Gothamist: Extra, Extra

Sten5915

Sun, 20 May 2007 07:57:28 -0500

I just don't have much to say recently. Such is life. I've basically been doing nothing. Basically nothing seems worth bothering with. Oh well.

TramadoL30656

Fri, 05 Jan 2007 00:28:57 -0500

I just don't have anything to say. Not that it matters. Eh. I've just been staying at home doing nothing, but I don't care. That's how it is.

bb

Thu, 17 Aug 2006 12:01:30 -0500

i assume everyones moed along here, but can any of the dudes give me a reason for cars? i ask this quite sincerely. there seems to be a lot of people that oppose the idea of a ban simply because. their opposition takes the shape of namecalling, but provides no backing. what benefits do private cars provide that can justify opposing a ban? of course, this is the nature of those people only interested in the satus quo and comfort level that, stragely enough, doesn't seem to satisfy them enough to speak with confidence or real purpose.

little chitaly

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:01:29 -0500

Besides Fulton, Mulberry is sometimes closed to traffic.

Chris

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:33:15 -0500

Urbanist- actually, closing streets to traffic has been successful around the world, an in NYC - Fulton St in Downtown Manhattan in particular, comes to mind. NYC is different than most cities in that it already has a lively street life, and so if done right, street closings can significantly enhance quality of life, safety and economic vitality. For more info on Fulton St, see: http://www.nycsr.org/nyc/video-view.php?id=5

Urbanist

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:11:53 -0500

The problem is that closing streets to traffic has been tried before and very often failed. The Times had an article a few years ago that told about all these pedestrian malls around the country that were being converted back into streets because they just did not live up to their promises.

Schadenfreudian Mensch

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 10:43:26 -0500

"Future Criminals of New York. Half these kids will be in rikers before they are 16." I beg to differ. Only 1/3 of the kids will be in Rikers, another 1/3 would probably be 6ft under. Life's a bitch on the streets of Williamsburg just as long as those kids don't mess with the hipsters and the Hasids all is good.

Dude

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:52:30 -0500

So all the "dudes" are in agreement that m is a TOOL!

dude

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:34:11 -0500

"sorry, dude, you don't deserve a response" that is a response. (rolling eyes)

Dude

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:33:25 -0500

Ooo, Mr."Let's close down Broadway for the bikes and kids" I was SOOO worry that you wouldn't respond to my post. Better watch your back for right turning 18 wheelers when you ride your bike down those car streets.

bb

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:23:16 -0500

banning cars (esp. private cars) from any city street is a good idea. the "utopian" theorist paul goodman explained why and how to do it decades ago: http://www.bopsecrets.org/CF/goodman-cars.htm and dude, sir, if you are so very interested in cars, perhaps a city isn't the place for you. while plenty of perfectly good reasons for reducing car use in urban areas have been provided over the years, I have yet to ever hear a good reason for them.

m

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:10:30 -0500

sorry, dude, you don't deserve a response, because i don't think you have the requisite mental capacity to understand.

jj

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:07:36 -0500

m: yeah, but you took all that time to type that out and correct a troll. still makes you a tool. lol

Dude

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:01:10 -0500

#14 - What's your problem with cars and highways? Go live with the Amish if you can't stand the "traffic". I can't stand people like you who are always complaining about how cars are destroying society, so go create your own "car free utopia" somewhere else. Have fun riding your rusty fixed gear bikes! LOL

m

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 08:24:31 -0500

jj- If you knew anything about history, you'd know that streets were not built for cars, especially in NYC. Most were built before the auto, and were highly multi-use: yes, for horse-drawn transportation, but also vending, children playing, neighbors meeting, etc. Look at any older picture of NYC streets and you will see a dizzying array of life, not just on the sidewalk, but IN the street. As the auto began to dominate, the City begin to enact policies that gave the streets to the car, like: traffic lights, inventing "jaywalking", moving kids from streets to newly-built playgrounds, widening streets, making them one way, building neighborhood-destroying expressways, etc. So, before you call me a tool, try opening a book and learning something first.

jj

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 08:01:42 -0500

m: "take back their streets from the car"?? they were built FOR cars you tool.

Dude

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 07:54:48 -0500

Shouldn't the NYPD bust these little hoodlums before they off someone in a couple of years, which they will! Preventive justice is the only way to go, flash a gang sign and off to the Big Pen. And I agree with #3 that most of these punks will be rotting in jail before they are 18 anyway. Also it's time for the NYPD to go in and take back McCarren from these unwashed, no talent hipsters. Throw them in jail with those would be gangsters!

aries

Wed, 16 Aug 2006 01:40:37 -0500

not every kid of color throwing gang signs is from the Lower East Side. the flickr caption says williamsburg.

G Unit

Tue, 15 Aug 2006 23:51:37 -0500

5 poppin, 6 droppin PIRU ST BLOOD 4 LIFE!!!

PMS 13

Tue, 15 Aug 2006 23:04:43 -0500

Which kid? The one who looks like a suicide bomber in the green bandana making the CRIPS sign?

anon

Tue, 15 Aug 2006 22:15:01 -0500

CLIMAX - I don't see how it's racist to say these kids look like a bunch of future criminals. They are already emulating a criminal lifestyle--why is it racist to assume that they will continue down the same path?

Gangsta

Tue, 15 Aug 2006 21:47:44 -0500

Double Douce Nigga!! Yeah yeah! Check out how the middle kid is all serious....yeah, we have a prison cell waiting for you when you hit puberty.

Erf

Tue, 15 Aug 2006 20:05:16 -0500

There's really very little reason for anyone to drive on Bayard or the sub-Canal side of Mott in the first place, except to park. Both streets could really use the space for foot traffic instead. As a local worker and constant purveyor of stores on both streets (Though admittedly, not as a driver), I'd love to see the two streets closed to traffic.

jn

Tue, 15 Aug 2006 19:00:01 -0500

OMG -- Shake Shack Trouble http://eater.curbed.com/archives/2006/08/shake_shack_fai.php

CLIMAX TOGETHER

Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:53:55 -0500

Of course no day can be completed without those trademark pattiecake racist comments.....

pattiecake

Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:28:00 -0500

Future Criminals of New York. Half these kids will be in rikers before they are 16.

m

Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:07:16 -0500

Closing a street is hardly "radical", as it's done all over the world, usually successfully. It's only in NYC, where we've completely lost leadership in urban/transportation planning, is it treated as novel. Other global cities are beginning to take back their streets from the car -- we've got a lot of catching up to do.

Glenn

Tue, 15 Aug 2006 17:50:10 -0500

Re: Closing Mott Street Why does it have to be all or nothing? What if they did a one week or one month or all Summer Experiment? We should be willing trying stuff out, collecting data, seeing what problems really arise, before we completely dismiss a new idea. Closing a street to traffic is no irreversible.