Committee Plan Moves MV Backwards

On March 6 the MVF Joint Golf Course Property Committee voted to endorse the proposed development plans for the Montgomery Village Golf Course.   They made some modest recommendations to adjust the plans, but overall are recommending that the MVF Board actually support and approve the proposals by Monument Realty Corp. to build between 550 and 600 residential units on the golf course, including an apartment building on the clubhouse site, and 24 single family houses and 274 townhouses on the fairways. 

Anyone wishing to voice opinions on the development of the golf course property should come to North Creek Community Center on Tuesday March 25 by 7:20 pm and sign in to speak at “Residents time”, where residents are allowed only 3 minutes each to make their voices heard on this important decision.

The Joint Committee was made up of representatives of the Transportation, Architecture, Environment, and Vision 2030 Committees, the Presidents of the Stedwick, Maryland Place, and Patton Ridge Homes Corps and Thomas Choice Condo association, and two representatives of the MVF Board of Directors.  The vote to support the current concept plan will condemn acres of green space to bulldozers and add a thousand more cars onto Montgomery Village Ave, remove acres of grass in favor of roads and hundreds of parking spaces, and replace the beautiful open green vistas of 440 residences with views of more townhouses and buildings.  The representatives from the Patton Ridge and Maryland Place Homes Corp. Presidents voted to support the plans even though their entire community will be affected by the loss of the park-like views.  Some committee members have argued that the new homes will not degrade the existing property values.  We can only suppose that they have not heard about a realty contract being canceled because the buyer learned about the planned development, or that other sellers abutting the golf course have recently had to lower prices by several thousands of dollars. 

The Village Citizens Organization offered four edits to 1) delete the phrase that said that the development was inevitable, since the development could only proceed if the committee and MVF Board endorses the changes needed to allow it, 2) remove the suggested change to Area 1 that would make the multi-family building smaller, since that was the only part of the plan endorsed by the Vision 2030 process and is actually a “smarter” option if the 140 acres of green space is preserved, 3) Add a “Whereas the Vision 2030 Plan recommended only a limited development of the property, focused on the front portion of the property, and a significant number of residents are negatively impacted by the proposed full development”, and finally 4)  adding “recommends that Montgomery Village Foundation seek options to purchase the fairway portions of the property and focus all development on Area 1 in the plan.”  Unfortunately the committee did not allow any of these edits to be discussed or even put up for a vote.  So much for resident inputs.

The current Town Sector Zoning that controls development of Montgomery Village was already quite generous to the original developers 48 years ago and limits the total development density to 15.0 people per acre.  That density is consistent with typical subdivision planning of 1/4 acre single family lots and about 3.75 people per residence.  Pushing density beyond that would turn Montgomery Village into Montgomery City.   The developer has argued that the addition of new housing in the Village would help improve property values for everyone.  Their sketches of new homes are beautiful, but those new units will also provide stiff pricing competition to the neighboring 40 year old houses across the street, and it seems more likely that existing-home property values will stagnate or suffer for several years.

The Joint MVF Property Committee could have voted to preserve the green nature of the village community as an enclave of trees and residential neighborhoods with spacious backyards.  Instead the Committee members argued that the towns around us were developing so the Village should develop also (maybe someone should go tell the residents of Potomac about this trend!).  Now the question is whether the Montgomery Village Foundation Board of Directors will share this view, and agree that an edible garden and a dog park provide our community more status than a golf course or 140 acres of open parkland.  The Vision 2030 plan endorsed limited development in “Area 1”, and a 116 unit apartment building could be built there without changing the Town Sector Zoning or destroying the property values of 440 neighboring residents. 

Come to the MV Board meeting next Tuesday and share your view on this important issue.