preserving the quality of life in Olney, Maryland

Dear Mr. Silverman,

My parents have been Montgomery County residents close to 50 years.  I love hearing my father tell stories of what life was like before the beltway was constructed.  It is amazing how some problems, like traffic congestion, never go away.  It is also interesting to study how different groups have tried to solve some of the recurring problems.  

In the late 1990s, Olney was growing much faster than the road infrastructure and a building moratorium was established.  The Annual Growth Plan approved in October 2003 (effective July 1, 2004) lifted this moratorium and Olney once again will continue to grow.  The logic given for that decision was that the moratorium wasn’t working and collecting impact taxes would provide money for the needed improvement.  I can understand the logic but I don’t agree with it.  The impact taxes do not account for the true cost the new development generates and the money collected from developments in Olney is not required to fix the road inadequacies in Olney.  This situation results in more development in Olney and failing roads in Olney with no money to improve them.   Therefore, I request staging future development in Olney to improvements in our roads – specifically 108 & 97 and both ends of Bowie Mill Road (at Muncaster Mill and 108).

When I found out that school forecasts are based only on development that is currently on the ground and what is approved, I realized why the school system contemplated closing Olney Elementary school in the early 1980s.  When those forecasts were done, the TDR receiving area developments had not yet been approved.  Therefore, it appeared the school would not be needed.  By 1990, Brooke Grove ES, Rosa Parks MS, Blake HS were built and Olney ES and Sherwood HS had additions.  Had MCPS factored in what could have been built based on the zoning of undeveloped property, the forecasts would have been much more accurate.  Since MCPS has not changed their forecasting model, we may find ourselves in the same predicament very soon.  Clustering development on sewer in the Southeast Quadrant of Olney will result in houses on the ground very quickly, given today’s real estate market.  During a Planning Board Work Session, Khalid Afzal mentioned that development in this area may need to be staged to school enrollments.  After much discussion, the Planning Board seemed unsure of the legality of staging mechanisms in the master plan – could the master plan override the development controls established in the AGP?  Since it was a grey area, they chose not to include staging elements in the plan.  I feel this was a mistake and staging in needed, especially given the potential growth in adjacent planning areas (Sandy Spring, Upper Rock Creek, and Shady Grove).

The 32 acre property on Bowie Mill Road has great potential to fulfill many county needs.  Based on their forecasting model, MCPS decided in 1996 to surplus this site.  If land can be found for the next high school in Montgomery County, then it will be very expensive.  Crown Farm (located near the 270/370 intersection near the Washingtonian) was discussed in front of the Planning Board as the next possible high school.  I have heard through the grapevine that the private property owner of that parcel does not intend to sell it.  I can only imagine how much that property would cost if it was on the market.  I do not know of any other potential high school sites that are under consideration.  This is a very important point.  Bruce Crispell will tell you another high school is needed.  I can understand the rationale of why the 32 acre site on Bowie Mill is not the best location – site restrictions due to the stream bed, gas pipeline, PEPCO lines and three other high schools close by.  However, until land is acquired for the next high school site, MCPS may not have a choice.  Land is scarce.

When another high school site is found, it will cost money.  The value of the 32 acre property could be used to help fund the purchase.  If this was to occur, then the property would be developed privately and would contain a minimum of 12 MPDUs.  Densities greater than the R200 zone are not appropriate for this site, given the location and adjacent neighborhoods.  

I look forward to the PHED Committee Work Sessions to hear these and other ideas discussed.

Sincerely,

Barbara Falcigno - written as a private citizen
18160 Darnell Drive
Olney, MD 20832