, but that percentage is

30%

projected to double by 2050. “Super seniors” (those 85-94) were the fastest senior adult growth segment

between 2000 and 2010, representing ges 18 to 64 (64%) Aged 65+ (11%) an opportunity for local parks to provide services to the full spectrum of senior adults.

28.5%

25.1%

4.3%

Millennial: Born 1981 to 1998

Generation Z: Born 1999 to 2016

Alpha: Born 2017 to Present

Bureau, Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024, Esri Vintage 2019 Time Seriesenvironments

The next decade will continue to

see a rapid rise in America’s senior

20%

that support their

Since the earliest days of Arlington’s

needs. An AARP survey indicated

Parks and Recreation Department,

that 89% of persons ages 50 and

there have been basic ballfields

above want to age in place, staying

and picnic tables throughout the

home as long as possible, or at least

city. But today, park amenities

in the same community. The City

are more numerous and of higher

of Arlington needs to prepare for

quality. The chart on the next page

the implications and effects of the

highlights some areas of particular

demographic trends of longevity,

improvement since the first master

aging-in-place, and other realities of

plan was published in 1987. Linear

the baby boomer generation.

parks (and the trails within them),

10%

s data provided by American Community Survey (ACS), Esri, Esri and Bureau of Labor Statistics. The vintage of the data is 2013-2 population as the baby boom generation, born between 1946 and 1964, passes age 65. The aging of the baby boom generation is noteworthy not only because of its size, but also because its members’ social and demographic profile contrasts sharply with earlier generations. Baby boomers are more highly educated, have a higher percentage of women in the labor force, are more likely to occupy professional and managerial positions, and are more racially and ethnically diverse than their predecessors. As the baby boomers reach retirement, local governments will face even greater challenges in creating physical and social

which are in high demand by Today, Arlington has over 4,700

residents, have grown dramatically.

acres of park land, comprising

“Spraygrounds” (water playgrounds),

99 separately designated park

skateparks, and dog parks did not

properties, and parks make up nearly

exist in 1987, but Arlington has

7.2 percent of Arlington’s total land

several of these assets today with

area. Park land acres have increased

more planned. Emerging trends such

35 percent since the 1997-98 Master

Pickleball and E-sports will also

Plan, and over 300 percent over the

shape the park system in the future.

past thirty-five years. Today, 87 percent of Arlington’s parks What’s in our parks has changed, too.

are at least partially developed.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

However, the current Master Plan

Despite the major acquisition and

views undeveloped park land

development projects completed

differently than in the past. It draws

since 1980, the Parks and Recreation

a distinction between land that will

Department has not achieved all of

ultimately be developed - equipped

its developmental goals, and many

with amenities such as athletic fields,

areas of the city remain deficient

paved trails and playgrounds - and

in terms of available recreational

land that will be left as natural as

opportunities.

possible. As noted previously, Arlington’s Arlington now has four park

population will continue to grow at

properties entirely designated as

least until 2030, when projected city

natural areas, with several others

population is anticipated to reach

partially comprised of natural areas.

423,000. Unfortunately, Arlington

These sites do not have typical

has a scarcity of undeveloped

park amenities, but the public is

land suitable for parks. Of this

nonetheless encouraged to come

undeveloped land, only a small

in and enjoy the plants, wildlife

percentage is suitable for park land.

and terrain. Even “developed”

As such land becomes scarcer, it

parks will have areas set aside to

also becomes more costly, making

be maintained in a natural state,

future opportunities to add park land

allowing citizens now and into the

to the City’s inventory increasingly

future the opportunity to enjoy the

difficult.

natural heritage of our area. The situation is further complicated As Arlington approaches build-out,

by capital and operational

and open space becomes even more

financial constraints, pressures for

scarce, the Parks and Recreation

development, and public demands

Department will need to continue

for preservation. These competing

this trend of designating park land as

demands make it difficult to acquire

natural areas.

and develop additional parks.

PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES: 1987 VS. TODAY 1987

2020

371

1762

Linear Park Trail Miles

Playgrounds

Recreation / Senior Centers

Outdoor Basketball Courts

Tennis Courts

Spraygrounds

Dog Parks

Skate Parks

Linear Park Acres

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

OUR CHANGING CITY

population of southeast Arlington

become even larger as the “Baby

In the early 1950’s, Arlington was a

grew at a rate of 60 percent to 83,609,

Boomers” become “Golden Agers”)

small, sleepy town midway between

an increase of 330 percent over 1990.

must be addressed in this Plan, as

Dallas and Fort Worth with less

Growth for this area is expected to

must the varying recreation needs of

than eight thousand residents. The

remain high through 2030, indicating

all age groups.

following decades brought enormous

that pressure for new parks and

change and growth. During the

capital intensive facilities in the

twenty-year period beginning in 1980,

southeastern area of the city.

Arlington’s population grew more than 1.5 times faster than the population of

Arlington’s Changing Demographics

Tarrant County and more than twice

In the early days, Arlington’s

as fast as that of the State of Texas.

population was a largely homogenous

Between 1980 and 2000, Arlington’s

group of white citizens, and as late

overall population increased by 108

as 1980, nearly 90 percent of its

percent (an average of 5.4 percent per

population was white. However,

year). 2018 census data estimates

Arlington of today is ethnically and

Arlington’s population at 392,462 up

racially diverse. Today, the proportion

7 percent since 2010 and 17 percent

of whites has reduced to 61.5 percent.

from 2000. Arlington is the 48th most

While all non-white groups have

populated city in the nation.

demonstrated tremendous growth, the

TOTAL POPULATION

Population increased 7.0% from 2010 to 2018, and 17% since 2000. = 20,000 people 2018: 392,462

2010: 365,438

most dramatic increase has been for Arlington’s explosive growth of

Hispanic or Latino comprising 29.2

previous decades has slowed. The

percent. Blacks now make up 22.5

rate of population increase in the city

percent and Asian comprise 7 percent.

is predicted to maintain a slow growth

As citizens’ recreation preferences

rate through 2030, when Arlington

may be strongly influenced by ethnic,

will be home to more than 400,000

racial and cultural factors, this Plan

citizens.

must attempt to accommodate them.

A Shift to the Southeast

Arlington, like the U.S. as a whole,

Arlington’s has expanded to its

is continuing to see an aging of its

maximum land area of 99 square

population. The 2000 census found

miles. There are almost no

the age group 65 and above to be

opportunities for annexation or other

the fastest-growing segment in the

means to grow Arlington’s available

city, with an increase since 1980 of

land. This means that land suitable for

186.5 percent. This group’s average

parks and other recreation purposes

rate of increase was more than 9

has become scarce, and costly.

percent per year, nearly twice that of the population as a whole. Currently

As Arlington continues approaching

10 percent of the population is over

build-out, the largest growth has

65, but that percentage is projected

occurred in the southeast sector of

to exceed 20 percent by 2050. The

the city. Between 2000 and 2010 the

unique needs of seniors (which will

2000: 332,969

RACE & ETHNICITY

From 2000 to 2018, the percent change in minority population increased by 8.4%, while the percent change in Hispanic or Latino population increased by over 56.8%. SOME OTHER RACE AMERICAN INDIAN AND ALASKA NATIVE

4.0%

TWO OR MORE RACES

2018

2.8%

ASIAN

7.0%

0.4%

BLACK OR AFRICAN AMERICAN

22.5%

WHITE

61.5% NATIVE HAWAIIAN AND OTHER PACIFIC ISLANDER

0.1%

NOT HISPANIC OR LATINO (71.7%)

HISPANIC OR LATINO (29.2%)

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

Our Changing City Economy There are significant economic issues facing Arlington and its parks. The following charts summarize the major reasons why traditional funding sources to support park and recreation development are expected to be reduced in the coming years. Median income in Arlington is $58,502, down 2.5 percent

ARLINGTON MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME

from 2000. The number and percentage of families living

Median household income decreased 11.9% between 2000 and 2018 in Arlington.

below the poverty line in the city has increased since 2000 as well. Roughly 1 in 7 Arlington residents lived below the poverty line in 2000, compared with 1 of every 6.3 in 2010 for an increase of 9.3%. Of the City’s total population, those residents under 18 years of age experienced the highest proportion of poverty. City services and facilities are often the only recreational outlets low income citizens can afford.

2000

2010

2016

2018

$66,374

$57,338

$53,574

$58,502

2018 POVERTY STATUS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS • ARLINGTON (ACS 1-YR ESTIMATES | US CENSUS BUREAU) ESTIMATED TOTAL CITY POPULATION

ESTIMATED POPULATION BELOW POVERTY LEVEL

PERCENT BELOW POVERTY LEVEL

Economic Challenges Facing Arlington’s Parks

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

• Decreasing tax revenues

All this means that the Arlington Parks and Recreation

• State mandated tax caps

Department must exercise restraint, flexibility and

• Declining park fees and grant opportunities

creativity in facing the tough choices ahead. During the

• Cost recovery pressures

economic boom times of the 1980s and 1990s, park

• Increasing poverty level

business strategy focused appropriately on acquiring new parks and building new facilities to meet the needs

The State legislature actions on property tax reform is

of a growing city. Today, the City must do more with less -

creating a severe strain on city resources. Between 2010

serve more parks and recreation users even as traditional

and 2017, Arlington’s population increased by nearly

revenue sources are declining.

29,000 (6 percent), but total appraised property value has not kept pace. Growing population means requirements for more city services, but there are fewer new property tax dollars to pay for them. The City’s tax-base problem is compounded by the fact that Arlington’s commercial property values have remained primarily flat. Of the 15 largest surveyed cities in the State, Arlington’s per capita taxable property value is the 4th lowest, per the chart at right. Sales tax revenues have in the past provided a boost to City finances through the high growth period of the 1980s and 90s. At present, Arlington’s sales tax revenues are up yet may not be sustainable as more consumers transition to e-commerce transactions. A 2018 report from the City Manager’s Office provides an interesting perspective on what Arlington’s residents actually pay for City-provided services when compared to residents of other Texas cities. This report states that, despite shrinking tax revenues, Arlington’s citizens pay a smaller percentage of their per capita income for City services than do residents of many of the other major cities in DFW and State. Furthermore, the price of these services has steadily declined over the past five years. Besides shrinking taxes, some traditional revenue sources for parks are also declining. The declining household income rate equates to few residents paying for parks and recreation services. Additionally, due to new state property tax caps there are fewer opportunities for the General fund to offset these lost revenues.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

FY 2018 ASSESSED VALUE PER CAPITA (in $1,000’s)

What Our Citizens Think Arlington conducted a parks and recreation citizen survey as part of the master plan update process. This work allowed the survey to be tailored to issues of strategic importance to effectively plan the future

The following are the 10 major survey findings:

Usage of parks is high with good satisfaction

Playgrounds, natural areas, picnic areas and walking/ biking trails are the most important facilities

system. The purpose of the survey was to help establish priorities for the future development of parks and recreation facilities, programs, and services within

Exercise and fitness, community events/festivals,

Arlington. The survey was administered in public

nature programs and youth sports leagues are the most

meetings and via the internet. The goal was to obtain

important programs and activities

a total of at least 800 completed surveys. This goal was far exceeded, with 1,247 surveys having been

and safety is “good” or “excellent”

completed. Distribution and promotion included:

Citizens continue to show strong support for parks and recreation, with 54% saying they are “very likely” and 38%

• Fliers and signs throughout the city

“likely” to vote in favor of future bond referendums

• Email and media blast with a link to the project website • Survey URL on the APRD Naturally Fun home page

More than 80% feel that overall park quality, maintenance

57% feel that parks and recreation facilities and programs have improved over the past five years,

This survey is important to developing proposals

compared to only 7% that feel they have declined

for the PROS Plan, as it provides some insight into what is important to current residents about parks

65% consider the money they pay versus the parks and

and recreation. APRD designed the survey to gather

recreation services provided to be a “good” or “great”

representative feedback from a mix of customers,

value

stakeholders and Arlington residents about their use of APRD programs and facilities. Questions were designed

The most important actions that respondents would

to reveal priorities for parks, recreation, open space

support with tax dollars include renovating existing

activities, improvements, and funding.

facilities, improving connectivity via the hike and bike network, developing new facilities in areas with unmet

Online Survey: APRD hosted the online survey on a

needs, preserving natural areas and greenways, and

secure server 24 hours a day, seven days a week for

acquiring land for future neighborhood park development

two months. APRD programmed the survey for both online and smart devices. APRD also made hard copies

trails, outdoor and indoor facilities and programs

available at public meetings and at recreation centers during this timeframe. The summarized findings are shown here, with a full Household Executive Summary located in the appendices.

