Pages

Tuesday, August 7, 2012

MCPS Lies Through Planning Process, Robs Kids of Basketball Court and Outdoor Amphitheater

Through out the multi-year planning process for the modernization of the old McKenney Hills Elementary School site MCPS staff represented that a parking lot at a neighboring pool would be used for the new school.  MCPS had no agreement to use that lot. 
Weeks before the school is set to open, MCPS finally admits that they can't use the neighboring parking lot.  MCPS staff pave over the planned basketball court and outdoor amphitheater for parking without taking this site plan change to the Board of Education for approval.
Silver Spring loses again...

MCPS opts for parking lot, eliminates basketball court at Flora M. Singer Elementary
Though the new Flora M. Singer Elementary School in Silver Spring will open on time for the upcoming school year, the county was forced to eliminate a proposed basketball court to make way for the construction of a 33-car parking lot, county school officials said.... 
http://www.gazette.net/article/20120807/NEWS/708079941/1007/news&source=RSS&template=gazette?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

13 comments:

  1. Thank Weast consultant and MCPS administrator - the PTA President

    ReplyDelete
  2. Why can't MCPS admit to mistakes?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who says this was a mistake?

      The plans clearly showed an outdoor amphitheater, just like over at Carderock ES in Bethesda. Basketball courts were clearly shown in the plans. These amenities made the plans presentable to the BOE, parents, neighbors and Planning Board.

      MCPS staff knew that they didn't have an agreement to use the neighbor's parking lot. That should never have been incorporated into the plans without a written agreement in place. Why does the BOE and the Planning Board allow plans to come before them without proper documentation. Want to use a neighbor's property for a school? Prove it with the deed/lease/easement/contract.

      What did this misrepresentation cost taxpayers?

      Delete
  3. This is Mr. Song's SOP. Promise the world and then make changes after the sham public process is complete.

    They operate unfettered. The BOE rubber stamps whatever staff puts in front of them. The Planning Board has no authority to stop them other than the Forest Conservation Plan.

    I'm sure this required a building permit. Department of Permitting Services wouldn't have issued a grading permit on property they didn't own. MCPS should have known about this problem well before today.

    Did the plan go back to the State Board for review? Seems eliminating 2 courts and a theater is worthy of someones attention.

    Mr. Song - Speaking of "no formal agreement", didn't you say you'd have a formal agreement in place with M-NCPPC before starting the design process for Farquhar Middle School? Four Design Meetings and who knows how many dollars later, still no formal request nonetheless a formal agreement. Talk about putting the cart before the horse. At least the architect admitted that the proposed design would work on the existing school site as well.

    Making promises to the community is easy when you don't have to prove to anyone you can actually implement them!

    ReplyDelete
  4. lying and bullying taught here

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree with anonymous, MCPS should have had an agreement with MNCPPC before starting the design. But - I have a feeling anonymous is responsible for the amazing legal delay that forced MCPS's hand. Right, Tom?

    Song and his staff have bent over backwards to incorporate community concerns into the Farquhar plan. They'll never please the small but vocal group that will only be happy if there were no school at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Should have an agreement?

      No, it's fine if the TAXPAYERS pay for designs on property that MCPS does NOT own. Taxpayers don't care about paying architects and consultants and construction supervision firms for plans that can NOT be built? How much money was just wasted at the McKenney Hills/Flora Singer Elementary School site? Flat out wasted on FAKE design plans.

      Cut the garbage, if you want a school built on a certain piece of land then prove that MCPS OWNS the land before taxpayers fund years of "planning" documents and meetings.

      Put up or move on. For one, the Police Department would like their Cold Case unit funded, and this type of massive waste at MCPS is costing us services like the Cold Case unit.

      Delete
    2. Anon-

      Let's assume for a minute that you live in a nice subdivision.

      How are your assured that your,neighbor''s house isn't replaced with a halfway house for recently paroled prisoners or maybe a treatment facility for drug addicts?

      Delete
  6. How has the "small vocal group" forced their hand? If anything, they've been ignored.

    MCPS still doesn't have an agreement with M-NCPPC (nor has a formal request been made), they still haven't explained how the new site only costs $500,000 more to develop (the architect rolled his eyes when this was mentioned to him), they still haven't told anyone how they can pull a building permit on property they don't own.

    Luckily, we'll have table games to help support this type of waste. No need to address the real issues!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Actually, I think the FMS opposition is fine with the school as long as it stays on the existing site.

    You know, where MCPS actually owns property and where the advertised "modernization" is supposed to occur.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous-

    Your 500k number is incorrect. The new school on the new site was the cheapest option (p.24).

    http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/construction/projects/Docs/Farquhar%20MS%20Modernization%20Feasibility%20Study.pdf

    Give me a break.

    How do you build this ski lodge on a new site for less than building the same building on an existing site?

    http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/construction/projects/Docs/WHFMS2012_6_28%20Farquhar%20SD%204.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  9. @Anon Aug 10, 7:14PM, apparently you didn't get the memo. The county is urbanizing, oh, except for you big political donors in Potomac and the "ag reserve." You get to keep your lovely suburban homes and trees. Just keep shoveling money at the council members and you get to keep your neighborhood. For the rest of us, it's accessory apartments, and new commercial/residential zoning (CR zone). No more 'residential' zoning for you! The developer will be able to choose: hmm, should we go commercial? or residential? where will this be decided? In backroom deals at the Planning Department. Read the new zoning code and read the proposed 'accessory apartments' legislation. Oh, and don't forget to make a big donation to your favorite council member.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where will it be decided? At cocktail parties.

      Delete

If your comment does not appear in 24 hours, please send your comment directly to our e-mail address:
parentscoalitionmc AT outlook.com