BOE to pave over $790,000 in Athletic Fields

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would be a better location for the bus depot?

Why couldn't they just leave it where it was?

Because the county has decided that it is better for the land right next to a Metro station to be used for housing and stores than for a school bus depot. And I agree with the county.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20140625/NEWS/140629599/a-total-of-2200-housing-units-library-school-planned-near-shady&template=gazette

That link mentions that they're adding a new school. Which HS would that feed into?

They're adding a new school SITE. Wait until construction of the school is actually funded before worrying about which high school it would feed into.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would be a better location for the bus depot?

Why couldn't they just leave it where it was?

Because the county has decided that it is better for the land right next to a Metro station to be used for housing and stores than for a school bus depot. And I agree with the county.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20140625/NEWS/140629599/a-total-of-2200-housing-units-library-school-planned-near-shady&template=gazette

That link mentions that they're adding a new school. Which HS would that feed into?

They're adding a new school SITE. Wait until construction of the school is actually funded before worrying about which high school it would feed into.

Well, don't they have to open a new school? Where would the kids who live be going to school? What's the difference between a school SITE and a school? Just that they'll leave the site open until the homes sell and then open a school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That link mentions that they're adding a new school. Which HS would that feed into?

They're adding a new school SITE. Wait until construction of the school is actually funded before worrying about which high school it would feed into.

Well, don't they have to open a new school? Where would the kids who live be going to school? What's the difference between a school SITE and a school? Just that they'll leave the site open until the homes sell and then open a school?

No, MCPS does not have to open a new school. The kids who live there will go to existing schools, unless and until MCPS builds a new school. The difference between a school site and a school is that a school site is the location where MCPS might build a school in the future, if they decide to do so and have the money for it, and a school is a school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would be a better location for the bus depot?

Why couldn't they just leave it where it was?

Because the county has decided that it is better for the land right next to a Metro station to be used for housing and stores than for a school bus depot. And I agree with the county.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20140625/NEWS/140629599/a-total-of-2200-housing-units-library-school-planned-near-shady&template=gazette

You must be a conservative.
Are you also happy about the BOE destroying the 7 acres of Forest Conservation? (In addition to the 8 acre park already being paved over.)

Why would she be a conservative? It's a liberal idea to co-locate housing, jobs, and public transportation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That link mentions that they're adding a new school. Which HS would that feed into?

They're adding a new school SITE. Wait until construction of the school is actually funded before worrying about which high school it would feed into.

Well, don't they have to open a new school? Where would the kids who live be going to school? What's the difference between a school SITE and a school? Just that they'll leave the site open until the homes sell and then open a school?

No, MCPS does not have to open a new school. The kids who live there will go to existing schools, unless and until MCPS builds a new school. The difference between a school site and a school is that a school site is the location where MCPS might build a school in the future, if they decide to do so and have the money for it, and a school is a school.

Right, the county requires developers to set aside land for a new school but that doesn't mean a new school will ever be built. They did this in King Farm and other relatively new developments but in many cases the land just sits there unused. Granted MCPS does not have the budget to build a new school every time a new development is built.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would be a better location for the bus depot?

Why couldn't they just leave it where it was?

Because the county has decided that it is better for the land right next to a Metro station to be used for housing and stores than for a school bus depot. And I agree with the county.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20140625/NEWS/140629599/a-total-of-2200-housing-units-library-school-planned-near-shady&template=gazette

If Metro was able to handle the increased ridership, I'd agree with you but it can't. Trains are already packed leaving Shady Grove. Moreover, it's naive to think that just because people live near the Metro they will somehow abandon their cars. Doubtful.

[Anonymous]

Moving Alt Programs to Aspen Hill will kill that community on so many levels.

The county spent quite a bit renovating Ewing Center during Alt's redesign, only to move the school to what was once an elementary school in Aspen Hill.

bad move

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That link mentions that they're adding a new school. Which HS would that feed into?

They're adding a new school SITE. Wait until construction of the school is actually funded before worrying about which high school it would feed into.

Well, don't they have to open a new school? Where would the kids who live be going to school? What's the difference between a school SITE and a school? Just that they'll leave the site open until the homes sell and then open a school?

No, MCPS does not have to open a new school. The kids who live there will go to existing schools, unless and until MCPS builds a new school. The difference between a school site and a school is that a school site is the location where MCPS might build a school in the future, if they decide to do so and have the money for it, and a school is a school.

Right, the county requires developers to set aside land for a new school but that doesn't mean a new school will ever be built. They did this in King Farm and other relatively new developments but in many cases the land just sits there unused. Granted MCPS does not have the budget to build a new school every time a new development is built.

Perhaps all this land supposedly set aside for schools could instead be turned into bus depot. Added up I'm sure it would equal the athletic fields bing paved over. Cost-efficient? Don't know but it's a thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would be a better location for the bus depot?

Why couldn't they just leave it where it was?

Because the county has decided that it is better for the land right next to a Metro station to be used for housing and stores than for a school bus depot. And I agree with the county.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20140625/NEWS/140629599/a-total-of-2200-housing-units-library-school-planned-near-shady&template=gazette

If Metro was able to handle the increased ridership, I'd agree with you but it can't. Trains are already packed leaving Shady Grove. Moreover, it's naive to think that just because people live near the Metro they will somehow abandon their cars. Doubtful.

But the roads are also not able to handle the increased number of cars. Roads are already packed leaving Shady Grove... Which roads would you like to widen, and how much would you like to pay for that?

In any case, nobody is talking about "abandoning" cars. It's not as though it were a question of all driving everywhere always for everything vs. no driving ever. If you drive for half of your trips and use Metro, a bus, a bicycle, or your own two feet for the other half, that's one less car on the road for half of your trips.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Perhaps all this land supposedly set aside for schools could instead be turned into bus depot. Added up I'm sure it would equal the athletic fields bing paved over. Cost-efficient? Don't know but it's a thought.

