Nope. Some unrelated person "owns" the spot and another person moved the space saver so that the driver ended up parking in an "open" spot, unaware of the dibs claimed by the spot "owner." The spot owner is likely the one who vandalized the car. Very unlikely it's random vandalism.
How does the law work? Walsh has said if you clear a spot after a snow emergency, you own that spot for awhile. The law said 48 hours. Neither he nor the law said what happens if you do take a space saver spot, nor does it say what happens if someone illegally saves a spot for more than 48 hours after a snow emergency (or anytime after a non snow emergency storm). So given the lack of clarity and the total lack of enforcement, and the city making these laws knowing how they are self enforced (thuggery), I would say a good lawyer could make the city, as well as the perp, liable.
But first you start with your insurance and if you don't have info on the offending party, you're stuck out of your deductible until you can try and get $ from the City.
DON'T
Use space savers more than 48 hours after a snow emergency has been lifted.
While it doesn't explicitly say "you can use space savers until 48 hours after the end of a snow emergency", it can be inferred that is what they are saying. And their actions (not removing space savers) speak quite loudly.
There us NO LAW. This is an inspectional services issue. The city will essentially ignore space savers until the first trash day after 48 hours of the end of a snow emergency, which is when sanitation is likely to remove space savers. If the trash guys don't, then call inspectional services. If you want to take matters into your own hands and damage results, then file a police report. Most importantly, if urban living is too difficult to adapt to, try somewhere else.
Here's the background of the policy that will drive people nuts.
Back in December of 2003, the policy was first promulgated. Here's what the Globe had to say on December 20th-
Starting Monday, the Department of Public Works will pick up "any materials designated as a parking space saver" 48 hours after every winter storm, he said.
After blizzards like this month's deep-drifting northeaster, chairs, barbecue grills, and garbage cans materialize at curbside spaces carved out of snowbanks across the city. But Menino said yesterday that he has decided that residents are unreasonably claiming spots long after storms and that recent episodes of vandalism and parking feuds show that the situation is getting out of hand.
"Streets in Boston belong to the people," Menino said. "I respect the tradition of reserving shoveled spaces, but enough is enough. The streetscape has been littered with household furniture long enough."
The new stance is a sharp departure from the city's attitude toward what a Menino administration official once called the "law of the street," dictating that anyone who digs out a spot after the first snowfall holds claim to it.
However, even at the time, the were questions about whether the policy will be enforced (ie removing space savers, not allowing them)
By the big storm of January 2005, things looked bleak for the idea of getting rid of the savers. From the Globe, Jan 25, 2005-
"The 48-hour rule is not the mayor's first priority right now," said Menino's spokesman, Seth Gitell. "Removing the 26 inches of snow is."
So, that's a bit of the backstory. No law. Policy and tradition. Agree or disagree, but there is no law.
Little EDIT- in looking further, Menino did crack down, on the 3rd of February.
After blizzards like this month's deep-drifting northeaster, chairs, barbecue grills, and garbage cans materialize at curbside spaces carved out of snowbanks across the city. But Menino said yesterday that he has decided that residents are unreasonably claiming spots long after storms and that recent episodes of vandalism and parking feuds show that the situation is getting out of hand.
"Streets in Boston belong to the people," Menino said. "I respect the tradition of reserving shoveled spaces, but enough is enough. The streetscape has been littered with household furniture long enough."
Mahty should take a play out of Tom's playbook. I 100% agree.. it even happens near my house. Tired of seeing people hog spaces for weeks on end, and getting NASTY about it if someone takes it (Chelsea has the same 48 hour rule but it isn't enforced)
He had the political intelligence to know that a balance needed to be struck. And when, a few seasons later, the city was "overwhelmed" by 2 feet of snow, he slacked off a bit and didn't do anything for 2 weeks, but then did something since the storm was well over. Of course, if things keep on getting ramped up like this, even Marty will have to invoke the edict of his predecessor.
I am sure that Adam will stick this idea in the back of his head. In June, someone will submit to Citizens' Connect a photo of a saw horse of whatever in front of someone's house, and we will discuss it. Let's just hope there is in fact no snow around by then.
For instance: Almost no one drives below the highway speed limit, except during a blizzard. Almost none of the fast drivers get tickets, unless they're doing at least 75 or doing something else the cop doesn't like.
