Roughly 97% of parking spaces in NYC are free.

no, free parking isn't "a terrible use of public space".

The space available is simply being under utilized in many situations.

We have proposed alternative uses.

....bike lanes are but one possible use.

As we re purpose the spaces, we will slowly get cars out of them. Nothing will be done suddenly, or without following the proper ULURP procedures; there is no need for car owners to feel threatened.

In the event that the car owners lose parking spots as a result of ULURP, this will be as a result of a fair process.

(car owners, it is time to get organized! ...people are coming after spots you believe are yours)

CTK, your points have merit.

However, we have discussed your points in detail and offered to mitigate the circumstances.

People who need cars and need to park them will be able to so.

Let's move on.

Now, let's get in front of the various community boards to discuss how we are going to repurpose the freed up spaces.

...wait, the DOT is already doing that.

The courts will decide whether Mrs. Weinshall and Chuck are correct.

When the court issues a ruling, I will abide by its decision.

Until then, the various Community Boards seem to be representing the community nicely, and they have not been found to have done anything wrong. I believe the Community Board is innocent until proven guilty.

Perhaps the community boards will get more participation now that people realize they actually play a role in their lives.

...fine with me.

Boygabriel, I've offered several points specifically disproving the articles themselves simply on the basis of their assumptions.

For the sake of an independent common sense check I've even thrown everything out and offered a calculation from scratch that anyone can do to independently and objectively evaluate on actual numbers, not agendas, to determine which use benefits more people as claimed by the articles.

Heck, whynot also mentioned the point here should be for the benefit the greatest number of people.

In spite of conversation on the merits of the points themselves things have been diverted to score points on issues never offered or, alternatively, to focus on the people here and not address the actual assertions in question.

The issue is exactly the need to examine all sides and evaluate data independently here, not just accepting misleading statistics of folks in support of a particular agenda.

In an attempt to regain focus on the central point of this entire discussion:

The articles claim to represent the need to benefit the greatest number of people possible and not disproportionately favor one minority group at the expense of all others.

Both whynot and I separately confirmed agreement on the same main objective.

The assertions you've posted to CTK and myself have contrasted 1 car versus many bikes, suggesting that many more people benefit and should benefit if the space is used for bike lanes.

So, to regain focus on discussion of the actual issues here...

Do you also agree as per above that the objective here is to benefit the largest number possible, not disproportionately favor a smaller one?

In my mind, the more objects it fits, the greater the number of individual people will benefit.

Example A:

Trash spot benefits everyone on the block, and everyone walking down the block, regardless of whether they owned a car ...whereas a parking spot benefits only the owner of the car.

Example B

Vacant loading zone benefits everyone driving down the block by preventing double parking. Everyone with heavy groceries living on the block has an increased likelihood of being able to off load somewhat nearby.

On Tuesdays, the loading zone could be --wait for it-- the trash zone!

...thus only consuming one precious parking spot.

Example C

The bench. Lots of people can sit on the bench. People love benches!

People get irate when you sit on their car.

Or for trash are you suggesting to dedicate a zone, in front of someone's house or apartment, that is the trash dump for the entire block?

Honestly, I can't see that ever gaining support. And people from the entire block would never be inclined to bring all their trash to one single location. People bring their trash out front, not interested in hauling it all down the block. So it'd just end up on the curb in front of their house again anyway.

And boy would those residents in front of the proposed garbage dumps be pissed. Heck, so would everyone else on the block as it'd be like each block's own Fresh Kills stink and vermin fest. Especially in the warmer months.

Boygabriel said:

Do you also agree as per above that the objective here is to benefit the largest number possible, not disproportionately favor a smaller one?

No, I don't.

Perhaps now you're getting where I'm coming from.

How many people it benefits is one important factor.

So is "what is it the people are actually doing?"

Or, "what other options exist for the activity in question?"

Or, "what harm or inconvenience comes to others?"

Or, "how necessary is the activity in question?"

Or, "what kind of lifestyle is promoted?"

Or, "what future demographics should be accounted for?"

Or, "are the original factors that led to this development still relevant?"

While those are good goals I'm not as prescriptive as you, Boygabriel.

Being that we are not talking about infringing on anyone's rights, I'm for simply giving the majority what it wants.

(so far, bikes have been able to convince the community board's that they are the best way to calm traffic and are the majority, but I suspect that will soon change)

I think the outcome of policies that try to change people's habits can't be measured, and such policies are a recipe for failure as a result. I'm not going to let my desire to repurpose those spaces be "destroyed" by people who can simply take pictures of a empty green lane.

As a result, I avoid standing by the bikers. As a minority, they are bad for my cause.

Instead, I will try to get the family with the minivan and 4 kids to come to the meeting and support my agenda. I'm going to get her on my side with my loading zones, and the world isn't going to be able to dismiss her and her family as being a spandex parrot or a grumpy rich person.