The school sites are typically in the residential neighborhoods, so that future students will be able to walk to the schools when (if) they get built. (This is not only good for the students and the environment, but also cuts down on the school district's busing costs.) How do you suppose the people in the neighborhoods would feel about having a mini bus depot there?

And this is completely aside from the inefficiency of having a lot of mini bus depots spread all over the place in neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Perhaps all this land supposedly set aside for schools could instead be turned into bus depot. Added up I'm sure it would equal the athletic fields bing paved over. Cost-efficient? Don't know but it's a thought.

The school sites are typically in the residential neighborhoods, so that future students will be able to walk to the schools when (if) they get built. (This is not only good for the students and the environment, but also cuts down on the school district's busing costs.) How do you suppose the people in the neighborhoods would feel about having a mini bus depot there?

And this is completely aside from the inefficiency of having a lot of mini bus depots spread all over the place in neighborhoods.

Perhaps you should ask the people in the neighborhood surrounding Mark Twain athletic fileds how they feel about having a bus depot in their nieghborhood. But I guess their concerns don't matter as much.

As for using land set aside for a future (and unlikely) new school, perhaps there is one that is as big as the plot of land proposed for the new depot. Or a few strategically placed could be efficient and a better fit. I agree that it would be good for the new developments to have their own school but how much of a reality is that? It's pretty clear that the county is not looking at building brand new schools on those plots of land anytime in the foreseeable future. Perhaps that land could be put to more immediate and better use. Not saying they should do this but only that it was an option to explore (if it hasn't been already) and perhaps preserve the athletic fileds that are already a part of a neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would be a better location for the bus depot?

Why couldn't they just leave it where it was?

Because the county has decided that it is better for the land right next to a Metro station to be used for housing and stores than for a school bus depot. And I agree with the county.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20140625/NEWS/140629599/a-total-of-2200-housing-units-library-school-planned-near-shady&template=gazette

If Metro was able to handle the increased ridership, I'd agree with you but it can't. Trains are already packed leaving Shady Grove. Moreover, it's naive to think that just because people live near the Metro they will somehow abandon their cars. Doubtful.

But the roads are also not able to handle the increased number of cars. Roads are already packed leaving Shady Grove... Which roads would you like to widen, and how much would you like to pay for that?

In any case, nobody is talking about "abandoning" cars. It's not as though it were a question of all driving everywhere always for everything vs. no driving ever. If you drive for half of your trips and use Metro, a bus, a bicycle, or your own two feet for the other half, that's one less car on the road for half of your trips.

Fair points. First, I wouldn't pay for anything, the developers should as part of the agreement to develop the land. As for your other point, yes, more people taking Metro means less congestion even if they do not use Metro all the time. However, developing high density housing brings more people into a crowded area. Since most or all of them will be driving at some point on the roads around Shady Grove it will likely cancel out any benefit of building so close to the Metro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Fair points. First, I wouldn't pay for anything, the developers should as part of the agreement to develop the land. As for your other point, yes, more people taking Metro means less congestion even if they do not use Metro all the time. However, developing high density housing brings more people into a crowded area. Since most or all of them will be driving at some point on the roads around Shady Grove it will likely cancel out any benefit of building so close to the Metro.

Either you build housing close to transit, or you build housing far from transit. Which contributes more to car traffic on the roads?

Also, which developers are going to pay $4 billion to widen I-270 to Frederick, and for which developments?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Perhaps all this land supposedly set aside for schools could instead be turned into bus depot. Added up I'm sure it would equal the athletic fields bing paved over. Cost-efficient? Don't know but it's a thought.

The school sites are typically in the residential neighborhoods, so that future students will be able to walk to the schools when (if) they get built. (This is not only good for the students and the environment, but also cuts down on the school district's busing costs.) How do you suppose the people in the neighborhoods would feel about having a mini bus depot there?

And this is completely aside from the inefficiency of having a lot of mini bus depots spread all over the place in neighborhoods.

Perhaps you should ask the people in the neighborhood surrounding Mark Twain athletic fileds how they feel about having a bus depot in their nieghborhood. But I guess their concerns don't matter as much.

As for using land set aside for a future (and unlikely) new school, perhaps there is one that is as big as the plot of land proposed for the new depot. Or a few strategically placed could be efficient and a better fit. I agree that it would be good for the new developments to have their own school but how much of a reality is that? It's pretty clear that the county is not looking at building brand new schools on those plots of land anytime in the foreseeable future. Perhaps that land could be put to more immediate and better use. Not saying they should do this but only that it was an option to explore (if it hasn't been already) and perhaps preserve the athletic fileds that are already a part of a neighborhood.

Which neighborhood surrounds the Mark Twain athletic fields? Are we talking about the Mark Twain athletic fields that are right off Norbeck Road, with the golf course on one side and Rock Creek Park on the other, or are there some other Mark Twin athletic fields in Rockville?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fair points. First, I wouldn't pay for anything, the developers should as part of the agreement to develop the land. As for your other point, yes, more people taking Metro means less congestion even if they do not use Metro all the time. However, developing high density housing brings more people into a crowded area. Since most or all of them will be driving at some point on the roads around Shady Grove it will likely cancel out any benefit of building so close to the Metro.

Either you build housing close to transit, or you build housing far from transit. Which contributes more to car traffic on the roads?

Also, which developers are going to pay $4 billion to widen I-270 to Frederick, and for which developments?

Wasn't talking about something as grand as I-270 to Frederick. Just around the Shady Grove area that is already congested and is likely to be more so with this new development. Same for where to build. Does building in an area that is already congested help or hurt?