Browsing this Thread:
2 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
Joined:
2014/12/21 14:43 Last Login : 2015/11/15 0:07 From Harsimus Cove
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
399
 |
Quote:
You, your neighbors and anyone else driving into DTJC for dinner would be doing everyone a favor if you told the managers of the restauarants you go to in DTJC that you would come more often if they offered validated parking. As far as I can figure only Skinner's Loft does that, but I don't know under what conditions. Also, Grove Pointe offers $6.00 parking from 6:00PM to closing.
Posted on: 2015/10/4 11:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Hmm... "hysterical rant"? That implies some sort of hysteria, I'm curious where you ascertain some hysteria from me typing calmly on my computer? Rant? I was merely pointing out the insane amount of unused parking spots in nearly every high-rise downtown. I guess typing something calmly on my computer is a "hysterical rant"? Regarding your second point, my silence should be construed as nothing more than me simply not caring at all about it. I am a car owner and wish there was LESS parking and more open space for pedestrians in JC. I could frankly care less if new buildings provided the X required spaces of parking. Not paying attention? Sure. I want less cars driving in the city, and don't care if those who drive everywhere ("gas guzzlers") go to another town, we will have more than enough people to take their space here. Comprende?
Posted on: 2015/10/2 21:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
There's a Chase at Old Colony near Pathmark. Zero problems parking there.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 19:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
This. If I can't find a spot on the street or a metered spot, I'll go somewhere else. I'll go to another town.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 19:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/1/3 19:12 Last Login : 2020/9/30 18:46 From Van Vorst Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
2391
|
Quote:
No car envy here; when I stopped driving regularly it was a very, very liberating thing in my life that is hard to explain unless you've done it. Life got a lot more enjoyable. Personally, I understand that some people like to have cars, and some even need cars if they choose to work in the suburbs. Plenty of people in Brooklyn and Queens have cars, and I even know a few people who live in Manhattan that keep cars. I get it; this is America and many Americans love to drive and for most it's the only way they have ever known. Going somewhere? You get in your car and go. What I'm against is the city government catering to the needs of vehicle owners. Cars are why we have hideous parking garages that destroy streetscapes and remove vibrancy from our streets. Cars and the way they are used are generally very ANTI urban fabric, with highways/multi-lane streets instead of pedestrian friendly streets, parking garages instead of nice retail lining streets, etc. Cars are bad for cities. That's why I'm upset with JC's desire to make it easier for car people.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 19:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
I really like the plan. I use mass transit but also require a car. The car issue in JC is complicated and think this is a good step in the right direction.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 19:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I am very pro-mass transit, and share your concern about JC's inability to dis-incentivize car use and ownership, but everything in her proposal seems pretty good to me. It includes some tangible enhancements for public safety, such as enforced no-parking buffers at corners (red curbs); and rationalizes many of the other policies in place (such as residential parking zones and reducing non-resident parking) in order to enhance JC resident's convenience. Making people pay a reasonable amount for a public amenity is only fair, too. This all seems like a good way to transition from the car mayhem we have now, to a better managed, multi-model transportation model for the city.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 18:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Ending one subsidy -- low cost parking -- is the first step in shifting policy. Charging market rate is not a penalty. A penalty would be charging above market rate to discourage the behavior.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 17:16
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Quick tip, if you drive into the parking deck next to Chase on Columbus, they have reserved parking for Chase Customers. I think it's up to 15 minutes. I think you just have show your receipt on the way out of the garage. I've been told they do the same at the Chase in Hoboken.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 17:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Well, you went on a hysterical rant against "gas guzzlers" and "chronic drivers" so maybe someone else can apply the appropriate description. And I'll take your silence on the latter point to be an admission you haven't been paying attention to the parking situation with new construction.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 17:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
That's exceptionally empirical. Why wouldn't you put a few quarters in the meter over paying for the light rail trip (the cost of your two hour parking meter) plus a PATH trip (making a round trip over four times the cost of paying for parking in the city you live in)? There is also the obvious time factor involved which is that you are passing by a parking meter in order to drive home to then wait for the light rail and then wait for the PATH. I value my time at a rate far higher than the proposed transaction. Why, if the light rail is such a convenient option, wouldn't you option to take the light rail downtown for dinner instead of needing to use a car? Personally, I have no desire to hunt for parking. I hit up Uber or I walk. Walking might be a bit further for some, but Uber is available and quite cheap.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 17:05