Unmet citizen needs exist for a wide range of parks,

Opportunities exist to grow programs at parks and recreation facilities

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Benchmarking Arlington’s Parks

In preparing this Plan, it was important to see how Arlington’s park system compares with that of other cities. For these comparisons, The Trust for Public Land’s ParkScore was utilized, which evaluates the measurements of park acreage, park investment, park amenities, and park access for the nation’s 100 largest cities. The analysis generates a score and ranking based on the elements measured below. While this is an effective tool to compare the quantity of park and recreation assets within a community, The Trust for Public Land recognizes it does not in any way consider the quality of park and recreation assets or services. This fact is critical to understanding why the perception of a park system may seem incongruent to its ParkScore.

ACREAGE

AMENITIES

The park acreage evaluation is based on two

The measurement for park amenities considers the

measurements, median park size and parkland as a

availability per capita of six different type of park amenities.

percentage of city area. Arlington’s median park size is 12.6

These include basketball hoops, dog parks, playgrounds,

acres, and 8% of the city is comprised of park land.

recreation and senior centers, restrooms, and spraygrounds.

INVESTMENT

ACCESS

Park investment measures the total spending in the park

Park access is a measurement based on the percentage of

system per resident. This includes not only public spending,

the population living within a ten-minute or half-mile walk of

but also non-profit spending and volunteer support.

a public park. The 10-minute walk utilizes the use of public

Arlington’s spend is $92 per resident. The national median

streets and roads, and considers highways, train tracks,

expenditure per resident was $109 in 2019.

and rivers to be physical barriers. Fifty-eight percent of Arlington’s population is within a ten-minute walk of a park.

ARLINGTON, TX • 2019 CITY CHARACTERISTICS Info provided by The Trust For Public Land

58%

OF ARLINGTON RESIDENTS LIVE WITHIN A 10 MINUTE WALK OF A PARK.

CITY LAND USE

REC & SENIOR CENTERS • 0.3 per 20,000 people (12th percentile)

8% of Arlington’s city land is used for parks and recreation (National median 15%) DOG PARKS • 0.5 per 100,000 people (20th percentile)

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

PLAYGROUNDS • 1.5 per 10,000 people (13th percentile)

NATIONWIDE COMPARISONS Arlington is considered to be a medium-low density city, as defined by the Urban Land Institute (ULI). According to the ULI’s standards, New York and San Francisco are considered high-density cities while Oklahoma City and Memphis are

MEDIAN PARK SIZE

% OF PARK LAND

INVESTMENT

BASKETBALL

DOG PARK

PLAY GROUND

REC CENTERS

RESTROOMS

SPRAY GROUNDS

10-MIN WALK

PARKSCORE

considered low density cities. The table below compares Arlington to nine cities closest in density nationwide.

Irvine, CA

6.1

27.4

$251.55

17.7

0.4

1.8

0.4

80%

79.2

Plano, TX

13.5

9.5

$210.73

7.3

0.3

4.6

0.3

1.5

0.3

75%

70.5

Cincinnati, OH

4.4

14.1

$192.71

8.9

1.3

1.5

3.1

4.5

77%

78.3

Dallas, TX

7.7

9.4

$110.37

2.4

0.4

1.7

0.6

0.1

0.8

69%

48.6

Arlington, TX

12.6

7.7

$92.25

1.7

0.5

1.5

0.3

1.2

1.3

57%

43.8

Riverside, CA

10.5

6.4

$75.51

0.6

1.5

1.1

2.4

1.9

51%

44.7

Mesa, AZ

2.8

3.5

$67.76

2.8

0.4

1.3

0.2

0.6

65%

29.5

Irving, TX

3.2

5.3

$67.51

1.1

1.2

3.1

0.8

0.2

0.8

62%

Houston, TX

4.7

$56.72

2.2

0.7

1.8

0.6

0.7

1.1

58%

35.3

Glendale, AZ

4.8

5.6

$35.97

4.9

1.2

3.9

0.6

1.7

1.6

75%

42.3

*Sourced from the Center for City Park Excellence, Trust for Public Land 2019 ParkScore index

This benchmarking exercise shows that Arlington falls below the median of these medium-low density cities based on the combined measures. While Arlington is well above average in median park size, it falls below the median in terms of park acreage and park access. Park investment in Arlington is above the medium-low density city average, while park amenities falls below the median.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

STATEWIDE COMPARISONS While it is important to compare Arlington nationally, it is likely more important to compare Arlington to similar communities both regionally and within Texas. The graph below compares Arlington to the nine other largest Texas cities on the same

MEDIAN PARK SIZE

% OF PARK LAND

INVESTMENT

BASKETBALL

DOG PARK

PLAY GROUND

REC CENTERS

RESTROOMS

SPRAY GROUNDS

10-MIN WALK

PARKSCORE

four measurements.

Plano

13.5

9.5

$210.73

7.3

0.3

4.6

0.3

1.5

0.3

75%

70.5

Austin

8.7

10.3

$119.18

2.5

1.3

1.5

0.6

1.2

1.8

59%

52.8

Dallas

7.7

9.4

$110.37

2.4

0.4

1.7

0.6

0.1

0.8

69%

48.6

Corpus Christi

3.3

8.5

$66.83

2.6

0.6

4.3

0.8

2.4

0.6

75%

43.9

Arlington

12.6

7.7

$92.25

1.7

0.5

1.5

0.3

1.2

1.3

57%

43.8

El Paso

3.9

19.2

$43.08

4.4

0.7

4.1

0.8

0.6

1.3

56%

San Antonio

11.7

10.4

$90.45

1.7

0.9

1.7

0.8

1.5

0.3

42%

41.1

Houston

4.7

$56.72

2.2

0.7

1.8

0.6

0.7

1.1

58%

35.3

Fort Worth

7.7

5.6

$67.03

1.5

0.3

2.3

0.3

0.2

0.1

60%

33.9

Laredo

4.1

2.1

$65.40

9.5

0.4

2.1

0.9

54%

30.1

*Sourced from the Center for City Park Excellence, Trust for Public Land 2019 ParkScore index

This benchmarking exercise shows that Arlington lies just above the median of these Texas cities based on the combined measures. As with the previous comparison, Arlington is above average in median park size but falls at or below the median in terms of percent of park acreage and park access. Park investment in Arlington is above the statewide comparison, while park amenities falls below the median. As previously discussed, the availability of suitable park land and associated funding will remain challenging. Previous strategies to acquire park land based on geographic needs will likely be replaced with those that consider socioeconomic needs. Additionally, strategies to increase access should be applied. These could include additional trails, trail and roadway network connections, and approaches to manage physical barriers.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

What’s In Our Parks?

Arlington’s adopted standard for

Basketball courts, which have

soccer fields is one for every 12,000

broad appeal to many age groups,

residents. Based on a projected 2030

are needed to increase by over 50

population of 423,000 and a current

percent, from 23 to 35. Three new

inventory of 35 fields, the City will

soccer fields, three new football

need an additional three fields at

fields, and 10 new baseball/softball

buildout.

fields are needed – facilities that are maintenance-intensive and typically

Note that this table shows citywide

require amenities such as lighting

needs. The breakdown of facilities

and irrigation.

As part of the Master Plan, it is

needs by subarea appears in a later

also critical to consider existing

section of this Plan. The table shows

It is important for the City and

recreational facilities, to determine

that Arlington’s Parks and Recreation

its citizens to be realistic about

future needs (both what and where)

Department has provided well for its

future needs. This Plan is built on

and develop plans to meet those

citizens in many areas. For example,

estimates. If Arlington’s population

needs. With a comparison of current

in the area of playgrounds, the City’s

grows at a rate different than

park and recreation assets to needs

63 playgrounds meet the current

projections, facility additions

assessment determined through

service level of one playground 6,000

will need to be accelerated or

community engagement, trends

residents. The Department plans to

decelerated accordingly.

analysis and benchmarking, a path

continue developing playgrounds,

forward can begin to develop.

and based on this standard there will

Finally, it is important to remember

need to be 8 additional playgrounds

that these standards represent

developed by the year 2030.

guidelines for service to parks and

Through evaluating APRD’s current facilities and parkland inventory,

recreation users, rather than hard

a set of facilities standards has

Golf courses and football and soccer

and fast rules. There are creative and

been developed tailored to the

fields are also presently available

flexible ways to meet citizen needs

city’s unique needs. As a part of

to city residents in quantities at or

that do not conform to a numbers-

this process, national, state and

above standards. Though some

driven strategy, and the Department

regional facility comparisons were

very costly new facilities are clearly

continues to look for these

considered. These comparisons

needed by 2030 - one aquatic facility,

alternatives. As demographics shift,

were then evaluated against current

one recreation center, a senior center

the demands may shift accordingly

Arlington information about usage

- these projects can be accomplished

to reflect the need relative to age

trends, locations of existing facilities,

over a number of years.

or other socioeconomic factors.

city demographics and citizen input.

