APS - Eminent Domain for Golf Courses?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nobody does a megathread like Arlington!

And it’s not sending us their brightest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reviving this post to see if anyone thinks it’s a possible solution to the CC debacle. I don’t believe the school board has condemnation authority, but the county board does. I know the acquisition costs would be high, but there seem to be no suitable parcels left anywhere else. Maybe the clubs could be combined?

There is no money in anyone’s budget for land acquisition. This isn’t happening.

What if other county or school board-owned sites were sold? (I realize I’m blurring SB/CB lines, just spitballing here).

Like what? What sites have enough value to get that kind of money and yet aren’t suitable for developing into schools?

I swear I saw a list on the most recent mega-thread but now I can’t find out. I want to say it was 160+ properties.

You’re missing the point. Parcels that have enough development value that someone would pay a substantial sum for them but that couldn’t be developed into schools. See the challenge?

We don't need enough land from a golf course to build a school. We DO need an easement from AMNC to provide access to Hoffman Boston site, where there is a great deal of open field space just begging for greater use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nobody does a megathread like Arlington!

Just wait for the McLean nutters to start chiming in because they HATE Arlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reviving this post to see if anyone thinks it’s a possible solution to the CC debacle. I don’t believe the school board has condemnation authority, but the county board does. I know the acquisition costs would be high, but there seem to be no suitable parcels left anywhere else. Maybe the clubs could be combined?

There is no money in anyone’s budget for land acquisition. This isn’t happening.

What if other county or school board-owned sites were sold? (I realize I’m blurring SB/CB lines, just spitballing here).

Like what? What sites have enough value to get that kind of money and yet aren’t suitable for developing into schools?

I swear I saw a list on the most recent mega-thread but now I can’t find out. I want to say it was 160+ properties.

You’re missing the point. Parcels that have enough development value that someone would pay a substantial sum for them but that couldn’t be developed into schools. See the challenge?

We don't need enough land from a golf course to build a school. We DO need an easement from AMNC to provide access to Hoffman Boston site, where there is a great deal of open field space just begging for greater use.

What are you talking about? There isn't enough open space on that site for another building, the most they could do is an addition to the existing school and they don't need an easement for that. Further, it couldn't just be an easement because there's no open space at the county club over there to use for access. If you force them to demolish part of their golf course to provide access to the Hoffman-Boston site, that would be a taking.

[Anonymous]

There was a plan for an easement through the golf course that would connect to a bridge (or use an existing bridge?) over 395 to provide connections between Pentagon City and H-B, specifically for emergency vehicle and pedestrian/bike access.

I assume that additional emergency access would allow the site to be zoned for more students?

[Anonymous]

Found a link: https://www.arlnow.com/2014/08/13/army-navy-country-club-access-road-moves-forward/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There was a plan for an easement through the golf course that would connect to a bridge (or use an existing bridge?) over 395 to provide connections between Pentagon City and H-B, specifically for emergency vehicle and pedestrian/bike access.

I assume that additional emergency access would allow the site to be zoned for more students?

That plan has nothing to do with schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reviving this post to see if anyone thinks it’s a possible solution to the CC debacle. I don’t believe the school board has condemnation authority, but the county board does. I know the acquisition costs would be high, but there seem to be no suitable parcels left anywhere else. Maybe the clubs could be combined?

There is no money in anyone’s budget for land acquisition. This isn’t happening.

What if other county or school board-owned sites were sold? (I realize I’m blurring SB/CB lines, just spitballing here).

Like what? What sites have enough value to get that kind of money and yet aren’t suitable for developing into schools?

I swear I saw a list on the most recent mega-thread but now I can’t find out. I want to say it was 160+ properties.

You’re missing the point. Parcels that have enough development value that someone would pay a substantial sum for them but that couldn’t be developed into schools. See the challenge?

Please skip the condescension when everyone is just looking for ideas. No one said anything about selling just one property - multiple parcels could be sold to generate the necessary funds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reviving this post to see if anyone thinks it’s a possible solution to the CC debacle. I don’t believe the school board has condemnation authority, but the county board does. I know the acquisition costs would be high, but there seem to be no suitable parcels left anywhere else. Maybe the clubs could be combined?

There is no money in anyone’s budget for land acquisition. This isn’t happening.

What if other county or school board-owned sites were sold? (I realize I’m blurring SB/CB lines, just spitballing here).

Like what? What sites have enough value to get that kind of money and yet aren’t suitable for developing into schools?

I swear I saw a list on the most recent mega-thread but now I can’t find out. I want to say it was 160+ properties.

You’re missing the point. Parcels that have enough development value that someone would pay a substantial sum for them but that couldn’t be developed into schools. See the challenge?

Please skip the condescension when everyone is just looking for ideas. No one said anything about selling just one property - multiple parcels could be sold to generate the necessary funds.

Which ones?

[Anonymous]

Maybe APS could just buy lots of Powerball tickets.

[Anonymous]

Exercise eminent domain and seize O'Connell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exercise eminent domain and seize O'Connell.

That would make for some fun boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exercise eminent domain and seize O'Connell.

So that those kids can add to the APS population. Great plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exercise eminent domain and seize O'Connell.

That would make for some fun boundaries.

APS should be lucky enough to have that problem to worry about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exercise eminent domain and seize O'Connell.

That would make for some fun boundaries.

APS should be lucky enough to have that problem to worry about.

Like they do at the elementary level?