Will gas prices ever go down?

[moose]

Frig,
It's like everyday the price of gas goes up, for me in CANADA it's $0.87/L. Rediculous! It's gonna be a dollar a litre soon, and all the 4 cyl., out there will be happy. I keep telling people that the great big 7.4L V8's aren't going to be around for much longer. As gas prices rise, we become more conservative about where we go, and what we do.
People raz the import scene, but sooner or later, they'll turn to the japanese for other fuel. I mean look at the hydrogen toyota, like that's pretty amazing.
No V8's please, just fine and dandy with my 4 cyl.

[SimpleS14]

:confused:


Expect gas prices to go up even more.....

[ca18guy]

Gas prices aren't that bad. I doubt they'll change engine sizes of it cause alot of the new engines get good mileage.

[moose]

true, true, but even still you can get 22-40 mpg on our modern day 4 cyl vehicles!

[uiuc240]

i hope they never go down! in the US, the prices are WAY out of synch with the rest of the world... i could go on. but i won't

Eric

[negular]

I dunno whats wrong with the U.S. but they have an excellent source of oil right next door... :rolleyes:

[tnord]

Originally posted by uiuc240
i hope they never go down! in the US, the prices are WAY out of synch with the rest of the world... i could go on. but i won't

Eric

i feel exactly the same way eric. i hope it gets to $4/gallon like it is in europe.

[Bbandit]

Originally posted by tnord
i feel exactly the same way eric. i hope it gets to $4/gallon like it is in europe.

4 dollar/gallon??? thats it! im selling my 240 and im gonna ride my skateboard again for transportation
do you know any shop that sells turbo kits for my blank powell skateboard?

[ca18guy]

YEAH I want to pay $4 a gallon for gas http://forums.off-topic.net/images/smilies/ugh2.gif

[HippoSleek]

Originally posted by tnord
i feel exactly the same way eric. i hope it gets to $4/gallon like it is in europe.

Ditto. The only place it's cheaper than the US is Saudi.

Two things I'd really like to see - 1) gas at the true market price; 2) CAFE standards increased by at least 5 mpg.

Mark - who takes mass transit.

[SimpleS14]

Originally posted by ca18guy
YEAH I want to pay $4 a gallon for gas http://forums.off-topic.net/images/smilies/ugh2.gif

how much do you pay for a gallon of gas?

[tnord]

what you guys don't understand is that fuel prices are included in COL figures. as a result, salaries are increased across the board, so your percentage of expense on fuel is still the same. what's the use then you ask? well this provides opportunity for the rest of us. by using more fuel efficient means of transportation than what is the social norm allows you to increase your wealth. this would also encourage the development of mass transit in urban areas that already desperately need it. since the 1950's (i think) the number of vehicles in the US has doubled, while the miles of new roads paved have increased by a slim margin. you have to look beyond the short term effects of $4/gal fuel for the benefits, but they are there. not the least of which is hopefully the elimination of gargantuan SUV's being used for anything but their originally intended purpose.

[AKADriver]

A large (but shrinking) segment of the US population lives in rural areas and depends on fuel for personal transportation to maintain their standard of living. Europe, Japan, etc. don't have the wide open spaces that we have in the US and Canada. This is why our fuel is cheap, and must stay cheap.

Mass transit is great if you live within 10 miles of a city center. I refuse to live within 10 miles of a city center :rolleyes:

[X-Iceman]

The cheapest is $1.39 but that for regular. Prem. is $1.49. Prices arent that bad, but i remember when it use to be $0.98:( but those days are gone.

[-E-]

Originally posted by HippoSleek
The only place it's cheaper than the US is Saudi.

I thought Iraq was, a full tank of gas is $0.50 give or take. Oh Well

[AKADriver]

Fuel is extremely cheap in most oil-producing nations... which doesn't just mean the middle east. Remember that much of our oil comes from South America.

Oh, and just to back up what I said about open spaces = cheap fuel for transportation; Australia's fuel prices are about in line with Canada's.. about AU$0.95/L which is about CAD$0.85/L or US$2.10/gal.