Additionally, citizen preferences may

Arlington’s adopted facility standards

At the same time, there are some

change that could shift development

and projections for future needs are

areas where Arlington must stretch

models outlined in this Plan. For

demonstrated in the tables found on

to meet citizen needs. By 2030, 53

example, Arlington’s adopted

page 33.

miles of new linear trails will be

standard of one aquatic facility for

needed - doubling the current service

every 50,000 residents represents

level.

major aquatic facilities located in

These standards were used to compare current service levels

community and city parks, such as

against future needs. For example,

the Randol Mill and Bad Königshofen

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Family Aquatic Centers. But Arlington

Tennis Courts

Playgrounds

citizens have indicated they would

Due to needs for greater efficiency

By 2030 additional playgrounds and

prefer to have more interactive

of operations and maintenance,

several replacement playgrounds will

aquatic facilities located closer to

tennis court development will be

be needed, with a concentration on

home. So, this Plan examines the

consolidated and accomplished

the aging units in central and north

feasibility of offering shallow water

through increasing the number of

Arlington.

play structures and neighborhood

courts at the Arlington Tennis Center

park spraygrounds as an alternative

and a multi-court facility at Webb

Aquatic Facilities

to major aquatic facilities. As such

Community Park.

The needs in this area are diverse,

facilities are developed, the City may

as the aquatic programming and

find that it does not need as many of

Recreation Centers

facility preferences of our residents

the larger, more costly facilities.

Significant investments have

have changed over time and several

occurred over the last 5 years with

existing facilities have passed their

A summary and context for the

new recreation centers. Due to age,

useful life. The new aquatics delivery

identified park and recreation needs

activity demand and programmatic

model will focus on:

by type follows:

need additional investments will be

• Renovation/expansion of two family

necessary to renovate and expand

outdoor aquatic centers

Athletic Fields

existing recreation centers within the

• Development of one family aquatic

The level of service standards

next 10 years.

center

indicate a deficit of soccer and

• Construction of four large

baseball fields. Due to the city’s

Trails

spraygrounds or small outdoor play

historic growth patterns, growing

Consistently ranked as the number

pools

interest and lack of available land,

one desired amenity by Arlington

• Development of one indoor family

the majority of new field need

citizens, additional miles of trail

aquatic center (in conjunction with

is in north central Arlington. To

also rank as the number one needed

the multigenerational center)

accomplish this will likely require

amenity through the terms of the

• Development of two indoor fitness

re-development of appropriate land

master plan. A combination of

and leisure pools (either underway or

parcels.

on street trail, partnership with

in planning stages)

private property owners and utility

• Continuation of a joint use

Basketball Courts

companies along with creativity will

agreement for the AISD’s natatorium

The analysis also includes a

be necessary to meet this standard.

that expires in 2029.

deficiency of basketball courts. Due

• Strategically placed small

to the mixed community reaction

Park and linear trails are also an

spraygrounds

to some outdoor basketball court

integral part of the City’s Hike and

projects consideration will be made

Bike master plan, providing off-street

Picnic Facilities

to maximize indoor courts through

connections throughout the plan.

The provision of picnic stations

new recreation center design and

These are represented by the trails

has been adequate. However,

installation of outdoor half-courts

and planned trails indicated on the

demand continues to grow and new

where appropriate.

map on Page 31.

stations and individual picnic tables will require continued investment throughout the master plan term.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

City of Arlington Hike and Bike Plan Bike Lane, Existing Bike Lane, Planned Bike Route, Designed Bike Route, Existing

Future Connection to Grand Prairie Bike System

Bike Route, Planned Paved Shoulder, Existing Paved Shoulder, Planned Ri ve r L eg a cy Pa rk - E as t of C ol li n s

Future Connection to Fort Worth Bike System N C OLLIN S S T

OAK W OOD LN

N B O W EN R

CR O W LEY R D

Geo rg e Stev e ns IO N

W MA I N ST

MILB Y R D

OO RW

NO Woo d la n d Wes t

Fie ld e r

W PA R K R OW D R

Ru sh C re ek Do g Pa rk Cl ar en ce Fos te r

W T UC K ER B LV

Du n ca n Ro b in so n

Ke ll y Pa rk

He ro e s

Ju lia Bu rg e n Jo hn so n Cr ee k Gre e n wa y Ju lia Bu rg e n Ju lia Bu rg e n

E MITC H ELL S T

Ti mb e rla ke Pa rk Ca rl K n ox J r.

Bu rl L . Wil ke s

Ju lia Bu rg e n

E PAR K ROW D R

Bo b C o ok e

E PION EE R PWY

E AR K A N SA S LN

CA L

EN D

Fish C re ek Li ne a r-N o rth - N o f SW Gre e n O ak s Bl vd

Fish C re ek Li ne a r - Wes t o f Ma tlo ck

Ru sh C re ek Li ne a r-O.W. Fa nn in 2 - Ha rd is ty-E de n

N LD IE SF

LED B ETTE R R D

All a n Sa xe

SO U

Lyn n Cr ee k Li ne a r Pa rk Ma tlo ck - S il o

C A R

RU S SELL R D

W.O. & Ze ta Wor kma n Pa rk

Ru sh C re ek L i ne a r - Ed en -H a rri s Ha rri s Ro a d Pa rk

Ru sh C re ek Li ne a r W HA R R IS R D - Ed en -H a rri s

TH E

E ED EN R D

DIN A L RD

Bo wm a n B ra nc h Li ne a r -Tin Cu p -Ma tlo c k

R TU

L RD A RN EL RW

Ed en Ro a d Pa rk

Lyn n C re e k Li ne a r Pa rk - NY-S H 36 0 So uth Ne w Yo rk P ar k Site

Bo wm a n B ra nc h Li ne a r Pa rk Co ll in s- SH 3 60

Bo wm a n B ra nc h Li ne a r - Ma n sfie l d Web b -We b b Fe rre ll

T UR NE R WA R NEL L RD

Bo wm a n B ra nc h L in e ar Ma tlo ck- Ma n sfie ld -We b b

E SU B LETT R D

Lyn n Cr ee k L in e ar Pa rk - C o ll in s-N Y

F IE

Web b Co m mu ni ty Pa rk

Ma rtha Wal ke r

Fish C re ek L i ne a r - NY-S H 36 0 HA VEN W OOD DR Fish C re ek Ne ig h b orh o o d

No rth Ne w Yo rk Pa rk Si te

Lyn n Cr ee k Li ne a r Pa rk Sil o -C ol li ns

E H AR R IS R D

Connection to Existing Fish Creek Linear Park

Bla ck la n d Pra ir ie

AS T P W Y

Lyn n Cr ee k Li ne a r Pa rk - Sil o -C ol li ns

SILO R D

Ti er ra Ve rd e Gol f Cl ub a t th e Re se rv e

7 28

Ma rtin Lu th er K in g Jr. S po rts C e n te r

Su bl e tt Cr ee k Li ne a r

EDEN RD Ma rtin Lu th er K in g Jr. S po rts C e n te r

S.J. Stov a ll

Fish C re ek Li ne a r - Sil o -C ol li ns St

Ru sh C re ek L i ne a r O.W. Fa n ni n1 Su bl e tt-H a rd is ty

F.J. Re d Ka ne

R US S EL L C UR RY RD

JO PL I N R D

£ ¤

RE D STON E D R

287

E B AR D IN R D

Fish C re ek Fish C re ek Li ne a r Li ne a r - Co ll in s- NY Co ll in s- NY

Do g Pa rk La rg e D o g s

Cr av en s

A I RES D R

ET FI R

T SS IN

Ru sh C re ek L i ne a r - Gre en Oa ks SW-S ub l ett

C O L L A RD R D De a ve r

W IH 2 0 W B

E IN TE R STATE 2 0 FWY

CR E EK VA LLE Y D R

Bo b McFa rl a nd

WIMB LED ON D R

W SU B LETT R D

Future Connection to Fort Worth Bike System

M AT L O C K RD

CA PL I N DR

Ha ro ld Pa tter so n Sp or ts Ce n ter

Wim bl e do n

Tr ee p oi nt

Connection to Future Kennedale Bicycle System

E A R B R OOK B LV

H IG H L AN DER B LV

W BA R D IN R D

USI A T R L

BR A D LEY LN

ALLE N AV E

RR D

S FI EL D E PA RK SP R ING S B LV

CH U R C H S T

AL ND

W A R B RO OK B LV

OLL S C

20 ¦ ¨ §

C A L I EN T E D R

T RD

T RE EP O

T RD

E MAY FIELD R D

AV E

IOT

Gen e Sch ri cke l Jr.

Ma ry & Jim mi e Ho o pe r

W IN TE RS TA TE 2 0 FWY

Cl iff Ne ls o n SW N a tu re Pre se rve

HI G H P OI N

Bra n tl e y Hi ns h aw

B.C . B ar ne s

YO R K NEW

EL L

STAGE LINE D R

E RD

Va n d erg ri ff

E R ST NT

W P LE AS ANT R ID G

E TIMB ER V IE W LN

La ke s a t Ma tlo ck W MA YF I E L D R D Arl in g to n Ten n is Ce n ter Arl in g to n H.A .D . Te nn is Ce n ter Du n sw o rth

Gate w ay Ple a sa n t Ri dg e Pa rk

LY KE L

Ma rti Va n Ra ve n sw a ay

M EDL I N DR

RD L IT

S I DE D R W OOD Ja ke La n gs to n

MOR R IS LN

K AR E P F IC

SPR OC K ET D R

O A KS B LV

PER K IN S R D

EN W G RE

Ca li fo rni a La n e S ite Vete ra ns

Bo wm a n S pr in gs

Ma rro w Bo ne Sp rin g s Pa rk

Ru sh C re ek S o . of Ark . L n . to I-2 0- Mo o re

Tho ra Ha rt

SH O RE W O O D DR

HOW ELL ST

He le n Wes sle r

Va l le y Vi ew

Ju lia Bu rg e n

W A R K A NS A S LN

Bo wm a n Sp rin g s

S SH 3 60 FWY

Ri ch a rd Sim p so n

Me ad o w br oo k & Go lf C ou rs e

Jo hn so n C re e k L in e ar Pa rk R ow - Pio n e er P kw y. W IN W OOD DR E LOVE R S LN Jo hn so n C r ee k Li ne a r Jo hn so n Ho w ar d E TU CK E R B LVD Cr ee k Mo or e Li ne a r

Ru sh C re ek L i ne a r No rth - Pi on e er

La ke Arl in g to n Gol f Co u rse

360

Se nte r

S DA VIS D R

La ke Arl in g to n Gol f Co u rse

S B OWEN R D

P WY

Do u g R u sse l l

V U M E AB R A

Jo hn so n Cr ee k L in

Future Connection to Joe Pool Lake and Lynn Creek Park

S C OO PE

Future Connection to Mansfield Bicycle System

DEB

BI E

G RA

N HO LL AN D RD

This product is for informational purposes and ma y not have been prepared for or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. It does not represent an on-the-ground survey and represents only the approximate relative location of property boundaries.

