How many people are getting sick of Takoma Park's high taxes and city gov't spending the city into the ground?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

The traffic back ups originate from lots of people deciding to drive their cars on the same streets at the same time. Wider streets - which is what people usually mean when they talk about "road improvements" - don't fix that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

The traffic back ups originate from lots of people deciding to drive their cars on the same streets at the same time. Wider streets - which is what people usually mean when they talk about "road improvements" - don't fix that.

There isn’t a Purple Line station at the only downcounty community college. That isn’t by accident.

[Anonymous]

Not me. I’m excited about it. TP is changing fast and I think developing Maple will be great. The hippy attitude appears to be fading and people are renovating. Seems to be going the way of Del Ray which moved from hyper lefty roots to really nice pretty quickly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

The traffic back ups originate from lots of people deciding to drive their cars on the same streets at the same time. Wider streets - which is what people usually mean when they talk about "road improvements" - don't fix that.

There isn’t a Purple Line station at the only downcounty community college. That isn’t by accident.

There isn't a Purple Line station at the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College because the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College isn't on the Purple Line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

The traffic back ups originate from lots of people deciding to drive their cars on the same streets at the same time. Wider streets - which is what people usually mean when they talk about "road improvements" - don't fix that.

There isn’t a Purple Line station at the only downcounty community college. That isn’t by accident.

There isn't a Purple Line station at the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College because the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College isn't on the Purple Line.

Which came first?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

The traffic back ups originate from lots of people deciding to drive their cars on the same streets at the same time. Wider streets - which is what people usually mean when they talk about "road improvements" - don't fix that.

There isn’t a Purple Line station at the only downcounty community college. That isn’t by accident.

There isn't a Purple Line station at the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College because the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College isn't on the Purple Line.

Which came first?

The Georgetown Branch of the B&O Railroad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

The traffic back ups originate from lots of people deciding to drive their cars on the same streets at the same time. Wider streets - which is what people usually mean when they talk about "road improvements" - don't fix that.

There isn’t a Purple Line station at the only downcounty community college. That isn’t by accident.

There isn't a Purple Line station at the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College because the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College isn't on the Purple Line.

Which came first?

The Georgetown Branch of the B&O Railroad.

It’s funny how touchy Takoma Park people get when it’s pointed out that they successfully, behind the scenes blocked mass transit to a community college in their neighborhood that serves mostly low income minority students and immigrants. Seems pretty racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

The traffic back ups originate from lots of people deciding to drive their cars on the same streets at the same time. Wider streets - which is what people usually mean when they talk about "road improvements" - don't fix that.

There isn’t a Purple Line station at the only downcounty community college. That isn’t by accident.

There isn't a Purple Line station at the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College because the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College isn't on the Purple Line.

Which came first?

The Georgetown Branch of the B&O Railroad.

It’s funny how touchy Takoma Park people get when it’s pointed out that they successfully, behind the scenes blocked mass transit to a community college in their neighborhood that serves mostly low income minority students and immigrants. Seems pretty racist.

What are you talking about? I'm the poster you're responding to. I don't live in Takoma Park. The Montgomery College Takoma Park/Silver Spring campus has mass transit: Rideon 17, Rideon 18, Metrobus F4, plus Rideon 70. (Also zero fare on Rideon for Montgomery College students with college ID.) If so-called Takoma Park people purportedly behind the scenes purportedly blocked the Purple Line from taking some purported imaginary route that would have directly gone to the campus, they did it so far behind the scenes that nobody except you has heard of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

The traffic back ups originate from lots of people deciding to drive their cars on the same streets at the same time. Wider streets - which is what people usually mean when they talk about "road improvements" - don't fix that.

There isn’t a Purple Line station at the only downcounty community college. That isn’t by accident.

There isn't a Purple Line station at the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College because the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College isn't on the Purple Line.

Which came first?

The Georgetown Branch of the B&O Railroad.

It’s funny how touchy Takoma Park people get when it’s pointed out that they successfully, behind the scenes blocked mass transit to a community college in their neighborhood that serves mostly low income minority students and immigrants. Seems pretty racist.

What are you talking about? I'm the poster you're responding to. I don't live in Takoma Park. The Montgomery College Takoma Park/Silver Spring campus has mass transit: Rideon 17, Rideon 18, Metrobus F4, plus Rideon 70. (Also zero fare on Rideon for Montgomery College students with college ID.) If so-called Takoma Park people purportedly behind the scenes purportedly blocked the Purple Line from taking some purported imaginary route that would have directly gone to the campus, they did it so far behind the scenes that nobody except you has heard of it.

If you live in Montgomery County, you must not have lived here very long.

They got a retail development on a parking lot blocked a couple years ago by having Peter Franchot pressure SHA to rescind a permit for a curb cut on a state highway.

