Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
Reply to "BCC Middle School Site Selction number 2 - 2012 version - "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote]But if Parks put an irrevocable open space condition on a site that was subject to a reclaim for school. then didn't Parks also have a hand in creating the problem? I guess I don't understand posters who insist on the one hand that a school can never be built at RCH because of what Parks did with certain funding, and on the other hand insist that Parks land can never be used for schools.[/quote] The above is refers to two different posters. I am not a rch resident while they appear to have a lot of paperwork regarding whether their park can or cannot be reclaimed, i do think that mcps does have a genuine right to reclaim, now if someone along the line did something to muddy that right then that is a separate issue. However, I do think that continuing to target parks (let's just leave rch out of this for a moment) as the only available places to build new school construction, especially in the down county area bodes badly for ALL of our parks, ALL OF THEM. We really need to change that mindset for the sake of our children and their children, because eventually, there won't be any parks left. Is this alarmist? No, just look at all the green space that is quickly being gobbled by the coming Purple Line and the attendant re-development. At least we can try to protect parks from disappearing one by one as they determine another need to build this and that. I think MCPS, the SSAC AND MNCPPC can all do better, think out of the box, and come up with a solution that is smart, economical, and spares the most loss of green space. My concern is the current SSAC (much like the last one) is buying into the premise that parks are vacant free land and because a park is listed as 20, 17, or 13 acres, it is considered to have "all that space". Yet many have not even taken the time to go to each location get out of their vehicles and walk around, see what is there, what could be built on, what is unbuildable acreage etc. The fact that MCPS puts together a citizens advisory and then gives them the impression that they are coming up with a good solution without adequate data makes me think they are putting on a show. That MCPS is trying to herd/guide folks towards certain sites and away from others (just watch the meetings in action to see what I mean). [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics