Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
17 user(s) are online (8 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 17

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 3 »


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#78
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
Yesterday 21:59
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5542
Offline
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
That would be a long-term investment that may have limited utility ten to twenty years out and would be a terribly inefficient use of space. Population growth won't necessarily come with car ownership rates equal to those of the past.

Millennials have demonstrated less interest in driving and car ownership than previous generations. The nature of transportation is changing. Continued growth in ride sharing and an embrace of autonomous driving vehicle technology could put a significant dent in car ownership, especially in urban areas. Why would you invest in a fifty-year asset that could very well be a white elephant in fifteen or so years?

There is plenty of parking downtown - you just don't always get it free.


Downtown is a small portion of JC, and the other areas mostly have much poorer quality and quantity of public transit options. We can, and must, do better.

Posted on: 2/12 21:15
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#77
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/10/14 23:28
Last Login :
7/2 21:27
From Earth
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 250
Offline
We'll see what tomorrow brings.

Posted on: 2/12 21:10
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#76
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/10/19 1:18
Last Login :
6/20 11:43
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1577
Offline
Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
I can't understand why--with the tax revenue that surely should be pouring in--the city can't build a number of centrally located low cost or no cost parking desks for residents.
Population increase looks to be a situation which will continue as long as NYC rates stay high and developers continue their building spree. A facility that can hold as many cars as the JSQ lot behind the Loew's would give so much relief to an area. Just imagine what five of them might do to help with parking difficulties.


That would be a long-term investment that may have limited utility ten to twenty years out and would be a terribly inefficient use of space. Population growth won't necessarily come with car ownership rates equal to those of the past.

Millennials have demonstrated less interest in driving and car ownership than previous generations. The nature of transportation is changing. Continued growth in ride sharing and an embrace of autonomous driving vehicle technology could put a significant dent in car ownership, especially in urban areas. Why would you invest in a fifty-year asset that could very well be a white elephant in fifteen or so years?

There is plenty of parking downtown - you just don't always get it free.

Posted on: 2/12 21:00
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#75
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
Yesterday 21:59
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5542
Offline
Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
Even so, Hoboken has a couple of municipal lots that allow people to get off the streets and curbs . Some of the large apartment buildings down by the water have great parking complexes attached to the living areas at very reasonable fees. These efforts help to make the "miracle mile" habitable. Jersey City needs to do the same before the situation becomes intolerable. Even North Bergen has some great arrangements which keep cars off the streets. Why is Jersey City dragging its feet on such a serious situation?


Because it's far less politically risky doing nothing than something you can be targeted for. Lets say the city makes a deal with a developer to build a parking structure on city land with the developer fronting the money and taking a large share of profits. I can see all sorts of "defenders of the people" making political hay with that. Why risk it?

Posted on: 2/12 19:17
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#74
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/10/14 23:28
Last Login :
7/2 21:27
From Earth
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 250
Offline
Quote:

MDM wrote:
Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
I can't understand why--with the tax revenue that surely should be pouring in--the city can't build a number of centrally located low cost or no cost parking desks for residents.


Hoboken did something like that in the early 2000s (but it wasn't low cost). It was an automated parking garage that would stow your car using a lift system. The original plan was to not have attendants. It was to be 100% automated.

The system when it was first implemented kept making headlines of having destroyed people cars. One example I remember is some poor guy's trunk opened up and the lifting system caught it and launched his car off the lift, dropping it down multiple stories.

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/nyr ... -a-garage-goes-wrong.html

https://hoboken411.com/archives/87561


That's not at all what I was talking about. Have you ever parked in the JSQ lot?

Even so, Hoboken has a couple of municipal lots that allow people to get off the streets and curbs . Some of the large apartment buildings down by the water have great parking complexes attached to the living areas at very reasonable fees. These efforts help to make the "miracle mile" habitable. Jersey City needs to do the same before the situation becomes intolerable. Even North Bergen has some great arrangements which keep cars off the streets. Why is Jersey City dragging its feet on such a serious situation?

Posted on: 2/12 18:38
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#73
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2010/7/9 11:16
Last Login :
Yesterday 20:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2358
Offline
Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
I can't understand why--with the tax revenue that surely should be pouring in--the city can't build a number of centrally located low cost or no cost parking desks for residents.


Hoboken did something like that in the early 2000s (but it wasn't low cost). It was an automated parking garage that would stow your car using a lift system. The original plan was to not have attendants. It was to be 100% automated.