All of the documents produced by the planning department magically never mention Takoma Park or recognize its existence. Like it doesn’t even exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

The traffic back ups originate from lots of people deciding to drive their cars on the same streets at the same time. Wider streets - which is what people usually mean when they talk about "road improvements" - don't fix that.

There isn’t a Purple Line station at the only downcounty community college. That isn’t by accident.

There isn't a Purple Line station at the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College because the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College isn't on the Purple Line.

Which came first?

The Georgetown Branch of the B&O Railroad.

It’s funny how touchy Takoma Park people get when it’s pointed out that they successfully, behind the scenes blocked mass transit to a community college in their neighborhood that serves mostly low income minority students and immigrants. Seems pretty racist.

What are you talking about? I'm the poster you're responding to. I don't live in Takoma Park. The Montgomery College Takoma Park/Silver Spring campus has mass transit: Rideon 17, Rideon 18, Metrobus F4, plus Rideon 70. (Also zero fare on Rideon for Montgomery College students with college ID.) If so-called Takoma Park people purportedly behind the scenes purportedly blocked the Purple Line from taking some purported imaginary route that would have directly gone to the campus, they did it so far behind the scenes that nobody except you has heard of it.

If you live in Montgomery County, you must not have lived here very long.

They got a retail development on a parking lot blocked a couple years ago by having Peter Franchot pressure SHA to rescind a permit for a curb cut on a state highway.

All of the documents produced by the planning department magically never mention Takoma Park or recognize its existence. Like it doesn’t even exist.

Ok, I get it now. It's a conspiracy fiction you made it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

The city roads can't handle the added traffic from developments like this. Getting out of TP via Carroll to University is already a nightmare.

I don't live in TP but arguing that a city should not develop a large vacant site in a prime location for fear it will create too much traffic is the kind of backwards thinking that kills local becomes and results in cities having to raise taxes and reduce amenities.

If a city isn't growing, it's dying. The key is smart growth-- advocate for a plan that will create more public transit resources along with this development, or improve existing traffic infrastructure. Look at what you can reasonably extract from a developer to assist with this.

But arguing the city should not build and new housing because of traffic congestion is just NIMBYism run amok. It won't work out how you hope.

Right now traffic backs up a crazy amount around TP during rush hour. It’s not a nimby issue; many of the people this will impact don’t necessarily live in TP. And even if it is a nimby issue, what’s wrong with advocating for consideration of something like traffic problems that will impact everyone who uses these roads? I assure you that these aren’t entitled rich people who will be most impacted. Sometimes the reality is that the way roads are designed impacts how much traffic they can hold. I’m happy to advocate for public transportation, but it is very naive to think that people will suddenly start taking busses and the like in mass numbers. Plus, I find it classist to assume that people in a new development should be expected to use public transportation instead of cars.

These arguments all amount to basically circular, self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

I'm sorry, but if traffic backed up and sat and sat on your road, you'd complain too.

The traffic back ups originate from NIMBYism blocking road improvements. The circularity then comes from pointing to the poor road conditions that your NIMBYism created as the reason why there cannot be more housing. Thus the self-perpetuating NIMBYism.

The traffic back ups originate from lots of people deciding to drive their cars on the same streets at the same time. Wider streets - which is what people usually mean when they talk about "road improvements" - don't fix that.

There isn’t a Purple Line station at the only downcounty community college. That isn’t by accident.

There isn't a Purple Line station at the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College because the only downcounty campus of Montgomery College isn't on the Purple Line.

Which came first?

Is this a rhetorical question?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[img]u

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having learned nothing from the abysmal financial drain by the city for the Takoma Junction project, the city is embarking on an ambitious upzoning project to attract a luxury residential developer to build condos on the site of the Washington Adventist Hospital. First step is $60K spending by the city for planning a new streetscape along Maple Ave meant to make this project attractive to developers. What are the chances this can succeed in a way that can pay back taxpayers for the "investment"?

Do you live in the City of Takoma Park? Have you considered moving somewhere else? It sounds like you might be happier if you did that.

+1. OP you should move. Takoma park is full of loons, is in a declining county, is next to high crime areas. Of all places that are good to live, it isn’t one of them.

+10000. Progressive hell-hole.

Interesting you describe hell hole. but I think there are way more 'hellish' places than Takoma park. Good thing you don't live there, eh?

Let us know where you live so we can trash it.

[Anonymous]

TP is legendary. They even have their own parody website:
https://takomatorch.com/

and their own satirical mascot (Nimbee):
https://takomatorch.com/index.php/2024/03/05/celebrating-5-years-of-satirical-journalism/

It's no surprise that both the county exec and a disproprotionately high number of Councilmembers hail from that area. That explains a lot!