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You are discussing services. We aren't talking about services when we discuss free onstreet parking - we are talking about land use. There is a well-established history and practice of the government charging "tax-paying citizens" for use of public lands - many state parks have entrance fees. The beaches, inexplicably, are allowed to charge people entrance during the summer. The airports have fees baked into your airfare for this purpose. Even many of the roads, bridges and tunnels have fees associated with them, despite the fact that drivers have paid their registration and licensing fees. The federal government charges private companies who want to drill or ranch on their lands. What I am saying only seems bizarre because it is a long-standing accepted practice. But it wasn't a conscious decision early on to say "hey, let's give over 30%? 40% of the street for people to just stop their car on the side and leave it there." I'm not sure that if the situation were just starting today (without the legacy of existing practice) that people would automatically jump to an outcome that gives over so much land (for free!) for the benefit of one segment of the population. Need money for better public transportation and infractructure? Raise the gas tax. Dissolve the PA. Encourage municipal consolidation to start to eliminate the incredible amount of overlap in services and government that chokes the NJ taxpayer.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 17:04
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Interesting, what data do you have supporting the notion that businesses are going to fail downtown, especially restaurants? I am good friends with two small business owners (one food, one retail) downtown that opened in the past 2 years and they are doing great.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
Quote:
Totally incorrect. That's not an incentive, it's a penalty--one that many people cannot afford. Again, you're not thinking about public policy or the public interest. You're not thinking about the social or economic implications of your penalty. And you're not thinking about how the principle behind your penalty has deleterious consequences for the way in which we structure our society. For you, only the wealthy are entitled to mobility.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I own a car, and have during the entire 15 years I have lived downtown.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:41
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
No it wouldn't. Mass transit here sucks. Not in NYC, where you live (and inexplicably keep posting on a JC board), but here it does. If someone needs a car, trying to make their lives more difficult won't lead to them taking an unacceptable and wholly inadequate alternative. It will simply just make their lives more difficult.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:40
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Charging market rate for parking would be the first step in incentivizing mass transit as it would make parking a privately owned vehicle more representative of the cost of owning that vehicle rather than artificially decreasing the cost of ownership.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2012/1/11 18:21 Last Login : 2019/12/26 15:30 From GV Bayside Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
5356
|
Without adequate parking down there businesses, especially restaurants will fail.
Many of my neighbors and myself included drive downtown to eat, and many of my neighbors shop downtown. Most times I will not eat dtjc if I can't find parking and that is usually half of the time. I will not pay for 2 hour parking. I would rather jump on the lightrail to the Path and eat in NYC.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
This thread once again demonstrates how many people simply cannot grasp the difference between good public policy and private interests. I'm referring to the people who think that residents' cars parked on public streets are somehow taking advantage of "free parking." First, all vehicles have paid both for state registration and a parking permit. Second, all residents are paying taxes for public services. Third, we have agreed as a civil society that we do not directly pay for all of the public services we enjoy. For example, when someone is victimized by a criminal, we do not expect them to pay for the investigation. When your child is educated in a public school, that cost is shouldered by all of us. Vehicles allow people of all different incomes to commute to distant jobs, take care of distant family members, etc. Furthermore, public policy in New Jersey has not incentivized mass transit. As we all know, it is cheaper to drive on the Turnpike than to take a train to work in Edison. People need to stop thinking about themselves and start looking at the bigger picture. And something tells me that all the people grumbling about gas guzzlers would balk at the tax increase necessary to run an affordable--not the same as efficient-- mass transit system in New Jersey that would be good for the single mother earning less than 25k who cannot afford a private parking space.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Just so I am clear, you previously said "I don't think cities should make it easier to park on public space. The costs outweigh the benefits." More metered parking, which I would want too, appears to contradict your original statement. If you've dialed back, that's fine. Then we are probably in complete agreement. And FYI, the issue of whether someone should have to pay market rate to store their car is a complete red herring. Candice's slides did not address it. While I pay market rate, I'm personally indifferent to the issue. But many people don't live near a paid lot or garage and Candice is trying to help them out. There really shouldn't be much opposition, except from loons. I think we agree that we need to expand public parking for businesses. Since it seems like we now agree on all points, it would be silly to accuse you of having car envy. Someone like Rescuelife and others who have made postings critical of Candice's proposals on the other hand...