The sort of act described in this post is pretty much inevitable, and we're going to see more of it. I agree that the Mayor's officially condoning space savers is very short-sighted.
I'm wondering what the liability is here, given a the law, given the official pronouncement, and given that municipalities have been sued in the past for not enforcing laws.
If a Mayor of a major city declared that drunk driving or speeding laws would not be enforced over a holiday, what, exactly, would you expect to happen when there was an accident?
Your hypothetical deals with non-enforcement of criminal statutes. The municipal ordinance in question is not a criminal statute and only carries a $250 civil penalty. Not the same thing. And see my comment below, the ordinance doesn't even ban space savers, it just rests authority in the city solely to set policies on reserving spaces.
if someone felt that Marty was personally liable, could they take him to small claims court? They'd lose, but it would put the issue at the forefront in the media.
The "Haystack ordinance" is being misinterpreted as a law banning these space savers. It does not do that. The ordinance states that only the city and no other entity can manage space reserving. This is the plain language of the ordinance with relevant parts in bold:
No person or entity other than the City of Boston or any of its departments or designees shall have the authority sell, lease, reserve or facilitate the reserving of any street, way, highway, road or parkway, or portion thereof, under the City of Boston's control.
That language is clear that only the city can facilitate the reserving of parking spots, as opposed to a private entity or person. And the city is in fact doing said facilitating by having a policy where it grants residents the ability to reserve spots after snow emergencies. What they're doing is consistent with that as I see it. People can argue over whether it's good policy or not, but it's not a situation where they're acting outside the scope of their authority. And the city is well within its discretion to adjust its policies on a situational basis and expand that written-down 48 hour window if it deems it more practical and efficient to focus its limited resources on snow removal or ticketing, etc.
Please find another city to assimilate your boringness into like and stop desperately trying to turn Boston into a midwestern amalgamation of monoculture.
By nearly all measures, Toronto would be more of a "world city" than Montreal: millions of people, very diverse population with a strong immigrant culture, flights from other world cities.
It took Montreal 30 years to pay for a stadium with a retractable roof that never worked and that sits empty most of the year now that the Expos are playing as the Nationals in Washington, D.C. The games were a financial disaster for the city.
Given that Montreal went through four mayors in 2012, I don't think that they have an example to follow when it comes to selecting chief executives. The incumbent, Gerald Tremblay, resigned under the cloud of a corruption investigation. His successor, Michael Applebaum, was indicted on corruption charges a few months after being selected as interim mayor by the city council. A replacement was chosen, Laurent Blanchard, who managed to hold onto the position until Denis Coderre won election a few months later.
But let's follow Montreal's example when it comes to snow removal.
In addition to a couple of other minor issues said this is it (cited this incident and the German papers writing about what infantile children we are).
Pass alternate side of street parking rules - in odd years (like 2015) designated alternate side of the street parking areas need to be free of cars on the odd side for the first 24 hours after a snow emergency ends and then the even side for the 24 hours following that. To be fair - in even years you reverse the order. If that's not reasonable - find something that works so that we can grow up and act like goddamned adults. C'mon people.
Oh - and if the snow is not deep enough to declare a parking emergency - no space savers.
How does this solve the problem though, if the city doesn't plow the empty side?
Somerville already has something similar, though the sides do not switch off. For many side streets now, the side that didn't allow parking during the snow emergency is now 6 ft high snow banks, because they never came back to plow to the curb after the first storm and everyone on that side piled the snow from driveways and sidewalks into the unplowed side of the street. So more than half the parking spots are now gone, and yes there is space-saving going on.
Success of your plan depends on drivers keeping track of time, of when a snow emergency is declared over, and of whether the year is even or odd. That's asking a lot of them.
I park my car for $10 in a lot during snow emergencies - and keep an eye out for when they end (the city also sends me a text - hats off for good use of modern technology on that one).
If I don't get my car out - I pay full fare. If you don't move your car - it gets towed - auto-texting and towing are not rocket science.
It's Boston - it snows. sometimes it snows a lot. Obviously people haven't put enough thought into this - until it happens. If nobody fixes this - they should all be voted out. It should be a MAJOR issue in the council elections this fall.
