This was quite obvious, surprised they have not done more articles about the subject.
an
February 25, 2012 @
9:19 AM
Mine is 11-15 blocks or ~3 Mine is 11-15 blocks or ~3 miles. Depending on lights, it can be anywhere between 5-10 minutes.
sdrealtor
February 25, 2012 @
9:31 AM
MIne is 16 stairs. Depending MIne is 16 stairs. Depending upon if I drank wine last night and how much, it can be anywhere from 30 seconds to 30 minutes.
barnaby33
February 27, 2012 @
3:25 PM
MIne is 16 stairs. Depending
MIne is 16 stairs. Depending upon if I drank wine last night and how much, it can be anywhere from 30 seconds to 30 minutes.
Too bad we can’t like comments here, this one is great.
Josh
Ricechex
February 28, 2012 @
6:57 PM
barnaby33 wrote:
MIne is 16 [quote=barnaby33]
MIne is 16 stairs. Depending upon if I drank wine last night and how much, it can be anywhere from 30 seconds to 30 minutes.
Too bad we can’t like comments here, this one is great.
Josh[/quote]
I liked this one too!
sdrealtor
February 29, 2012 @
8:49 AM
Been lying in bed watching Been lying in bed watching Bernanke on cnbc and playing with the iPad. Time for that dreaded commute
SK in CV
February 25, 2012 @
10:14 AM
One block.
Fill up my gas One block.
Fill up my gas tank once a month.
ocrenter
February 25, 2012 @
10:07 AM
seems like a lot of folks are seems like a lot of folks are telecommuting from home these days, reducing the need to stick to the center of town.
briansd1
February 25, 2012 @
10:20 AM
ocrenter wrote:seems like a [quote=ocrenter]seems like a lot of folks are telecommuting from home these days, reducing the need to stick to the center of town.[/quote]
Humans are social animals.
I’d feel isolated living way out of town.
sdrealtor
February 25, 2012 @
10:23 AM
Yet you sit on a computer all Yet you sit on a computer all day
briansd1
February 25, 2012 @
11:52 AM
Living close to town gives Living close to town gives more time to do things, including get on the computer.
For outdoor activities, I do have to drive to get there, but it’s worth it. San Diego’s weather makes it possible to schedule regular outdoor sports activities. That’s the best part of San Diego. But
it’s too sunny here though and I have to be mindful of sunburns… I wish the weather were overcast and foggy more often.
ocrenter
February 25, 2012 @
12:28 PM
briansd1 wrote:Living close [quote=briansd1]Living close to town gives more time to do things, including get on the computer.
For outdoor activities, I do have to drive to get there, but it’s worth it. San Diego’s weather makes it possible to schedule regular outdoor sports activities. That’s the best part of San Diego. But
it’s too sunny here though and I have to be mindful of sunburns… I wish the weather were overcast and foggy more often.[/quote]
SD is kinda like multiple towns cobbled together. So essentially most of us all live “close to town”. I think most folks end up staying within that 10-20 minute radius for everything they do.
Personally I like the sun. Doesn’t really make sense to have to pay a fog/coastal eddy premium.
an
February 25, 2012 @
12:39 PM
briansd1 wrote:I wish the [quote=briansd1]I wish the weather were overcast and foggy more often.[/quote]You can always move to Seattle. The amount of sunshine is why I love SD.
briansd1
February 28, 2012 @
3:49 PM
AN wrote:briansd1 wrote:I [quote=AN][quote=briansd1]I wish the weather were overcast and foggy more often.[/quote]You can always move to Seattle. The amount of sunshine is why I love SD.[/quote]
It’s too rainy in Seattle.
Sunday was perfect. And today is nice. Last night was perfect. Did you hear that it only rains at night in Camelot?
I love the coastal fog. May Grey and June Gloom are perfect for me.
CAwireman
February 25, 2012 @
1:40 PM
Sadly, while we were renting Sadly, while we were renting 5 to 7 minutes. After we bought our place, ~25 min in the morning, and ~ 40 min in the afternoon.
protorio
February 25, 2012 @
4:02 PM
10 miles for me. 12-15 10 miles for me. 12-15 minutes in the car, 45 minutes by bike, 25-30 minutes by Trolley. I try to ride most days.