[240 2NR]

Originally posted by HippoSleek
Ditto. The only place it's cheaper than the US is Saudi.

Two things I'd really like to see - 1) gas at the true market price; 2) CAFE standards increased by at least 5 mpg.

Mark - who takes mass transit.

Wow, I should have posted my gas tax reform here instead of Car and Driver forums. I pretty much got ran out of town for suggesting that gas taxes should go up and we should invest in alternative transportation methods (you can't fix the driving problem with a driving solution). I don't know if I'd be happy at $4 per gallon, but I'll support anything up to $3. After that they better start lowering other taxes to compensate for the added revenue in gas taxes (user fees) which cover the costs currently picked up by income, property and sales tax.

[240 2NR]

Originally posted by AKADriver
A large (but shrinking) segment of the US population lives in rural areas and depends on fuel for personal transportation to maintain their standard of living. Europe, Japan, etc. don't have the wide open spaces that we have in the US and Canada. This is why our fuel is cheap, and must stay cheap.

Mass transit is great if you live within 10 miles of a city center. I refuse to live within 10 miles of a city center :rolleyes:

I guarantee the people who live in the booney's have little say in how much gas costs, though I'm sure that people who stand to benefit greatly from low fuel costs will use that as an excuse to show sympathy for the little guy though I doubt they care. Trust me, gas is not cheap because of a few poor people in the middle of nowhere. It's more likley rich people who can make a lot of money from our oil dependance (car makers selling SUV's, oil companies, Walmart, etc).

I would argue that most farmers would actually benefit from expensive gas. The current state of affairs where super corporate farms under cut local farmers by running HUGE farms that serve the whole country rather than smaller regions. If they could no longer afford to drive a salad from CA to Maine, for less than growing it in Maine and selling it in Maine, then the farmers in Maine stand to benefit. This is quite similar to the Walmart phenomena that eliminates local merchants but is also heavily reliant on the cheap fuel cost.

What's wrong with cities? I refuse to live in suburbia again.

[-aishiteru-]

I pay about 1.50 for regular. :(


I get ****ty mpg too. Like 16-19.

I should sell my car and get a fawking civic or echo. :o

[uiuc240]

Originally posted by AKADriver
A large (but shrinking) segment of the US population lives in rural areas and depends on fuel for personal transportation to maintain their standard of living. Europe, Japan, etc. don't have the wide open spaces that we have in the US and Canada. This is why our fuel is cheap, and must stay cheap.

Mass transit is great if you live within 10 miles of a city center. I refuse to live within 10 miles of a city center :rolleyes:

You're wrong. A VERY SMALL portion of the US actually lives in rural areas. Most of America lives in suburbia...the average density being 3 houses per acre. And I guarantee these houses are never more than 5 minutes away from a gas station. Does that really make sense either? Can't you get more than 5 miles down the road without needing more gas? Seems to me we could put ALL the gas stations along the higways and such, and keep urban areas URBAN...sorry off topic.

Anyway, about the gas prices. I agree that $4/gal is not "fun" to pay for. But right now, we are getting all sorts of road improvements from funding OTHER THAN GAS. This means that some people who don't even drive cars are paying for people who need roads. How phucked up is that? Raising (gradually) the tax on gas is that answer. European gas prices *are* high...but have you driven on a French or German road? Holy crap. Smooth as a baby's ass. So awesome. Oh, and the reason autobahns in Deutschland have unlimited speed sections is because there are LESS CARS in those areas (rural connections to other cities) so there is less traffic = more speed.

Oh, and as for just "getting more fuel in Alaska"...I guess that's OK for the short term, but we really just need to change our level of dependence on petroleum.

Next.

Eric

[KoukiS14]

Gawd damn what do you guys pay? It's cheap enough where I live. It's 1.35 right now, for the 89 octane I use. Premium isn't a LOT more, maybe 1.49 or so.


To fill an S14 in the rest of the world, it'd probably run you about 35-40 USD or so. *shrug* what do we have to worry about?

