Today’s Headlines

  • Please read about the awful things that are happening in the Bronx with the Yankees building too many parking spots and taking away too much park land. You have no idea how crowded the little “replacement” park is! I’ve seen 2 soccer games, a baseball game, 15-20 kids playing in the sand, 20 or more people on the track 8 guys at the “pull up bar” and half of an aerobic class all going on in this tiny park at once— And they want to make this in to a bunch of parking spots that will only be used on game days?

    More people live in the Bronx now than 5 years ago but they have reduced the size of our publics spaces– at the same time there will be fewer seats in the new stadium– but they are increasing the amount of parking! That makes no sense.

    It’s absurd. The public spaces should be for the majority who are here 365 days a year, not for the few (soon to be fewer, since there will not be as many seats in the new stadium) who are only here on game days. Why is the parks department running parking garages anyway?

    I love baseball, and I don’t even mind the crowds, but it seems like the residents of the Bronx are getting overlooked again!

  • m-o

    I completely agree, as a s.bronx resident until last month. So sad to see that little park so crammed up, and so sad to see that s. bronx “revitalization” consists of just parking lots. well, according to the Yankees, anyway. Thankfully there are other positive developments happening in other parts of the s. bronx.

  • bob

    love how one of the commenters on the daily news article (i know, i shouldn’t read that depressing stuff) basically said, “stop whining, south bronx residents should be glad they even have the yankee stadium”. umm – go take a walk around the yankee stadium. what, exactly, has the bronx gained from having the stadium there for decades? as far as i can tell, they have nothing to show for it. so why would anyone think they will have anything to show for the new one? a parcel of land that is empty most of the time, surrounded by numerous parking garages, isn’t going to create a heck of a lot of economic vitality.
    oh well, it’s a story as old as time itself.

  • bob

    forgot to mention the part-time, low-paying jobs with the vast bulk of all profits funneling to corporate tycoons.

  • Braddy

    Re: Prospect Park. Like so many things, opponents complain that it can’t be done, it will cause huge problems, result in loss of business, etc. And then afterwards, it turns out to be not so bad, and the former opponents forget about how they complained in the first place. Remember the smoking ban?

  • They didn’t even hire local people to help build the new stadium, even though that was one of the many promises made when the project first began.

  • Low-income drivers as individuals save substantially if they do not have to pay tolls, but as a group low-income residents, on average, pay more out-of-pocket with sales taxes.

    Yes, but driving is about freedom, and bread isn’t! Right?

    Sorry, Brodsky and Tarlow, you’re no Jean-Paul Marat.

  • Re: Anthony Weiner:

    What’s a “parking shield?” And if, by “parking shield,” he’s actually referring to an actual legal instrument, is he actually entitled to have one? And should he be using it for campaign stops? And besides, he voted yes on allowing Bush to start the Iraq War. Never liked the guy since then.

  • RE: The Yankees is just another land grab by the city. When I first heard about the park, my first thought was there goes another one.

    RE: I dream of a car-free Prospect Park, and anyone who says that cars don’t speed in the park need to get under from the rock they are living under. What is more important is that no dialogue about the effects of the cars in the park on the psyche of park users. SF restricted cars on Sunday in Golden Gate Park and usership went through the roof. This is not to say we don’t have enough people using the park already, but a matter of how we want and should use our parks.

  • Car Free Nation

    In terms of the 70,000 bike thefts per year in NYC, why can’t NYPD run a campaign like they did in the subways to catch people stealing bags?
    See http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2007/12/06/2007-12-06_nypd_says_operation_lucky_bag_stings_hav.html
    Instead of leaving unattended bags, leave loosely locked bikes (eg. new bikes with light chains around them that can be easily clipped). Unlike the Lucky Bag program, where there is a very good case to be made that the people were not intending to commit crimes, in this case there is no reason someone would be clipping the chain unless they were interested in stealing the bike. There’s no confusion, and it would make what is now a reasonably “safe” crime, much more risky.

  • Or, provide free “citybikes” as does Copenhagen, and reduce the incentive to steal.