San Diego’s early boosters designed a “city of villages” – so most people have pedestrian business districts, at least in the older areas. Some in newer areas (post-war) might be able to walk to the strip mall.
an
February 25, 2012 @
8:15 PM
So far, 48% of Piggs commute So far, 48% of Piggs commute 0-10 minutes. Nice!!!
sdrealtor
February 25, 2012 @
10:40 PM
AN wrote:So far, 48% of Piggs [quote=AN]So far, 48% of Piggs commute 0-10 minutes. Nice!!![/quote]
That’s because Piggs have the jet packs all of us boomers were promised long ago that makes for an easy commute from the far flung areas.
That’s because Piggs have the jet packs all of us boomers were promised long ago that makes for an easy commute from the far flung areas.[/quote]
I’m still waiting for my hoverboard. 3 more years to go :-D.
briansd1
February 26, 2012 @
11:13 AM
protorio wrote:
San Diego’s [quote=protorio]
San Diego’s early boosters designed a “city of villages” – so most people have pedestrian business districts, at least in the older areas. Some in newer areas (post-war) might be able to walk to the strip mall.[/quote]
I like the City of Villages concept. It’s not an original plan for the city, but a concept developed only recently to address the problem of sprawl.
IMO, San Diego is just a same version of Orange County (their villages are different smaller cities). San Diego is better because we have a cultural center, Downtown, and Balboa Park.
We talk about the commute, but anyone commute by public transport, foot, or bike?
Navydoc talked about biking from Stonebridge to Mira Mesa and taking the the bus to work. That’s pretty admirable.
I doubt that most people here have ever been to work on bus, so they wouldn’t understand how terribly inconvenient public transport is in San Diego, especially if you work in a business park that is not serviced by a bus line.
ocrenter
February 26, 2012 @
12:28 PM
Almost 1/3 of piggs work from Almost 1/3 of piggs work from home. That’s quite different from the general population. I think the statistic on working from home/telecommuting is less than 5% of the general workforce. Of course this site probably pulls in a lot more self employed than the general population as well.
No wonder the prospect of $5 gas doesn’t really matter too much to this group.
In sdrealtor’s defense, I would not consider his driving of clients around town to be commuting. He should be able to fully deduct those drives as work related driving, whereas commute mileage can not be deducted.
sdrealtor
February 26, 2012 @
12:30 PM
ocrenter wrote:Almost 1/3 of [quote=ocrenter]Almost 1/3 of piggs work from home. That’s quite different from the general population. I think the statistic on working from home/telecommuting is less than 5% of the general workforce. Of course this site probably pulls in a lot more self employed than the general population as well.
No wonder the prospect of $5 gas doesn’t really matter too much to this group.
In sdrealtor’s defense, I would not consider his driving of clients around town to be commuting. He should be able to fully deduct those drives as work related driving, whereas commute mileage can not be deducted.[/quote]
FWIW I think telecommuting is abnormally high in SD overall. Very few large employers for a city this large. Lots of folks who could live anywhere choose to live here for lifestyle.
ocrenter
February 26, 2012 @
12:47 PM
briansd1 wrote:
I like the [quote=briansd1]
I like the City of Villages concept.
We talk about the commute, but anyone commute by public transport, foot, or bike?
Navydoc talked about biking from Stonebridge to Mira Mesa and taking the the bus to work. That’s pretty admirable.
I doubt that most people here have ever been to work on bus, so they wouldn’t understand how terribly inconvenient public transport is in San Diego, especially if you work in a business park that is not serviced by a bus line.[/quote]
The city of villages concept also allow for employment centers to be close to housing developments. Hence even though some may consider a place to be far flung, the fact that most everyone in these far flung neighborhoods end up working within the same far flung industrial parks and shop within the same far flung shopping centers end up making the concept of far flung quite dated.
As for public transportation. Problem is people have to be forced into taking public transport. Do you think folks in Tokyo really want to take the subway? The fact that they have no place to park if they drive, along with sky high gas prices, and the slowness due to traffics make the subway the only way to travel and commute. If we create that environment by squeezing all 3 million people in this county into the central city area, we would all be taking public transportation.
briansd1
February 26, 2012 @
2:31 PM
It’s all relative ocrenter. It’s all relative ocrenter.
I have a friend who commutes from Old City Philadelphia to UPenn for work by subway. He could live in the suburbs and drive to work.
He moved to Philly from Houston. I suggested he buys a house 2 miles north of where he lives now, but he said that he doesn’t want to come home to nothing after work.
About the City of Villages, I doubt that people live where they work, unless they telecommute. The way the city is built now, there is not a mix. There are upscale “villages” and lowbrow neighborhoods. People have to commute back and forth depending on their social economic conditions, and their jobs.
