bodhipooh t1_jef0g72 wrote

Reply to comment by viniciusah in Casual hit and run by driftingwood2018

It's particularly bad to cross at the intersection crossing Marin to/from O'Hara's. For whatever reason, people turning from 1st onto Marin to head North can seldom be bothered to wait for pedestrians and will often cut off people.


bodhipooh t1_jef05nm wrote

It really is. Too bad they chose a name that sounds downright scammy. Lots of people stay away from it because it does sound sketchy, but I am thoroughly impressed by how easy and simple it is to use. AND, it does better than other platforms or professionals. For example, I know lots of people miss out on the NJ property tax credit for renters because it is a very unique thing not seen in other states.


bodhipooh t1_jebo4hp wrote

Lived in that area for over 8 years and NEVER parked on Marin precisely because of this concern... I see so many people drive down Marin like maniacs, all worked up over the recent changes (removing lanes, un-synchronizing lights, etc) and the only surprising thing is that we don't see more of this on a regular basis.


bodhipooh t1_jebnize wrote

They are already down to a minimum amount. When they brought them back a few weeks ago, we all joked they would be gone in no time. And, people didn't disappoint... my last two visits had zero baskets available by the entrance and you could barely spot anyone carrying them inside, which leads me to believe most have been stolen again by now.


bodhipooh t1_jebmq1h wrote

The legislation that allowed red light cameras on a test basis was rescinded (or, perhaps more accurately, allowed to sunset) because (as feared by many) some towns couldn't resist the corruption urge and started messing with the timing of yellow lights to shorten it. Once it was shown/proved that some intersections where the cameras were deployed had their yellow light duration shortened (in violation of mandated standards) the state did away with the red light camera test. So, if you are upset about the current state of things wrt red light cameras, blame the corrupt politicians that tried to squeeze more money out of people.


bodhipooh t1_je34jg7 wrote

>NYC has created over 1 million jobs in the past decade. They've built only 400,000 housing units in that time. Less than 1 housing unit for every 5 jobs created.

Your math aint mathing... 1 million jobs, 400K housing units means 1 housing unit for every 2.5 jobs created. So, half as bad as you posited. And, considering that the average NYC household consists of 2.63 people (source), your stats are not as damning as you seem to believe. There is no question that NYC is not building enough housing, but one has to also dive into this a bit more carefully to understand how that is the case considering that the numbers being cited don't make that argument persuasively. What is happening is that the household size figure is distorted by some larger families and households in lower economic rungs, as well as by ethnic groups and such. CUNY publishes a very interesting breakdown and analysis of housing stats in NYC. In any case, most of the new construction being built is targeted at groups that often live alone, or with another person (couples with no kids) and so the 400K units being mentioned are probably housing a number closer to something like 800K people, leaving the rest to be absorbed by neighboring towns.


bodhipooh t1_je31349 wrote

Total BS. Just walked past it this morning while the doors were open and it is nothing short of baffling that it remains a massive construction site inside. I will be surprised if it opens by Summer.


bodhipooh t1_je30uzk wrote

Skinner's Loft used to be a solid spot for brunch dates and first dates. Good, solid menu, good beers on tap, and decent wine list. Service was always great, too. Haven't been in a while, so perhaps someone else can chime in with a more up-to-date take.


bodhipooh t1_je16v59 wrote

Precisely my point, and it is really fresh that they are trying to portray this as some sort of benefit to those in the community relying on food stamps as I can't imagine how it would make sense for those with a very limited food budget to spend double the money on produce. Spending $3 to $5 for a pound of whatever is a surefire way to run out of food budget way too fast.


bodhipooh t1_je031p4 wrote

Reply to comment by yayforhooray in Farmers market drama? by yayforhooray

I am more confused by the amount of people that seem to believe a farmers market equals "access to cheaper or more affordable produce". My experience is that the farmers markets in JC are ridiculously priced.


bodhipooh t1_jdj5zte wrote

In that case, an entirely useless statistic given the size and density. That area would encompass ~6% of the US population. I misread the infographic and thought they were adding the MSA solely as a location reference. Of course, your interpretation is much more likely to be the correct one.


bodhipooh t1_jdj4r6q wrote

I did specify... Park & Sixth Gastropub. The York Street location was the only one named that way. The other two locations were Park & Sixth, not Park & Sixth Gastropub. Same owner, different menus and vibes.


bodhipooh t1_jdi4gb7 wrote

> If I had to raise a family somewhere, I’d pay more to live somewhere where there aren’t more people on meth than people who are literate. You get what you pay for.