[KoukiS14]

Originally posted by X-Iceman
The cheapest is $1.39 but that for regular. Prem. is $1.49. Prices arent that bad, but i remember when it use to be $0.98:( but those days are gone.

Yeah I remember those days. . I coulda sworn I filled my tank on my S13 for around 10 bucks one day.


Gas is cheaper now than it was for a large part of the early 80s. . haha. . it can get and probably will get cheaper.

[AKADriver]

Originally posted by 240 2NR
What's wrong with cities? I refuse to live in suburbia again.

Too many people. Too much noise. Too much crime. Costs too much to live there.

Suburbia sucks too.

-Ryan, redneck and proud of it

[KiDyNomiTe]

At leas we have gas, when I went to Zimbabwe for Christmas, they had very very little gas, lines longer than the US has ever seen. Like it was some line for Star Wars or something, except each person had thier own car.

And the odd part is my uncle drives a TT V12 Benz, but his tank is always full (it's good to know people ;) )

But anyway, I am fine with the gas prices, they were higher when I started paying for gas, so this is good.

If you hate gas prices so much you would be driving one of the ugly ass Hybrid cars.

[tnord]

don't start talking politics people.

[ca18guy]

Originally posted by GT specR
how much do you pay for a gallon of gas?

On base I pay $1.30 give or take for 91 octane. Off base its $4+ a gallon. If there making money off taxing the gas, I would like to know where it goes, besides their highways which are average the roads in England are majorly messed up.

[misnomer]

don't start talking politics people.

hehe, gas pricing IS politics :P Just like the US is the world's largest consumer of gas/oil, therefore, the rest of the market god damn better conform to OUR prices ;-)

Anyhow, I'm one of those rural junkies who relies on a car to keep up my standard of living (or however you put it). Mass transit will prolly never be an option for me, because I prefer houses to acres be a fraction. A small fraction.

More efficient cars or changes in gas pricing wont solve much, oil is a very very slowly replenishing resource, we'll run out soon enough and need to switch to something else. I'm personally hoping for hydrogen powered automobiles, but that's just me :-)

[negular]

did u know it is possible to make methanol out of hemp seeds... ;)








<---- my 420th post!

[KoukiS14]

Originally posted by ca18guy
On base I pay $1.30 give or take for 91 octane. Off base its $4+ a gallon. If there making money off taxing the gas, I would like to know where it goes, besides their highways which are average the roads in England are majorly messed up.

OMFG!!! 4 bucks a gallon? No WONDER in all these English mags I read they ditch the high performance engines in favor for the damn diesels. .

[uiuc240]

England is having some of the same problems we are. They made the mistake of building highways instead of spending money on even more mass transit. If you're in London, you know what I mean. I agree that British roads are less than perfect. But, just remember that the taxes they earn from the gas does go to pay for roads and mass transit.

Rural is rural. You can have cars. The point is that we shouldn't need to use cars to do simple things like buying a loaf of bread in town.

About performance cars in Europe: the difference is that with expensive gas, people don't waste it on COMMUTING. They use the gas to blaze around on the weekends, at the track, and for cruising for fun at night (would you rather drink a pint of Guinness or drive for 30 mins...I guess).

Anyway, there are a lot of complex issues to consider here......

Eric

[240 2NR]

I think the two important things expensive gas does is reduce wastefulness, and rebalance the cost of roads (infastructure).

With cheap gas you get planning like the modern US where nothing can share he same pod, meaning like Eric said, if you discover you're out of bread in suburbia you have to get in your car and drive to the store. If it were based on community with small stores nearby you could walk to the store and back. You also wouldn't be compelled to commute everyday in an SUV getting 12mpg. Even activities in a 28 mpg 240sx might be reconsidered and even if people choose to own an SUV, they wouldn't be quite so compelled to own 2 or 3 and would instead use a more efficient car for the mundane activites of everyday life.