....there are a lot of families like theirs, and they get listened to.

For example, they often make me pay for their kids schooling and my employer pay for their kids health insurance.

When you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

Whynot at community meeting"Why yes, I'd love a handful of goldfish crackers. Thanks"

Okay, just saw your trash idea clarification whynot, and at least it's not as per my daydream above.

In order to make that work I'm guessing you'd have the side street parking spaces permanently marked in paint and garbage spaces marked explicitly as such.

I like the thought of having something perform multiple roles.

Here are some wrinkles I see in that, however:

1) People will still just bring all their garbage to the curb in front of where they live.

2) The homes or apartments in front of any dedicated garbage spots would unfairly bear the burden of all the related mess and cleaning and spraying to avoid smell, vermin etc.

3) Imagine apartment building supers being required to haul 50-100 bags further down the block.

4) Now imagine the faces of residents in front of those spots when apartment building supers/porters drop all their building's trash in front of their home.

5) Imagine instant impact on rents and property values particularly of homes directly in front of garbage spaces. Don't know the term opposite to curb appeal but if I did I'd use it here.

So while the loading/unloading sounds great I'm not so sure there'd be broad support for anything other than the more convenient reality garbage pickups on the curb in front of their house.

jeffrey said:

Okay, just saw your trash idea clarification whynot, and at least it's not as per my daydream above.

In order to make that work I'm guessing you'd have the side street parking spaces permanently marked in paint and garbage spaces marked explicitly as such.

I like the thought of having something perform multiple roles.

Here are some wrinkles I see in that, however:

1) People will still just bring all their garbage to the curb in front of where they live. Not if sanitation only picks it up if it is in the spot

2) The homes or apartments in front of any dedicated garbage spots would unfairly bear the burden of all the related mess and cleaning and spraying to avoid smell, vermin etc. Not if the spots were frequent enough. They would also get a trade off being the lucky ones who didn't have to haul their trash far, and have a loading zone in front of their house.

3) Imagine apartment building supers being required to haul 50-100 bags further down the block. Highly urban areas, such as 6+ story buildings, would get their own spot, right in front of their building.

4) Now imagine the faces of residents in front of those spots when apartment building supers/porters drop all their building's trash in front of their home. see above

5) Imagine instant impact on rents and property values particularly of homes directly in front of garbage spaces. Don't know the term opposite to curb appeal but if I did I'd use it here. one day a week. see above

So while the loading/unloading sounds great I'm not so sure there'd be broad support for anything other than the more convenient reality garbage pickups on the curb in front of their house. when first introduced recycling was hated too, yet we made them change their habits to benefit the "common good". Now everyone does it without much moaning. Remember all of the whining about having to separate their trash into different varieties? ...it seemed they have found a way to do it, and we are all better off as a result.

Plus w/the garbage deal, couldn't they coordinate it so that garbage trucks collect during alternate side street parking? Is it that bad as is?

Boygabriel said:

Ironic, b/c you're precisely one of the people who didn't know that car owners are actually in the minority in this city, and people who drive work even more so.

Car owners make up the majority of primary users of the roads in NYC, which is the topic of discussion. Plus as I mentioned car ownership is inversely tied to population density & public transportation quality, as evidenced here:

http://www.cars-suck.org/research/censusrelease.html

Manhattanites are the most car-free; 78% of households there do not have a vehicle. In the Bronx, the car-free share of households is 60%. Brooklyn is also majority car-free, with 54%. Only Queens and Staten Island have car-free minorities: 34% and 20%, respectively.

A point very key to the discussion.

You mean besides almost every opinion article the New York Post has ever written about bike lanes?

Here are some others:

1. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2011/03/battle-of-the-bike-lanes-im-with-mrs-schumer.html

2. The group suing against the PPW Lane. If you'd like me to google their "argument", I can.

Any proof that these editorials are representative of NYC car owners in general?

Can I rehash this entire thread about individual car ownership vs other land use options and my opinions therein?

No, I can't.

Just a simple list would suffice. ANYTHING. We've heard one or two ideas from other people, but nothing from you as far as how to actually attack the problem. If free parking is such an awful/egregious use of easily convertible public space then it shouldn't be hard to come up with better ideas on how to use it. Of the three ideas presented, two are rife w/flaws (bike lanes & central garbage dumping), and the last, while a good idea, doesn't warrant the abolition of free street parking. So again if there are solid ideas on how to better utilize the space I'm all ears but I haven't heard any.

whynot_31 said:

My use only has to be better than a privately owned car in the spot.

...even my sucky, made up, plan meets that standard.

Imagine what an Urban Planner could do with such opportunities.

There are already openings where such central dumping could occur- fire hydrants. But as discussed, it seems the positives outweigh the negatives. I was unaware that garbage disposal was even that big of a nuisance for anyone but sanitation workers... the system of curbside pickup is prob the best compromise.