America Still Loves Cars, But Some Cities Are Starting to Ditch Them

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by lio45

Actually, many people will drop more money than needed on their appliances, too... getting special features and a nicer look.

Yup. Thanks to my wife, my household has spent way too much on higher end kitchen appliances.

There are 50k stove ranges and 40k fridges if you're so inclined. There's a whole esoteric snobbery around La Cornue or whatever fancypants brand.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Yup. Thanks to my wife, my household has spent way too much on higher end kitchen appliances.

There are 50k stove ranges and 40k fridges if you're so inclined. There's a whole esoteric snobbery around La Cornue or whatever fancypants brand.

And I'm sure those are conversation pieces and will get shown off to friends and family who see them for the first time, with the newest, state-of-the-art options probably even getting a bit of a demonstration on the spot (to "ooh"s and "aah"s).

Strikingly similar to higher end cars, when you think about it. You get them for various reasons but a good part of it is status symbol and also comfort and options and looks (all of which are worth paying for, to a degree).

[JManc]

People who love to cook and take it seriously would drop serious coin on kitchen appliances if their budget allows. My wife had a gas line installed into the kitchen simply because she wanted a gas stove top to bake with. That cost more than the damn stove itself.

[llamaorama]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Yup. Thanks to my wife, my household has spent way too much on higher end kitchen appliances.

There are 50k stove ranges and 40k fridges if you're so inclined. There's a whole esoteric snobbery around La Cornue or whatever fancypants brand.

At some point I think you'd be better off buying restaurant equipment.

I'd love a 3 compartment sink and a dish machine. And a concrete floor with a drain. Clean up thanksgiving in under 15 minutes.

jk

[austin242]

I'm an Austin, Tx Millennial who lives downtown. I don't own a car even with the bad public transit. I ride my bike everywhere because it's the most predictable and one of the fastest forms of transit in the city center. Even if I had the money to buy a car I wouldn't. I'd just get car2go since they are in my apartment complex's parking lot. It's a shame that our public transit isn't better and that no real investment has been put into it. We're a lot like San Fran in that the city is limiting lanes and making it even harder for cars to get around while not really investing in public transit (other than wider sidewalks and bike lanes).

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by lio45

That's extremely interesting but... legally, what's the deal? As we saw with Uber, moving people is a protected business segment. At least here.

Can anyone start a bus/shuttle service in SF? Or, say, a bank? On a small scale...?

Oh, they've had their issues and, of course, the city hates them (heck, they counter the "progressive" effort to run peoples' lives as well as thwarting the regulatory state) but, like Uber, they survive:

Chariot back in business after suspension
Private transit company suddenly suspended service last week
By Adam Brinklow Oct 24, 2017, 9:19am PDT

Chariot, the private bus startup owned by Ford, was back in business Monday after unexpectedly suspending shuttle service last week.

Chariot users received an email, signed by Chariot CEO Ali Vahabzadeh, which, in part, read: “Effective Monday afternoon, service will be back on and running as regularly scheduled. We’ve resolved the situation and do not expect any future interruptions. Thank you so much for your patience, and for all your support during this time.”

This came after riders received a message last week saying that Chariot was briefly cancelling all San Francisco service, without divulging any particular reason why . . . :

“[...] Even though Chariot is in full compliance with all regulations, we have received an order from a regulator to temporarily suspend service. We are working to resolve this mattter.”

According to the San Francisco Examiner, the problem was with certain Chariot drivers. “On three separate California Highway Patrol inspections, at least seven Chariot drivers were found to be driving without Class B licenses, which certify them to drive buses,” according to the newspaper.

A Class B license certifies necessary training to operate buses, farm vehicles, three-axle vehicles, and vehicles over 26,000 pounds in the state of California. Muni and AC Transit drivers must obtain Class B licenses along with separate permission to ferry passengers.

Chariot is a privately-owned startup noted for its distinctive aqua blue vans, operating routes mostly in the northeast of the city. Riders pay up to $119 for a monthly pass . . . . (Muni, the city transit agency, charges $75 for a monthly pass that doesn't include BART within the city).

The suspension and CHP fracas comes at the same time that the city is considering putting tighter restrictions on Chariot and potential imitators. SFMTA is considering a new law that would hinder Chariot from poaching Muni riders by making it illegal for a private company to run a route that’s more than 75 percent similar to an existing Muni route.

https://sf.curbed.com/2017/10/24/165...transportation

[Jonesy55]

Originally Posted by austin242

I'm an Austin, Tx Millennial who lives downtown. I don't own a car even with the bad public transit. I ride my bike everywhere because it's the most predictable and one of the fastest forms of transit in the city center. Even if I had the money to buy a car I wouldn't. I'd just get car2go since they are in my apartment complex's parking lot. It's a shame that our public transit isn't better and that no real investment has been put into it. We're a lot like San Fran in that the city is limiting lanes and making it even harder for cars to get around while not really investing in public transit (other than wider sidewalks and bike lanes).

