View Full Version : I can't wait until SUVs go out of style.
Go sweatshops! yay.
Speaking of wasteful, what about the size of houses people are building these days, that's not obscene? or how much some eats, or a 50 dollar T-shirt from Abercrombie & Fitch. Is there going to be a waste police to decide where we can spend our money, and which trips are necessary?
Originally Posted by FXjohnSpeaking of wasteful, what about the size of houses people are building these days, that's not obscene? or how much some eats, or a 50 dollar T-shirt from Abercrombie & Fitch. Is there going to be a waste police to decide where we can spend our money, and which trips are necessary?
lala Go sweatshops! yay.
People who build houses are working in sweatshops? yay
Sweatshops have always existed, if a person loses their job at a sweatshop..are they any better off?
I don't have all the answers...do you? yay!!
BMXTRIX
08-11-04, 08:33 AM
Let's also look at the alternatives to SUV's...
1. I wanted a vehicle that would handle the very modest, but very difficult to deal with snow in the Washington DC region. (ie: 4WD)
2. I wanted a vehicle I could put my bike in the back seat of with perhaps one other bike and not lose seating space, and be able to lock up securely.
3. I wanted a vehicle I could haul stuff around in efficiently.
4. I wanted a vehicle that had a little more style than any minivan on the market had to offer.
With those requirements, everything really points towards a SUV. What is most irritating, is that if the Honda Odyssey was made as a 4x4 with a little more style in an SUV style body and maintained it's power and very comfortable ride, then it would likely sell to high hell and back again.
Since I got my vehicle a few years ago, I have had a son and now we do own a minivan and I eagerly await getting rid of my SUV for something a lot more fun. But, it doesn't change that should we get hit with 6 inches of ice/snow as we often do around here, the Odyssey really won't do a good job in it and should an emergency arise then I'm not sure how we will get around.
I have a mid-sized SUV of the Grand Cherokee variety and would be thrilled to see it on a car frame with an additional 5-10mpg and geared a lot more towards street usage instead of being so truck like. But, given the near complete lack of alternatives then you get what is appropriate.
BMXTRIX Let's also look at the alternatives to SUV's...
I was looking for something similar myself and didn't want to lay out a lot of cash.
Subarus didn't seem worth the time or money.
I ended up with an old toyota tercel wagon with no rust.
It has 4wd and works great!!
It's a tercel SR5 wagon.
Another alternative is a mini truck with cap and 4wd.
FXjohn
Oh man, I know this to be true. Here in the fattest, most cycling-unfriendly city in America (Houston), I know of several people who have chosen SUVs because they can't fit their obese bodies into a "normal" car.
:eek:
Not gonna happen when the majority of the population can't fit into anything but SUV's...
mocella
08-11-04, 10:42 AM
With those requirements, everything really points towards a SUV. What is most irritating, is that if the Honda Odyssey was made as a 4x4 with a little more style in an SUV style body and maintained it's power and very comfortable ride, then it would likely sell to high hell and back again.
Honda calls that the Pilot and Acura calls it the MDX - they just lose the sliding side doors in favor of ones with hinges, and add 4 wheel-drive.
Stor Mand
08-11-04, 11:27 AM
What does one consider to be an SUV? There are many that fit the discription -Subaru Forester, Toyota RAV4, Suzuki Grand Vitara or XL-7 - or are we only to dislke the larger ones - Hummer H2, Dodge Durango, Ford Explorer, etc? What MPG is unacceptable for the SUV and/or auto haters?
SD Fixed
08-11-04, 12:29 PM
I'll probably be flamed to death for this, but I personally cheer when oil and gas prices increase. The higher the better. I want it to hurt every time these SUV driving soccer moms fill up their huge, gas-guzzling monsters at the pump.
Sverre
I own a SUV that I've modified such that it now gets 13mpg at best.
And I could not agree with you more on the increase in price of gas.
Raise it for everyone EXCEPT: Construction, mass transit, Emergency vehicles and transportation of goods.
Let's also look at the alternatives to SUV's...
<snip>. But, it doesn't change that should we get hit with 6 inches of ice/snow as we often do around here, the Odyssey really won't do a good job in it and should an emergency arise then I'm not sure how we will get around.
</snip>
SIX INCHES?
That's enough to justify a 4WD?
Omigod! :eek:
I'll have to tell my parents that they've been doing it wrong for the last 35+ years!