L A KE DR T I M B ER

La ke Arl in g to n Gol f Co u rse

FOR EST E D GE D R

GRE EK R OW D R Co ll e ge H il ls

ION S T

NI N G DR

W PI O N E ER

Ru sh C re ek L i ne a r Pa rk Tra il -D ivi si on to Pi o ne e r

Gen e A ll en UTA B LVD Fou n de rs ' Pla za E SE CO ND S T

W SEC ON D ST

S E D I VI

Dr. R ob e rt Cl u ck Li ne a r Pa rk Di vi sio n -R R

UT A BL V

AVE NU E G S T

E RA ND O L M I L L R D

O.S. Gra y

IV IS WD

AV EN UE H EA ST

Ri ch a rd Gr ee n e Li ne a r - E Ra n do l M il l R d Dr. R ob e rt Cl uc k L in e ar Dr. R ob e rt Pa rk - We st Cl uc k L in e ar Pa rk - Sa n for d

M BRA W A

L A ND OP E

Ri ch a rd Gr ee n e L in e a r No la n R ya n-B a ll pa rk Wa y

Pir ie

Hi gh Oa k P ark

S OA K S T

Bo b Fi nd l ay Li ne a r Pa rk Vil la g e C re e k Hi sto ric al A re a

Ri ch a rd Gr ee n e L in e a r E R an d ol Mi ll -N ol a n R ya n

PEC A N ST

Future Connection to Fort Worth Bike System

Tr in ity Ea st Su ba re a E IN TE R STATE 3 0 FWY

10 9 TH S T

AVEN UE J S T

BL V

SU SA N DR

AN DO

30 ¦ ¨ §

R MA

GIBB IN S R D

W IN TE RS TA TE 3 0 FWY

N F I EL D ER R D

Pa rkw a y C en tra l

SH ER R Y ST

Gib b in s

N C EN TE R S T

Ra n do l Mi ll No rth

Cr ysta l C a ny on Na tu ral A re a

WA S HIN GTON D R

FOR UM D R

ER D R

C AR T

MA R GA

N D AVIS D R

R BE

W L A MA R BL V

Ra n do l M il l So uth of I-3 0

Di xo n W. Ho lm a n

BR O W N B LV

N C OOP ER ST

B LV

Di tto Go lf Co u rse

N B LV

Universities

Ri ve r Le g ac y Pa rk - Ea st

ENS I O

Schools

A SC

GR EE N

J.W. D u nl o p Sp or ts Ce n ter

GR EE N

V BL

Parks Property

No rth Sp or ts Ce n ter

S K

No rth Sp or ts Ce n ter

RE T D R

Planned Sidepath

Planned Trail

3 6 0 FW

Ri ve r Le g ac y Pa rk

Existing Sidepath

BA IR D FA R M R D

Existing Trail

DA N IEL D R

Wide Outside Lane, Planned

N SH

Wide Outside Lane, Existing

0 Miles

Adopted 8/2/2011 | Updated 4/4/2019

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

PARK CLASSIFICATIONS The purpose of park classifications is to recognize the different types of park space that will satisfy park and recreation needs throughout the community. Arlington’s classification system is based on the current framework of existing parks and recreation facilities and the need for additional park land throughout the city. It should be noted that parks do not always conform to a single classification. Depending upon size, resources, improvements, and other variables parks may take on hybrid characteristics. Typical attributes of each classification follow.

Neighborhood Parks

Linear Parks

• Less than 20 acres

• Vary in size

• Serve nearby individual neighborhood(s)

• Floodplain adjacency and preservation

• Residential adjacency

• Serve large areas of the city

• Passive, non-destination amenities

• Naturalized state

• Minimal parking, walkable to neighborhoods

• Passive pedestrian and bicycle use

• No restroom facilities

• Minimal parking at trailheads • No restrooms

Community Parks

• Connections with other parks and destinations

• Greater than 20 acres • Serve large areas of the city

Natural Areas

• Thoroughfare adjacency

• Vary in size

• Passive, active and destination amenities

• Serve the entire city

• Restrooms

• Natural or nearly undisturbed state

• Ample parking for heavy use, destinations, and events

• Unique scenic, geologic, or ecological value • Passive pedestrian use

City Parks • Vary in size • Serve the entire city • Unique amenity(s), location, or activity • Parking varies

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

• Parking varies

NATURAL AREA LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS Natural Area Standards

Adopted Standard

Total Park Acres Natural Area Acres

Buildout Population (423,000)

2020 Inventory

50%

Required

Build-Out Needs

4,711

5,304

593

2,416

2,652

236

PARK LAND LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS Park Classification

Service Area Radius

Adopted Standard

(miles)

(acres per 1,000)

Neighborhood

0.5

1.37

Community

3.0

City Linear

Buildout Population (423,000)

2020 Inventory

Required

Build-Out Needs

440

580

140

2.75

1,030

1,163

133

3.23

1,404

1,366

5.10

1,837

2,157

320

Total

4,711

5,304

593

RECREATION FACILITY LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS Adopted Standard 1 per:

2020 Inventory

Aquatic Facilities

50,000

18-Hole Golf Courses

Amenity

Buildout Population (423,000) Required

Build-Out Needs

8.5

1.5

125,000

3.5

3.4

Recreation/ Senior Centers

60,000

Soccer Fields

12,000

Football Fields

45,000

Baseball Fields

8,500

Softball Fields

30,000

Linear Trails (miles)

4,000

106

Playgrounds

6,000

Picnic Pavilions

9,000

Basketball Courts

12,000

Tennis Courts

7,000

Spraygrounds

80,000

Off-Leash Dog Parks

150,000

Large Skate Facilities

150,000

Small Skate Facilities

20,000

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Needs Assessment Summary This section of the Plan presents a view of Arlington’s parks and recreation needs over the next ten years. This needs assessment process takes information collected at a point in time, and uses that information to project future needs. After a thorough analysis of the needs assessment process, including survey results, public meeting input, resource opportunity analysis, existing inventory analysis, facility standards assessments and staff input, a series of park and facility priorities were identified for each sector of the city. The full list of “needs” for each sector took into consideration the Plan’s stated Goals, the strategic assessment of the community in the Issues and Opportunities section of the Plan, and an assessment of the Department’s ability to deliver services and programs over the next decade. A series of capital maintenance priorities is also shown for each sector. These priorities were taken from the Department’s capital maintenance database.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

Sector Map

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

RIVER LEGACY PARKS

TEXASDITTO RANGERS GOLF CLUB GOLF COURSE RIVER LEGACY PARKS - EAST CRYSTAL CANYON Oaks Blvd. NW B

een Gr

DIXON W. HOLMAN

J.W. DUNLOP SPORTS CENTER

NE d. lv

e G re

CLARENCE THOMPSON

Brown

Collins / FM 157

Cooper

Davis

Lamar

Fielder

Brown

Lamar

PARKWAY CENTRAL North

North Sector

Trinity West and Trinity East Subareas LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS

SURVEY RECOMMENDATIONS

• Concentration of multi-family and

Of citizens surveyed in the North

MAJOR NEEDS ASSESSMENT PRIORITIES & OPPORTUNITIES

single-family residential development

Sector, the following represent the top

• Off leash dog park

south of the Trinity, and the Viridian

three needs for each category, sorted

• River Legacy Park trail extensions and

development north of the Trinity east of

by level of importance.

improvements • Sports center improvements

SH 157

• Neighborhood park land acquisition

• Commercial activity adjacent to I-30,

Programs and activities:

SH 360 and Collins Street

1. Exercise and fitness

• Neighborhood park improvements

• Arlington’s entertainment district

2. Community events/festivals

• Skatepark development

3. Youth sports leagues

• Natural area improvements • Elzie Odom Athletic Center renovations

RESOURCE BASED ASSETS • Trinity River and woodlands

Facilities and amenities:

• Fort Worth Drying Beds

1. Natural areas

• Captain Denton Ambush Site

2. Playgrounds

• Village Creek

3. Hard surface trails

• Trinity River wetlands • Gibbins Cemetery

Facility needs:

• Arlington Landfill property

(definitely/possibly needs more)

• Bird’s Fort

1. Nature trails

• Tomlin Cemetery

2. Greenways with trails 3. Hard surface trails

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES • Erosion, roadway and parking lot renovations • Playground renovations • Baseball field renovations

West Sector

Randol Mill, Lake Arlington, and Tri-City Subareas LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS

SURVEY RECOMMENDATIONS

• Established development with little

Of citizens surveyed in the West Sector,

MAJOR NEEDS ASSESSMENT PRIORITIES & OPPORTUNITIES

vacant land

the following represent the top three

• Dottie Lynn Recreation Center

• Primarily single-family residential

needs for each category, sorted by level

renovations and improvements

with light commercial uses adjacent to

of importance.

• Lake Arlington GC improvements • Randol Mill Family Aquatic Center

major thoroughfares

expansion

• Surrounds cities of Dalworthington

Programs and activities:

Gardens and Pantego

1. Exercise and fitness

• Woodland West Pool renovation

2. Community events/festivals

• Natural area acquisition

3. Nature programs

• Neighborhood park land acquisition

RESOURCE BASED ASSETS

• Neighborhood park improvements

• Village Creek and woodlands

• Neighborhood park development

• Rush Creek

Facilities and amenities:

• Pioneer Parkway woodlands

1. Natural areas

• Skatepark development

• Lake Arlington

2. Playgrounds

• Linear park development

• Rush Creek relief channel

3. Natural surface trails

CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES

• Woods Chapel Baptist Church • Lake frontage next to Richard

Facility needs:

Simpson Park

(definitely/possibly needs more)

• Battle of Village Creek site

1. Greenways with trails

• Union Pacific R.O.W.

2. Nature trails

• Masonic Temple pasture

3. Soft surface trails

• Key Branch • Forest Edge connection • California Trail

• Randol Mill Park renovations • Pond dredging • Trail replacement • Playground renovations • Restroom renovations

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

East Sector

Six Flags and Johnson Station Subareas LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS

SURVEY RECOMMENDATIONS

• Arlington’s entertainment district

Of citizens surveyed in the East Sector,

MAJOR NEEDS ASSESSMENT PRIORITIES & OPPORTUNITIES

• Primarily single-family residential

the following represent the top three

• Neighborhood park improvements

• Limited multi-family residential and

needs for each category, sorted by level

• Neighborhood park land acquisition

commercial uses adjacent to major

of importance.

• Neighborhood park development • Helen Wessler Pool renovation

thoroughfares • Mixed uses including commercial,

Programs and activities:

office and multi-family adjacent to

1. Exercise and fitness

major thoroughfares

2. Nature programs

• Commercial and some light industrial

3. Community events/festivals

uses in the I-20 corridor • Industrial and light industrial in SH

Facilities and amenities:

360 corridor

1. Natural areas 2. Picnic shelters or pavilions

RESOURCE BASED ASSETS

3. Playgrounds

• Johnson Creek and woodlands • Watson cemetery

Facility needs:

• Cottonwood Creek

(definitely/possibly needs more)

• Entertainment district

1. Soft surface trails

• Johnson Station cemetery

2. Nature trails

• Marrow Bone Springs

3. Natural areas

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

• Meadowbrook GC improvements • Skatepark development

CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES • Pond dredging • Eunice Activity Center interior renovations • Brantley Hinshaw pavilion renovation

Central Sector UTA Subarea

LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS

SURVEY RECOMMENDATIONS

• Downtown Arlington and central

Of citizens surveyed in the Central

MAJOR NEEDS ASSESSMENT PRIORITIES & OPPORTUNITIES

business district

Sector, the following represent the top

•Linear park development

• University of Texas at Arlington

three needs for each category, sorted

•Neighborhood park improvements

• Single-family residential

by level of importance.

CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES

• Multi-family residential including student housing

Programs and activities:

•Tennis and basketball court

1. Exercise and fitness

RESOURCE BASED ASSETS

2. Community events/festivals

• Johnson Creek

3. Nature programs

renovations •Roadway and parking lot renovations •Playground renovations

• Tate Johnson Cemetery • UTA facilities

Facilities and amenities:

• Cabins at Knapp Heritage Park

1. Natural areas

• Union Pacific R.O.W.

2. Natural surface trails

• Doug Russell Cemetery

2. Picnic shelters or pavilions

• City Cemetery

Facility needs: (definitely/possibly needs more) 1. Greenways with trails 2. Natural areas 3. Small neighborhood parks

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Southeast Sector

North and South Lynn Creek Subareas LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS

SURVEY RECOMMENDATIONS

• Mostly single-family residential

Of citizens surveyed in the Southeast

MAJOR NEEDS ASSESSMENT PRIORITIES & OPPORTUNITIES

• Light industrial and commercial along

Sector, the following represent the top

• Aquatic center development

I-20 corridor

three needs for each category, sorted

• Dog park improvements

• Arlington Municipal Airport

by level of importance.

• Community Park Improvements • Neighborhood park improvements • Natural area improvements

RESOURCE BASED ASSETS

Programs and activities:

• Bowman Branch

1. Exercise and fitness

• Linear park development

• Lynn Creek

2. Youth sports leagues

• Neighborhood park development

• Fish Creek

3. Community events/festivals

• Skatepark development • Neighborhood park land acquisition

• Tarrant County College

Facilities and amenities: 1. Playgrounds 2. Picnic shelters or pavilions 3. Hard surface trails

Facility needs: (definitely/possibly needs more) 1. Soft surface trails 2. Picnic areas 3. Nature trails

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES • Pond dredging • Playground renovations • Sprayground renovations • Roadway and parking lot renovations

Southwest Sector

North and South Rush Creek Subareas LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS

SURVEY RECOMMENDATIONS

• Predominately single-family

Of citizens surveyed in the Southwest

MAJOR NEEDS ASSESSMENT PRIORITIES & OPPORTUNITIES

residential

Sector, the following represent the top

•Cliff Nelson Recreation Center

• Mixed uses in the US 287 corridor

three needs for each category, sorted

renovations and improvements

including multi-family residential,

by level of importance.

•Tierra Verde Golf Club improvements •Bad Königshofen Family Aquatic

commercial, and industrial

Center expansion

• Commercial activity along I-20 and

Programs and activities:

Green Oaks Boulevard

1. Exercise and fitness

•Community park improvements

2. Community events/festivals

•Neighborhood park improvements

3. Youth sports leagues

•Natural area improvements

RESOURCE BASED ASSETS

•Linear park development

• Sublett Creek and woodlands

•Neighborhood park land acquisition

• Hawkins Cemetery

Facilities and amenities:

• Rush Creek

1. Playgrounds

• Kee Branch

2. Picnic shelters or pavilions

•Skatepark development

3. Natural areas

•Pond dredging

Facility needs: (definitely/possibly needs more) 1. Nature trails

CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES •Playground renovations •Roadway and parking lot renovations

2. Greenways with trails 3. Natural areas

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Recent Development While identifying the vast needs of the parks system, it is also important to recognize and celebrate recent accomplishments that are advancing the Parks and Recreation Department’s objectives. Since the adoption of the 2004 Park, Recreation and Open Space Masterplan, many of the projects included were realized. In addition, many needs not identified in the plan emerged and subsequently were funded and/or developed. These projects occurred during the transition between the 2004 plan and this plan, so are not specifically included in either. The projects below are not only indicative of the recent advancing of parks and recreation in Arlington, but also the support of Arlington’s citizens for parks and recreation.

PROJECTS

DEVELOPMENT

RENOVATION

Playground Replacements

$653,773

Gibbins, Fielder, Carl Knox, Jr., Thora Hart, Marti VanRavenswaay and Bob McFarland Parks

Pond Dredging

$1,384,749

Gateway Park and Lakes of Matlock

River Legacy Park

Trail extension to Highway 360

$2,258,598

Randol Mill Park

$1,671,172

Miracle League field replacement and pond dredging

Bob Findley Park

$616,808

Trail replacement

Rush Creek Dog Park Develop dog park

California Lane Park

Restroom and sprayground renovation

Deaver Park

Playground renovation, new park sign and trail

$790,649 $359,432

$210,000

$121,877

$415,708

Cravens Park

$294,946

Trail replacement

Harris Road Park

Park development

Eden Park

Park development

$1,359,454 $1,177,089

Don Misenhimer Park

$458,117

Restroom

$6,067,099 $11,772,372

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

$5,705,273

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

RIVER LEGACY PARKS

KEY -

Trinity River

Parks Playgrounds RIVER LEGACY PARKS

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION

Ft. Worth Drying Beds

NE d. lv

RIVER LEGACY PARKS - EAST

Davis

Cooper

GIBBINS PARKWAY CENTRAL

CRYSTAL CANYON

DIXON W. HOLMAN

e G re

Brown

CLARENCE THOMPSON

Johnson Creek

Brown

Collins / FM 157

Fielder

Lamar

DITTO GOLF COURSE

J.W. DUNLOP SPORTS CENTER

Village Creek

RANDOL MILL PARK

Oaks Blvd. NW

een Gr

NW SPORTS CENTER

Lamar

I - 30

JOHNSON CREEK LINEAR

RANDOL MILL

yw ebb

Sherry

BRANTLEY HINSHAW

B.C. BARNES

Mayfield

ARLINGTON TENNIS CENTER

POND DREDGING

Arbrook

GATEWAY

MARY & JIMMIE HOOPER

New York

Matlock

VANDERGRIFF

H.A.D. DUNSWORTH

PLEASANT RIDGE

CALIFORNIA LANE PARK

Arkansas

MARROW BONE SPRING PARK

Wo o

JAKE LANGSTON Pleasant Ridge

TIMBER LAKE

BOB COOKE

Pioneer Parkway

LAKES OF MATLOCK

Mayfield

CARL KNOX, JR.

Collins

Cooper / FM 157

Davis

Fielder

d si d e

California

HELEN WESSLER

BURL L. WILKES

JOHNSON CREEK LINEAR

Mayfield

I - 20

ak s

TREEPOINT

HAROLD PATTERSON SPORTS CENTER

Bardin

Ember cres t on Wimbled

Blvd. SW

RUSH CREEK LINEAR

WIMBLEDON

Green Oaks Blvd. SE

Nathan Lowe Cravens Park

DEAVER Sublett

Harris

Lynn Creek LYNN CREEK LINEAR

7 28

WEBB COMMUNITY

b We

b-L

HARRIS

MARTHA WALKER

Rush Creek

DON MISENHIMER b

eb -W

eld

fi ns

HARRIS ROAD PARK

NORTH NEW YORK PARK SITE

W.O. & ZETA WORKMAN Silo

Eden

CRAVENS PARK

FISH CREEK FISH CREEK LINEAR

Matlock

Calender

F.J. "RED" KANE Cooper / FM 157

RUSH CREEK LINEAR Sharon Lee

Sublett Creek

ALLAN SAXE

MLK SPORTS CENTER & TIERRA VERDE GOLF CLUB at the RESERVE

O.W. FANNIN NATURAL AREA

Fish Creek

DOG PARK

Sublett

Calender

Eden

TAILS ‘N TRAILS

CRAVENS

S.J. STOVALL

SUBLETT CREEK LINEAR Curry

BLACKLAND PRAIRIE

BOB MCFARLAND New York

Kee Branch

Gr ee

GENE SCHRICKEL, JR.

Collins

CLIFF Bardin NELSON

Bowen

MARTI VANRAVENSWAAY

SW NATURE PRESERVE

CALIFORNIA LANE

VALLEY VIEW

JULIA BURGEN LINEAR

Arkansas

tle Lit

THORA HART

Kelly Elliot

Bowman

SENTER DOUG RUSSELL

HOWARD MOORE

VETERANS

Park Springs

DUNCAN ROBINSON

Abram

MEADOWBROOK & MEADOWBROOK GOLF COURSE

S.H. 360

P ol

Perkins

BOWMAN SPRINGS

COLLEGE HILLS

FIELDER

.W Perkins

Shorewood

KELLEY

RUSH CREEK LINEAR

Green Oaks Blvd

O.S. GRAY

CLARENCE FOSTER

DR. ROBERT CLUCK LINEAR

FOUNDERS’ PLAZA

Park Row

HEROES’

Bowen

WOODLAND WEST

RUSH CREEK LINEAR

gto

GEORGE STEVENS GENE ALLEN

Division / US 180

RICHARD SIMPSON

PIRIE

Sanford

HIGH OAK

RUSH CREEK DOG PARK

LAKE ARLINGTON GOLF COURSE

RICHARD GREENE LINEAR

B a llp a

VILLAGE CREEK HISTORICAL AREA

rlin

Wa y

Randol Mill

BOB FINDLAY LINEAR PARK

BOB FINDLEY PARK

BOWMAN BRANCH LINEAR

EDEN ROAD PARK

SOUTH NEW YORK PARK SITE

EDEN PARK

Bowman Branch

DON MISENHIMER PARK

North

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

Strategies for Success Based upon an analysis of the major issues and opportunities facing the city and the Department, the following “strategies for success” were identified and defined as critically important issues to help guide efforts to improve the park system and provide quality recreational programs and services over the next decade. These strategies will direct the development of annual work plans by providing policy direction based on the themes and goals previously outlined.

CONNECTIVITY AND EQUITY Goal: Provide an open space system that physically connects people with parks and other centers of activity across the City.

Goal: Provide parks and diverse recreational opportunities that are equitably distributed and accessible across the City.

Strategies:

• Create a trail system that provides opportunities for

• Geographically balance the distribution of parks and

recreation as well as alternative modes of transportation

facilities to meet established standards.

(i.e. cycling, walking, skating, jogging, hiking).

• Prioritize capital improvements based on the greatest

• Implement recommendations from the 2011 Hike and

need for park and recreation facilities and following

Bike Plan, including the creation of on-street bicycle routes

adopted service level standards.

and the use of utility easements, drainage ways and street

• Continuously monitor population growth and adjust the

rights-of-way as trail connections.

capital program as needed to keep pace with established

• Promote the use of trails to access major destinations

standards.

such as schools, places of employment, public spaces and

• Provide facilities for people of all physical capabilities,

retail establishments.

skill levels, age groups, income, and activity interests.

