Hi Paul - we badly need more housing in this country. Is it not preferable to
infill urban areas near mass transit rather than to push development further
out and generate more sprawl and land conversion? Your GHG accounting is not
taking this alternative scenario into account, just comparing apples to nothing
as if the housing won’t get built elsewhere anyways. John raises good questions
about affordability and equity but assuming those are adequately addressed, I
think we need to accept some development nearby rather than always find reasons
to oppose it.
Jonathan (Takoma Ave)
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Wednesday, April 27, 2022, 12:27 PM, John Seelke <jseelke@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mike - I understand addressing climate change and having resources closer by.
What I am ALSO saying are what the possible ramifications could be - for
example, could my wife CHOOSE to drive FURTHER (to Ft. Totten, where spots are
very hard to come by) as opposed to to Takoma - if the goal is to eliminate
emissions, then at least her action would NOT do that. Too often decisions are
made without looking at the potential downsides...until it's too late.
In terms of housing, I also wonder about the number of houses that are
considered affordable - and the comment that it is up to 60% of the market
rate. Seth mentioned 50-80 would be in that category - I am curious how many
two or three bedrooms are in that category, of it is only one bedroom or
studios, which would not help many immigrant families searching desperately for
housing.
On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 12:18 PM Mike's Email <mjohnsen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What, no GHG emissions from suburban sprawl, miles of road and additional
infrastructure and auto use? HUD, DOT, EPA and DOE point to out suburban
sprawl development pattern as a primary reason Americans drive 3-4 times as
much as other developed countries. and one of the biggest challenges to
addressing climate change unique to the U.S.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 27, 2022, at 12:05 PM, Paul Chrostowski <paul.chrostowski@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Have to disagree on this. Construction greenhouse gas emissions are a
significant source here. I have run the math on several of these large
developments—amounts of GHG from the construction process and embodied in
materials are truly staggering. We don’t benefit climate by ignoring these
emissions. There is also the urban heat island that will be exacerbated by
these projects, not to mention hundreds of additional cars pouring out into the
streets. There are also questions about stormwater runoff and management (most
of which will be done by Takoma Park MD) and emission of criteria air
pollutants. Note that the Blairs in SS are a good example of the failure of
transit oriented development to mitigate car pollution. None of these projects
even have an environmental impact assessment so that people can decide if they
fit in with climate action plans. My testimony on the previous development
compelled an environmental impact assessment but I don’t have the time or
inclination to go through that again.
Paul C
Sent from Mail for Windows
From: Mike's Email
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2022 11:55 AM
To: north-takoma@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [north-takoma] Re: Fwd: Takoma Metro site development plans: 350-380
apartments + retail
I think the proposal looks much better than the last. If you are going to say
we need to address climate change and resource issues, mixed use development
next to transit it how you assess those issues.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 27, 2022, at 10:10 AM, Paul Chrostowski <paul.chrostowski@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Nope—still alive. This is 350 units, much bigger than previous. If you add up
all thedevelopment under construction, pro[posed, or planned for Takoma DC, we
are facing well over 1,000 new housing units in this tiny corner of the world.
Paul C
Sent from Mail for Windows
From: Dvidutis
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2022 9:59 AM
To: north-takoma@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; hodgesheights@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [north-takoma] Re: Fwd: Takoma Metro site development plans: 350-380
apartments + retail
I thought we killed this.
Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS
On Wednesday, April 27, 2022, 8:22 AM, Seth Grimes <seth.grimes@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Developer EYA's plans for the Takoma Metro site include "studio to
three-bedroom units and 10,000-20,000 square feet of retail," reports DC Urban
Turf. "Roughly 50-80 units would be affordable to households earning up to 60%
of area median income (AMI)..
"There would be 184 residential and retail parking spaces and a
pick-up/drop-off/loading turnaround area under the building off Cedar Street.
The site will also be reconfigured, which will eliminate WMATA's existing
short-term parking and convert the Kiss & Ride drop-off to a driveway loop. Two
acres of open space will be split across a passive park along Eastern Avenue
and an activated retail plaza with terraced steps at the Metro entrance along
Carroll Street."
Visit EYA's project Web site at https://takomastationdevelopment.com/ ;.
Seth
Welcome to the North Takoma Park Listserve! (For NTP residents and special
invitees only) To Subscribe: Go to https://www.freelists.org/list/north-takoma ;
and enter your email. You will need to confirm by clicking the link sent to
your email, and then be confirmed by an administrator. To Unsubscribe (we are
sad to see you go): Send an email to north-takoma-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
the subject "unsubscribe" Questions/Comments/Problems? Email the administrators
at north-takoma-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Welcome to the North Takoma Park Listserve!(For NTP residents and special
invitees only)To Subscribe: Go to https://www.freelists.org/list/north-takoma ;
and enter your email. You will need to confirm by clicking the link sent to
your email, and then be confirmed by an administrator.To Unsubscribe (we are
sad to see you go): Send an email to north-takoma-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
the subject "unsubscribe"Questions/Comments/Problems? Email the administrators
atnorth-takoma-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