Driving around in that and more in just a normal car! :rolleyes: (They average about six feet of snow per year from October until March / April and the snow isn't usually all gone until May / June)
Six inches <shakes head> I took my driver's test in about a foot of unplowed snow. The only thing you need for six inches is front wheel drive and the ability to not drive like a nimrod. You have to drive deliberately and smoothly rather than herky jerky. When you start getting consistent snowfall across three days of 10-11 inches or more in OCTOBER like my family and I did back 1991 (I'll grant you that was early for that kind of storm, usually they wait until November / December before they get that nasty.) Halloween Storm 1991 (http://climate.umn.edu/doc/journal/top5/numberthree.htm) then we'll talk.
I'm guessing that people forget how to drive when it snows up there like they forget when it rains down here? I never did understand that.
Dchiefransom
08-11-04, 10:27 PM
Let's also look at the alternatives to SUV's...
1. I wanted a vehicle that would handle the very modest, but very difficult to deal with snow in the Washington DC region. (ie: 4WD)
2. I wanted a vehicle I could put my bike in the back seat of with perhaps one other bike and not lose seating space, and be able to lock up securely.
3. I wanted a vehicle I could haul stuff around in efficiently.
4. I wanted a vehicle that had a little more style than any minivan on the market had to offer.
With those requirements, everything really points towards a SUV. What is most irritating, is that if the Honda Odyssey was made as a 4x4 with a little more style in an SUV style body and maintained it's power and very comfortable ride, then it would likely sell to high hell and back again.
Since I got my vehicle a few years ago, I have had a son and now we do own a minivan and I eagerly await getting rid of my SUV for something a lot more fun. But, it doesn't change that should we get hit with 6 inches of ice/snow as we often do around here, the Odyssey really won't do a good job in it and should an emergency arise then I'm not sure how we will get around.
I have a mid-sized SUV of the Grand Cherokee variety and would be thrilled to see it on a car frame with an additional 5-10mpg and geared a lot more towards street usage instead of being so truck like. But, given the near complete lack of alternatives then you get what is appropriate.
The front wheel drives go fairly well in snow.
madpogue
08-11-04, 11:01 PM
Snow? In DC???!? Snicker! In WI, 6" is a good start; sends the meekest rear-wheelers packing. When I drove regularly, I seldom had trouble with simple front wheel drive with traction control, ABS decent tires and attentive gray matter. The most you'd ever need here is all-wheel-drive (NOT four-wheel-drive), which is available on many small wagons and minivans. 'Course, unlike DC, we don't all share one plow and one snow shovel; last I recall, they usually shut down the whole city when it gets more than about 1/4 inch.
BMXTRIX
08-11-04, 11:45 PM
Anyone who hasn't driven in snow in DC shouldn't comment on DC snow. You see - it's never SNOW - it's snow, hitting warm ground, promptly freezing, then not being touched by plows for weeks because there isn't enough snow equipment or a clue how to get rid of it, and a bunch of drivers who DO NOT know how to drive in 1" of snow, let alone 6.
The hills here bogged my front wheel drive Corolla no less than a dozen times with very minor inclines, so please don't tell me 'front wheel drive will do it' when experience quite clearly tells me that front wheel drive does not do it.
I've been up North and have seen very dry snows that are much easier to drive on regularly than what happens in our area. I admit we don't get it often, but what happens here is regularly more difficult to drive than colder climates because it regularly is ice, not snow, that we have on our roadways. Throw down 1/10" of rain, then 3" of snow on top of it, and you have a surface that is far more difficult to drive than 12" of pure cold snow.
Anyone who hasn't driven in snow in DC shouldn't comment on DC snow. You see - it's never SNOW - it's snow, hitting warm ground, promptly freezing, then not being touched by plows for weeks because there isn't enough snow equipment or a clue how to get rid of it, and a bunch of drivers who DO NOT know how to drive in 1" of snow, let alone 6.
The hills here bogged my front wheel drive Corolla no less than a dozen times with very minor inclines, so please don't tell me 'front wheel drive will do it' when experience quite clearly tells me that front wheel drive does not do it.