The other error of cheap gas is it doesn't cover the cost of useage by users. So while some of it is paid for by gas tax and tolls, the rest comes from income, property, and sales taxes which do not consider if you own a car or not. At the same time because we have developed a gold plated road system and very little in terms of mass transit, it leaves those not driving cars with limited options while paying for a system they don't use. There are also stats that show suburbs can't pay for themselves so they tend to draw from the city core they get built around, to maintain the high cost of ownership. Just think of how much is wasted plowing roads in the suburbs versus the compactness of a city. I can think of plenty of roads near my parent's house with one or two houses, then in the actual "neighborhoods" it's still very few houses per mile, where you might pass hundreds or thousdands of dwellings per mile in a city, or even like around the corner from me many single family houses with a similar front and backyard to the suburbs, but small side yards. Yep, only six miles (and probebaly even closer) from downtown chicago you can own an actual house with a front and backyard.

[HippoSleek]

I had a nice long post yesterday b/f zilvia crashed... ugh.

At any rate, the problem with the current system is that they use sales, income, and property tax to subsidize roads when there is such a natural way to do it - gas taxes. Funny - the Republicans LOVE "user fees" (so that they can push a higher % of the burden onto middle and low income people) for everything but gas tax. Why? B/c gas must be cheap!! After all, poor people drive 30 mpg Corollas and wealthy ones drive 11 mpg SUVs... you wouldn't expect the wealthy to pay three times as much for the same use of the roads? (actually, cars don't do as much damage... other argument). Of course, they could give up their behemuths... but that wouldn't be fair. Or you could raise CAFE standards to make the two competitive for mpg purposes... but that would make a $40,000 truck a $42,000 truck! Hell no!! :rolleyes:

For those of you that live in the middle of no where, you should have to pay for your space. There is no right to a house on a 1/2 acre parcel. Or right to wide open roads. Your asphault costs as much per linear yard as mine... no reason you should pay proportionately less based on the increased distance you drive! You already take up a higher percentage of the services budget based on your spread out nature - now you want to avoid the true cost of that system. That's crap! You want your space, you should have to pay the fair market value for it - not the value some sniviling politician thinks is "fair" based on the fact that it is filled with nice friendly middle class people that vote for him.

The only thing that gives me joy about the status quo is hearing about people how have a 1.5 hour drive into and out of work. 3 hours a day in traffic! You'd think people would figure it out by now...

**edit* b/c while a Corolla really isn't capable of much over 20 mph I really did mean mpg. I think Steve and I could jointly run our own hippie compound/religion. :p **

[240 2NR]

Hehe, I think we wrote our post at the same time hippo. Funny how they're almost the same.

You should check out a book called Suburban Nation (http://www.fsbassociates.com/fsg/suburbannation.htm) . You're a lawyer right? Want to go into property law when Eric an I start our architecture firm:D

What is scaring me in Chicago is the growth of "suburban" companies in the city that are simply recreating their suburban business models. Walgreens, CVS, gas stations, etc tend to tear down great old buildings and set up shop on the coner and build in their half acre of parking setting the building back from the street in typical suburban fashion and at odds with urban context.

[240 2NR]

Originally posted by HippoSleek
(actually, cars don't do as much damage... other argument). Of course, they could give up their behemuths... but that wouldn't be fair. Or you could raise CAFE standards to make the two competitive for mpg purposes... but that would make a $40,000 truck a $42,000 truck! Hell no!! :rolleyes:

I think the funniest solution I ever heard was to divert the remains of our highway funding to buying every American an SUV and then stopping forever highway funding. This would cause all the roads to rapidly deteriorate and eventually all SUV's would be put to their intended use even if they were just going to sprawlmart. tHen no stupid sports car driver could complain about Suzy soccer mom and her stupid SUV.

[HippoSleek]

Originally posted by 240 2NR
Hehe, I think we wrote our post at the same time hippo. Funny how they're almost the same.

You should check out a book called Suburban Nation (http://www.fsbassociates.com/fsg/suburbannation.htm) . You're a lawyer right? Want to go into property law when Eric an I start our architecture firm:D


True dat.

Property law? Uh - sorry, I'm a corporate whore whose experience with suburban land use is limited to Superfund clean-up sites. Besude, the only money in property law is in destroying community.