The system when it was first implemented kept making headlines of having destroyed people cars. One example I remember is some poor guy's trunk opened up and the lifting system caught it and launched his car off the lift, dropping it down multiple stories.

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/nyr ... -a-garage-goes-wrong.html

https://hoboken411.com/archives/87561

Posted on: 2/12 17:41
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#72
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
8/15 15:10
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3744
Offline
Quote:

Sutherland wrote:
Dude, pack up your SUV and your wife's van and move to Maplewood or better yet Whitehouse Station!!

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
[

Dude, you are making a fool out of yourself: those two specific examples (Mazda CX5 and Acura RDX) are VERY short by SUV standards. In fact, they are both shorter than the average mid size sedan, certainly shorter than a Ford Fusion.

I am not trying to argue or defend the ownership of SUVs (people can own whatever they choose!) but your stance just comes across as petty and misguided when your justifications are based on misconceptions.

You can keep spouting your crank, but it is nothing more than shaking your fist at the sky: you will accomplish nothing because your argument and logic are not based on facts, just feelings and misconceptions.


You are quite the character... when the error in your logic is pointed out, you turn to personal attacks.

I am not advocating for a parking free-for-all, nor am I arguing against higher fees! In fact, I think JC parking permits are ridiculously low ($15/year!!) but any change in regulations has to be rooted on good, sound policy and/or reason. Spouting obviously wrong logic or erroneous facts is not a way to get people to agree to your point.

Posted on: 2/12 17:15
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#71
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/10/14 23:28
Last Login :
7/2 21:27
From Earth
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 250
Offline
I can't understand why--with the tax revenue that surely should be pouring in--the city can't build a number of centrally located low cost or no cost parking desks for residents.
Population increase looks to be a situation which will continue as long as NYC rates stay high and developers continue their building spree. A facility that can hold as many cars as the JSQ lot behind the Loew's would give so much relief to an area. Just imagine what five of them might do to help with parking difficulties.

Posted on: 2/12 12:49
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#70
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
Yesterday 21:59
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5542
Offline
The problem with significant parking permit fees is that it would look like a very regressive tax. From a public policy perspective, parking is a self solving problem. People don't have cars if they don't want to deal with the hassle or cost of parking them. People moving to an area with difficult parking at least know what they're getting into. It's only the incumbent residents that get hysterical as density increases.

I am all for density, it's what makes cities unique and wonderful places to live. but increases in density require commensurate increases in public transportation, which is what we are not seeing.

Posted on: 2/11 18:41
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#69
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/10/19 1:18
Last Login :
6/20 11:43
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1577
Offline
Interesting time we're going through. People are getting wise to the amount of the cost they bear through the externalities created by of others and are starting to push back. You see it in the climate discussion, land use, pollution, gun rights, among others.

From a public policy perspective, free or near-free onstreet parking was a mistake to begin with. The arguments to defend it are understandable, because that's the way its been for our lifetimes. Doesn't make it a good practice, but taking things away from people is never popular. I'd suggest the opposite approach - parking permits should cost $/sf whatever the land costs are in a given block divided by whatever an appropriate number of years would be (40? 50?) to come up with a proper rent. Let the negotiations begin from that point instead of the other way around.

The general assumption that reduced parking requirements for new development is increasing street parking isn't exactly correct. Many of the garages in these buildings aren't full. Some even allow outside parking for a fee.

Posted on: 2/11 18:13
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#68
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
7/31 17:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4411
Offline
Quote:

Sutherland wrote:
Dude, pack up your SUV and your wife's van and move to Maplewood or better yet Whitehouse Station!!

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
[

Dude, you are making a fool out of yourself: those two specific examples (Mazda CX5 and Acura RDX) are VERY short by SUV standards. In fact, they are both shorter than the average mid size sedan, certainly shorter than a Ford Fusion.

I am not trying to argue or defend the ownership of SUVs (people can own whatever they choose!) but your stance just comes across as petty and misguided when your justifications are based on misconceptions.

You can keep spouting your crank, but it is nothing more than shaking your fist at the sky: you will accomplish nothing because your argument and logic are not based on facts, just feelings and misconceptions.


Maplewood? No overnight street parking in Maplewood.

Posted on: 2/11 17:54
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#67
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2010/1/22 18:54
Last Login :
8/15 21:30
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 437
Offline
Dude, pack up your SUV and your wife's van and move to Maplewood or better yet Whitehouse Station!!

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
[

Dude, you are making a fool out of yourself: those two specific examples (Mazda CX5 and Acura RDX) are VERY short by SUV standards. In fact, they are both shorter than the average mid size sedan, certainly shorter than a Ford Fusion.