I've been up North and have seen very dry snows that are much easier to drive on regularly than what happens in our area. I admit we don't get it often, but what happens here is regularly more difficult to drive than colder climates because it regularly is ice, not snow, that we have on our roadways. Throw down 1/10" of rain, then 3" of snow on top of it, and you have a surface that is far more difficult to drive than 12" of pure cold snow.Been there done that on hills a lot steeper than DC's It's called sleet and freezing rain, it's fairly common in the early winter and especially getting towards spring and while it's no picnic it is certainly doable with only a FWD car. If you think DC's a pain try Duluth, MN sometime and don't give me that "dry" business it's on Lake Friggin Superior!
BMXTRIX
08-12-04, 08:32 AM
Of course it's doable in a FWD car... The half dozen plus times I got stuck are clearly just my poor memory creeping back up. Come on, if you don't live here, don't bag on the crappy weather we sometimes get that makes driving difficult.
4WD is safer for driving on in the snow. It makes me a SAFER driver and puts me in a more dependable vehicle. Especially when it is snow & ice mixed and a lot of freezing rain mixed in as well. If you have been on freezing rain, then you know it is tougher than snow to deal with, and it's what we deal with here throughout the entire winter. Snow is easy, until you put half a foot of it on top of freezing rain. Then it's nearly impossible to move on.
FWD is OK for getting unstuck, for high speed cruising and cornering in snow I think they suck.
My rear wheel drive truck with snow tires and weight in the back actually works great.
Rear drive is under rated I think. If you are using summer tires with no weight in the back, you can't expect traction.
I have my 4wd tercel for really bad conditions. I hope to never own a front wheel drive car again. AWD and RWD are the ways to go!
I live in the DC area with two RWD cars. My wife uses hers to commute and she does fine. When it snows in DC, traction is not the issue, traffic jams are. Which is one reason I ride my bike to work. Another is all the car-destroying salt they dump on the roads.
Paul
BMXTRIX
08-12-04, 09:08 AM
Traffic is definitely an issue, but I specifically got 4WD because I got stuck on residential streets, which are far to often overlooked in the DC area. I had a Silverado RWD truck at one point which did not have a loaded down back end, which promtly got stuck on about a 3 degree hill... It really is not convenient to own a vehicle that needs half a ton put into the bed to actually make it work properly.
I like the idea of 4WD cars a lot more than SUV's, but I also like the ability to haul a fair amount of stuff around and to be able to put three bikes inside the vehilce, protected from the elements and still be able to have three passengers in the vehicle.
Traffic is definitely an issue, but I specifically got 4WD because I got stuck on residential streets, which are far to often overlooked in the DC area. I had a Silverado RWD truck at one point which did not have a loaded down back end, which promtly got stuck on about a 3 degree hill... It really is not convenient to own a vehicle that needs half a ton put into the bed to actually make it work properly.
A half ton is certainly exaggerating, and after all, a Truck is designed to carry a load.
Snow tires make a HUGE difference.
I like the idea of 4WD cars a lot more than SUV's, but I also like the ability to haul a fair amount of stuff around and to be able to put three bikes inside the vehilce, protected from the elements and still be able to have three passengers in the vehicle.
AWD probably makes more sense on a car. Pulling a trailer occaisionally is a way to get the best of both worlds. More AWD cars are coming out, Ford has the 500, Chrysler the Pacifica, so at least we may get something different than just Subaru
That makes sense, BMXTRIX. I'm not anti-SUV -- my family owns a large luxury sedan and a large luxury station wagon, neither of which get better gas milage than many SUVs. I always found SUVs wierd, but then, many people find bikes wierd. To each their own -- and bikers hassling SUV people is just as bad as SUV people hassling bikers.
Years ago, SUVs did not exist, and nobody seemed to want or need one. They have always seemed very alien to me. Then again, I am the sort of guy who thinks it a shame that Jaguar put a syncromesh first gear on the XK-E in 1964 and that the new US Lotus Elise will come with air conditioning :)
Your post is the first I have seen that explains the utility of the SUV. It got me thinking that, back in the 1940s, cars were about as high as SUVs are today and that the horse-drawn carriages were also high like SUVs. Maybe they are a return to what multiperson vehicles have historically been like.
Paul
(who would still be happier just using tire chains like his Dad did if getting stuck were a problem)
What's so special about an outback?
Terrible mileage, in the low 20's or worse in town.
Reliability-wise they are troublesome.
A diesel expedition can get 17mpg pulling a trailer.
