Montgomery Village Golf Course: Recreation Versus Edible Landscaping

Monument Realty took another step in its plan to develop the Montgomery Village Golf Course. It announced that it will build 600 homes. This newly revealed plan shocked many attendees at the September 2013 community meeting. However, this announcement elicited a tepid reaction from Village leaders.

Still more concerned about the loss of his view of the golf course than a 5% increase in the area’s population, Montgomery Village President Bob Hydorn urged people to accept reality. True to form, Bob Hydorn, a lover not a fighter, acted more like the bordering resident he is than the Village leader we need, a leader who will draw a red line on density, traffic, and community amenities. 

1. Where is the traffic cop to throttle the 5% increase in population right in the center of Montgomery Village?
2. Will these new arrivals simply become free riders on existing facilities in the Village?
3. Will this new development refresh the recreational facility stock in any way?
4. Will these new arrivals become members of the Montgomery Village Foundation, pay annual assessments, establish a Golf Course HOA, and comply with MVF architecture control guidelines, and participate in community affairs?
5. What are the MVF goals and objectives for this project and what is the plan and strategy?

Monument Realty has a plan and would have Village residents focusing on meadows and edible landscaping of nut trees and berry bushes instead of something consequential, such as, recreation, so far overlooked in the several community meetings held and conducted by change management specialists.

Here is my suggestion to Monument Reality and Bob Hydorn should he decide to be a President not just a resident. With 147 acres, the golf course would be a wonderful site to relocate the Montgomery Village Sports Association (MVSA) sports fields from South Valley Park, a move that would address the following community stresses:

1. It would eliminate the South Valley tension between the interests of recreation enthusiasts and nature preserve purists. The MVF Board could then designate South Valley as a nature preserve. 
2. It would eliminate the tension surrounding State Senator Nancy King's Bond Bill sports toilet project. Relocating the MVSA sports fields and the South Valley Restroom and Concession stand to the golf course would eliminate this persistent community tension entirely.
3. It would eliminate the South Valley specific sports toilet project cost pressure stemming from sewer/water and electrical connections and permit costs along with a plat requirement for a natural resource inventory and forest conservation plan.
4. It would eliminate the MVSA sports field scheduling conflicts and ensure fairness for both boys and girls teams.
5. It would eliminate the disruption to the MVSA South Valley sports programs and the attendant health risks of the impending M83 Mid-County Corridor Study Options 8 or 9 representing 40% of the alternatives retained for additional study and impacting 30-48 acres of parkland. The Montgomery County Executive and City of Gaithersburg selection of Alternative 9 makes it the odds on favorite choice.

Adopting this game changing strategy would convert the challenge of developing the MV golf course into an opportunity to resolve these long held issues and stresses and an opportunity to demonstrate leadership to deliver outcomes residents desire.