Comments on: O’Malley faces heat for ICC

By: Ruth

Ruth — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 04:18:44 +0000

Shame on O’Malley for insisting on the ICC, which will only promote the sprawl he says he is opposed to. His claims to care about the environment, and about not wasting taxpayers’ money, are clearly shown to be hypocrisy given his support for this massive, environmentally disastrous boondoggle.

By: Thomas Nephew

Thomas Nephew — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:01:09 +0000

"NIMBY" is a serious and scurrilous charge, Jake, one that continues to ignore the "counterproposals" point I made. Here are links to 2: 1) 2) Nelson/Nygaard-Takoma Park MD So this isn't about *any* development at the site, it's about *this particular* development there. Re "nimNby", I point out again that Takoma DC residents appear to be against the EYA proposal, too. Re your assurances about car use, that would be great. Can I borrow your crystal ball for stock picks, too? More seriously, I don't see how it's arguable that the more garage space allocated for residents, the more cars and the more traffic there will be. Reduce that allocation.

By: jake

jake — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 08:23:54 +0000

Thomas Nephew says, “this isn’t “NIMBY”, it’s “NTSDIOBY” – Not This Stupid Development in Our Back Yards.”

Actually, I believe that the correct acronym in this case would be “nimNby”- not in my neighbors back yard.

While I am not thrilled that there are 2 car garages in this new development, I believe that the issue is being used to fuel unwarranted fears. The appeal of this new development to future homeowners is its location to the metro. The vast majority of the individuals that buy these townhouses will take the metro to work during the week and will only operate their cars on the weekend. This is the exact situation that I am in. I live near a metro in a building complex with available on-site parking. I have one car that sits in its parking space all week. Only during the weekend do I occasionally use it. People living across the street from the metro will use it not only to go to work, but to go to the District, mall, shopping, etc. The reality of the situation is that most of the new owners of these townhouses will probably only have 1 car (if any) and that car will probably not see action until the weekends so the fears of the Takoma Park folks on this issue is unwarranted.

I don’t know what “insufficient bus access, competing with residents” means but I bet that if specifics were given we would find out that these are also weak arguments.

I believe that the Takoma Park folks need to take a step back and look at the big picture. This is not a garbage dump that is being built. This is transit-oriented housing going up in the District- not even in their jurisdiction. Is this a fight they really want to take on? If so, they will look like out-of-control Nimbys in the eyes of many. Are the Takoma Park folks going to petition to impeach Mayor Fenty if they don’t get what they want?

By: Evan

Evan — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 15:52:22 +0000

There is absolutely no need for townhouses with two-car garages to be constructed adjacent to any Metro station. We need the bureaucratic planners to stop approving all the non-transit oriented growth in the Takoma Park-Silver Spring corridor. We live in an area with a wonderful public transportation infrastructure and it is a wrongful shame that land-use planners are allowing developers to ignore public transportation and instead incentivize multiple car use.

By: Thomas Nephew

Thomas Nephew — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 00:15:20 +0000

So that I understand the situation,

You don’t understand the situation. First, it’s hard to call an 85 townhouse*2 car garage= 170 car development “transit oriented”, nor do other design features bode well for transit: insufficient bus access, competing with those residents. Second, it’s not just Takoma Park, MD residents who oppose this — as can be heard on the video, by those who bother to listen. Takoma DC residents have overwhelmingly opposed this as well — they’re just being ignored by the DC powers that be. Third, there are counterproposals for development of the site that contradict your “NIMBY” charge. This isn’t “NIMBY”, it’s “NTSDIOBY” – Not This Stupid Development in Our Back Yards.

By: jake

jake — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:58:47 +0000

These Takoma Park Nimbys are getting out of control. So that I understand the situation, there is transit-oriented housing going up on property that is located in the District and they want Governor O’Malley to do something about it? They want to tell the folks in the District that they cannot build transit oriented housing in their own community? Why stop at the District line? Maybe they should start telling the other 49 states what they can and cannot build. Maybe they can use their influence to rename our country the United States of Takoma Nimbys.

By: Springvale Roader

Springvale Roader — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:12:07 +0000

O’Malley is a real disappointment. He kept in place that damned bear hunt, which was an Erlich initiative (typical Republican initiative — kill things). There are only a few hundred black bears left in MD, and the “nuisance” ones are not the ones who will be killed by big brave hunters, since nuisance bears are almost always by definition in residential neighborhoods, where hunting isn’t allowed.

And then O’Malley is going the coward’s route by pursuing slot machines as a way to raise revenue. Gambling should be legal, but governments should not be in the gambling business. It’s taxation on the backs of the poor, period. A courageous leader would simply raise taxes if necessary and not go the slots route.

I have no use for O’Malley at this point.