05 outback base model gets 23 MPG I am of the oppinion that that is not terrable, but certainly not great. I suggested it because it is a great car with AWD which is better than real 4wd in winter (unless you can actually drive), it has a lot of room in it and, they are extreamly reliable (where did you get troublesome from?). I just seemed like a good alternative to me. As far as diesels go they are great if not cancer causing. We use Dodges with the Cummings turbo diesel and they get 10 mpg at 80 mph towing 26,000 pounds, add in the weight of the truck and that is one efficent vehicle, its also the only diesel that can actually stand up to such abuse Chevy's aluminum heads blow up at 100,000, and Fords have some mystery problem that appears around the same mileage.
Your post is the first I have seen that explains the utility of the SUV. It got me thinking that, back in the 1940s, cars were about as high as SUVs are today and that the horse-drawn carriages were also high like SUVs. Maybe they are a return to what multiperson vehicles have historically been like.
Paul
(who would still be happier just using tire chains like his Dad did if getting stuck were a problem)
That is a great point, ever see a car from the 40's in modern traffic, they are massive.
05 outback base model gets 23 MPG I am of the oppinion that that is not terrable, but certainly not great. I suggested it because it is a great car with AWD which is better than real 4wd in winter (unless you can actually drive), it has a lot of room in it and, they are extreamly reliable (where did you get troublesome from?).
From a subaru newsgroup. alt.autos.subaru.
They are terribly expensive to fix, and are nowhere near as reliable as Toyota.
The mileage is terrible, the new chevy truck with the 4.6 V-8 gets 22 on the highway.
My Tercel 4wd gets in the mid thirties.
Toyota also made Corolla All-Trac wagons in the early 90's, a much more economical approach, I like cars that don't cost me money upfront or for repairs, and get GOOD mileage. I don't believe in car payments.
Gives me more money for bikes.
If anyone has a Subaru and they like it, that's great, I just happen to think they are a little overpriced for what you're getting.
That is a great point, ever see a car from the 40's in modern traffic, they are massive.
ever see a truck from the 40's?They're tiny
Small, maybe, badass definitly.
People in other countries would laugh their asses off at this thread. Americans crack me up! "yes, give me an SUV any day to haul Johnny and Sarah around our subdivision and to the metroplex mall"
See, I wouldn't argue this from a "I drive this car and you should too" point of view. I think we just need to take a serious look at how we live in this country. I believe that we should promote development that makes cars unnecessary. With the advent of teh car, we took everything that we knew about building cities and towns and threw it in the trash to build freeways, malls, and subdivisions.
People shouldn't have to own cars at all. We need to end all subsidies for suburban sprawl development, raise gas taxes to fund mass transit, and begin reinvesting in existing infrastructure. Yeah, I know, you don't make as much money doing that sort of thing, but it sure would be worthwhile. Imagine seeing the fatasses you see in suburbia actually walking places. They might even find it enjoyable! (maybe)
(maybe)
bpohl People in other countries would laugh their asses off at this thread.
depends on the country. Personally, I don't think we need every other country's approval.
I believe that we should promote development that makes cars unnecessary.
Impossible, unless we all live in a city. Imagine seeing the fatasses you see in suburbia actually walking places. They might even find it enjoyable! (maybe
They'd probably just buy segways
If someone wants to be fat, I don't worry about it
I wouldn't argue this from a "I drive this car and you should too" point of view
Me either...don't drive so there will be more room for me on the road.
depends on the country. Personally, I don't think we need every other country's approval.
Impossible, unless we all live in a city.
They'd probably just buy segways
If someone wants to be fat, I don't worry about it
Me either...don't drive so there will be more room for me on the road.
A. Not impossible at all... There are things called small towns and villages. You are a Hoosier, however, so it's possible that you don't know anything but suburban sprawl.
B. You may be correct on the Segway thing, but I highly doubt it.
C. You can have all the space on the roads you want, just don't use my tax dollars to build them!
BMXTRIX
08-12-04, 11:07 AM
A half ton is certainly exaggerating, and after all, a Truck is designed to carry a load.
Snow tires make a HUGE difference.
That's true, a half ton may be exagerating, but I had about 150 pounds in the back that day and the truck got stuck.
Let me give you a quick perspective - this was a full size, extended cab Chevy 1500 RWD vehicle.
