Yeah i’m certainly going to do that now, it seems a lot simpler than getting the city to change their policies, I just hate being screwed with

You don’t complain about those tickets? Even when you’ve parked it in a legal spot that then becomes illegal before you’ve moved it? That’s an incredibly frustrating situation and I admire your patience.

And again, this is truly not about money, it’s about defending myself against something I consider unfair. I guess not everybody agrees.

That really sucks. Hoboken will call you to tell you to move your car if you’re in a no parking zone (though I believe that only applies to parking permit holders I could be wrong). If it’s happening that frequently, it could be worth it to just start taking walks by your car every couple days. Not the most practical thing but that sounds like the simplest solution

>But the fact that it’s a 17-story building in a neighborhood of 2 and 3 story buildings connected to a park is enough of a reason

I mean I don't doubt there are people who don't support this, but I think this claim itself needs more support and evidence than what you are providing. For example, there are already neighborhoods in JC that exist with exactly what this sentence describes, so why imply these characteristics are bad in and of themselves without the data to support that claim?

If someone rolls up with a bunch of claims, don't be surprised when the Reddit masses ask: "sauce?"

Sell the car, don't move it.

You asked if you were overreacting and whether you should just shut up and pay the ticket.

1. How is it not about the money? Your post is predicated on the question of whether or not you can fight this. There is no other penalty involved than the fines you'll need to pay. It's not as though you're attempting to plea down some points on your license. You've admitted that you do not check your car every day so there is no way to know if the signs were posted with the appropriate 48 hours notice.

2. You're correct that I'm making some assumptions based on the information you've provided that you, "work from home, so I'll often leave my car in the same place for a few days in a row until I have to move it for street cleaning."

I do own a bike, but also a car. I also do not need my car with significant frequency, but I don't complain when I leave it unattended for multiple days and get hit with a parking ticket because I know the alternative is paying $250+/month for space in a garage.

I don’t have the shadow study, though one will be presented I’m assuming again on Tuesday? There’s a reason this is considered controversial - it’s not hysteria. This was snuck through planning, during the pandemic, and did not have community support. A non-profit sued but didn’t win, but that still doesn’t mean it has community support. It doesn’t. I wouldn’t support this in someone else’s neighborhood either. It doesn’t make any sense. I looked at the map, and having spent a lot of time at Berry Lane can see with my eyes that it will block the sun (partially) in the morning (unless the location has moved, again - there have been multiple revisions). But the fact that it’s a 17-story building in a neighborhood of 2 and 3 story buildings connected to a park is enough of a reason, especially when we can get the benefits of density through multiple mid-rises on that same lot. We don’t have to give up having light here on the ground.

Do you know how shadows work?

On Earth, north of the Tropic of Cancer, you will never have a solar shadow cast on the south side of a building.

I feel like they have one more adult themed exhibit at a time from my experience volunteering there. By the looks of this one it should be interesting for you

In the original post you claimed it would cast a shadow "block sunlight to Berry Lane Park"? Do you have the shadow study?

1. It’s not about the money, it’s about making parking even more difficult than it already is
2. My car is unnecessary? You don’t know anything about me or what I might need my car for. You sound like one of those guys who runs your bike through stop signs because the rules don’t apply to you

Happened with me once. I contested the ticket, judge didn't even hear me and I had to pay. I suggest file a plea online. Greater chance you may lose but you might get lucky if other people also contest.

It isn’t trepidation. I’m not going by “seems to me!” Or “my gut says!” “I would think…” I’m looking at data and best practices and this is NOT best practice. Not for density and not for the neighborhood.

You're furious that your out-of-pocket cost to park your admittedly unnecessary vehicle on public property has skyrocketed in price from $18/year to $18 + 2x $50 parking tickets?

But the density can be achieved through mid-rises. Why do we need more open space next to the largest park in JC? Just put more buildings on the lot! Even the developer was open to it.

I did read the whole article, idk why you’re acting like it’s a definitive statement. They’re also not comparing change in density,

> For a city supporting 20,000 people, moving from low rises to high rises without changing the density results in 140% more carbon emissions.

Finally

> Ultimately, how tall a city should build depends on multiple environmental and socioeconomic factors, including affordable housing needs and greening efforts.

Nowhere in the article Did it say mid rise builds are superior to high rises in all cases. Also show me how you could fit more units on this land while also keeping the low rise plaza and green space

The tower is northeast of the park. If you have the shadow study, could you share it?

The tower is north of Berry Lane. It won't cast a shadow on the park.

The notion that a single high rise will bring in "disconnected" people is hard to credit. This particular project has much more public engagement at its base than the entirely enclosed Foundry or the tucked-away Lafayette lofts. It's also occupying space that's been civically and commercially dead for decades. If the complex fills with the most insular people imaginable, the community loses nothing.

I get the trepidation. Lafayette's low-key low-rise character feels more like an old mill town than an urban neighborhood, and that charm is hard to let go of. But mill towns have mills. Lafayette doesn't anymore, and when it did it wasn't pleasant. It's a residential neighborhood with easy access to a major world hub. 420 units with public space over a dead steel steel mill doesn't seem like a threat to the neighborhood to me.

No point in arguing with the deranged yimbys in this sub. These people think driving a car makes you worse than hitler.

Don’t forget labor costs have increased dramatically. Minimum wage went up the past few years with a (ultimately good) ripple effect.

Labor is a huge part of a buildings operating costs if you look at a condo or coop. Like 30-60% depending on age of building. Newer buildings have less repair costs so 60% isn’t hard to hit.

If it’s a “Luxury” building with concierge… yea costs went up quite a bit for 24x7 staffing. Even more if you’ve got indoor plumbing that needs a plumber, electrical, someone taking care of the trash, vacuuming the hallway etc.

NYC has also seen a wave of doormen unionizing so there’s upward pressure impacting us from there too. You get a lot more compensation across the Hudson.

Then add in inflation.

I thought this went to court and was already settled? I'm confused about what stage this is in and what the avenues to make those demands are?

It’s a company where you pay them a flat amount per month and get a certain amount of credits that you can exchange for lunches at participating restaurants. It’s kinda like classpass but for lunch spots. There’s hundreds if not thousands of participating restaurants in Manhattan and probably about 10 in JC.

I'm in real estate and I'm not sure I understand your arguement. Are you saying that a bank will lend on a 17-story project with 420 units but not 3 six-story buildings totalling 420 units on that same lot? I'm not sure I understand that.

I saw somewhere in this thread that this development will "block light to a park". Can someone help me understand that claim better? I thought this would be north of Berry Lane Park and the sun moves east to west. When would it block light? Or are there many other things being built currently around that park too?

No one is advocating for keeping it empty. We all want to see more housing. The discussion is that a mid-rise on multiple buildings is better for many reasons and a similar number of units could be built on that same lot in a mid-rise fashion. High-rise doesn’t help the neighborhood even if it’s a pretty design.