Too bad to hear about that in Chicago!! That's horrible. In DC, the neighborhood associations are tough! Increasingly, if you want to build your 12 story office building (nothing can be higher by law), you will have to keep the old row house facade and put the building up behind it. Want parking? Build a garage! I like the idea of keeping a city a city.

[uiuc240]

Mark, the situation in Chicago is not that bad...yet. But it's also not unique to Chicago...it's happening in all the major cities. (Transect violations...i.e. buildings that relate inappropriately to their place in the city fabric). Anyway, this IS unacceptable, and we have to stop doing it.

About D.C. Those "facade projects" aren't exactly the most popular things in the architecture world. It's a half-assed nod to preservationists. They keep the "look" but nothing else. I (and others) say either keep the rest of the building (reuse/retrofit) or build something totally new that responds to the context of the surrounding buildings. But you're right about the general idea of keeping the city fabric TAUT and CONSISTENT. That's what makes a good community.

Good to see we have a few urbanists on here. Oh, by the way, Mark, you're 100% right about road use costs. I have nothing more to add about that. The situation is deplorable. Oh, one more thing...people think that road expansion is a good thing. Wrong. Wider = less traffic for short term. But, wider = more sprawl and more traffic in the long term. The equilibrium state of a road is, in fact, consistent stop-n-go traffic. Traffic engineers want roads to "flow"...it's impossible. As soon as they "flow", people want to move where it's flowing to, and then the roads stop flowing. Vicious cycle.

Anyway, that's enough for this post.

Eric

[KoukiS14]

Originally posted by uiuc240
England is having some of the same problems we are. They made the mistake of building highways instead of spending money on even more mass transit. If you're in London, you know what I mean. I agree that British roads are less than perfect. But, just remember that the taxes they earn from the gas does go to pay for roads and mass transit.

Rural is rural. You can have cars. The point is that we shouldn't need to use cars to do simple things like buying a loaf of bread in town.

About performance cars in Europe: the difference is that with expensive gas, people don't waste it on COMMUTING. They use the gas to blaze around on the weekends, at the track, and for cruising for fun at night (would you rather drink a pint of Guinness or drive for 30 mins...I guess).

Anyway, there are a lot of complex issues to consider here......

Eric

Very valid points. . I think the prices would even out, in that case.. I use my car way more than I should have to.

But, I live in a place with NO mass transit. You have to own a car or equivalent here. We DO have a bus system, which is a joke. The 3 people that ride on it are mostly homeless.

Not a bad deal for students with no cars wanting to get to the mall though. . but if you don't live in campus, like me. . you HAVE to drive.

[AKADriver]

I gotta say, Mark, that I agree with your argument at least from a completely objective point of view... the same way I agree with drug legalization but am revolted by the concept of drug use.

Honestly there's good chance that the costs would balance out for we rural folk* anyway. Pass the buck of road maintenance costs from property taxes and state/local income taxes to gas taxes, basically... At least in Upstate NY the local taxes are actually already pretty high. And anything that ends sprawl is a good thing in my eyes. I never really understood what the big deal was until I moved right into the middle of it. It works just like everyone said - I can't get around Gaithersburg/Germantown without my car. The grocery store's just a mile away, but the amount of traffic and the way the roads are designed, I have to drive there, because public transit takes forever and a day to get there, and forget walking or biking.

I would support a fuel tax increase if fuel taxes were set aside specifically for infrastructure maintenance and not more pork.

*I live in nasty suburban sprawl now but that's not were I grew up, just clearing up that picture. I gre up in Sylvan Beach, NY, which is about 40 miles from anything.

[240 2NR]

Awesome, once again it is the youth undoing the problems their parents left them.

I think it would be funny for some conservative adult just stumbling across this thread on a "ricer" board to be like, huh? Aren't these the kids with altezza lights who are the bane of my existance? Tansect? User fees? What?

[KoukiS14]

Originally posted by 240 2NR
Awesome, once again it is the youth undoing the problems their parents left them.

