The site is hardly underutilized as a park.

That is not what the county reported, when in 2008 the activity's building of said park was placed on a list for possible closure due to under-use. It is now closed, so the "activities building" or the glorified picnic shack could easily make way for the new school project. I know that Parks would be willing to work with mcps on this site.

The park would remain intact, and could share the space with the school as it did for decades.

It is the responsible choice.

Anonymous wrote:
Not the poster you're responding to, but you're spending way too much time splitting hairs. The site belongs to Montgomery County taxpayers, it is way underutilized, and it should be reclaimed for expanded use now. Some will argue that the fields are used by BCC, but I don't see why HS students can't continue to use those fields, and send the MS students over to NCC park, as an earlier poster suggested. It amazes me that taxpayers are complacent about more development when there are sites that need to be redeveloped. And NO, I do not live in RCH. I don't live adjacent to any park, actually, but that doesn't mean I don't value them.

The site is hardly underutilized as a park. I think it's pretty obvious to anyone that NCC is much more underutilized (which is not to say that NCC is the best site). I value parks too, but it's not obvious that more value should be placed on a park with a little more green space and a lot less use. Also, the suggestion that MS students should go off to NCC for sports seems completely unworkable to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most buildings have asbestos and lead paitn. it is when it is disturbed that is causes problems.....

Right. But they will need to disturb it sooner than later.

Why?

Because according to an architect's thorough survey of the property in June of 1988, the interior of the buildings were very deteriorated...that was 23+ years ago, I doubt that they have improved their condition since then, so...yes, I do think MCPS will eventually have to spend money and disturb the lead and asbestos. So since they need a new middle school and these old decrepit buildings are or will be in need of tax payer money eventually, why not fill two needs at once. It makes good fiscal sense.

Well there's a big difference between they will need to do it "eventually" and they will need to do it"sooner rather than later". It's one thing to say that the buildings can't be renovated and it's another to say that MCPS will have to spend money on them in the near future.

Not the poster you're responding to, but you're spending way too much time splitting hairs. The site belongs to Montgomery County taxpayers, it is way underutilized, and it should be reclaimed for expanded use now. Some will argue that the fields are used by BCC, but I don't see why HS students can't continue to use those fields, and send the MS students over to NCC park, as an earlier poster suggested. It amazes me that taxpayers are complacent about more development when there are sites that need to be redeveloped. And NO, I do not live in RCH. I don't live adjacent to any park, actually, but that doesn't mean I don't value them.

I'm fairly certain that if that site is chosen, it will be MUCH more cost efficient for MCPS to demo all the buildings on the site rather than renovate what's there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most buildings have asbestos and lead paitn. it is when it is disturbed that is causes problems.....

Right. But they will need to disturb it sooner than later.

Why?

Because according to an architect's thorough survey of the property in June of 1988, the interior of the buildings were very deteriorated...that was 23+ years ago, I doubt that they have improved their condition since then, so...yes, I do think MCPS will eventually have to spend money and disturb the lead and asbestos. So since they need a new middle school and these old decrepit buildings are or will be in need of tax payer money eventually, why not fill two needs at once. It makes good fiscal sense.

Well there's a big difference between they will need to do it "eventually" and they will need to do it"sooner rather than later". It's one thing to say that the buildings can't be renovated and it's another to say that MCPS will have to spend money on them in the near future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most buildings have asbestos and lead paitn. it is when it is disturbed that is causes problems.....

Right. But they will need to disturb it sooner than later.

Why?

Because according to an architect's thorough survey of the property in June of 1988, the interior of the buildings were very deteriorated...that was 23+ years ago, I doubt that they have improved their condition since then, so...yes, I do think MCPS will eventually have to spend money and disturb the lead and asbestos. So since they need a new middle school and these old decrepit buildings are or will be in need of tax payer money eventually, why not fill two needs at once. It makes good fiscal sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Most buildings have asbestos and lead paitn. it is when it is disturbed that is causes problems.....

Right. But they will need to disturb it sooner than later.

Why?

Anonymous wrote:

Most buildings have asbestos and lead paitn. it is when it is disturbed that is causes problems.....

Right. But they will need to disturb it sooner than later. It has to be dealt with. Asbestos is a common problem n older buildings, nothing new.

But not when a day care is there. PP made it sound like because there is a daycare you can't have asbestos

Most buildings have asbestos and lead paitn. it is when it is disturbed that is causes problems.....