• Coordinate planning efforts to connect Arlington’s trail

• Provide sidewalks, ramps, paths, and trails for passive

system to neighboring cities’ trails and bikeway systems.

recreation, pedestrian safety, and accessibility for persons

• Create trailhead improvements that provide support

with disabilities.

services, including interpretive and directory signage,

• Improve access to waterways and promote the use of

lighting, emergency call boxes, rest areas, drinking

water trails throughout the park system.

fountains, landscaping, and parking.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

QUALITY FACILITIES Goal: Design and maintain facilities to a highquality standard. Strategies: • Provide the resources necessary to maintain all parks and facilities to desired service levels. • Repair, replace and upgrade existing parks and recreation facilities through a system-wide lifecycle management program that takes into account changing conditions, facility needs, funding and priorities. • Refine current maintenance service levels and standards based on industry best practices and update as needed. • Promote the use of low-maintenance design techniques. • Encourage community groups, special interest groups, and neighborhood associations to maintain and improve parks and open spaces.

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES Goal: Provide a variety of recreational facilities and programs to meet changing needs and priorities.

Goal: Appropriate resources in a manner which favors reinvesting and enhancing existing facilities.

Strategies:

development, adults, seniors, and persons with disabilities.

• Continuously update the facility infrastructure gap report

• Improve the comfort and convenience of customers by

with asset conditions and repair costs.

providing accessible restrooms, shade structures, drinking

• Develop lifecycle plans for all capital assets to ensure

fountains, signage, parking, and other features.

that resources are available to meet renovation/

• Re-balance the inventory of aquatic facilities across the

replacement needs.

City in response to facility usage, facility conditions, and

Goal: Continually improve the safety and security of parks and recreation facilities.

• Provide facilities and programs that support emerging trends. • Provide enriching family experiences that support youth

future needs. • Meet youth needs for convenient access to healthy play opportunities.

Strategies:

• Expand and enhance opportunities for trail experiences

• Diversify park activities as a means to attract a greater

that promote health and wellness.

number of park users. statistics and established standards.

Goal: Leverage park system improvements to promote health, wellness, and active living.

• Incorporate traffic calming strategies where needed at

Strategies:

access points to parks, open space and trailheads.

• Promote community health and social benefits of the

• Continue using Crime Prevention through Environmental

parks and recreation system.

Design (CPTED) principles in design and maintenance

• Incorporate health and wellness in all facilities, programs,

practices.

and services.

• Coordinate and balance law enforcement and security

• Provide opportunities for an active and healthy lifestyle.

personnel as appropriate.

• Offer fun places where people can play spontaneously,

• Explore options for implementing park watch programs.

exercise, and connect with nature.

• Evaluate risks and park conditions using available

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURE Goal: Preserve and protect Arlington’s natural environment and native ecosystems.

Goal: Foster opportunities for environmental education. Strategies: • Celebrate natural areas and the environment through a

Strategies:

variety of educational experiences.

• Develop and implement a natural resources management

• Increase interpretive and educational signage and

plan that focuses on opportunities at distinctive sites.

programming.

• Identify environmentally sensitive areas (e.g. floodplains,

• Create environmental and cultural awareness through

wetlands, lands with scenic and/or wildlife values) and

programs, festivals, and activities.

encourage conservation.

• Support environmental programming at the Living

• Acquire, protect and preserve lands with significant

Science Center.

natural and cultural resources. • Identify restoration opportunities for increasing natural areas and improving ecosystems. • Expand efforts to control non-native invasive plants, particularly in environmentally sensitive areas. • Promote the use of natural systems and practices for managing stormwater and improving water quality.

Goal: Design and maintain parks and facilities to achieve environmental sustainability.

COMMUNITY AND CHARACTER Goal: Provide places where people can interact and build community. Strategies: • Promote the benefits of the park system through creative planning and programming. • Leverage relationships with “friends groups,” staff, and volunteers to promote parks and recreation.

Strategies:

• Expand the use of parks and open spaces for festivals

• Incorporate sustainable “green” planning, design,

and special events.

construction, and operational practices.

• Design facilities, amenities and gathering spaces to

• Utilize and promote the City’s integrated pest

support, attract and promote social interaction.

management program to discourage the use of pesticides.

• Incorporate public art into projects, programs and

• Promote water conservation through native plants,

services.

xeriscaping, water wells and reclaimed water, and other methods. • Expand the use of solar power. • Promote recycling in all parks and public spaces, especially during festivals and special events. • Expand tree planting programs to offset the City’s carbon footprint. • Advance environmental sustainability goals by expanding partnerships with other agencies and organizations.

Goal: Provide a park and recreation system that will improve the physical form and image of the City. Strategies: • Promote beautification of key corridors and City entryways. • Acquire and maintain park, greenbelt and open spaces that are prominent and highly visible to neighborhoods. • Reinvigorate neighborhoods and ensure sustainability by leveraging resources, increasing citizen participation and encouraging stakeholder collaborations. • Improve wayfinding to parks and facilities by installing directional signage along collector and arterial roadways and park entrances. • Promote the economic benefits of the parks and recreation system. 2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

PARTNERSHIPS AND ENGAGEMENT Goal: Develop partnerships to promote ownership in the park system and greater efficiencies in programming, acquisition, maintenance, and development. Strategies: • Emphasize a multi-jurisdictional approach to providing parks and recreation programs and facilities with other agencies and organizations. • Work with school districts to share facilities that accommodate service needs. • Expand the “Fiends of Parks” program to encourage community volunteers in park development and maintenance. • Explore partnership opportunities to reduce maintenance liability. • Utilize non-profit organizations to help generate alternative funding through grants, donations and sponsorships. • Expand sponsorships and naming rights opportunities.

Goal: Provide meaningful opportunities for public support, input, and engagement. Strategies: • Increase outreach and communication regarding system needs and benefits. • Engage historically under-represented segments of the community. • Periodically update the plan to reflect changing conditions (e.g. demographics) and to provide a forum for citizen input. • Develop collaborative partnerships to enhance support for parks and recreation. • Identify strategies for financing major facilities.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Recreation Facility Development Model Given limited resources, choices that best represent the desires and needs of the community must be made to ensure that major recreation facilities are provided in a fair, equitable and efficient manner. The following are policies that the Department believes are vital to efficiently providing the community with major park and recreation facilities.

RECREATION CENTERS It is the policy of the Arlington Parks and Recreation Department to provide diverse indoor recreation opportunities throughout the City including:

ELZIE ODOM

• Mid-sized, regionally oriented indoor recreation centers - current

CITY-WIDE MULTI-GEN REC CENTER

• Five of the City’s six sectors (North, East, West, Southeast, and Southwest)

• East location is multigenerational

DOTTIE LYNN

• Large city-wide multigenerational recreation center - future

ACTIVE ADULT CENTER

• Located in central Arlington • Stand-alone active adult center

LAKE HOUSE EVENTS CENTER

MEADOWBROOK

• Currently served by Eunice Activity Center located in east Arlington • Future replacement facility slated for location in west Arlington • Rental and event centers - current • Three centers each offering a distinctive experience 

o The Lake House Event Center



o Bob Duncan Center



o Meadowbrook Recreation Center

EAST LIBRARY & RECREATION CENTER

BOB DUNCAN CENTER EUNICE CLIFF NELSON

• Indoor field house - future

THE BEACON

• Located in central Arlington Older facilities should be renovated and expanded to provide additional services. The Bob Duncan Center and Meadowbrook Recreation Center will be appropriately maintained and kept in service until such time that the facility is no longer operable, requires major reconstruction, or funding is available to construct the city-wide multigenerational center in which the event space will be incorporated within. The current Eunice Activity Center could be repurposed as a rental and event center upon completion of the future active adult center, or the determination could be made to liquidate the asset.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

FAMILY AQUATICS CENTERS PROPOSED INDOOR FAMILY AQUATIC CENTER LEISURE POOLS, SHALLOW WATER PLAY POOLS OR LARGE SPRAYGROUNDS SMALL SPRAYGROUNDS INDOOR POOLS

AQUATIC FACILITIES It is the policy of the Arlington Parks and Recreation Department to provide diverse aquatic opportunities throughout the City including: • Family aquatic centers - a higher priced leisure water park experience • Three regionally oriented outdoor family aquatic centers o Randol Mill and S.J. Stovall Parks - current o Webb Park - future • One indoor family aquatic center located with the city-wide multigenerational rec center in central Arlington - future • Leisure pools, shallow water play pools, or large spraygrounds - a moderately priced leisure experience • Three leisure pools or large spraygrounds (Helen Wessler, Howard Moore, and Woodland West Parks) • Vandergriff Park currently serves as a leisure pool but is intended to be replaced by the indoor family aquatic center. • Webb Park currently serves as a large sprayground but is intended to be incorporated into the future family aquatic center slated for that location. • Helen Wessler Pool will be replaced at the relocated park site, currently the Roark Elementary School campus. • Small spraygrounds - free leisure experience • Multiple sprayground facilities (currently located at Brantley Hinshaw, California Lane, and Don Misenhimer Parks) • Future locations to be determined • Indoor pools – moderately priced fitness and leisure experience • Two regionally oriented indoor pools (East Library and Rec Center, and future Active Adult Center) • Access to Arlington ISD Natatorium (Ten-year agreement) Existing facilities in Vandergriff Park and Woodland West Park will be appropriately maintained and kept in service until such time that these facilities are no longer operable, require major reconstruction, or funding is available to replace them. At such time Woodland West Pool is a likely candidate to be replaced with a shallow water play pool or large sprayground.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

ATHLETICS FACILITIES It is the policy of the Arlington Parks and Recreation Department to provide two large, regionally oriented, sports centers at the existing Harold Patterson Sports Center and a future site to be determined. Additionally, a majority of Community Parks will provide varying levels of formal athletic fields, with the primary focus on Randol Mill, Dunlop, MLK, Vandergriff and Cravens Parks.

GOLF FACILITIES It is the policy of the Arlington Parks and Recreation Department to focus future golf capital funding towards improvements at existing courses. The current three 18-hole courses and one nine-hole course are adequate to meet Arlington’s population at build-out. These facilities provide diverse experiences and a range of pricing options. Re-investing in these facilities, as opposed to constructing additional facilities, will be the focus.

TENNIS/PICKLEBALL COURT FACILITIES It is the policy of the Arlington Parks and Recreation Department for the Arlington Tennis Center (ATC) to be the main venue for city tennis programs and services. Additional courts and amenities are planned in the third and final phase of construction. Historically, tennis courts have been provided in both community and neighborhood parks. However, because of their significant construction and ongoing maintenance costs, any new courts will be located in community parks and the ATC. Opportunities to incorporate Pickleball into tennis courts will be considered when new courts are developed, and existing tennis courts receive surfacing maintenance.

DOG PARKS It is the policy of the Arlington Parks and Recreation Department to provide three large, regionally oriented, dog parks at the existing Tails ‘N Trails and Rush Creek Dog Parks, and one additional dog park at an undetermined site in north Arlington. Additionally, a future dog park in the Viridian development will be available to the public and serve as a fourth regional facility.

SKATE PARKS It is the policy of the Arlington Parks and Recreation Department to provide skate parks in accordance with the adopted Arlington Skate Park Master Plan.