As I said before, the “villages” of San Diego is just another Orange County of many cities, except that we have downtown and Balboa Park.
There is less traffic in SD, but there is more sprawl in SD — the distances are greater than in LA and OC.
sdrealtor
February 26, 2012 @
2:45 PM
Your friend doesnt want to Your friend doesnt want to get shot either which is a distinct likelihood 2 miles North of UPenn.
briansd1
February 27, 2012 @
8:37 AM
sdrealtor wrote:Your friend [quote=sdrealtor]Your friend doesnt want to get shot either which is a distinct likelihood 2 miles North of UPenn.[/quote]
Not 2 miles north of UPenn, but about 1.5 miles north of Old City in Northern liberties. There you can find a brand new house with parking, but compared to Old City, it’s not the same vibe, and not the same walkability. He’s renting a very nice loft in an old 100 yo building.
[quote=ocrenter]
Agree that we do have more sprawl here in SD. Therefore making the city of villages even more essential and true to form.
[/quote]
[quote=ocrenter] More likely, if the employment center grow up along with new housing, the convergence of the living and working spheres tend to happen more.[/quote]
That’s where the City of Villages come in. It’s a work in progress that can only happen with population growth and more density.
I think that urban planning goes in trends… and cities are following the same trend. They go to conferences and all copy each other. IIRC, the woman who came up with the City of Villages concept left to go work for Los Angeles.
LA is trying to use their subway/train to connect all their villages. OC has it’s own cities with their villages.
ocrenter
February 27, 2012 @
6:56 AM
briansd1 wrote:It’s all [quote=briansd1]It’s all relative ocrenter.
I have a friend who commutes from Old City Philadelphia to UPenn for work by subway. He could live in the suburbs and drive to work.
He moved to Philly from Houston. I suggested he buys a house 2 miles north of where he lives now, but he said that he doesn’t want to come home to nothing after work.
About the City of Villages, I doubt that people live where they work, unless they telecommute. The way the city is built now, there is not a mix. There are upscale “villages” and lowbrow neighborhoods. People have to commute back and forth depending on their social economic conditions, and their jobs.
As I said before, the “villages” of San Diego is just another Orange County of many cities, except that we have downtown and Balboa Park.
There is less traffic in SD, but there is more sprawl in SD — the distances are greater than in LA and OC.[/quote]
Agree that we do have more sprawl here in SD. Therefore making the city of villages even more essential and true to form.
Also agree that not everyone live close to employment centers and work there. But we do see that pattern. Lots of HP and Sony and previously Nokia folks live in RB, 4S. Qualcomm folks are mostly in CV and Scripps. That’s how these communities ended up having so many Asians and Indians. Carlsbad has its own high tech and biotech cluster and a lot of employees end up buying in the city and adjacent SEH. More likely, if the employment center grow up along with new housing, the convergence of the living and working spheres tend to happen more.
protorio
February 27, 2012 @
12:41 PM
briansd1 wrote:
As I said [quote=briansd1]
As I said before, the “villages” of San Diego is just another Orange County of many cities, except that we have downtown and Balboa Park.
There is less traffic in SD, but there is more sprawl in SD — the distances are greater than in LA and OC.[/quote]
You are right about “City of Village” being recent. Maybe I confused the content of a California history course with reading the newspaper.
The big difference is how the “villages” here are close together. I ride my bike easily to many of them – North Park, Normal Heights, La Mesa, Hillcrest, University Heights, Mission Hills, Lemon Grove, OB, Kensignton, etc. They all have central, walk-able business districts with eateries, bars, cafes, Main St.-style associations and usually independent businesses (jewlers, lawyers, shoe repair, etc). Then there’s Downtown, the costal cities with their little strips, etc.
Its the business parks – starting in Kearny Mesa, and up through Sorrento Valley and beyond, and the attached sprawl in North County that hiccups things. But that was “modern progress” for the middle class after the war – moving toward a bright future of the automobile, freeways, larger homes, modern technocratic jobs in specialized productivity complexes, privacy, and shopping malls divorced from the spaces they draw customers from.
Study after study shows people want pedestrian culture. Who comes back from Europe saying, “I missed sitting on the 805 in my car. Damn all those trains, trams, and people-watching cafes!” So, the core neighborhoods have become magnets for money and people, and I can only imagine that will increase.
The big cowardice of the city/county is not running the Trolley up University Ave. and up the coast. Instead, the Mission Valley line (which I ride often – living on the Trolley line was a key consideration in my housing search) serves malls and empty stadiums along the route.