Right. But they will need to disturb it sooner than later. It has to be dealt with. Asbestos is a common problem n older buildings, nothing new.

If I'm wrong, and East Bethesda is less NIMBYistic than RCH, great, and it would confirm my increasingly low opinion of RCH.

The irony for RCH is that when the shoe was on the other foot, and the Coffield site was about to be picked, a bunch of Kensington folks upon hearing that there was push-back from that community actually signed an electronic petition in support of building a school in that community's park. Many of those same folks are now crying foul the loudest.

I guess ultimately this could be the most poetic justice.

Anonymous wrote:

and full of asbestos, the cost to remove it is a driving force why they won't select Lynbrook. It is going to go where they said awhile back, this is jsut a show......

And yet it houses a day care center! Do you think someone should tell those parents?

Most buildings have asbestos and lead paitn. it is when it is disturbed that is causes problems.....

Interesting perspective PP. Do you or others think that the Lynnbrook site would ease some of the concerns about the new middle school resulting in a race/class split between a very white, upper middle class Westland and a new middle school which is less white and less upper middle class? I'd note that I've heard those concerns, not sure if I actually share them. But it occurs to me that maybe it's a selling point for Lynnbrook that I hadn't considered. I wonder what the neighborhood is saying... I know there's a pretty active community group there right?

I have been following this thread with interest since I am actually in the Rosemary Hills neighborhood that successfully fought to keep our park during the first go round. I think someone had questioned why we were so against construction here. It was simple, RHLP is the only park our community has. We are surrounded by East West Highway, CSX train tracks and the Brookville Rd light industrial area, with two maintenance facilities, WSSC and the Ride On Bus Depot, and soon we'll be getting a third, the Purple Line Maintenance Yard. The actual park is bordered by 4 different apartment buildings, needless to say, our park is truly HEAVILY used. Furthermore, within a half mile radius of the park we have 4 schools, so we are not wanting for the amenities a school can provide, including those noxious idling buses. As the saying goes, we already gave at the office...

Having said that, I still think MCPS should look hard at the inventory that it has and does not use. Yes, RCH does have a reclaim clause, so while they may not like it, MCPS could reclaim that property for school use. But I also think there is a lot of merit to looking at the Lynnbrook site more closely. A previous poster said something about asbestos...but that will have to be dealt with sooner than later. Another poster mentioned that the "rich" Bethesda community would fight tooth and nail to keep a school out, but from what I understand, Bethesda has always welcomed community walkable schools, and would prefer not to bus their kids out of their neighborhood. So it would seem to me to be a win win for all.

Wow. Are you saying that whether a neighborhood gets school construction or not depends on the deep pockets and the ratio of lawyers? So...since Lynnbrook community is richer than the RCH community, they will successfully keep the school out? Really? Could the MCPS school system be kept from using property they already own by a bunch of deep pockets?

I am shocked.

Yes, my guess (and I don't live there, so perhaps it's wrong) is that Lynnbrook's immediate neighbors will do precisely what RCH neighbors have done, which is to fight tooth and nail to ensure that their neighborhood can remain as unscatched by infrastructure and traffic as possible, and they will insist that their "open space" is inviolable as RCH is doing. Everyone wants the development, but they want the impact to fall disproportionately on someone else's sidewalks. I'm more sympathetic to East Bethesda simply because they already deal with speeding school buses by CCES and lots of cross traffic from downtown Bethesda, even if the County has done tons to insulate them (more than it has done for the rest of us.) If I'm wrong, and East Bethesda is less NIMBYistic than RCH, great, and it would confirm my increasingly low opinion of RCH.

What scares me, as someone who lives in one of the parts of this catchment already hit too hard by BRAC and the future PL and the future CC Lake monstrosity, is that MoCo may be too susceptible to the pressures of rich communities. A pox on all your houses, frankly - or better yet a middle school in all your neighborhoods. None of us live in the bucolic exburbs - if that's what you want, move to Frederick or even Gaithersburg. If you want to be close-in and part of a vibrant community on the edge of a city, you're going to have to accept some density. Or, god forbid, a school.

and full of asbestos, the cost to remove it is a driving force why they won't select Lynbrook. It is going to go where they said awhile back, this is jsut a show......

And yet it houses a day care center! Do you think someone should tell those parents?