Just to compare, how much of a premium do you pay each month for your downtown apartment compared with a similar sized place further out where you would need a car,?

[240glt]

Originally Posted by badrunner

There are a lot more car enthusiasts than there are skyscraper enthusiasts. There are literally hundreds of car forums with more traffic than this one. Yes, Americans absolutely love their cars. Outside the bubble of urban fetishists this isn't even a debate.

QFT. I'm not even a skyscraper enthusiast, but my career has been in construction management, engineering and property management for the past 18 years. That's moreso why I spend time here.

I am a car enthusiast, and belong to several Volvo and Toyota enthusiast sites. I'm pretty sure there are WAY more car enthusiasts out there than skyscraper enthusiasts. By quite a large margin.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by Jonesy55

Just to compare, how much of a premium do you pay each month for your downtown apartment compared with a similar sized place further out where you would need a car,?

Don't forget HOA. It is not uncommon to pay $6000+ each and every year towards an HOA in a downtown unit. Plus don't forget about those rare special assessments that can result in a 'one time' YUGE payment.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by 240glt

QFT. I'm not even a skyscraper enthusiast, but my career has been in construction management, engineering and property management for the past 18 years. That's moreso why I spend time here.

I am a car enthusiast, and belong to several Volvo and Toyota enthusiast sites. I'm pretty sure there are WAY more car enthusiasts out there than skyscraper enthusiasts. By quite a large margin.

Absolutely. I see your username is 240, there are dozens of forums on Bricks alone.

[mhays]

The HOA covers a lot of costs you'd still pay otherwise, from utilities to insurance to periodic maintenance.

240glt, I'm sure you're right. But I bet it's still a small number of active enthusiasts compared to the general population.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by mhays

The HOA covers a lot of costs you'd still pay otherwise, from utilities to insurance to periodic maintenance.

True. Landscaping, roof, pool, gym - it's peace of mind, which many prefer.

For $6000/year that really adds up. After 10 years, that's $60,000. So it depends, would you rather use $60,000 towards your own expenses, or just donate it to some entity to take care your expenses? It all depends on a case by case basis.

[240glt]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

True. Landscaping, roof, pool, gym - it's peace of mind, which many prefer.

For $6000/year that really adds up. After 10 years, that's $60,000. So it depends, would you rather use $60,000 towards your own expenses, or just donate it to some entity to take care your expenses? It all depends on a case by case basis.

You're not donating anything though. You're still paying for the same things you'd pay for if you owned another type of dwelling. It's just that you and a bunch of other people are paying for them together.

I wish all I paid was $500/ month for insurance, electricity, gas, tv & internet, garbage removal, domestic water service, drainage and general maintenance.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by 240glt

I wish all I paid was $500/ month for insurance, electricity, gas, tv & internet, garbage removal, domestic water service and general maintenance.

Not all HOA's cover all of that. TV/internet, garbage, water, sewer may not be covered. Like I said, it's case by case. Some are strictly common areas outside.

[240glt]

Some are strictly common areas outside.

Those tend to be townhouse complexes though. And their fees are significantly less than those in a building where all that is included

Any apartment style building is going to have most, if not all of those things included in their fees

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by 240glt

Those tend to be townhouse complexes though. And their fees are significantly less than those in a building where all that is included

Any apartment style building is going to have most, if not all of those things included in their fees

Most definitely not in Southern California, specifically the LA metro. Most HOA's will cover water, gas, trash and common area. Some may have earthquake insurance on top of that and very few, maybe less than 1% have fees that cover all of the expenses. Everything else is on the owner.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by 240glt

Those tend to be townhouse complexes though. And their fees are significantly less than those in a building where all that is included

Any apartment style building is going to have most, if not all of those things included in their fees

This is true. I own a townhouse and the HOA dues are only $250 a month but they cover the basics; ground exterior maintenance and common areas. We pay for the water, electric. We are even responsible for our own roof.

Condos very drastically. Some of the older complexes can have huge HOA fees and offer little in return. Newer ones cover internet, utilities and so on. The bad thing with all these is you lose control over your expenses and cannot shop around if you wanted to.

[mhays]

My condo dues cover water, sewer, gas, trash/recycling/composting, building insurance, maintenance, and a 24/7 staff. It's about 0.9% of my home value per year, not bad for what it does.

[JManc]

Not only do you recycle...you also compost? Because Seattle. I wish we did that here. I'm thinking about putting one in our backyard and composting all our food waste.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by JManc

Not only do you recycle...you also compost? Because Seattle. I wish we did that here. I'm thinking about putting one in our backyard and composting all our food waste.

You should in Houston. My dad in the 1980's built a huge compost pile that seemed to take up half the back yard. I remember it being 10' tall. It was surrounded by chicken wire and 4x4s that he built. We would mow the lawn and throw all clippings and food waste in this huge pile. Then we would use the mulch for our garden the following spring. At the time, everybody used to burn their yard waste - very common. We were one of the first to compost organic waste.

It was common to see a smoke column and automatically assume it was yard work, people used to burn their leaves.