UNIQUE/SPECIALIZED FACILITIES It is the policy of the Arlington Parks and Recreation Department to provide new types of recreation facilities based on citizen interest and support. Innovation and community benchmarking will continue as part of the Department’s ongoing effort to deliver innovative park and recreation programs and facilities.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Funding Our Future To implement this Master Plan and achieve our vision of great parks and exceptional recreation, there must be adequate funding to provide new services where needed and to keep existing facilities properly maintained. The table on the following page outlines both current and projected funds for park and recreation acquisition, development and renovation over the next ten years

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

ESTIMATED COST FOR PRIORITY PROJECTS

$349,205,000

Existing Funds by Fund Type Bonds

$91,665,000

Grants

$1,427,000

Park Fees

$9,397,956 $102,489,956

Projected Funds by Fund Type Future Bonds

$60,000,000

Future Park Fees and Grants

$5,000,000 $65,000,000 GRAND TOTAL

$167,489,956

FUNDING SHORTFALL

$181,715,044

This Plan outlines more than $350 million in priority projects. To achieve the goals of this Plan, funding will be required from multiple sources. Beginning in 2014, a series of bond elections have contributed nearly $80 million towards this vision. Additionally, nearly $11 million of other capital funding including park fees and grants are available for this Plan. Through the term of this plan, it is expected that another bond election will occur that conceivably could yield another $60 million, with other capital funding sources supplementing this funding. Funding will also be needed to address existing and future capital maintenance projects not included in these funding priorities. The annual general fund appropriation for capital maintenance is only a fraction of the current need and will certainly not keep pace with increasing demands. While additional appropriations of general funds are recommended for this purpose, the City’s current fiscal situation makes this increasingly unlikely. In order to meet the additional capital requirements, the Department must seek out and maximize non-traditional funding sources. Alternative funding sources could include the following: • Public/Private Partnerships - Pursue opportunities for complementary private development that would either generate funds to invest in the park system or provide facilities and services that offset costs to the City. • Facility Surcharge Fees - Implement facility surcharge fees at capital intensive facilities that would be directly reinvested into the facilities at which they were collected. • Park Development Fee - Evaluate the current structure to determine opportunities for increased flexibility and revenues, including consolidation of sub-areas to allow broader geographic flexibility and valuation of fees assessed. Even as these and other funding sources are considered, there is a high likelihood the funding required for this Plan will not being completely realized. This will require a continual exercise of prioritizing projects against available funding, and many of the priority projects in this Plan will be re-considered during subsequent master plans.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

The Big Picture

Earlier in this Plan, six strategies were outlined to help guide the Department in establishing priorities and annual work plans. Taken together, these strategies articulate an overarching philosophy aimed at creating a strong sense of place in Arlington’s parks.

Based upon this general philosophy, the Action Plan identifies specific projects that, taken together, will produce these sought-after results by strategically investing the Department’s limited resources. The final section of the Plan, entitled “Project Recommendations,” spells out in detail the Department’s priority projects and initiatives, both citywide and within specific subareas of the City. First, however, it is important to look at the Plan from a broader perspective to see where and how the Plan allocates future funding.

The Plan gives the highest priority to projects that meet the following goals: • Provide an open space system that physically connects

• Preserve and protect Arlington’s natural environment and

people with parks and other centers of activity across the

native ecosystems.

City. • Provide parks and diverse recreational opportunities that are equitably distributed and accessible across the City. • Design and maintain facilities to a high-quality standard. • Appropriate resources in a manner which favors reinvesting and enhancing existing facilities. • Continually improve the safety and security of parks and recreation facilities.

• Design and maintain parks and facilities to achieve environmental sustainability. • Foster opportunities for environmental education. • Provide places where people can interact and build community. • Create a park and recreation system that will improve the physical form and image of the City. • Develop partnerships to promote ownership in the

• Provide a variety of recreational facilities and programs

park system and greater efficiencies in programming,

to meet changing needs and priorities.

acquisition, maintenance, and development.

• Leverage park system improvements to promote health,

• Provide meaningful opportunities for public support,

wellness, and active living.

input, and engagement.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

FUNDING BY PARK AND FACILITY TYPE Recreation Centers

42%

Athletic Facilities

25%

Parks

16%

Linear Parks

Aquatic Facilities

Golf Facilities

Skate Parks

Natural Areas

Tennis Facilities

The chart above demonstrates that 66 percent of parks and recreation funding is planned for recreation centers and athletic facilities. Of that 66 percent however, four major projects make up over 80 percent of that and over 54 percent of the total funding need. These are the Active Adult Center, Citywide Multi-generational Center, Youth Athletic Facility, and the Indoor Field House together totaling $189 million. Funding for linear parks accounts for an additional six percent of the funding, at just nearly $18 million Another useful perspective is to analyze the funding distribution as it relates to new development vs. renovation vs. acquisition projects.

CITYWIDE FUNDING BY PROJECT TYPE Development

80%

Renovation

14%

Acquisition

This breakdown demonstrates the Department’s balance of competing demands. The majority of funding is allocated for development of existing park properties, with the proportion set aside for renovation is substantially less than the previous master plan which allocated approximately 33 percent. Again, the four major projects just mentioned greatly impact these percentages. Absent of these four, the proportions would be 59, 30, and 12 percent respectively. Acquisition assumes a smaller, yet still important role, as the Department emphasizes strategically bringing properties into the parks and recreation system that contribute to the strategies of this Plan.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

Project Recommendations

The identified strategies and goals articulate an over-arching philosophy aimed at creating a strong sense of place in Arlington’s parks. Based upon this general philosophy, the Master Plan identifies specific projects that, taken together, will produce these sought-after results by strategically investing the Department’s limited resources. Projects are prioritized into each of the 12 park planning sub-areas and the overall citywide category. 2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Project Priorities by Subarea

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

CITYWIDE PROJECTS PROJECTS

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION

Harold Patterson Sports Center *

$3,600,000

Phase II - replace existing restroom/concession building and lighting at the multipurpose fields

Active Adult Center *

Design and construct active adult center

Richard Simpson Park Phase II *

Replace existing pavilion, playground, boat storage and roadway/parking lots

Citywide Multi-Generational Center **

Citywide center with active adult, aquatics, fitness and wellness, gymnasium, theater and rental components

ACQUISITION

$45,000,000

$4,050,000

$90,000,000

Harold Patterson Sports Center

$5,000,000

Phase III - renovate and enhance athletic fields, fencing, lighting, concession/restroom and parking

Bowman Springs Park renovations *

$520,000

Drainage, renovate playground and parking lot

Arlington Tennis Center

Phase III - additional courts, expanded parking lot, event pavilion, clubhouse expansion, shade structures, restrooms, and gazebo

Vandergriff Skatepark

Phase II – lighting, skate plaza and bowl features

$1,150,000

$1,000,000

Harold Patterson Sports Center

$20,000,000

Phase IV - renovate and enhance athletic fields, fencing, lighting, concession/restroom and parking

Bowman Springs Park additions

Restroom, sprayground, trail, exercise stations and renovate pavilion

Youth Athletic Complex **

Acquisition and development of a youth athletic complex

Indoor Field House

Acquisition and development of an Indoor Field House

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

$1,200,000

$25,000,000

$3,000,000

$25,000,000

$1,500,000

$192,400,000

$29,120,000

$4,500,000

$226,020,000

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

TEXAS RANGERS GOLF CLUB

TRINITY WEST SUBAREA PROJECTS

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION

River Legacy Parks renovations *

$2,000,000

Roadway and parking lot renovations, trail and erosion repairs

River Legacy Parks additions *

Trail extension to Greenbelt Road, trailhead

J.W. Dunlop Sports Center

Parking lot expansion, automated gates, re-construct orange field

ACQUISITION

$2,500,000

$400,000

$600,000

$50,000

$350,000

Parkway Central Park

General site improvements, exercise stations, automated gate and replace existing asphalt parking lot and roadway

J.W. Dunlop Skatepark

Community skate facility

North Dog Park

Develop off-leash dog park (site undetermined)

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

$750,000

$800,000

$4,500,000

$2,950,000 $7,450,000

TRINITY EAST SUBAREA PROJECTS Clarence Thompson Park additions I

Looped trail, exercise stations, and pavilion; renovate playground

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION $250,000

Elzie Odom Athletic Center (River Legacy Parks East)

Sprayground, restroom, skatespot, and tennis courts; expand parking lot

River Legacy Parks East

Exercise stations and skatespot; expand parking lot

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

Dixon W. Holman Park

Phase II - additional trail, bridges, pavilion, playground shade structure, and exercise stations

Crystal Canyon Preserve

Phase II – additional trail and bridges

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

$150,000

$550,000

Interior/exterior facility renovations

Clarence Thompson Park additions II

ACQUISITION

$1,100,000

$500,000

$1,000,000

$400,000

$250,000

$3,500,000

$700,000

$1,000,000

$5,200,000 2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

RANDOL MILL SUBAREA PROJECTS

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION

Randol Mill Park renovations

$1,500,000

Renovate basketball courts, tennis courts and parking lots

Village Creek Historical Area

Land acquisition; replace entry sign; dredge pond; reconstruct trail sections

ACQUISITION

$25,000

$300,000

$2,000,000

$100,000

$700,000

Randol Mill Aquatic Center (Randol Mill Park)

Phase II - add major slide feature and smaller slide feature on existing deck, lap lanes, shade structures, and concession building air conditioning; replace play structures

High Oak Park *

Phase II – playground, pavilion, and exercise stations

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

$300,000

$1,000,000

Randol Mill Park additions

Second phase of the barrier-free playground, second phase of the skate facility, looped trail with exercise stations, and maintenance center covered parking structure

George Stevens Park Skatespot

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

$1,000,000

$200,000

$4,525,000

$1,900,000 $8,125,000

$1,700,000

RUSH CREEK DOG PARK

LAKE ARLINGTON SUBAREA PROJECTS

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION

ACQUISITION

Lake Arlington Golf Course

General course improvements; replace maintenance building, cart barn, maintenance drive and clubhouse roof

Rush Creek Linear Park

Trail from Pioneer Parkway to Division Street

$2,000,000

$5,000,000

Griffin Woods

$3,000,000

Acquisition of natural area at Pioneer Parkway and West Green Oaks Blvd

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

Thora Hart Park

Pavilion, trail, exercise stations, and skate spot

Marti Van Ravenswaay Park

Replace replace entry sign; add exercise stations and skate spot

Clarence Foster Park

Pavilion and skate spot

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

$1,000,000

$400,000

$250,000

$25,000

$200,000

$6,850,000

$2,025,000

$4,000,000

$12,875,000 2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

TRI-CITY SUBAREA PROJECTS Dottie Lynn Recreation Center (Woodland West Park) Interior facility renovations and additions

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION $2,000,000

California Lane Park

ACQUISITION

$1,000,000

$200,000

Replace playground

Veterans Park

Skate facility and exercise stations; replace restrooms, bridge and trail sections; dredge pond; irrigate open space

Jake Langston Park

Pedestrian bridge, trail and exercise stations

Village/Rush Creek Linear Park *

Trail between Veterans Park and Kelley Park

Mary and Jimmie Hooper Park

Dredge pond; renovate playground and low water crossings; add exercise stations and skate spot

$500,000

$750,000

$1,000,000

$225,000

Woodland West Pool (Woodland West Park)

Trail, exercise stations and skate spot

Pleasant Ridge Park

Phase one of neighborhood park

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

$250,000

$1,000,000

Replace facility per aquatics master plan

Woodland West Park

$600,000

$400,000

$1,000,000

$5,875,000

$3,050,000 $8,925,000

SIX FLAGS SUBAREA PROJECTS Bob Cooke Park

Pavilion, exercise stations and skate facility

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION $1,000,000

$1,000,000

Helen Wessler Pool (Helen Wessler Park)

Carl Knox Jr. Park

$500,000

Dredge pond

Interior facility renovations; add trail and exercise stations

$1,000,000

Replace facility per aquatics master plan

Eunice Activity Center (Meadowbrook Park)

ACQUISITION

$80,000

$220,000

$250,000

$1,200,000

Meadowbrook Park / Golf Course

Replace pedestrian bridge; renovate parking lots and golf buildings; add skateable art trail and exercise stations

Valley View Park

Skate spot; acquire adjacent properties for expansion

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

Timberlake Park

Phase one of neighborhood park

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

$200,000

$600,000

$1,000,000

$4,530,000

$2,920,000

$2,600,000

$10,050,000

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

JOHNSON STATION SUBAREA PROJECTS Brantley Hinshaw Park

Skate spot and renovate pavilion

B.C. Barnes Park

Phase II – east loop trail with exercise stations and irrigated open space

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

Vandergriff Park

Trail lighting and parking lot improvements

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION $400,000

$150,000

$1,000,000

$500,000

Marrow Bone Spring Park

** Project has partial funding authorized

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

$1,000,000

$500,000

$250,000

Remove streets and utilities at Arkansas Lane

* Project has funding authorized

ACQUISITION

$2,050,000

$750,000 $3,800,000

$1,000,000

JULIA BURGEN

UTA SUBAREA PROJECTS Johnson Creek Greenway *

Phase III – trail connection from Meadowbrook Park to Julia Burgen Park

Fielder Park

Replace restrooms, and tennis/basketball courts; reconfigure parking lot; add trail and exercise stations

Duncan Robinson Park

Pavilion and exercise stations; renovate parking lot and playground

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION $2,500,000

$800,000

$100,000

$400,000

$300,000

Renovate playground and replace pedestrian bridge

Center Street Trail

Trail construction between Pioneer Parkway and Park Row

O.S. Gray Natural Area

Phase II - additional trail and pavilion

College Hills Park

Renovate playground and entry sign; add walking trail

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

$1,000,000

$200,000

Howard Moore Park

ACQUISITION

$1,000,000

$300,000

$100,000

$160,000

$4,200,000

$1,660,000

$1,000,000

$6,860,000

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

RUSH CREEK NORTH SUBAREA PROJECTS Cliff Nelson Recreation Center

Land acquisition and center renovations/expansion

Deaver Park**

Phase III - trail, exercise stations, pavilion; dredge pond; expand parking lot

Gene Schrickel Jr. Park

Phase II - basketball court, skate spot, exercise stations and additional trail

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION $2,000,000

$150,000

$400,000

ACQUISITION $2,000,000

$700,000

Treepoint Park

Phase II - pavilion, basketball court, skate spot, and additional trail with educational nodes; expand playground

Cliff Nelson Park

Dredge pond; add exercise stations and skate spot

Southwest Nature Preserve

Phase II - additional improvements per site master plan

Rush Creek Linear Park

Trail construction from I-20 to Sublett Road

Wimbledon Park Skate spot

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

$1,000,000

$200,000

$400,000

$2,000,000

$600,000

$200,000

$7,100,000

$950,000 $9,050,000

$1,000,000

RUSH CREEK SOUTH SUBAREA PROJECTS Tierra Verde Golf Club

Event pavilion and driving range shade structures; expand parking lot

F.J. Red Kane Park

Additional trail, exercise stations and skate spot; renovate playground and dredge pond

Bad Königshofen Family Aquatic Center

Phase II - additional shade, water slide, and lighting

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

S.J. Stovall Park

Skate facility, picnic stations, and additional parking

Allen Saxe Park

Exercise stations and additional parking

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION

ACQUISITION

$7,000,000

$1,000,000

$1,500,000

$1,000,000

$400,000

$250,000

MLK Jr. Sports Center

Phase III - additional baseball fields, restrooms, parking, skate facility, playground, and recreational courts

Rush Creek Linear Park

Trail construction from FJ Red Kane Park to Harris Road

Sublett Creek Linear Park Trail construction

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

$6,000,000

$2,000,000

$1,000,000

$20,150,000

$1,000,000

$22,150,000 2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

LYNN CREEK NORTH SUBAREA PROJECTS Tails `n Trails Dog Park*

Expand facility into three areas and add shade structures

Cravens Park

Skate facility and exercise stations

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

Blackland Prairie Park

Parking lot, soft surface trail, interpretive signage, and fencing

Harold Patterson Skatepark Community skate facility

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

Fish Creek Neighborhood Park Skate spot

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION

ACQUISITION

$200,000

$300,000

$1,000,000

$400,000

$750,000

$1,000,000

$200,000

$3,850,000

$0 $5,850,000

$2,000,000

HARRIS ROAD

EDEN

LYNN CREEK SOUTH SUBAREA PROJECTS Lynn Creek Linear Park*

Extend trail system to New York; replace entry sign

Southeast Aquatic Center

New aquatic component at Webb Community Park

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

Bowman Branch Linear Park*

Extend trail system to Hwy 360

Neighborhood Park

Land acquisition and development

W.O. and Zeta Workman Park

Skate spot; renovate playground with shade structure

Don Misenhimer Park

Sprayground renovations; renovate playground; add exercise stations and skate spot

Webb Community Park

Phase IV development per site master plan

New York Park

Phase one of neighborhood park

* Project has funding authorized ** Project has partial funding authorized

DEVELOPMENT RENOVATION $1,400,000

ACQUISITION

$25,000

$4,000,000

$1,000,000

$1,400,000

$1,000,000

$200,000

$25,000

$400,000

$10,000,000

$1,000,000

$20,400,000

$450,000

$2,000,000

$22,850,000 2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Master Plan Goals and Outcomes As noted earlier, six themes were established to guide development of the Master Plan and its priorities. For each theme, plan outcomes have been identified to demonstrate linkages between goals and project priorities. These linkages are described below. CONNECTIVITY AND EQUITY

QUALITY FACILITIES

Provide parks and diverse recreational opportunities within an open space system, equitably distributed and accessible across the City, that physically connects people with parks and other centers of activity across the City.

Design and maintain facilities to a high-quality standard, appropriate resources in a manner which favors reinvesting and enhancing existing facilities, and continually improve the safety and security of parks and recreation facilities.

Outcomes: • The Plan includes a multitude of different types of

Outcomes:

projects including recreation, active adult, athletic, aquatic,

• The Plan recommends over 85 development projects that

golf, skate, and tennis facilities, as well as park, linear park,

will provide opportunities to incorporate quality design

and natural area initiatives.

standards and safety/security considerations.

• The Plan recommends the development of facilities that

• The Plan recommends over $48 million in renovations,

provide new and unique services to the community.

26% of the plan funding not considering the Active Adult

• The Plan recommends at least $5 million of projects in each sub-area, with higher emphasis placed on areas of the city traditionally lacking facilities. • The Plan recommends over $22 million in Linear Park projects.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

Center, Citywide multi-generational Center, and Indoor Field House.

HEALTHY LIFESTYLES

COMMUNITY AND CHARACTER

Provide a variety of recreational facilities and programs to meet changing needs and priorities, and leverage park system improvements to promote health, wellness, and active living.

Provide places where people can interact and build community and provide a park and recreation system that will improve the physical form and image of the City.

Outcomes:

• The Plan includes various projects that support, attract,

• The Plan includes a multitude of different types of

and promote social interaction including centers, athletic

projects including recreation, active adult, athletic, aquatic,

complexes, aquatic centers, golf courses, skate, and

golf, skate, and tennis facilities, as well as park, linear park,

outdoor park amenities.

and natural area initiatives.

Outcomes:

• The Plan recommends over 85 development projects

• The Plan recommends the development of facilities that

that will provide opportunities to incorporate enhanced

provide new and unique services to the community.

beautification and art. • The Plan recommends over $23 million in acquisition

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURE Preserve and protect Arlington’s natural environment and native ecosystem, design and maintain parks and facilities to achieve environmental sustainability, and foster opportunities for environmental education.

providing beautification opportunities that are prominent and highly visible to neighborhoods.

PARTNERSHIPS AND ENGAGEMENT

projects.

Develop partnerships to promote ownership in the park system and greater efficiencies in programming, acquisition, maintenance, and development. Provide meaningful opportunities for public support, input, and engagement.

• The Plan recommends funding for the acquisition of

Outcomes:

natural areas.

• The Plan includes projects with multi-jurisdictional

Outcomes: • The Plan recommends over $22 million in Linear Park

• The Plan recommends over 85 development projects

administration, funding and promotion.

that will provide opportunities to incorporate sustainable

• The Plan emphasizes pursuing public/private

“green” design.

partnerships to provide facilities and services for the

• The Plan recommends project funding for natural areas

community.

including Crystal Canyon Preserve, O.S. Gray Natural Area,

• The Plan emphasizes engaging non-profit organizations

Southwest Nature Preserve, and the Blackland Prairie Site.

to secure non-traditional funding sources like grants, donations, and sponsorships. • The plan recommends projects that support ongoing volunteer initiatives.

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

Conclusion While this Master Plan has similarities to previous plans,

The Plan is not intended to prescribe a parks and

it uniquely reflects today’s Arlington, the American Dream

recreation system, yet it is an approach to managing

City.

the everchanging demographics, economy, needs, and priorities of this community as it relates to providing

The Plan is ambitious, demonstrating a substantial

great parks and recreational opportunities. Constant

funding gap while available land is scarce and traditional

prioritization, relentless analysis, and intense planning will

funding not keeping pace. However, the innovative, forward

be required to affect the ambition and diversity of the Plan.

thinking, and “can do” spirit of Arlington will ultimately be reflected in the success of the Plan.

The Plan ultimately advances the mission of Arlington Parks and Recreation, providing quality facilities and

The Plan is diverse, fostering the continued evolution

services that are responsive to a diverse community and

of Arlington’s parks and recreation system to meet the

sustained with a focus on partnerships, innovation and

changing needs of the citizens. From goals to project

environmental leadership.

recommendations, the Plan reflects the diversity of the community. Therefore, as the Plan is executed the parks and recreation system will certainly reflect the people of Arlington.

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n

2 02 0 PARK , RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE M A STE R PLAN

A r lin gton Pa r ks an d R e cr e at i o n