Er... tons of places all over the US with much more reasonable taxes that are not shitholes filled with backward hicks or meth-heads. It's a weird take (but a common one among people in this region) to think it's either crazy taxes (for very shitty roads and infrastructure, government corruption, and overall HCOL - so not exactly getting all that much for what we pay) or living in real-life Ozark with meth, hillbillies, and whatever other stuff you are imagining.


bodhipooh t1_jd8316r wrote

If you are touring 65 Bay, make sure to ask to see an -06 unit. Those are the units in the southeast corner. The mostly uninterrupted views are incredible, and it is also ridiculously quiet. They are 2bd/2ba, so exactly what you are looking for. The -04 units (across the hallway from the -06) are also nice, but the view not quite as expansive (you would be looking at the construction site for the powerhouse down below, and lots of other buildings blocking much of your view) and your Sun exposure will be limited. Good luck in your house hunting adventure.


bodhipooh t1_jd32gi6 wrote

I was mostly thrown off by the line "I'm not really sure how they can possibly compare" considering they are actually quite close together in age, and not all that different overall. But, agreed that the Vantage is definitely a different aesthetic/vibe. Both are good buildings, in my opinion. But the location of Vantage was a dealbreaker for us. We ended up choosing 65 Bay and happy here at the moment. My only quibble/complaint are minor things that others wouldn't care about: the cabinets could/should be nicer, the floors are 100% crap (wood laminate?) and the main bathroom has a single sink. We used to have dual sinks and I miss that. Great kitchen and unbeatable view, plus the location is convenient to both PATH lines.


bodhipooh t1_jd2zm4e wrote

If proximity to PATH is important, definitely avoid Vantage. BLVD is old/dated. We lived in a DVORA building (ArtHouse) for 8 years and were happy there, but we are an outlier given all the other negative feedback. We are currently at 65 Bay, in a corner unit facing Manhattan, and we enjoy an insane view that never gets old. The kind of view for which people would pay millions. We visited a ton of places and decided on 65 Bay for a number of reasons: it is SUPER quiet over here, the amenities were great, and the apartment size/layout was better than anything else in the same price range. The management has been a pleasure throughout the entire process of leasing and moving in, and we haven't had any issues or complaints in the almost four months we have been here.

Lots of people recommending Hendrix, Haus25, or 351 Marin Blvd are not taking into consideration how loud it is in those areas. We lived at ArtHouse for 8 years and it was incredibly loud and it gets annoying at night. Now, our place is basically dead silent AT ALL TIMES.

Before choosing 65 Bay, we toured a bunch of places. VYV had some neat features, but it's the Shoprite parking lot and there is a ton of construction starting again soon. Lively had some great amenities we loved, but we didn't like the unit layouts or sizes. We toured Hamilton House and 372 Ninth (joined DVORA buildings by Hamilton Park) and loved the amenities and the 3bd/3ba unit we toured was just perfect, but we didn't like the location, and how far it felt from everything. Heck, anything North of Hamilton Park would be a hard no from us based on location alone. The Hendrix (and Haus25) felt too expensive considering the drawbacks. Modera Lofts is a joke (floating walls and fake bedrooms without windows and you can hear everything) and Urby was also ridiculous because of the small size of units and the prevailing demographic. We are in our mid 40s and didn't want to consider a building catering to a much younger crowd. One thing we have really appreciated about 65 Bay is that it is (seemingly) mostly well established people in their upper 30s (and, older) with a sprinkling of younger people.


bodhipooh t1_jd2u5v5 wrote

>Vantage is the newest one so the amenities have all the bells and whistles and there is an awesome pool deck. Can also get sweeping views of the city.
>The other buildings you mentioned (BLVD and 65 Bay) are older so I'm not really sure how they can possibly compare

Odd take considering that the original Vantage opened in 2017, while 65 Bay opened in 2016, almost exactly one year apart.


bodhipooh t1_jd0vcnl wrote

Another vote for the YMCA option. Never used it for myself, but did lots of their programs for my daughter when she was younger and always great staff and results. The Chelsea location (YMCA McBurney) is particularly great and a two minute walk from the 14th Street PATH exit.


bodhipooh t1_jcnb6ip wrote

>As I mentioned below, the general perspective is that charters are selective, hurt local schools, etc

That's NOT the "general perspective"... that's simply the narrative pushed by teacher unions because they stand to lose the most if/when parents get a choice in schooling.

As for why charters tend to do better, the answer is not that "small classrooms may be the key". That sounds like another self-serving finding to allow the local BOE and NJEA to push for higher budgets. The fact is that charter schools are a self-selective sample. People who choose to seek out other, better school options for their kids are already showing a higher interest and involvement in their kid's education. It's been shown over and over that the biggest determining factor in scholastic success is parental involvement. When parents take it upon themselves to be more involved in what their kids are learning, and actively participate in helping them in their scholastic experience, the result is a kid that does better. Unfortunately, a lot of parents don't understand this, or don't care, and some are simply unable to do it. To be fair, lots of parents are struggling financially and may be working more than one job, and their ability to get involved may be heavily curtailed. Others simply lack the experience/knowledge to understand the importance of getting involved. But, certainly, a lot just don't care, or don't care enough. Regardless of the reason(s) why a parent is not involved, there are no easy answers or solutions. We live in a country in which support for families is very lacking. As such, for a lot of people the option of being involved is not really a possibility.