...School Security Systems - New schools need to have a Safety and Security Representative in the planning process. Following the construction of Bells Mill ES and Cabin John MS, it has become apparent that a Safety and Security Representative should be placed on all future new school construction and planning boards. Schools would be able to avoid the following concerns:
• The stairwells and many spaces in Cabin John MS are all glass. Although very attractive, during an evacuation due to severe weather or criminal activity the stairwells are left unprotected and vulnerable to the situation.
• All schools have the need of security cameras and a security specialist will be able to incorporate the most efficient use of a system in the planning of site...
Extensive retaining walls are going to be required to accommodate the grade at the proposed site for Farquhar Middle School. Mention of that is noticeably absent from the Feasibility Report, but all a rational person needs to do is pull up the County's own topo and draw your own conclusions.
Again, that is up to the Planning Board. They are appointed by the County Council -- the one you voted for. The chair of the Planninng Board is Francoise Carrier. The Planning Board can bring this up but from what you are saying they haven't. And, Parks is also under the purview of the Planning Board. Send them an email and ask where they are in this process. Here is the email address for Board Chair Carrier: MCP-Chair@mncppc-mc.org
Planning Board only has an Advisory Role through the Mandatory Referral process and cannot dictate site design. Their only binding bite at the apple is the Forest Conservation Plan.
Anonymous, you are right. However, the Planning Board Chair has a bully pulpit that is being under used in this discussion. And, who knows what off site secret discussions go on between the Planning Board, Planning Department and Parks staff, and MCPS staff and the members of the Board of Education. (Although, from what we know regarding the Rosemary Hills/Lyttonsville Local Park deal that the BOE tried to cram through, apparently not many). This overall is poor planning and a poor use of our meager public land resources. The Planning Board has the authority to speak up and advise. We would like to see more of that.
Feel free to pull the topo for the approved site plan or County GIS - 524' NW corner, 462' in the SE corner... 62' of grade change if my calculator still works.
I don't disagree that it looks like a gentle and gradual slope today. The issue is when you grade it out for parking lots, a school and ball fields all of which have maximum slopes.
I know how much dirt I generated when I put a level patio in my backyard and the ground looked level to begin with! Same premise, just a much larger scale.
If it isn't a big deal, let's see a grading analysis and retaining wall exhibit. My guess is 10 to 15' walls along the northern edge of the property and along the rear. Maybe taller given that they have to adhere to the existing Forest Conservation Plan and Stream Valley Buffer. (Those walls and grading must be free based upon MCPS Site Development Budget being virtually the same for the greenfield or redevelopment!)
Even with the walls, I'd be surprised if they end up with 12+ usable acres versus their own requirement of 20 usable acres. The principal already said the existing fields wouldn't be practical from a supervision perspective, so no need to make the argument in favor of counting that acreage.
The 3-story school is really a down-county solution, necessary when land is scarce, and is being totally misapplied in this circumstance.
Mr. Song's retaining walls appeared again last night...
MCPS has more detailed drawings of the FMS middle school site and indeed there are retaining walls along the northern perimeter and along the edge of the playing fields on along the stream valley buffer.
The scale was difficult to read, but it appeared the ones along the northern edge were at least 8' and Id be surprised if the ones to the south weren't taller given the way they laid out.
• At Cabin John MS large walls with approximately 15 foot drops were built. These high walls in proximity to both athletic fields and walkways, should be avoided in future designs.
Extensive retaining walls are going to be required to accommodate the grade at the proposed site for Farquhar Middle School. Mention of that is noticeably absent from the Feasibility Report, but all a rational person needs to do is pull up the County's own topo and draw your own conclusions.
ReplyDeleteAgain, that is up to the Planning Board. They are appointed by the County Council -- the one you voted for. The chair of the Planninng Board is Francoise Carrier. The Planning Board can bring this up but from what you are saying they haven't. And, Parks is also under the purview of the Planning Board. Send them an email and ask where they are in this process. Here is the email address for Board Chair Carrier: MCP-Chair@mncppc-mc.org
ReplyDeletePlanning Board only has an Advisory Role through the Mandatory Referral process and cannot dictate site design. Their only binding bite at the apple is the Forest Conservation Plan.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, you are right. However, the Planning Board Chair has a bully pulpit that is being under used in this discussion. And, who knows what off site secret discussions go on between the Planning Board, Planning Department and Parks staff, and MCPS staff and the members of the Board of Education. (Although, from what we know regarding the Rosemary Hills/Lyttonsville Local Park deal that the BOE tried to cram through, apparently not many). This overall is poor planning and a poor use of our meager public land resources. The Planning Board has the authority to speak up and advise. We would like to see more of that.
ReplyDeleteThere's some serious exaggeration here about the Farquhar site. It's a very gradual slope across the whole property, just drive by and take a look.
ReplyDeleteExaggeration?
ReplyDeleteFeel free to pull the topo for the approved site plan or County GIS - 524' NW corner, 462' in the SE corner... 62' of grade change if my calculator still works.
I don't disagree that it looks like a gentle and gradual slope today. The issue is when you grade it out for parking lots, a school and ball fields all of which have maximum slopes.
I know how much dirt I generated when I put a level patio in my backyard and the ground looked level to begin with! Same premise, just a much larger scale.
If it isn't a big deal, let's see a grading analysis and retaining wall exhibit. My guess is 10 to 15' walls along the northern edge of the property and along the rear. Maybe taller given that they have to adhere to the existing Forest Conservation Plan and Stream Valley Buffer. (Those walls and grading must be free based upon MCPS Site Development Budget being virtually the same for the greenfield or redevelopment!)
Even with the walls, I'd be surprised if they end up with 12+ usable acres versus their own requirement of 20 usable acres. The principal already said the existing fields wouldn't be practical from a supervision perspective, so no need to make the argument in favor of counting that acreage.
The 3-story school is really a down-county solution, necessary when land is scarce, and is being totally misapplied in this circumstance.
But, just my 2 cents.
James Song loves retaining walls.
ReplyDeleteMr. Song's retaining walls appeared again last night...
ReplyDeleteMCPS has more detailed drawings of the FMS middle school site and indeed there are retaining walls along the northern perimeter and along the edge of the playing fields on along the stream valley buffer.
The scale was difficult to read, but it appeared the ones along the northern edge were at least 8' and Id be surprised if the ones to the south weren't taller given the way they laid out.