I went to a clients home to do some A/V work, and the sun was out. I came outside at 5:30PM and there was 1/10 of an inch, just a few mm of snow on the ground. The truck was STUCK in the client's driveway. The 150 pounds in the back didn't help, and fortunately a friend had a bag of snow melt in the back of his Civic which he gave me before he pulled right out of the driveway.
Bottom line was that I was truly stuck because I didn't have several hundred pounds of cargo to carry with me at all times while I was working. I don't call it a convenience to have to load up your vehicle, or change the tires anytime the forcast calls for 1/10" of snow. If I had another vehicle then that's a different story, but I have ONE vehicle, and I demand it to get me from point a to point b in all types of weather regardless of a hill or some snow and be able to carry my bike (at all times!) protected from the elements, and to fit my family inside without everyone uncomfortable.
Oh, and I got it used with under 20K miles for $18.5K which is far less than a lot of other vehicles out there were going for. I spent about 3 months looking for the right vehicle before going with a Jeep Grand Cherokee, I thought out my reason, and if you don't like my reasoning, that's fine. But, it doesn't mean that they aren't valid reasons either.
http://www.sleepy-fish.com/sleepy/Top_Gear_Dodge_Charger_lo.wmv
Pretty cool vid, we could all drive these instead.
Let me give you a quick perspective - this was a full size, extended cab Chevy 1500 RWD vehicle.
Why not just get a truck with 4wd???
I just slap the snows on in Nov, and remove them around early April
Oh, and I got it used with under 20K miles for $18.5K which is far less than a lot of other vehicles out there were going for. I spent about 3 months looking for the right vehicle before going with a Jeep Grand Cherokee, I thought out my reason, and if you don't like my reasoning, that's fine. But, it doesn't mean that they aren't valid reasons either.
No, I never said anything a Grand Cherokee (?)
Are you saying you have a separate work truck, or is that your employer's?
When there's a difference of opinion, no one is wrong :)
BMXTRIX
08-12-04, 12:11 PM
No, sorry, may have come off a little harsh, not meant. :)
I was just stating that I had dealt with a RWD only truck, as well as a FWD only car and had transportation issues both times, much more so in the truck. The truck was a work owned vehicle that I drove everywhere. My FWD car was broken at the time so the truck was not one that I would have purchased... A Chevy 1500 is a bigger behemoth than a full sized van or almost any SUV other than the Hummer.
If I were to purchase a truck now, it would definitely be 4x4 - but it would still only be a secondary vehicle. For me, since we have the good minivan, I think I will go ahead and get a zippy little convertible or something fun. The Pontiac Solstice looks like a fun way to get from point a to point b when it comes out next year.
The Pontiac Solstice looks like a fun way to get from point a to point b when it comes out next year.
That is (will be)a very nice car, and the price is only around 20k! (relatively cheap these days)
Hate. That's what I say about SUVs. Hate.
They're called Sports Utility Vehicles for a reason. They're for doing mountainous stuff, hauling large loads and staying dry in floods and small creeks. NOT for driving in NYC.
BAN THE SUV IN THE CITY
They're NOT for soccer moms. That's what MiniVans are for and station wagons. Just because your son or daughter plays soccer, doesn't mean you need an SUV to haul the soccer ball in. That's ridiculous.
Hate those things.
Hate. That's what I say about SUVs. Hate.
They're called Sports Utility Vehicles for a reason. They're for doing mountainous stuff, hauling large loads and staying dry in floods and small creeks. NOT for driving in NYC.
BAN THE SUV IN THE CITY
They're NOT for soccer moms. That's what MiniVans are for and station wagons. Just because your son or daughter plays soccer, doesn't mean you need an SUV to haul the soccer ball in. That's ridiculous.
Hate those things.
All we NEED is food, water, air and sex.
No one needs a Porsche or Ferrari, or a big mansion or diamond bracelet.
You can't be in charge of what someone NEEDS
EyeBike2
08-12-04, 01:08 PM
For 4x4 SUV are great, I prefer MTB. For road, cars bug me just the same as SUV's. Big rigs even more. Trains are the best, they stay on a track.
God I need to get away from Indiana. Four years here has been quite enough for me. It's no wonder that people here worship cars like they do. Until the advent of the auto, Indiana was merely an agricultural backwater. Now, we done got cars, and dey drive real good to are job in de citee.
This point used to be really fun to argue with Hoosier nimrods, but now it's just gotten old.