I think it would be funny for some conservative adult just stumbling across this thread on a "ricer" board to be like, huh? Aren't these the kids with altezza lights who are the bane of my existance? Tansect? User fees? What?

f'n old people. . christ. =)

Hey man, speak for yourself. . I don't waste my time on ricer boards!! I don't consider this to be one.

SHO, okay. . sometimes I DO go on there because it seems they have lots of 240sx questions. Anyone else go on there and count the number of Nissan pics in their sigs and stuff?

[240 2NR]

I was kidding yo. I don't consider us ricers, but my mom does. So does just about any domestic lover . The term just gets thown around and according to most people not in the import scene, it pretty much applies to all imports.

[uiuc240]

He didn't mean that Zilvia is a ricer board. He was saying that it would be cool if someone who just happened to be passing through found this thread. It's rather out of character for a bunch of gas-in-the-veins car junkies.

BTW, I drove my car 3 miles to work today because the mass transit from my apt. to work blows. But I ride it to school EVERY DAY. I'm not saying the world can be perfect with $4/gal...but if you can improve little by little, we'll have at least a few more choices. For instance, KoukiS14, if you could get where you going on foot in 5 mins, would you? And if you could get somewhere else by transit in 15 (vs. a car in 10 or something), would you?

Eric

[KoukiS14]

Originally posted by 240 2NR
I was kidding yo. I don't consider us ricers, but my mom does. So does just about any domestic lover . The term just gets thown around and according to most people not in the import scene, it pretty much applies to all imports.

I know I know... I was mostly just kiddin' =)
Hey, who here wants to help me install my LED washer nozzles and exhaust tip?

[KoukiS14]

Originally posted by uiuc240
He didn't mean that Zilvia is a ricer board. He was saying that it would be cool if someone who just happened to be passing through found this thread. It's rather out of character for a bunch of gas-in-the-veins car junkies.

BTW, I drove my car 3 miles to work today because the mass transit from my apt. to work blows. But I ride it to school EVERY DAY. I'm not saying the world can be perfect with $4/gal...but if you can improve little by little, we'll have at least a few more choices. For instance, KoukiS14, if you could get where you going on foot in 5 mins, would you? And if you could get somewhere else by transit in 15 (vs. a car in 10 or something), would you?

Eric

I would, if I could get there on foot in 5 minutes. The only place I can get to within 5 minutes. . is well, I MIGHT be able to make it outside my neighborhood, but doubtful. It's too far and dangerous to even BIKE to where I need to go. The problem is, the U.S. (at least most of it) is DESIGNED so you have to drive everywhere.

And in transit in 15 compared to 10? Of course, provided I didn't have to leave an hour early or more to get there, as is the case with OUR mass transit here. In addtion, I'd need to be able to get HOME before an hour, too. . otherwise, it's a pointless waste of time.. But.. I'm all about saving miles on my S14 =)

[uiuc240]

I would, if I could get there on foot in 5 minutes. The only place I can get to within 5 minutes. . is well, I MIGHT be able to make it outside my neighborhood, but doubtful. It's too far and dangerous to even BIKE to where I need to go. The problem is, the U.S. (at least most of it) is DESIGNED so you have to drive everywhere.

you said it right there. that's the essence. we much change. not to worry, SuperUrbanist to the rescue!

Eric

[HippoSleek]

Glad to hear Chicago isn't wasting away. I know there are some cities with less interest in preservation that are putting stand-alone one story drug stores w/ parking lots, fast food, etc. downtown! I just don't get it. I also agree that the facades aren't the best thing, but I'm also a pragmatist. The alternative in most cases would be to knock these down. Instead, the old storefronts are kept (usually as stores) and continue to serve as vital binders in the social fabric - albeit with a law firm, etc. on top. In a town like DC with a limited amount of space, you can't increase the urban center without gentrifying half of the residents out of the city. Fortunately, there are increasing numbers of people in DC that demand new grocery stores, pharmacies, etc. that fit into their neighborhoods without the overt convenience of a suburban box store. While there are some terriffic new buildings around town, there are a lot of big 1970s-80s concrete boxes too. Again, DC is also unique b/c we don't have high rises b/c it is illegal to build above a certain height (so as not to overshadow the Capitol). For better or worse, office sprawl is going to happen here... all that can be done it to maintain the cohesiveness and add more as it goes.