I am not trying to argue or defend the ownership of SUVs (people can own whatever they choose!) but your stance just comes across as petty and misguided when your justifications are based on misconceptions.

You can keep spouting your crank, but it is nothing more than shaking your fist at the sky: you will accomplish nothing because your argument and logic are not based on facts, just feelings and misconceptions.

Posted on: 2/11 17:47
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#66
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/12/28 13:51
Last Login :
Today 12:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 180
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

Ralph_Abutts wrote:
Sorry, but if parking spaces are in short supply, as you suggest, a $15 a year residential permit does not help. Make the permit $1,500/year and surely demand will not exceed supply.


Punish local car owners while developers are getting zoning variances allowing them to provide less onsite parking, forcing more people to park on the street? That's ass backwards.


Where did I mention granting variances is okay? Of course I did not. You can troll on elsewhere.

The bottom line is parking permits are under priced in Jersey City, even in parts of the city that developers are not granted variances.


Posted on: 2/11 16:51
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#65
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
7/31 17:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4411
Offline
Quote:

Ralph_Abutts wrote:
Sorry, but if parking spaces are in short supply, as you suggest, a $15 a year residential permit does not help. Make the permit $1,500/year and surely demand will not exceed supply.


Punish local car owners while developers are getting zoning variances allowing them to provide less onsite parking, forcing more people to park on the street? That's ass backwards.

Posted on: 2/11 14:15
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#64
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/12/28 13:51
Last Login :
Today 12:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 180
Offline
Sorry, but if parking spaces are in short supply, as you suggest, a $15 a year residential permit does not help. Make the permit $1,500/year and surely demand will not exceed supply.

Posted on: 2/10 23:12
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#63
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/8/12 18:31
Last Login :
8/15 15:10
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3744
Offline
Quote:

Sutherland wrote:
In my earlier post I made it clear I was distinguishing between bigger SUVs mostly crossovers like the Acura RDX, Mazda CX5 etc and the huge SUVs like Hummers, utility trucks, vans etc.

But your need to defend your position on the SUV thing, suggests you should probably move to Montclair or Maplewood.
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
[

Thankfully, you are not in charge of public policy. Here is the problem with your stand: some SUVs are so compact as to be smaller than most mid-size sedans. Heck, of the top 10 SUVs sold in the US last year, almost all are about the same length as a Ford Fusion, with only two being about a foot longer.


Dude, you are making a fool out of yourself: those two specific examples (Mazda CX5 and Acura RDX) are VERY short by SUV standards. In fact, they are both shorter than the average mid size sedan, certainly shorter than a Ford Fusion.

I am not trying to argue or defend the ownership of SUVs (people can own whatever they choose!) but your stance just comes across as petty and misguided when your justifications are based on misconceptions.

You can keep spouting your crank, but it is nothing more than shaking your fist at the sky: you will accomplish nothing because your argument and logic are not based on facts, just feelings and misconceptions.

Posted on: 2/10 22:57
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#62
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/10/14 23:28
Last Login :
7/2 21:27
From Earth
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 250
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
JC gives out zoning variances allowing builders to short parking in their new structures, then JC residents complain about lack of street parking.

A solution is available, don't give out those types of variances.


My point exactly Monroe.
The city is doing a favor to special interests--everybody gets greased--and the people wind up pointing at one another as the problem. Not too long ago there was ample parking on the street, but obviously that had to go when thousands of new living units came into being.
That's major irresponsibility on the part of planning boards and overall administration. Free municipal parking decks for residents should be provided by developers.

But for heaven's sake, don't blame your neighbor and try to assign extra costs to their budgets.

Posted on: 2/10 19:46
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#61
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2010/1/22 18:54
Last Login :
8/15 21:30
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 437
Offline
I supposed I've surmised it's a suburban mentality thing, because suburban people have driveways, have more of a need to drive around and particularly across highways to other suburbs to meet up with their other suburban friends or go to their jobs in other suburban towns, take their suburban children to their travel sports and play dates. So all of this driving makes them feel they need what they falsely perceive or ostensibly persuade themselves to be a "safer" vehicle.

When I first moved downtown 18 years ago from J. Sq where i lived for 10 years, those people who had cars, mostly had hatchback kinda cars or smaller jeepish kinda cars. These people were more artist types who needed to tote their work around.

It's in more recent years that I've seen more Hummers, stupid utility vehicles, large vans etc. So, I've imputed a suburban take on it.