Not everyone is sagacious as you. I'm sure you've noticed this -- in fact I've seen you pointing it out, right here on this site. How many sub-Stevil ignorami would it take to thoroughly sabotage this parking solution by losing track of the time, or by just not giving a shit?
While bailing their car out of the tow lot for $150. That's just not as free as $#!+
Are we somehow stupider than all the other cities that do this without all the fanfare of parking savers? If you are so stupid that you can't tell time - you probably shouldn't have a driver's license. How's that for sagacious?
Would year-round street cleaning be the end of space savers? In the winter, it could just be street plowing, but making everyone eventually move their car would certainly change things.
... Chicago used to simply move cars when they wanted to clear streets of snow (to the curb). They would clear a street, then move the cars from the next uncleared street onto the newly cleared street. This meant one sometimes had to spend a fair bit of time looking for where your car got moved. ;-)
This applied to ordinary streets -- not ones where parking was banned due to a snow emergency. (Much more civilized than towing to a tow lot -- and being charged a zillion dollars).
I don't agree with space savers unless we have a catastrophic amount of snow like this. In my neighborhood many people just leave their cars so only the ones who actually have to drive to work have to leave the space. But there is literally no other parking because any extra space has been filled with snow. If I thought I stood a chance of getting a space when I got home I wouldn't mind not saving it, but with the city just giving up on clearing the streets there is no other choice.
this is the biggest problem with space saving. The city (or anyone else) can remove all the space savers. An unsuspecting driver finds a spot, parks and gets his tires slashed. The guy that parked had no idea the space was saved and was not trying to be a dick. But i've seen this happen too often.
That's why it's a cultural attitude problem. The fact that people think vandalism of this sort is a perfectly reasonable reaction to having a parking space they don't own taken (note: it wasn't stolen, never was, never can be,) has got to go. It's just such a difficult thing to track. Outside of equipping your car with cameras, or pointing a camera good enough to make out people's faces out your apartment window, how do you get the message across to people this deranged? I feel like the city can make an official statement and pick up all the space savers as trash and put notes on the doors of all buildings in Boston, but people would still be over-reactive vigilantes they wan to be.
At this point it's probably best to just not park in a residential area at all unless it's in a space you cleared out yourself. Nobody in their right mind is just driving off and giving up their spot. There are exactly as many spots as there are people who need to drive — there are no extra spots. So stay away and don't drive into someone else's neighborhood until the City makes some room.
If said baby was being used as a space saver (which I have seen in photos).
I don't know any of the people in this situation, but for some reason I just got really unreasonably angry while reading this post! Almost angry enough to write a letter.
That's the best you've got? No, I don't live in Boston now. I lived here for ten years, I visit friends frequently, and I work downtown. And yes, I'm sure Marty the Donkey doesn't give a rat's ass what I think, but guess what? He cares about showing his jackass ears in public, and that's exactly what would happen if someone shoved this in his face at a press conference. So why don't I do that? Because I'm not a member of the press.
By the way, your boy Marty also doesn't give a rat's ass what you think either, even if you are one of his constituents (you are, right?). He'd only give a rat's ass what you thought if you gave six figures to his campaign and fellated him twice a day.
The six figure donors are not quite the folk who put their cars on the street, so space saving is not a thing for them.
However, I am willing to bet that throughout Dorchester, Mattapan, Hyde Park, and Roslindale there are a lot of Walsh voters who would not think too kindly to an edict that the space someone shoveled out is not theirs.
Oh, and I might be wrong, but I want to say Vaughn was a Connolly voter. Could be wrong, though.
Comments
So it was this guy's own spot
By gotdatwmd
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:09am
So it was this guy's own spot and the victim was his friend? Sounds more like random vandalism rather than space saver related
No
By Steeve
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:17am
They're saying someone moved someone else's spot saver at some point, and then the friend parked in the spot, and found that treat on the car.
Nope. Some unrelated person
By R Hookup
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:20am
Nope. Some unrelated person "owns" the spot and another person moved the space saver so that the driver ended up parking in an "open" spot, unaware of the dibs claimed by the spot "owner." The spot owner is likely the one who vandalized the car. Very unlikely it's random vandalism.
Wow
By cybah
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:11am
This has just dragged on.
Really glad I don't own a car so I don't have to deal with this BS... this has gone from from bad to worse.