What is more interesting to me than the plight of DC is what's happening in some of the "inside the beltway" suburbs. The Metro trains here run from the closer suburbs inward. In recent years, development around these nodes has been increased so that little half-cities are formed around the stops. I say half b/c while these "nodes" contain apts., condos, rowhouses, markets, stores, retail, dining, and entertainment - one still has to board a train downstairs to get to work every day. Drawback No. 2 is that the dining is chain-food and the shops are all clones (Pottery Barn, Banana Republic, Blockbuster, etc.). Basically, it is like a suburb with its anonomous conveniences packed into one square mile. It is also expensive like a city, however, but people even manage to live w/o a car - just as they would in the core city. Now, I imagine from an achitectural standpoint, it is not an ideal solution, but from a planning perspective, it makes a lot of sense. While I don't live in such a compact node, but I live in a highrise less than 10 mi. from work and I can still walk to three grocery stores, two video stores, 10 restaurants, etc. in 15 minutes or less. I still have a 40 minute door to door commute every day, but I spend most of it on a train doing work anyway. In my car, I could get to major shopping in 3 minutes, downtown DC in 15 (non-rush), but the furthest out suburbs in about an hour. To me, that just makes sense. I don't have crime or most of the other unwanted elements of the core city (even if I face them every day at work). IMHO, I have the best of both worlds - and it doesn't depend on a car.

must do more work...

[HippoSleek]

Originally posted by KoukiS14
And in transit in 15 compared to 10? Of course, provided I didn't have to leave an hour early or more to get there, as is the case with OUR mass transit here. In addtion, I'd need to be able to get HOME before an hour, too. . otherwise, it's a pointless waste of time.. But.. I'm all about saving miles on my S14 =)

A big part of living with mass transit is being able to work on some one else's schedule. I usually take a bus to a train, then walk 6 blocks to my office. When I go home, I have to plan when I leave. If I don't get out at 6:55, I have to wait until 7:10, 7:30, 7:55; 8:30; or 9:20 or else I'm just waiting at a bus stop, paying for a cab, or walking 15 minutes in the dark on pededtrian unfriendly roads (what I like least about winter :( )

[uiuc240]

Originally posted by HippoSleek
What is more interesting to me than the plight of DC is what's happening in some of the "inside the beltway" suburbs. The Metro trains here run from the closer suburbs inward. In recent years, development around these nodes has been increased so that little half-cities are formed around the stops. I say half b/c while these "nodes" contain apts., condos, rowhouses, markets, stores, retail, dining, and entertainment - one still has to board a train downstairs to get to work every day. Drawback No. 2 is that the dining is chain-food and the shops are all clones (Pottery Barn, Banana Republic, Blockbuster, etc.). Basically, it is like a suburb with its anonomous conveniences packed into one square mile. It is also expensive like a city, however, but people even manage to live w/o a car - just as they would in the core city. Now, I imagine from an achitectural standpoint, it is not an ideal solution, but from a planning perspective, it makes a lot of sense.

What you're talking about are places like Kentlands. That is "New Urbanism." Basically, the decentralization of a city is a GOOD idea. Small nodes dispersed around the urban core allow for the development of community, increase in business opportunities, etc. etc. Huge list. Anyway, by producing town/city centers around transit nodes, these communities are regenerating the sort of network so cherished in Europe. Yay!

The second drawback you mention is only temporary. At the moment, you need Pottery Barn, Banana Republic, Blockbuster, Chipotle, McDonald's, etc. to fund these operations. However, as sprawl becomes urbanism, the big boxes will go away, and retail/commerical/etc. will become more privatized and more diversified. We are in a transition period.