Quote:

srs7191 wrote:


I agree with you that most people own a larger vehicle than they need, but I don't see how it's a "suburban mentality".

Every major US city that I have visited is rammed full of SUVs. All of Hudson county, Newark, NYC, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Wilmington, DC, Boston, LA, and Vegas - full of SUVs.

I mean, I lived in Hong Kong for three years, which doesn't even have suburbs in the American sense (even its "suburban" areas are more dense than most US cities) and that city had plenty of SUVs.

I'm originally from the UK, where SUV ownership is much lower - not because people don't want them, but because people can't afford them. They're a status symbol, and where do you see the most SUVs in the UK? The place where more can afford them - London.

Posted on: 2/10 18:09
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#60
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
7/31 17:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4411
Offline
JC gives out zoning variances allowing builders to short parking in their new structures, then JC residents complain about lack of street parking.

A solution is available, don't give out those types of variances.

Posted on: 2/10 17:22
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#59
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2005/7/13 15:03
Last Login :
8/3 10:31
From Western Slope
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4418
Offline
Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
Quote:

heights wrote:
Along with the annual fifteen dollar fee for resident zone parking stickers how about we apply a digital process that reads plates and adds a surcharge for a proximity parking tax. The closer you park to your house the more you pay for the privilege ? It is similar to resident parking permits but on a temporary basis.


Here we go again.
The municipality allows wealthy corporate interests to disrupt the lives of ordinary people and other people step up to offer solutions that will infringe on rights that they had (free, available parking) prior to these disruptions.

Why should people offer costly solutions to problems that the administration creates?--doesn't make sense.

Sometimes these edicts are necessary due to over crowding and the monopoly of our curbside real estate. I think the next step should be to eliminate zoned parking with the numbered zones and replaced with uniformed single zone system throughout the entire city except for special zones such as schools and resident only areas. Then implement two types of zone parking stickers, one for homeowners and the other for tenants. The tenants would pay a monthly fee as opposed to the property tax payer who would continue to pay an annual fee. Then provide visitor passes at a cost for those out of the area.

Posted on: 2/10 16:43
Get on your bikes and ride !
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#58
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/10/14 23:28
Last Login :
7/2 21:27
From Earth
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 250
Offline
Quote:

heights wrote:
Along with the annual fifteen dollar fee for resident zone parking stickers how about we apply a digital process that reads plates and adds a surcharge for a proximity parking tax. The closer you park to your house the more you pay for the privilege ? It is similar to resident parking permits but on a temporary basis.


Here we go again.
The municipality allows wealthy corporate interests to disrupt the lives of ordinary people and other people step up to offer solutions that will infringe on rights that they had (free, available parking) prior to these disruptions.

Why should people offer costly solutions to problems that the administration creates?--doesn't make sense.

Posted on: 2/10 15:54
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#57
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2010/10/18 18:59
Last Login :
Today 0:02
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 535
Offline
Usually it is the soccer moms who drive the SUVs and forget to signal and are the worst drivers.

Posted on: 2/10 15:20
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#56
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined :
2017/10/28 19:03
Last Login :
8/11 3:29
From Paulus Hook
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 28
Offline
Quote:

Sutherland wrote:
Anyone who voluntarily wants to own a huge car is free to pay to park it in a garage somewhere if they want. But owning a huge car in a city is ridiculous. It's a very, very suburban mentality. And it exacerbates the parking problem. And it's just plain out stupid.


I agree with you that most people own a larger vehicle than they need, but I don't see how it's a "suburban mentality".

Every major US city that I have visited is rammed full of SUVs. All of Hudson county, Newark, NYC, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Wilmington, DC, Boston, LA, and Vegas - full of SUVs.

I mean, I lived in Hong Kong for three years, which doesn't even have suburbs in the American sense (even its "suburban" areas are more dense than most US cities) and that city had plenty of SUVs.

I'm originally from the UK, where SUV ownership is much lower - not because people don't want them, but because people can't afford them. They're a status symbol, and where do you see the most SUVs in the UK? The place where more can afford them - London.

Posted on: 2/10 15:20
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#55
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2005/7/13 15:03
Last Login :
8/3 10:31
From Western Slope
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4418
Offline
Along with the annual fifteen dollar fee for resident zone parking stickers how about we apply a digital process that reads plates and adds a surcharge for a proximity parking tax. The closer you park to your house the more you pay for the privilege ? It is similar to resident parking permits but on a temporary basis.

