tax assessment to help the county purchase the Burling tract for use as a nature park.
At the hearing, a group of thirty students representing Fairfax Students for Preservation of the Burling Tract delivered petitions signed by 2,300 district residents. This was an unusual statement of financial support for land preservation in a fiscally conservative county that had long been devoted to attracting suburban development.56 The move, however, made sense given that Fairfax was experiencing rapid suburbanization, which degraded environmental resources that many residents felt were critical to their quality of life.57 While offering to pay to preserve the Burling tract, the signatories did not expressly question the political economy underlying suburbanization or the legal and cultural endorsement of private property rights that made public acquisition the only sure way to protect the property.58
The presence of the students at the April 8 hearing confirmed the central role of young people in the case. They testified about their interests in hiking to the waterfall on the property at Scott’s Run, confirming the influence of recreational interests on open space preservation.59 Many of the students went to the same high school and were in the gym class of Marian Agnew, an early supporter of preservation. Some people contended that Agnew had duped her students into participating in the hearing to advance her own interests. In response, one parent wrote to a local newspaper that her son and the other students had not been “indoctrinated” but believed in their cause.60 The prominent role that students would play in the Burling case confirmed their bona fide environmental interests.
Even with vocal civic support, the board of supervisors voted five to two to reject a civic appeal to consider its approval of the site plan. Residents in attendance loudly voiced their disapproval, forcing the board to take a fifteen-minute recess before resuming its agenda. During the break, John Adams cornered two of the supervisors who had voted against the appeal, asking them to change their votes. When the hearing resumed, one of the supervisors asked the board to reconsider its decision. In a highly unusual turn of events, the precise reasons for which are not clear, the two supervisors that Adams had lobbied changed their votes, helping to pass a 4-3 motion that retracted the board’s support for development of the Burling tract.61
Following the decision, the board asked the county’s park authority to consider the feasibility of buying the Burling tract to serve as the district park for the Dranesville District.62 If it reached a positive conclusion, the board would put the property on the county’s public facility map, giving it the ability to issue $600,000 in bonds that had been approved by voters in 1966 for a district park.63 Three weeks later, and just a few days after the first Earth Day was celebrated in communities across the United States, the Fairfax Board of Supervisors held a hearing on the results of the district park study. The park authority concluded that the Burling tract had the qualities needed for a district part, emphasizing its natural features, its location adjacent to the Potomac, and its accessibility to over seven thousand residents within a two-mile radius.64 Even with the county park authority’s endorsement, which allowed the county to issue $600,000 in bonds, and the offer of $1.2 million from the Interior Department, the existing financing was still not enough to buy the land.
Elected officials remained unconvinced of preservation. Harriet Bradley reaffirmed her support for the developer’s project for its compliance with the local master plan and for offering several measures to mitigate the impact of development, including fifty-six acres of parkland. She was also skeptical about of the petition drive undertaken by Fairfax Students for Preservation of the Burling Tract, insisting that residents did not know they were expressing support for paying part of the costs for acquiring the Burling tract.65 The students responded by conducting another petition drive, obtaining 2,350 signatures over the next month.66
The growing movement to preserve the Burling tract suggested that people were more responsive to environmental issues when they felt an intimate connection with nature. Initially, residents affiliated with the Old Georgetown Pike and Potomac River Association had gotten involved in a “backyard” case to scale down prospective development at the site to curb the erosion of its hilly terrain and runoff into the Potomac. Over time, however, the tract’s wildness became a source of admiration as more citizens desired to preserve its amenities. This included “the dramatic bluffs of the palisades, the breathtaking waterfall of Scott’s Run, the Potomac River frontage, the abundant wildlife, the unique array of wildflowers, and scientifically acclaimed forest of high quality tulip, oak, hickory, and hemlock.”67 As local residents came to interpret expansive development as destructive, preservation advocates gained ground in their fight to protect the Burling tract.68 Developing an appreciation for nature and the various roles it fulfilled thus went a long way to cultivating a sense of responsibility for its protection.69
With local environmentalism on the rise, the board of supervisors agreed in early May to allow residents of the Dranesville District to vote on whether they would pay a special tax to help the county purchase the Burling tract for a public park. Although officials intended the ballot measure to be advisory, the county attorney concluded that if voters approved the tax, the outcome would be legally binding and enforceable by the local circuit court.70 A week later, Gordon Smith announced that his development firm, after ten months, had finally purchased the Burling tract for $3.36 million and was planning to proceed with their approved development project.71 Because the purchase price exceeded the funds available from the Interior Department and a local park acquisition bond, the special tax assessment—estimated at $1.5 million—was a prerequisite for acquiring the Burling tract.
On May 28, the Fairfax planning commission held the tenth public hearing on the Burling tract, at the request of the board of supervisors, to outline the costs to homeowners of the referendum measure. While familiar points of view were aired in what had become an intense debate, the atmosphere was incredibly lively. Cameras from a national television station recorded a public hearing that drew over two hundred attendees. Fifty-one people signed up to speak, most favoring preservation. Many in attendance were local teenagers, several of whom broke with the traditional approach of offering written and oral testimony to be more creative. Some of the youth showed a film explaining the merits of preserving open spaces. The high point of the meeting, and a watershed moment in the case, came when high school student Susan Daniel performed a folk song she had written in support of preserving the Burling tract.72
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.