Its great to see so many people here work from home – I hope they have a nice cafe to walk to. Maybe something more heterogenous than Starbucks.
ocrenter
February 27, 2012 @
12:46 PM
protorio wrote:
Its great to [quote=protorio]
Its great to see so many people here work from home – I hope they have a nice cafe to walk to. Maybe something more heterogenous than Starbucks.[/quote]
actually, it is great to see the overwhelming majority here commute at less than 30 minutes. I doubt the same can be said for LA/OC.
briansd1
February 27, 2012 @
3:10 PM
protorio wrote:
Its the [quote=protorio]
Its the business parks – starting in Kearny Mesa, and up through Sorrento Valley and beyond, and the attached sprawl in North County that hiccups things. But that was “modern progress” for the middle class after the war – moving toward a bright future of the automobile, freeways, larger homes, modern technocratic jobs in specialized productivity complexes, privacy, and shopping malls divorced from the spaces they draw customers from.[/quote]
I absolute agree with you.
The reason people moved to the suburbs is for better houses and lower ppsf. I can understand that. However, building technology has changed. We can now have roomy, airy homes in the city, if there is the will to build them.
For example, when I look at El Cajon Bl, and University Ave, I see so many missed opportunities for condo living right above the shops, using the same roads and the same infrastructure.
As I mentioned before, urban planning goes in trends. The post war culture created planning where businesses were completed separated from housing estates built around the car.
You said it really well about visiting European Cities. We generally have fun in the urban core, or the main business drag of the cities. We do not visit the suburbs.
Some new developments I like in SD are the Egyptian in Hillcrest, 1 Mission in Mission Hills, and La Boheme in North Park. Those developments are not cheap but I believe that prices would fall if they were duplicated thousands of times over in the city. I’d also like to see 3-4 story townhouses with garage built in the city.
I know, most Americans would think of my ideas as snobbish and crazy. So I think that we are condemned to eternal sprawl. When the hydrogen and long-range electric cars are invented, then we can sprawl out even more.
The-Shoveler
February 27, 2012 @
3:27 PM
“long-range electric cars are
“long-range electric cars are invented”
Long range electric cars are here, even 76 mile per gallon Fords are here,
BUT!!! They really have no interested in selling cheap economic cars in the U.S. , They want to market 30-50K gas guzzlers and exotic electric hybrids, or fancy 100K 300 mile range electric sports cars.
But Yea, Sprawl, get used to it. The Cities are great for younger (or young at hart) grownups but they are lousy for rising kids or having a nice patio with a view at a reasonable price too.
sdrealtor
February 27, 2012 @
9:48 PM
briansd1 wrote:protorio [quote=briansd1][quote=protorio]
Its the business parks – starting in Kearny Mesa, and up through Sorrento Valley and beyond, and the attached sprawl in North County that hiccups things. But that was “modern progress” for the middle class after the war – moving toward a bright future of the automobile, freeways, larger homes, modern technocratic jobs in specialized productivity complexes, privacy, and shopping malls divorced from the spaces they draw customers from.[/quote]
I absolute agree with you.
The reason people moved to the suburbs is for better houses and lower ppsf. I can understand that. However, building technology has changed. We can now have roomy, airy homes in the city, if there is the will to build them.
For example, when I look at El Cajon Bl, and University Ave, I see so many missed opportunities for condo living right above the shops, using the same roads and the same infrastructure.
As I mentioned before, urban planning goes in trends. The post war culture created planning where businesses were completed separated from housing estates built around the car.
You said it really well about visiting European Cities. We generally have fun in the urban core, or the main business drag of the cities. We do not visit the suburbs.
Some new developments I like in SD are the Egyptian in Hillcrest, 1 Mission in Mission Hills, and La Boheme in North Park. Those developments are not cheap but I believe that prices would fall if they were duplicated thousands of times over in the city. I’d also like to see 3-4 story townhouses with garage built in the city.
