Comments on: Front Street Parking Regulations Update

By: mike d

mike d — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 02:00:37 +0000

Please don’t confuse me with Mike. He’s a bum.
There’s free parking in every neighborhood in Manhattan, possibly North America’s most definitive “urban” area. They happen to be residential neighborhoods, with alternate side parking rules to clean them, but free. And there’s a lot of ‘em.
Problem here is, as I see it, is Front St. part of a residental or commercial neighborhood? Since I live on Front St. I like to think of it as residential, but I’m a newbie yuppy louse who moved here to ruin this obviously open minded neighborhood with my double wide stroller.

By: T bone

T bone — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:19:08 +0000

I couldn’t agree more! I am so sick of this whole thing. I am sorry I ever posted to begin with. I would have stopped posting on this parking issue a lONG time ago, if Adam had not continued to post remarks instead of just accepting that I have a differing opinion on the matter. Sorry if I feel the need to defend myself.

My one vote does not put anyone in office, by the way! I can not control how the entire government operates and spends my tax money, as much as I would like to.

By: adam

adam — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:08:43 +0000

Hi JJJJJJ! I agree with you!

shhhhh.

By: JJJJJJ

JJJJJJ — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:57:55 +0000

OK! You disagree. Now both of you just shut the hell up!

And, actually, yes, it IS the people’s fault if our government isn’t spending our tax dollars the way we’d like. They don’t elect themselves (George Bush’s win in 2000 notwithstanding).

By: T bone

T bone — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:41:08 +0000

Adam- I don’t know what makes you think I am trying to turn the city into the suburbs. Whatever that means. Just because I don’t think I should have to pay to park on ALL city streets? I think you are taking this way too far. I am sorry you have such a problem with someone disagreeing with you.

My opinion is simply that I pay A LOT of money in taxes (In fact, I pay a NYC tax that people in the suburbs don’t) and I feel my taxes should cover parking on some public streets, as long as I adhere to the rules and regulations (including having meters on some main streets, which as I have stated before, I agree with). I don’t know how that is based in some “suburban reality”. Most of the city is actually set up that way! You think I should pay more for parking on all city streets, and that is your opinion, which as I have stated before, I am totally fine with. I just disagree.

By: Robin

Robin — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:46:18 +0000

DUMBO needs more Adams.

By: adam

adam — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 04:23:09 +0000

@T-bone:
I believe that parking should cost $10,000 a month. So what? As far as I can tell, your opinions on this matter are totally based on some suburban reality you once knew. Let it go. Stop trying to turn the city into the suburbs.

@Harold
I’m not declaring a rule when I say that cars are anti-urban. Use common sense and figure out for yourself the practical uses for private vehicle in this city. I understand that cars are a necessity for some but it’s a luxury for most and so I’m not going to feel empathy when parking regulations are implemented.

“Do you want to eliminate cars or do you want to reserve space for all those commuters”

I don’t understand this question… will you explain?

“How much should we charge for those free spaces on Front St?”

Let the market decide and direct all proceeds to DOT projects, obviously. Or open tab for cyclists… either is okay with me.

@Jonboy:
hugs and kisses!

By: Jonboy

Jonboy — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:43:08 +0000

Adam is a tree-hugging, cycling, vegan tosser.

By: Prof. Harold Hill

Prof. Harold Hill — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:09:48 +0000

You know you have two arguments here. You are saying that cars are antiurban and we should charge for space on the street. I would argue that guns are also aniturban but if we tax or charge a high price for the bullets you too can own a gun. I presume you agree that both cars and guns have the potential to kill us. Do you want to eliminate cars or do you want to reserve space for all those commuters. How much should we charge for those free spaces on Front St? What should we do with all that money? Free day care center for crack (or Cracky’s) babies? How about a senior center for old yuppies. Better yet, let’s just set up an open tab at ReBar for all us bike riding fools.

By: Prof. Harold Hill

Prof. Harold Hill — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:44:10 +0000

It is so easy to argue hypothetically about cars being anti urban. Adam, you should define in a practical way, so we may adhere or not adhere, to your rule. Do you include all of NYC or just the area you are riding your bike through at any given time. Cars are a necessary nuisance for many of us. For you to argue with that is just being naive. I can argue that air conditioning is anti urban. To somebody without AC listening to my AC all night it probably is very “anti urban”. There are many things that annoy us about living in an urban environment, but they are annoyances and not anti urban. Most of us are here because we enjoy (and hate) the anarchy.

By: T bone

T bone — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:46:03 +0000

what I meant to say is my tax dollars (and yours) should entitle both of us to use public streets.

By: T bone

T bone — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:44:26 +0000

My points ARE valid, Adam. They are my opinion. I believe that I should be able to park on public streets. I believe some streets should have meters and some not. That’s the way it works in many places, so you may disagree with me, but my point is not invalid. I believe that my tax dollars (and yours) should entitle me to use public streets. It is not my fault that our government wastes our tax dollars and does not put them to good use much of the time.

I agree that my one point was silly. That was kind of the point of it. So many suggestions posted on this blog are downright silly- like saying that driving is anti-urban. Or for example, it is also silly to complain that my circling the block looking for a space is a huge source of pollution.

Like I said, I am sorry I disagree with you, but I don’t think that makes my points invalid, nor does it make yours invalid. Unlike you, I don’t think the simple fact that you disagree makes your opinion invalid.

By: to KD

to KD — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:23:01 +0000

the way adam knows which lines to dissect and prove the original poster wrong is brilliant. but don’t take my word for it, i might get quoted and he’ll prove me wrong.

By: KD

KD — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:20:51 +0000

Adam is so smaaaart. We been schooled!

: ) I’m just playing.

By: adam

adam — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:51:25 +0000

I bitch (and act to limit) needless car use all the time.

“If you have such a problem with pollution from cars, perhaps you shouldn’t live in a city.”

How is that a worthwhile suggestion? How about… If you have such a problem with paying for a parking spot, perhaps you shouldn’t live in a city. See? Comments like that are pretty silly.

“I pay taxes.”

Awesome. Me too. But you suggested that this fact should entitle you to free parking and use of city streets and I was intimating that tax dollars don’t even come close to covering the true cost of private auto use. Their state of disrepair is one clue among many that your taxes do not cover that cost.

Kudos for limiting your driving to the weekends though.

It’s obvious you disagree. I just don’t think your points are really valid or cognizant of the whole picture.