omg I was just following the subreddit, that 2G2G NYC Insta page is great. Following it now

I'm more curious about the milling process. I've seen the machines and it just looks like a big rotor with knives - hammers on it. how to they deactivate those when that part of the rotor gets near the manhole, is there some kind of ferrous sensor? I never see a manhole battered so they must be pretty effecicent at detecting and avoiding them.

I read an opinion piece arguing exactly what you’re saying. Basically that political deadlock has encouraged progressives and conservatives alike to retreat to winnable battles over language and culture.

Politically-active people want to feel like they’re accomplishing something but legislatures are mostly useless so they just bicker over language instead.

[removed]

i'd bet he's negotiating a smaller number. even if he can knock 20m off the price that's worth it

Generally, the primary manhole has a sort of metal ring/extension on it. The extension is about the thickness of the new course of fresh assault. It can be removed temporarily to lower the height of the manhole after the street has been cut

You can see in the picture they built a temporary asphalt ramp around the manhole in the center. I’m not sure the SOP for NYC in particular, but most structures have adjusting rings sitting just below the frame/lid that you see. A crew will adjust the structures in the road to the final grade before the paver comes by. This is usually a concrete patch around the structure, either on the final grade or in a layer below so you don’t see it. That way they just pave around the structure.

Sometimes they are at the same grade now and don’t need adjustment. A company I’ve worked for also had a different specification for manholes in the middle of the road - adjusting the frame downward so it’s not sticking up of the road in the interim condition - then back up again to the final elevation.

[removed]

Welcome to America, a country centered around CARS

If you're a tenant, you stand only to gain from this bill.

There's a reason landlords are in such vehement and deep-coffered opposition to this bill: it stands to benefit tenants.

Tenants are not forced to stay longer than they wish under Good Cause legislation, nor are landlords forced to rent it out; it just permits tenants to renew their lease every year or two regardless of the whims of their landlord (unless they are a bad tenant). The term "perpetual lease" is not appropriate to describe the changes promised under the wording of the bill.

> Maybe get a real job and stop leeching off of our hard work? Cheers.

dude I work a day job & side hustles and no LLing is not paying the bills and infact it's a net negative once I calculate all the expense & depreciation. I been a renter way longer been a LL. The real value why I do it not because it makes me money now but it enables me to be eligible for the mortgage to buy the place. Becoming a LL is often the only way one is qualified and able to buy a home in NYC if you don't come from money.

So now we’re just making stuff up?

> Am a LL

Yeah, well I called that I guess. No working class person in their right mind goes out of their way to defend the privileges of landowners to lord over our ability to house ourselves.

It's bad enough having to pay you a third of my hard-earned income and deal with the prospect of not being able to renew my contract, or have the rent raised 50% in a year.

Let alone have you try to convince me of the righteousness of the current state of our class relations vis-à-vis the state — while you remain in the dominant position.

Maybe get a real job and stop leeching off of our hard work? Cheers.

Add this to the list of reasons I will never ever lease out my apartment. I give someone a 1 year lease because I don't need the space for a year. Now I have to make sure that if I want it back for my own personal use woops I now have a tenant for life. At the very least I have to hire a lawyer goto housing court and prove my reason is OK.

Once this law passes the next thing will of course be back door rent control. The legislature will invent some reason at some point to make a hard cap. Whether it be fairness, the market rates are unaffordable who knows but once they have a soft cap it will be a hard cap soon enough. I would bet a lot of money on that.

The Morris-Jumel Mansion. House of Aaron Burr's wife and Washington's command center during the Revolutionary War.

[removed]

It is completely unique in the world, as are those cities. Paris is a total dump right now though

The cobblestones of course! 🤔

At the moment you are agreeing to borrow said space for X amount of time. The proposal seeks to extend existing contracts whether or not the lender agrees to lend said space. If you're saying that the lender has too much power in that dynamic then duh. They are the ones lending the property. If you're upset at the rates then blame the city for creating the situation.

IDC if they detest me. I know what the relationship is from the jump.

Great, flood the market. Lower housing prices.

Keep the original streets alive!

Use the app "spot hero"

The timelines for discovery needs adjustment and it should be for relevant items to case. Let the judge decide if relevant and if defense feels they are missing something crucial to defense...let them argue it to the jury & judge during trial. Tossing entire case for non relevant items is absurd. It should be a measured response. Defense simply abusing discovery to prevent cases from reaching trial. Where's the justice in that for victims?

oh fuck here we go again

The fact that you were confused by your own simple metaphor about a service provider and a customer says to me that you see landlords and tenants as interchangeable individuals with equal footing in a business relationship. But they are not, because like ISPs and their subscribers, it is not a level relationship that goes in both directions. It is someone running a business and selling it to the public, which tend to come with obligations and restrictions on what they can and cannot do because if affects the public at large. Reversing that makes no sense, which is why the way you used your metaphor resulted in an absurd scenario that is in no way anything like what this bill is doing.