Reply to More MOCO Upzoning - Starting in Silver Spring

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "More MOCO Upzoning - Starting in Silver Spring"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Again. Build a 3-D replica showing what all the “ante” lawyer speak is going in about.[/quote]

Three visualizations, one of current condition, one with maximal use based on the ex-ante zoning and another with maximal use based on anything that might be considered in the study, each noting road usage, school occupancy vs. capacity and other public facility adequacy measures, would be very useful.

The prior post suggesting that planning and the County Council have little to no control over school planning/capacity is incorrect and intentionally daft.

The Council has the power of the purse (and has consistently underfunded school capital needs for decades).  It has taxation authority (and has decimated impact taxes that would help fund schools in many instances in pursuit of development).  It has both zoning approval authority (where upzoning/exceptions might be denied if adequate public facilities are not easily foreseen to be available) and authority over acquisiton, disposal and use of county land that might be used for schools (or parks, or...).  All of this may be used directly or as leverage to achieve better school facility outcomes.

Montgomery Planning/M-NCPPC is intended to work [i]with[/i] MCPS, both to facilitate student population forecasts based on existing trends and when considering changes such as those represented in this study.  They also have input regarding MCPS planning for construction that would need eventual County approval (and MCPS regularly has to alter designs -- properly so, at least notionally -- to accommodate that input).

MCPS is already way behind the 8-ball and has been without the support of the County Council over these decades to reserve additional land in closer-in areas that might provide for the space needed to serve the now-existing population, much less that which would come with any of the additional development.  And that development in these areas would be infill, not large greenfield where 10% (guess) of the acreage out of hundreds to thousands might be reserved for public facilities such as schools. With continued underfunding even for improvements/expansions of existing facilities, there has been little realistic opportunity for them to propose new facilities in the area, though I wish they would do so if only to give the issue greater visibility.[/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