Vienna council reviews draft 10‑year parks master plan; staff to circulate appendices before July vote

Consultants from Kimley‑Horn and town staff presented the draft Parks & Recreation Master Plan, called “Our Plan to Play,” at Vienna’s June 9 work session, laying out a 10‑year vision and a set of priorities the town could use to guide maintenance, improvements and new projects.

The presentation described a process that included 18 months of data collection, community meetings and two types of surveys. David Samba, the lead consultant, said the draft frames six goals—operations and maintenance; financial sustainability; advancing parks infrastructure; programs, services and events; marketing and outreach; and investment in staff and partnerships—and includes 29 recommendations and 76 strategies. The consultants ran a case study on the Maud Robinson property, concluding its 0.75‑acre size would be most appropriate for a pocket park if the town pursued that use.

Council members said the analysis and community outreach were useful but questioned whether approving a 100‑page plan as a 10‑year policy would “lock” future councils into priorities they may later change. “I’m concerned about the idea that this would be a plan that council would adopt that would set goals that we are expected to adhere to for 10 years,” said a council member. Staff and consultants stressed the plan is intended as a flexible, scalable tool to inform decisions and said appendices (site evaluations, scoring and detailed cost estimates) would be circulated to council for review.

Town staff said the document is designed to guide the capital improvement plan and budgeting processes rather than automatically commit the town to projects without subsequent feasibility or operating‑cost analyses. The town manager explained that large investments would be brought forward with a feasibility study that includes capital and operating cost estimates before the council would be asked to fund them.

Council members pressed for clearer financial projections and a more visible presentation of the evidence supporting major recommendations. One councilor suggested delaying final adoption to the fall to allow time for additional financial detail; others preferred to see targeted edits circulated by staff so the council could review changes ahead of the scheduled July 7 adoption vote.

The council directed staff to return revised sections and the appendices for review; staff said they will email updated materials and highlighted items for council feedback. No formal vote was taken at the work session. The town manager said staff would use council feedback to refine the draft and that adoption remains scheduled to be considered at the July 7 meeting if outstanding questions can be resolved.