in many cases the gravy in this thread is put on the pumpkin pie instead of turkey
To each their own. No gravy-shaming here.
2 Likes
I like gravy
thanksgiving is close!
Had to dig to find anything super relevant. Unsurprisingly, it varies by state.
Tangent: this thread got me thinking about my first house.It was a bit run down and in a shitty area of town. Hadn’t looked up the values for a while. I timed my purchase pretty well, as the neighborhood started gentrifying pretty much right after I bought it.
Summary
1992: I purchased for $34,900
1999: I sold it for $89,000
2003: it sold for $106,500
2005: sold for $145,000
2006: sold for $179,000
2018: sold for $204,000
zillow estimate now: $312,000
Why?
because they’re a burden to society
But, rental cars aren’t? As I pointed out earlier, rental fleets us more roadway than owned cars.
This looks like the cost of buying new and trading one year later. I don’t do that.
The state by state listing is specific to bicycles and the state where I saw the horse drawn carriage prohibits bicycles according to that list.
In my research to see if that particular state allows horse-drawn carriages on interstates, I didn’t find an answer to the question, but I did manage to learn that you can get a DUI if you drive a horse-drawn carriage drunk.
Show me ze numbers, adjusted for the future state of car use, not the current one.
Here’s a list of animal statutes by state. I haven’t perused it, but a quick scan doesn’t see a lot of restrictions on roadways.
Most of the rules are about slaughtering animals, transporting animals about to be slaughtered, and restrictions on motorists passing animals.
It’s not.
The cost includes depreciation. Insurance. Licensing, maintenance. Fuel. I get a similar number based on my own personal car, which is 11 years old.
Btw, his relates to those who are in need of housing. The topic is affordable housing. I stand by my statement that putting up housing in SR1, with virtually no mass transit promotes car dependency. It is a policy decision. It ends up excluding those who cannot afford a reliable, personal car.
I see no future in banning cars. But JSM is correct that the solution lies with addressing that car dependency.
Random example: cul de sacs.
We used to call these dead ends. Roads that go nowhere. But given the unflattering nature of being called a dead end kid, realtors went with a cutie French phrase. Classy, right?
But a cul de sac is still a street that goes no where. It’s basically a shared private drive for a handful of homes. Owners get a privacy, and the city paves, plows, and maintains the driveway. Great deal for the handful of owners. But a burden on the city treasury.
Defend it if you want, but the SR1 promotes car ownership. Why do you think this wise?
Starting to sound like a certain someone
For those of us who lack an encyclopedic knowledge of zoning laws in whatever region you happen to be thinking about, can you run down what specifically SR-1 means to you?
I get broadly that it’s residential. But I’m reading in one area that it’s only single family homes on one acre lots and in another area duplexes are permitted and the minimum lot size is 1/20th of an acre so… I’m not sure we’re all working off the same definition here.
I’ve heard SR as both “suburban residential” and single residential. I find the former more descriptive.
We are all familiar with this. If/When Toll Bros is developing a 70 unit site, it’s most likely on SR1 zoned land. Each county or incorporated area is empowered stricter standards if they wish. This is a good start. CA model zoning regulation.
It’s most striking feature is the absence of commercial areas. To be walkable, there has to something to walk to. Curiously, the most livable neighborhoods are found in older cities, where business properties were grandfathered in. So you have street intersections with perhaps 3 or 4 story brick structures, a pub or pizza restaurant or liquor store on the first floor and apartments above. Even just a bodega or coffee shop is something. Those neighborhoods are in alder sections, with streets that aren’t so wide. Very pedestrian friendly.
Help?
1 Like
Ok, so it seems like you’re zeroing in on the lack of businesses more than the density of the housing, am I right?
Two of my last three homes were large single family houses with garages on a half acre on streets of other similar homes.
But they were under a mile from the grocery store, several restaurants, bars, other businesses, transit stops. Pretty walkable, but not particularly dense.
So a 30-35 minute round trip, then? That route is going to get old, real fast.