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Again, I have a car. So it's not car envy. Metered parking for local businesses is fine.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Again, I have a car. So it's not car envy. Metered parking for local businesses is fine.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I don't commute, and I frequently bike. But I can attest there's plenty of times I've passed on patronizing a business while out driving errands because there was no parking spots in the business district. But nearby residents would get hysterical if more meters were installed. Just one more thing Hoboken does better than us is putting meters on the side blocks off Washington. Particularly bad is the DT Post Office. What few meters there are, are often taken by Postal trucks. And you don't have a choice about going there when you have a package or letter to pick up.
The reserved street spots is an obscene idea to begin with. I bank with Chase, but there's no metered parking anywhere near the one on Columbus, just reserved spots. As for street cleaning, just the other week I was parking in Ft Greene, and noticed the street cleaning was once a week. If it's good enough for Brooklyn why isn't it good enough for us? Or is it, as we have long suspected, all about the ticket revenue rather than clean streets?
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:07
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Thank you for providing such a vivid illustration of someone with car envy. If you've been paying attention, much of the approved new construction offers far fewer parking spots than total incoming residents. So while you're right that they technically offer "parking," an offer of say 100 spots for 300 units is inadequate. That fix is pretty simple. Enforce the existing laws which require a higher % of parking spots be made available in new construction and quit granting waivers.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 16:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'm curious, the gas guzzlers complain new buildings don't include parking, but many of the new construction I see around downtown does have parking. And of course the high-rises all have largely unfilled parking lots built in. Maybe we should just bulldoze the parks so we can make more parking? Would the chronic drivers be happy then?
Posted on: 2015/10/2 15:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
Joined:
2005/9/27 20:08 Last Login : 2022/9/6 11:43 From Historic Downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
96
|
Many excellent ideas. Thank you for listening! If even half of this goes through it will improve the quality of life downtown.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 15:49
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I am not talking about where you park your car overnight. I pay for a parking spot as well.
I'm talking about making it easier to find parking if you wanted to go to a local business. That's what Candice's slides address, along with those residents who don't have paid parking spots near their house. Believe it or not, it's a problem. Not everyone lives near a paid parking lot or garage. And I actually agree with Yvonne that new construction should have plenty of (paid, market rate) parking available for residents. Otherwise the problems only get worse. Of course, hide the garage and allow retail on the ground floor as well, like some of the newer buildings in DTJC. And yes, I think the people who oppose any of these efforts have car envy.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 15:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Car owners are getting something for free / below market rate cost. Non-car owners are subsidizing their free / low cost parking. If you can't afford market rate costs for your car, then you don't need the car.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 15:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Actually, not. Many people who own cars (myself and the councilwoman included) solidly support efforts to improve pedestrian/bicycle safety and catch Jersey City up to at least the late '90s in terms of how streets function and recognizing the needs of everyone. I would suggest envy here, if it exists, lies with the folks who play the Free Parking game. Free, onstreet parking is not a constitutional right. In fact, its a very expensive subsidy (around $3,000 per year, per space) that somehow has been taken as a given. You want to own a car in a city? Pay for parking (I do. The councilwoman does.) It's widely available. Could public transportation be better? Of course - quite a bit. But that's a bit of a red herring. I'm not saying (nor is anyone, I think) ban all cars - as I said, I have one. But it would be great to see progress toward rules and infrastructure that actually resembles how people choose/want to live today and not how they did fifty years ago. Look at the bike lanes - even with shoddy execution and a result that has been, to date, a substantial under-delivery from the original hype, there are a lot more bikes on the streets as a result. Citibikes have quickly been embraced. Many people want these changes.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 15:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Proposed Recommendations to Downtown Parking
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I don't think cities should make it easier to park on public space. The costs outweigh the benefits. And I have a car, I just pay for a parking spot instead of expecting the city to give me free real estate. I don't have a problem with people keeping a car but expecting a below market rate for parking isn't right. Pay for what you use. As for improving public transport, this is our point - we should be focusing resources on this and not making it easier to park. If you make it easier to park, in the long-run, you'll just have more cars driving around looking to park. The problem isn't actually solved.
Posted on: 2015/10/2 15:16
|
|||
|
||||