Wishful_Thinking wrote:

Or, is this more about expectations, than facts? One side will never be satisfied, even if it's proven to be true, with the availability of garage space for rent, because it doesn't provide them with what they expect - free parking right where they want it; the other side not satisfied with a solution that enables what they see as an obsolete, socially and ecologically unsustainable model, e.g. that of the private car.

bodhipooh wrote:
I don't buy the argument that "everybody does it" or the (seeming) implication that it is therefore OK.

But, as moobycow indicates, based on what is known of the city IT department (based on previous performance) I would guess that using a private email address is probably a safer bet.

Regardless, there is NO EXCUSE whatsoever to use that as a justification to allow government employees, especially higher ups, to use personal email addresses when conducting city business. Moving the city email service to a privately hosted solution (such as Microsoft Office 365, or Google Mail for Business) is SUPER easy and cost effective. Incredibly so, actually. As IT costs and budgets continue to grow across all industries, there is a very valid argument for local governments to outsource some of those functions to private providers.

DAllen wrote:
Isn't there a big parking deck at the end of Newark Ave already at Grove Point or am I missing something?

07310 wrote:
Quote:

Sommerman wrote:
And just a question for you economics-savvy readers: If the existing parking decks are 1/2 full, why hasn't the cost of parking gone down?

Most of the parking decks are available to the residents of the building and are not open to the public.

Yvonne wrote:
The parking lots that existed before were not free, please stop putting words into my mouth that I did not say. You and the city officials are ignoring the fact that the new residents who live in these monster buildings have 1/3 of the parking so they park on the streets taking parking away from long term residents who do not have parking available. That is the issue. The parking the long term residents had has a building on the lot, now. The city is planning for everyone except the long term resident. For some reason they do not count. Yet they are the ones who pay full taxes.

Sommerman wrote:
And just a question for you economics-savvy readers: If the existing parking decks are 1/2 full, why hasn't the cost of parking gone down?

Yvonne wrote:
The traffic that comes through downtown are the "shortcuts" from the turnpike. Travelers to the Holland Tunnel do not wait to exit as they should they drive through the downtown streets. This has been happening for years. Many newer residents confuse that traffic with long term residents. The long term resident either parked on the street with no problem or parked on a lot that has become a building. New buildings will bring in more residents with one third the parking for those residents. They are competing with downtown residents who park on the streets. The city is making the problem worse. It is the reason I said we need lots or garages.

RUrahrah wrote:
can confirm the BBQ place at the old vespa spot - a silverman condo meeting had mentioned it.

Yvonne wrote:
Since the late 1990s, half the the bus routes have disappeared. Last year, there was an article in the paper that the number 10 bus might disappear.It would take billions to create a mass transit route. Who will pay for this? The lite rail is still half empty.
The city is allowing monster building to go up in areas, ignoring the fact people do use cars for travel. I know people in the Van Vorst area who travel every day to Trenton and Bergen County.

The PATH is not without it's problems, but as someone who is dependent on the regions other, dysfunctional transit option, I am surprised by the animus expressed towards it.

SRhia wrote:
@Dolomiti - the breakdown of common sense and the structure of the society is all around us - one just needs to see and recognize them. If one chooses to see the world with rose-colored eye glasses, then that's their choice.

Yes, the world is much "smaller" today because of technology and such, but it's easy to see the behavior of people today is very different from people of 50 / 30 / 20 years ago - and that's not because these didn't have that same thing 30 years ago (partially true), but it's because these people today are NOT thinking!!!

PS For your information, I do not read the NY times.

brewster wrote:
It says 10k ft of retail. That's not a lot. on a Manhattan Avenue that would be four 25' storefronts. But Manhattan commercial spaces tend to be much deeper than in JC. As I understand it one of the problems for restaurants in the historic areas is the small spaces make i hard to fit in a decent kitchen and enough seating to do well. Hence Skinners and several others being multifloor.

tommyc_37 wrote:
Quote:

moobycow wrote:
Quote:

GrovePath wrote:
New condo towers in Manhattan also have parking -- but it would be nice to have some commercial on the first floors!

I'f I'm not mistaken there is commercial on the first floor. Kind of like what is on Grove St with the subway/GNC tucked into the parking deck.

Check out Pic #5 on the link to the NJ.com article. Adjacent to the light rail tracks, that looks like a massive parking structure with no outward facing retail. Am I looking at it wrong?

GrovePath wrote:
New condo towers in Manhattan also have parking -- but it would be nice to have some commercial on the first floors!

Yvonne wrote:
Let us return to the subject of parking. The classic turn around for business is the Medical Center downtown. When the hospital was on Montgomery St, it had limited parking. Its new location has a tremendous parking lot even though it is across the street from the lite rail. The Medical Center is competing for customers across Hudson, Bergen, and Essex Counties. It could not survive without its parking lot. If this was a Aesop fairy tale, the moral of the story is, provide parking for your customers or they will go elsewhere.

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

moobycow wrote:
Yvonne,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you want a deck on at least every other block, so that no one has to walk in the snow.

Could you please lay out your plan for which businesses and homes you feel should be removed to allow for this?

Absolutely not, I want what was available in the 1970s. There was various public and private lots on Newark Avenue. When JC placed buildings on them many businesses moved which partially contributed to junk stores. There was a great deal of garages along Bright and Barrow in which residents parked, those are gone. When you do not accommodate businesses with parking, they leave.