God I need to get away from Indiana. Four years here has been quite enough for me. It's no wonder that people here worship cars like they do. Until the advent of the auto, Indiana was merely an agricultural backwater. Now, we done got cars, and dey drive real good to are job in de citee.
This point used to be really fun to argue with Hoosier nimrods, but now it's just gotten old.
Interesting.
Evidently I have just been called a "nimrod" for having a different point of view.
I have also been mocked for bad spelling too I guess.
I guess Indiana isn't the best state in the world, but if your family is here, it's where you live.
Weren't most rural states agricultural until the advent of the "evil" automobile?
Have a nice day.
Actually, I never called you a nimrod... but you know... if the shoe fits. To be truthful, I just find it ironic that it's a Hoosier who's defending SUV's, considering I've had the smart growth/ suburban sprawl argument with what seems like hundreds of Hoosiers, and they all seem to understand things one way- big truck, Wal-Mart, Drive-thru burger joints.... good.....any sort of sensible development that doesn't favor the car over any other type of transport.... bad. As an urban planner in this godforsaken armpit of America, yeah, this sort of thing gets underneath my skin. No one's calling the auto "evil", even if that word always has a way of being put into my mouth. I'm simply saying that we need to stop subsidizing the building of suburbia (a pattern of development that will prove nice and disastrous once our twentieth century drunken oil bath is over), and that cars should NOT be favored in planning before pedestrians and cyclists.
Do you not see the results of suburban sprawl around you? This state is home to more strip malls, fry pits, and big box outlet stores than any of the rest of the world I've been to. I don't think this registers on most people's radars, so I'm sure it doesn't register on yours. Just keep driving your SUV, and you keep a clear conscience. I'm sure if you're that adamant about doing so, you don't mind watching kids come home in body bags from Iraq to support the "world's highest standard of living."
This point used to be really fun to argue with Hoosier nimrods, but now it's just gotten old.
Actually, I never called you a nimrod... but you know... if the shoe fits.
If the shoe fits? Thanks again.
Do you not see the results of suburban sprawl around you? This state is home to more strip malls, fry pits, and big box outlet stores than any of the rest of the world I've been to. I don't think this registers on most people's radars, so I'm sure it doesn't register on yours. Just keep driving your SUV, and you keep a clear conscience
I live up in Steuben County. I don't see what I would call "Urban sprawl" here.
They did build a Meijer's and a Lowe's in Angola recently...
By the way I drive a mini truck and tercel.
If you inferred I own a SUV, you are mistaken.
I live in a modest 1 bedroom lake house,and live well under my means.
My biggest purchase this year has been a new Trek.
don't think this registers on most people's radars, so I'm sure it doesn't register on yours
Once again...have a nice day sir, I'll be riding my bike in about an hour.
Bold prediction - after peak oil the SUV will fade away rather quickly. 10+ years after peak the sprawl will end... and much of it will be dismantled. Bikes will become mainstream transportation, especially electric assisted bikes, along with public transit.
Dchiefransom
08-15-04, 05:52 PM
God I need to get away from Indiana. Four years here has been quite enough for me. It's no wonder that people here worship cars like they do. Until the advent of the auto, Indiana was merely an agricultural backwater. Now, we done got cars, and dey drive real good to are job in de citee.
This point used to be really fun to argue with Hoosier nimrods, but now it's just gotten old.
The reason people don't live in the city is the crime rates. When the crime rate drops all the advantages of living closer to work/stores will become obvious. Until then, living in areas where the streets are ruled by criminals won't be as attractive as living way out in the suburbs and driving in.
It would be better to focus on transit systems that get people into town without using cars. Another consideration is building multi-dwelling townhomes/condos to save on heating and air conditioning, but again, people don't want noise blasting through walls from next door, so this will also be a hard sell over the single family home.
The reason people don't live in the city is the crime rates. When the crime rate drops all the advantages of living closer to work/stores will become obvious. Until then, living in areas where the streets are ruled by criminals won't be as attractive as living way out in the suburbs and driving in.
That may be one reason. But I think a more significant factor is real estate values. In many cities, the real estate values are so high that many people migrate out to suburban areas where homes are more affordable. Now certainly there are some suburbs that are quite expensive, but in general, the farther you go from a city, the cheaper the real estate. There is also more available space in the suburbs. The average lot in suburbia is larger than a city lot (or a city condo).