Can't wait to see what next we'll see. What's next? Someone getting stabbed?
Is the City criminally liable
By MattyC
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:13am
Is the City criminally liable for damages caused by tacit acceptance of this system?
Food for thought.
No
By Doc Holliday
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:15am
No
No.
By Scratchie
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:16am
Hope this helps.
Not how the law works....
By Rob Not Verified
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:17am
Not how the law works....
How does the law work? Walsh
By anon
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:35am
How does the law work? Walsh has said if you clear a spot after a snow emergency, you own that spot for awhile. The law said 48 hours. Neither he nor the law said what happens if you do take a space saver spot, nor does it say what happens if someone illegally saves a spot for more than 48 hours after a snow emergency (or anytime after a non snow emergency storm). So given the lack of clarity and the total lack of enforcement, and the city making these laws knowing how they are self enforced (thuggery), I would say a good lawyer could make the city, as well as the perp, liable.
And if you can't find the
By MattyC
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:30am
And if you can't find the person who trashed your car, you're left with the City.
You can try
By ElizaLeila
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 1:08pm
But first you start with your insurance and if you don't have info on the offending party, you're stuck out of your deductible until you can try and get $ from the City.
What law?
By Bob Leponge
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:32am
Can anyone find the law that says this? I sure can't.
Not sure if it's a law...
By Steeve
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:38am
but this is on the city's website:
http://www.cityofboston.gov/snow/parking/
While it doesn't explicitly say "you can use space savers until 48 hours after the end of a snow emergency", it can be inferred that is what they are saying. And their actions (not removing space savers) speak quite loudly.
http://www.cityofboston.gov/snow/parking/
By Jeff Boudreau
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:23pm
http://www.cityofboston.gov/snow/parking/ is administrative policy, not law.
Can someone provide a link to the law?
Good Point
By Jay
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:51am
There us NO LAW. This is an inspectional services issue. The city will essentially ignore space savers until the first trash day after 48 hours of the end of a snow emergency, which is when sanitation is likely to remove space savers. If the trash guys don't, then call inspectional services. If you want to take matters into your own hands and damage results, then file a police report. Most importantly, if urban living is too difficult to adapt to, try somewhere else.
I agree with Bob on this
By Waquiot
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:37pm
And me and Bob disagree on the issue.
What we are talking about is a policy, not a law.
Here's the background of the policy that will drive people nuts.
Back in December of 2003, the policy was first promulgated. Here's what the Globe had to say on December 20th-
However, even at the time, the were questions about whether the policy will be enforced (ie removing space savers, not allowing them)
By the big storm of January 2005, things looked bleak for the idea of getting rid of the savers. From the Globe, Jan 25, 2005-
So, that's a bit of the backstory. No law. Policy and tradition. Agree or disagree, but there is no law.
Little EDIT- in looking further, Menino did crack down, on the 3rd of February.
Mahty
By cybah
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:42pm
Menino is right
Mahty should take a play out of Tom's playbook. I 100% agree.. it even happens near my house. Tired of seeing people hog spaces for weeks on end, and getting NASTY about it if someone takes it (Chelsea has the same 48 hour rule but it isn't enforced)
Of course he was right
By Waquiot
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:59pm
He had the political intelligence to know that a balance needed to be struck. And when, a few seasons later, the city was "overwhelmed" by 2 feet of snow, he slacked off a bit and didn't do anything for 2 weeks, but then did something since the storm was well over. Of course, if things keep on getting ramped up like this, even Marty will have to invoke the edict of his predecessor.
I am sure that Adam will stick this idea in the back of his head. In June, someone will submit to Citizens' Connect a photo of a saw horse of whatever in front of someone's house, and we will discuss it. Let's just hope there is in fact no snow around by then.
Even if they are blatantly not enforcing a law?
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:42am
How does "not enforcing a law" and "mayor makes it clear that the laws won't be enforced" play into liability?
Space saving is actually illegal according to the laws that banned Haystack.
There are probably thousands of laws not being enforced
By perruptor
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:10am
For instance: Almost no one drives below the highway speed limit, except during a blizzard. Almost none of the fast drivers get tickets, unless they're doing at least 75 or doing something else the cop doesn't like.