Posted on: 2/10 14:42
Get on your bikes and ride !
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#54
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
7/31 17:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4411
Offline
Quote:

Ralph_Abutts wrote:
1) Is public parking a problem?

Jersey City - Yes

Red Bank - No (per Monroe)


2) Annual cost of a resident parking permit

Jersey City - $15

Red Bank - $1,000



Wrong. The $1,000 is for non residents to park in municipal lots. Residents get a car sticker, for free, allowing them to park on their own residential block. The non resident fees are directed to out of towners who commute via NJ Transit trains and need to park their cars somewhere.

https://www.redbanknj.org/189/Parking-Permits

Posted on: 2/9 14:08
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#53
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2010/1/22 18:54
Last Login :
8/15 21:30
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 437
Offline
In my earlier post I made it clear I was distinguishing between bigger SUVs mostly crossovers like the Acura RDX, Mazda CX5 etc and the huge SUVs like Hummers, utility trucks, vans etc.

But your need to defend your position on the SUV thing, suggests you should probably move to Montclair or Maplewood.
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
[

Thankfully, you are not in charge of public policy. Here is the problem with your stand: some SUVs are so compact as to be smaller than most mid-size sedans. Heck, of the top 10 SUVs sold in the US last year, almost all are about the same length as a Ford Fusion, with only two being about a foot longer.

Posted on: 2/9 13:12
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#52
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/10/14 23:28
Last Login :
7/2 21:27
From Earth
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 250
Offline
I think that it's somewhat tragic to see people arguing among themselves --even to the point of endorsing taxes and fees for driving certain vehicles--when the fault lays with the administration allowing haphazard development of the city. The attack on infrastructure simply does not allow quality of life under the stressful building program Jersey City is permitting.

It will surely worsen, judging by recent new acquisitions below the Square area (Puccini's) and developments up in the West Side and elsewhere. Jersey City is the belly for the ravenous appetite of New York City. A gigantic bellyache and worse is on the horizon.

Posted on: 2/9 12:52
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#51
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/12/28 13:51
Last Login :
Today 12:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 180
Offline
1) Is public parking a problem?

Jersey City - Yes

Red Bank - No (per Monroe)


2) Annual cost of a resident parking permit

Jersey City - $15

Red Bank - $1,000


Posted on: 2/9 12:16
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#50
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
7/31 17:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4411
Offline
Quote:

Ralph_Abutts wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

Ralph_Abutts wrote:
Car density, yes - permit fees, no. New Brunswick is another good example. If you actually spent time in your car at those locations, like I have, you would immediately agree. Or you can look at their municipal websites to see the chatter about parking issues and challenges.

The original point is JC's very low parking fees are not helpful with respect to parking or having to constantly navigate around double parked cars.


Other than Front or Broad Streets there is no parking issue in Red Bank; like many suburban towns people complain if they have to walk a half block to a store or restaurant. Comparing JC parking to Red Bank parking is absurd.



Uuuuhhh yeah...and why is that? Put your thinking cap on. Like I mentioned before, compare the costs of acquiring a residential permit. If Jersey City charged what Red Bank does, it would not have the parking issues it has today.

Free or nearly free parking isn't really free if you spend a lot of time looking for a space or are sitting in traffic, taboot. That is, if you consciously valie your time, like I do.


By the way, Red Bank offers residents FREE on street parking on their own block, they just have to show their license and registration to verify. FREE is quite a bit lower than JC resident parking costs.

Posted on: 2/9 3:11
Top


Re: The SUV Phenomenon
#49
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/12/28 13:51
Last Login :
Today 12:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 180
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

Ralph_Abutts wrote:
Car density, yes - permit fees, no. New Brunswick is another good example. If you actually spent time in your car at those locations, like I have, you would immediately agree. Or you can look at their municipal websites to see the chatter about parking issues and challenges.

The original point is JC's very low parking fees are not helpful with respect to parking or having to constantly navigate around double parked cars.


Other than Front or Broad Streets there is no parking issue in Red Bank; like many suburban towns people complain if they have to walk a half block to a store or restaurant. Comparing JC parking to Red Bank parking is absurd.



Uuuuhhh yeah...and why is that? Put your thinking cap on. Like I mentioned before, compare the costs of acquiring a residential permit. If Jersey City charged what Red Bank does, it would not have the parking issues it has today.

Free or nearly free parking isn't really free if you spend a lot of time looking for a space or are sitting in traffic, taboot. That is, if you consciously valie your time, like I do.

Posted on: 2/8 23:23
Top




(1) 2 3 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017