BMXTRIX
08-15-04, 10:02 PM
I would definitely agree with Trab on that point. I live about 15 miles South of Washington DC and am looking to get a home, average homes I am looking at, keeping in mind that I'm not look at stuff anyone would call 'enormous' on about 1/10th of an acre. Keep in mind this home is at least a 45+ minute commute during rush hour from downtown DC.
Cost (current) $750,000.00
That's spitting distance from your neighbor, with no land pretty much at all.
INSIDE the city for the same home? I would expect to pay upwards of 2 million.
Price and safety are definitely the two biggest issues for me when looking at a home combined with how far away I am from my office.
When I lived in San Francisco, I really rode my bike everywhere and public transportation was excellent, but it didn't work well if you had to regularly make trips to far outside the city. Also, a place where homes are outrageous... LA? Same way! Also, I'm not sure how many people work out of an office and don't have to travel from location to location to get work done. I know I have to, so public transportation in the DC area is a joke if you actually want to work and have a life at the same time.
Desk Rider
08-16-04, 03:43 AM
Real estate values only reflect how much people are ready to spend for something they view as desirable.
If commuting become expensive, demands for out-in-the-sticks homes will decrease, drawing real estate values of these homes down.
The reason people don't live in the city is the crime rates. When the crime rate drops all the advantages of living closer to work/stores will become obvious. Until then, living in areas where the streets are ruled by criminals won't be as attractive as living way out in the suburbs and driving in.
It would be better to focus on transit systems that get people into town without using cars. Another consideration is building multi-dwelling townhomes/condos to save on heating and air conditioning, but again, people don't want noise blasting through walls from next door, so this will also be a hard sell over the single family home.
Try telling that to a Hoosier Nimrod.
, living in areas where the streets are ruled by criminals won't be as attractive as living way out in the suburbs and driving in.
It would be better to focus on transit systems that get people into town without using cars. Another consideration is building multi-dwelling townhomes/condos to save on heating and air conditioning, but again, people don't want noise blasting through walls from next door, so this will also be a hard sell over the single family home.
I agree with most of what you write here in that we do need to focus on funding transit initiatives, but you do realize that funding could come at the expense of funding our mega-highways and collector streets. What would everyone in suburbia do if we stopped funding highways full-tilt and started focusing on alternative solutions. As far as the noise concern, most, if not all, builders can build soundproof units where you cannot hear anything your neighbor does. I take issue with the "streets ruled by criminals" part of your post. While this may be what the 11:00 news would have you believe, this is definitely not the case in most "bad neighborhoods". In the area where I live, my friends ask me how I live "there" with "those people", when in truth our neighborhood is great. You see people walking with their kids on the sidewalks (ours are ten feet wide- find that in suburbia), and I can actually walk (yes, walk) to get groceries, grab dinner, or see a movie. Even new communities could and should be built like this, mixing commercial and residential uses, but developers refuse to try. Where I work, I have been trying to start an initiative that offers credits for developers who mix commercial uses into their communities. It's going well, but most developers will probably not understand the whole system and try to bring all new subdivisions in as PUD's (Planned Unit Development), which will give them bartering power with the Plan Commission to get out as cheaply as possible. This means that they will probably not provide commercial space, and development will continue as it has for the past fifty years- a place for every use and every use in its place, with everyone forced to drive in their cars to travel anywhere. I guess it really isn't the fault of the people, because most residents I talk to feel that their neighborhoods should include amenities such as commercial uses (once they find out that we limit the GFA to only allow small-scale uses). There just isn't money in it for the developers.
Try telling that to a Hoosier Nimrod.
"hoosier nimrod" was a bit harsh. I apologize for that. Working in my field makes you a bit jaded towards these sorts of issues, and since I can't say it to the people with whom I work, I said it to you. Undeserved from you... sorry.
The premise of my argument stands, however.
samundsen
08-18-04, 07:47 PM
I agree with most of what you write here in that we do need to focus on funding transit initiatives, but you do realize that funding could come at the expense of funding our mega-highways and collector streets. What would everyone in suburbia do if we stopped funding highways full-tilt and started focusing on alternative solutions.
HoustonPress recently had a great article on the powerful forces behind the drive for more of those mega-highways and freeways.
http://www.houstonpress.com/issues/2004-07-22/feature.html/1/index.html
Sverre
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.