The sort of act described in this post is pretty much inevitable, and we're going to see more of it. I agree that the Mayor's officially condoning space savers is very short-sighted.
Are they officially not enforced, though?
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:15am
As in "Mayor says there is no enforcement"?
I'm wondering what the liability is here, given a the law, given the official pronouncement, and given that municipalities have been sued in the past for not enforcing laws.
If a Mayor of a major city declared that drunk driving or speeding laws would not be enforced over a holiday, what, exactly, would you expect to happen when there was an accident?
Your hypothetical deals with
By Rob Not Verified
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 2:25pm
Your hypothetical deals with non-enforcement of criminal statutes. The municipal ordinance in question is not a criminal statute and only carries a $250 civil penalty. Not the same thing. And see my comment below, the ordinance doesn't even ban space savers, it just rests authority in the city solely to set policies on reserving spaces.
Specifically...
By Bob Leponge
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:34am
Municipal ordinance 1310
Just wondering
By polarbare
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:44pm
if someone felt that Marty was personally liable, could they take him to small claims court? They'd lose, but it would put the issue at the forefront in the media.
The "Haystack ordinance" is
By Rob Not Verified
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 2:21pm
The "Haystack ordinance" is being misinterpreted as a law banning these space savers. It does not do that. The ordinance states that only the city and no other entity can manage space reserving. This is the plain language of the ordinance with relevant parts in bold:
No person or entity other than the City of Boston or any of its departments or designees shall have the authority sell, lease, reserve or facilitate the reserving of any street, way, highway, road or parkway, or portion thereof, under the City of Boston's control.
http://www.masslive.com/news/boston/index.ssf/2014... (ordinance at bottom of article)
That language is clear that only the city can facilitate the reserving of parking spots, as opposed to a private entity or person. And the city is in fact doing said facilitating by having a policy where it grants residents the ability to reserve spots after snow emergencies. What they're doing is consistent with that as I see it. People can argue over whether it's good policy or not, but it's not a situation where they're acting outside the scope of their authority. And the city is well within its discretion to adjust its policies on a situational basis and expand that written-down 48 hour window if it deems it more practical and efficient to focus its limited resources on snow removal or ticketing, etc.
Only liable
By anon
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 6:21pm
If the City actually removed the snow. If they just want to push snow around they cannot be held responsible.
Thanks Marty for condoning
By anon
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:14am
Thanks Marty for condoning the practice!
Walsh has to go...
By SoBo-Yuppie
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:49am
This is what happens when you elect a life long townie as Mayor.
NYC elects mayors that are not from NY. We need to do the same.
We should elect someone from a world class city like LA, Montreal, London, NYC..etc.
- The Original SoBo Yuppie
Ugh
By gotdatwmd
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:18am
Ugh
You were doing fine...
By lbb
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:39am
...until you blew that silly trite childish "world class city" dog-whistle.
He posted the same trollbait
By gotdatwmd
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:42am
He posted the same trollbait shit in at least 2 other threads so it doesn't matter.
It's true, he did
By lbb
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:08pm
He's like Markkkk or that Silver Line nutter.
Not trolling..
By SoBo-Yuppie
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 1:14pm
..but rather speaking the truth.
Boston is long over due for a leader with fresh ideas and new ways of solving problems. Typically, outsiders are the best for that.
No, you are a troll
By Ishmael Jones
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 3:23pm
But usually you stick to bashing the local sports teams.
Please find another city to
By gotdatwmd
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 3:26pm
Please find another city to assimilate your boringness into like and stop desperately trying to turn Boston into a midwestern amalgamation of monoculture.
Hey....
By Michael Kerpan
Fri, 02/20/2015 - 9:43am
... why the Midwest-bashing? - has soboyup ever said he was from the Midwest?
Montreal?
By anon
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:52am
Sorry, Montreal isn't any more 'world class' than Boston. Great city, fun place to visit, lots of industry - not the same as London, NYC, etc...
Also, most of their mayors are from there or have spent signifiant time there - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mayors_of_Mon...
Notice how they didn't mention Toronto?
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:18pm
By nearly all measures, Toronto would be more of a "world city" than Montreal: millions of people, very diverse population with a strong immigrant culture, flights from other world cities.
And ... Rob Ford.