This makes sense from BOTH architectural and planning standpoints. However, it's the current planners and zoning codes that are keeping things like this from happening across the nation. The more we (the public) push for better towns and cities, the sooner they will be forced to listen. The reason we have suburban sprawl is because we asked for it (after WWII we needed housing...BAD), and they gave it to us. We wanted open space because 19th century cities were not good. They gave it to us. We wanted big roads for our new cars. They gave it to us. Now we're stuck with it. The sooner we start accepting the finer points of a more "urbane" lifestyle, ditch the focking SUVs, and start pushing for transit, the sooner we're going to be on the road to getting rid of Sprawl-Mart, big oil, and other crap.

w0rd.

Eric

[HippoSleek]

The drawback to these seems to be zoning related issues not involving the government, oddly enough. I was reading an article in the Post the otehr day that was discussing how much extra work it is for developers to make these communities b/c of NIMBY problems from the existing locals. They were saying that despite the $200,000 lofts that they are creating and the $$$$ retail space, the return on investment is slow and less profitable than chewing up another farm in the hinterlands b/c of all the legal battles that the existing neighborhood puts up. As a result, the largest developer in this area for these projects has not scheduled any more.

Its unfortunate that people seem willing to pay for it ($$ lofts and $$$ stores), but those that surround the land feel compelled to make so many problems that it is nearly unworkable. I understand that having a townhouse or condo overlooking your backyard would suck, but I wish people would let the market work and allocate resources outside zoning pet projects. :mad:

Having formerly lived in two areas that are now being re-developed (gentrified out while I was a student), I am trying to buy where I think the next hot area is. When the time comes, I would gladly sell out my NIMBY rights for more convenience or a 50% increase in property value.

[240 2NR]

Originally posted by HippoSleek

Its unfortunate that people seem willing to pay for it ($$ lofts and $$$ stores), but those that surround the land feel compelled to make so many problems that it is nearly unworkable. I understand that having a townhouse or condo overlooking your backyard would suck, but I wish people would let the market work and allocate resources outside zoning pet projects. :mad:

Having formerly lived in two areas that are now being re-developed (gentrified out while I was a student), I am trying to buy where I think the next hot area is. When the time comes, I would gladly sell out my NIMBY rights for more convenience or a 50% increase in property value.

Well seeing all the negative drawbacks of "growth" people have a right to be worried. They know they don't like more suburbs cause that means more people on their roads, but they also don't like urban growth because they left the city. So in the absence of good growth models they will allow bad growth they are familiar with but only grudgingly.

You're like me. I'm dying to buy some old place on the south or west side of chicago before everyone else does.

[Jim96SC2]

Call me crazy but I think that part of the reason gas is so high isn't suburban america, it's the SUV craze (hear me out). SUVs get worse gas mileage then any late-80's V8 I know of. Since what, 50% of new veichles, are SUVs the gas consumption goes up. Since demand goes up and supply stays the same then prices go up. Just plain economics. I agree with making a minimum gas milage law. I also think that it would be useless if half the cars sold today aren't under that law cause they are classified under commercial veichle laws.

I'm in the air about using alternitive fuels. Electric cars are 0 pulluting, but then where do you get the elecrticity? Where do you dump old batteries? Hydrogen seems nice too. But believe it or not the BEST fuel source is alchohol. It pollutes much less, allows better performance, and is a renewable resource.

[KoukiS14]

Originally posted by HippoSleek
A big part of living with mass transit is being able to work on some one else's schedule. I usually take a bus to a train, then walk 6 blocks to my office. When I go home, I have to plan when I leave. If I don't get out at 6:55, I have to wait until 7:10, 7:30, 7:55; 8:30; or 9:20 or else I'm just waiting at a bus stop, paying for a cab, or walking 15 minutes in the dark on pededtrian unfriendly roads (what I like least about winter :( )

Very true, and if they could afford locally to offer reasonable departure and arrival times, like you have there, I may do it. BUT... Our buses, in most places, arrive every 45 min to 1 hour, which negates the value altogether. If I lived up in Chicago, I'd probably take the train everywhere. That thing is pimp, but smells funky.