Don't forget the Olympics
By Anonyme
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 8:02pm
It took Montreal 30 years to pay for a stadium with a retractable roof that never worked and that sits empty most of the year now that the Expos are playing as the Nationals in Washington, D.C. The games were a financial disaster for the city.
Given that Montreal went through four mayors in 2012, I don't think that they have an example to follow when it comes to selecting chief executives. The incumbent, Gerald Tremblay, resigned under the cloud of a corruption investigation. His successor, Michael Applebaum, was indicted on corruption charges a few months after being selected as interim mayor by the city council. A replacement was chosen, Laurent Blanchard, who managed to hold onto the position until Denis Coderre won election a few months later.
But let's follow Montreal's example when it comes to snow removal.
Stay Classy
By polarbare
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:15am
you world class city you.
Bring in the tourists! They
By tofu
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:49am
Bring in the tourists! They are dying to meet all the friendly Massholes!
Wow
By Scratchie
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:17am
Nobody could have predicted this outcome.
Is it so bad?
By bohemka
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:22am
A lot of people pay good money for similar detailing. I think it looks faster now.
Good point
By Steeve
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:33am
I doubt anyone will be complaining once they get that bad boy on the road and VTEC kicks in, yo.
Good point
By Steeve
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:33am
I doubt anyone will be complaining once they get that bad boy on the road and VTEC kicks in, yo.
Where are all the space-saver defenders now?
By JCK
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:40am
Seems like they've all vanished in a hurry.
Busy at work.
By gotdatwmd
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:19am
Busy at work. #notallspacesavers
They are out vandalizing cars
By Kinopio
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 1:38pm
They are out vandalizing cars, threatening their neighbors and making poorly written signs.
Just wrote Josh Zakim an email
By Stevil
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:46am
In addition to a couple of other minor issues said this is it (cited this incident and the German papers writing about what infantile children we are).
Pass alternate side of street parking rules - in odd years (like 2015) designated alternate side of the street parking areas need to be free of cars on the odd side for the first 24 hours after a snow emergency ends and then the even side for the 24 hours following that. To be fair - in even years you reverse the order. If that's not reasonable - find something that works so that we can grow up and act like goddamned adults. C'mon people.
Oh - and if the snow is not deep enough to declare a parking emergency - no space savers.
DONE - not rocket science.
How does this solve the
By anon
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:09am
How does this solve the problem though, if the city doesn't plow the empty side?
Somerville already has something similar, though the sides do not switch off. For many side streets now, the side that didn't allow parking during the snow emergency is now 6 ft high snow banks, because they never came back to plow to the curb after the first storm and everyone on that side piled the snow from driveways and sidewalks into the unplowed side of the street. So more than half the parking spots are now gone, and yes there is space-saving going on.
Effectively rocket science
By perruptor
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:15am
Success of your plan depends on drivers keeping track of time, of when a snow emergency is declared over, and of whether the year is even or odd. That's asking a lot of them.
No it's not
By Stevil
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:23am
I park my car for $10 in a lot during snow emergencies - and keep an eye out for when they end (the city also sends me a text - hats off for good use of modern technology on that one).
If I don't get my car out - I pay full fare. If you don't move your car - it gets towed - auto-texting and towing are not rocket science.
It's Boston - it snows. sometimes it snows a lot. Obviously people haven't put enough thought into this - until it happens. If nobody fixes this - they should all be voted out. It should be a MAJOR issue in the council elections this fall.
News flash!
By perruptor
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:31am
Not everyone is sagacious as you. I'm sure you've noticed this -- in fact I've seen you pointing it out, right here on this site. How many sub-Stevil ignorami would it take to thoroughly sabotage this parking solution by losing track of the time, or by just not giving a shit?
You ticket or tow them.
By JCK
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:37am
It's not that hard.
I'm sure you're enjoying your
By Scratchie
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:43am
I'm sure you're enjoying your first day in Boston, but in fact, it *is* that hard, as decades of evidence indicate.
In general, snow emergency towing is fairly efficient
By JCK
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:48am
Unlike just about anything else.
They are free to not give a $#!+
By Stevil
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:40am
While bailing their car out of the tow lot for $150. That's just not as free as $#!+
Are we somehow stupider than all the other cities that do this without all the fanfare of parking savers? If you are so stupid that you can't tell time - you probably shouldn't have a driver's license. How's that for sagacious?
Street Cleaning
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:20pm
Would year-round street cleaning be the end of space savers? In the winter, it could just be street plowing, but making everyone eventually move their car would certainly change things.
Long ago, at least....
By Michael Kerpan
Fri, 02/20/2015 - 9:49am
... Chicago used to simply move cars when they wanted to clear streets of snow (to the curb). They would clear a street, then move the cars from the next uncleared street onto the newly cleared street. This meant one sometimes had to spend a fair bit of time looking for where your car got moved. ;-)
This applied to ordinary streets -- not ones where parking was banned due to a snow emergency. (Much more civilized than towing to a tow lot -- and being charged a zillion dollars).
residents of other cities
By tape
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 1:20pm
residents of other cities seem to sort it out just fine.
I don't agree with space
By Cambridge Commando
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 6:48pm
I don't agree with space savers unless we have a catastrophic amount of snow like this. In my neighborhood many people just leave their cars so only the ones who actually have to drive to work have to leave the space. But there is literally no other parking because any extra space has been filled with snow. If I thought I stood a chance of getting a space when I got home I wouldn't mind not saving it, but with the city just giving up on clearing the streets there is no other choice.
the problem..
By Ha Ha
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 10:58am
this is the biggest problem with space saving. The city (or anyone else) can remove all the space savers. An unsuspecting driver finds a spot, parks and gets his tires slashed. The guy that parked had no idea the space was saved and was not trying to be a dick. But i've seen this happen too often.
That's why it's a cultural
By fox_orian
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:49am
That's why it's a cultural attitude problem. The fact that people think vandalism of this sort is a perfectly reasonable reaction to having a parking space they don't own taken (note: it wasn't stolen, never was, never can be,) has got to go. It's just such a difficult thing to track. Outside of equipping your car with cameras, or pointing a camera good enough to make out people's faces out your apartment window, how do you get the message across to people this deranged? I feel like the city can make an official statement and pick up all the space savers as trash and put notes on the doors of all buildings in Boston, but people would still be over-reactive vigilantes they wan to be.
Stay in Your Own Neighborhood
By Cambridge Commando
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 6:38pm
At this point it's probably best to just not park in a residential area at all unless it's in a space you cleared out yourself. Nobody in their right mind is just driving off and giving up their spot. There are exactly as many spots as there are people who need to drive — there are no extra spots. So stay away and don't drive into someone else's neighborhood until the City makes some room.
So angry I would punt a baby!
By dnkaye
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:36am
If said baby was being used as a space saver (which I have seen in photos).
I don't know any of the people in this situation, but for some reason I just got really unreasonably angry while reading this post! Almost angry enough to write a letter.
Grrrr...
I want to see Marty's face
By lbb
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:41am
I want someone to shove this photo in Marty's face and film his reaction. What do you have to say for your stupid selfish idiot policy now, ya donkey?
Who's stopping you?
By Scratchie
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:43am
Go right ahead, and post the response on Youtube.
I'm sure
By anon
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 11:56am
Walsh is super interested in what someone who doesn't live in Boston has to say about his policies.
Neither one of you actually lives here, right? Even in the metro area?
Really?
By lbb
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:16pm
That's the best you've got? No, I don't live in Boston now. I lived here for ten years, I visit friends frequently, and I work downtown. And yes, I'm sure Marty the Donkey doesn't give a rat's ass what I think, but guess what? He cares about showing his jackass ears in public, and that's exactly what would happen if someone shoved this in his face at a press conference. So why don't I do that? Because I'm not a member of the press.
By the way, your boy Marty also doesn't give a rat's ass what you think either, even if you are one of his constituents (you are, right?). He'd only give a rat's ass what you thought if you gave six figures to his campaign and fellated him twice a day.
Um
By Waquiot
Thu, 02/19/2015 - 12:30pm
The six figure donors are not quite the folk who put their cars on the street, so space saving is not a thing for them.
However, I am willing to bet that throughout Dorchester, Mattapan, Hyde Park, and Roslindale there are a lot of Walsh voters who would not think too kindly to an edict that the space someone shoveled out is not theirs.
Oh, and I might be wrong, but I want to say Vaughn was a Connolly voter. Could be wrong, though.
Pages
Add comment