I know, most Americans would think of my ideas as snobbish and crazy. So I think that we are condemned to eternal sprawl. When the hydrogen and long-range electric cars are invented, then we can sprawl out even more.[/quote]
Brian
Just so you know the hardest properties to sell that i have ever listed are 3 story townhouses. They are the kiss of death. Even in the boom of the bubble market no one wanted them. Now you say 4 story townhouses??? I say good luck!!
bearishgurl
February 28, 2012 @
10:25 AM
sdrealtor wrote:Brian
Just so [quote=sdrealtor]Brian
Just so you know the hardest properties to sell that i have ever listed are 3 story townhouses. They are the kiss of death. Even in the boom of the bubble market no one wanted them. Now you say 4 story townhouses??? I say good luck!![/quote]
I could believe that few would want these in SD County as they are like living in a multi-level “traincar.” However, they are very common in SF but are not as narrow as a 14′ “traincar.” Each floor constitutes a “flat” and the vast majority of these buildings have no HOA. The garages are on the bottom. Most were built post-fire (1907-1917).
Each “flat” ranges from 1300-2600 sf (2-4 bdrms), depending on how wide the lot it sits on is (residential buildings did not need side clearance back in the day). Their facades often sport 1-2 “real” bay windows (where the REAL wood floor is actually half of a hexagon – NOT A KIT) and have hot-water heat! Open stairs in front lead to the second-floor flat (over the garages) with closed stairs leading to subsequent-floor flats.
This type of housing is not common in SD County and I don’t see it ever being adopted. Urban residents in SD enjoy more of an outdoor lifestyle and enjoy their yards year round. Sitting out there on a collection of “rocks,” SF is windy with chilly nights at least ten months per year (yes, even in July). I’ve been there when wind gusts were 150 mph and many thousands of discarded x-mas trees and trash/recycle carts rolled 1+ mile downhill. The warmest months in SF are September and October.
briansd1
February 28, 2012 @
12:27 PM
There is a certain orthodoxy There is a certain orthodoxy to the suburban lifestyle that people are used to and unwillingness to change.
On the part of the planners there’s also unwillingness to permit anything that doesn’t have certain number of parking spaces per 100 residents, setback, etc…
The 3 story townhouses that sdrealtor mentions are not useful. It also depends on location.
Now imagine 4 story townhouses built to the curb, to the lot lines, with no HOA or MR. Garage on the bottom and 1000sf per floor. The garage might be 600sf so there would be 400sf at the bottom. That makes a 3400sf house with bay windows and balconies on every floor, and roof top terrace with a view of the city.
Sell those houses for $200/sf in North Park, Normal Heights, Hillcrest, Mission Hills, Bay Park, on the edge of downtown, and they would sell like hotcakes. People would move from the suburbs. *
Some houses could have garages, other could have shops or living space.
The problem, in my view, is people won’t allow any building and changes that don’t conform the the existing old wood bungalows.
Cities are made to change, to be town-down and rebuilt to fit the needs of the new citizens.
* edit: I changed moving “back” from the suburbs because, people never moved away to the suburbs. They know nothing but the quasi suburban lifestyle built around the car, even if they lived within the city borders.
briansd1
February 28, 2012 @
3:02 PM
These days politicians talk These days politicians talk about the “public square” a lot.
Where the heck is the public square? I sure hope that we can drive to it and that there’s free parking for everyone.
UCGal
February 25, 2012 @
9:15 PM
Usually just under 10 mins in Usually just under 10 mins in the morning… usually around 20 mins on the way home. It’s only 7 miles but Mira Mesa Blvd to south 805 totally sucks in the afternoon/evening.
The-Shoveler
February 26, 2012 @
10:52 AM
My case is more an outlier My case is more an outlier situation, sometimes I drive, sometimes I don’t, sometimes I am on a plane and I can have a commute of 16-20 hours.
I am sure some piggs drive as part of their jobs, so does commuting occur all day in this case or does the commute end when they walk to their cars to start the day ?
Apparently, the main part of a Realtor’s job it not showing houses but sitting a home doing paperwork. 😉
In this case, is the drive considered a commute?[/quote]
LOL, I drive constantly but commute to office is the stairs
poorgradstudent
February 27, 2012 @
9:04 AM
I average about 25 minutes, I average about 25 minutes, but that’s because I’m not willing to shift my schedule slightly to avoid traffic. Today was closer to 20 minutes.
briansd1
February 27, 2012 @
11:10 AM
I drive about 30 min.
But my I drive about 30 min.
But my schedule is such that I don’t hit traffic.
I only wish my commute were shorter.
If you think in terms of distance, it’s amazing how much we generally drive. In many communities, 5 miles to get to the freeway is normal.
The-Shoveler
February 27, 2012 @
2:14 PM
One point for Brian, Seems One point for Brian, Seems The car companies cannot keep up with demand,
Whatever the average commute for L.A. is I am sure it is longer, there is nothing like trying to make time on the 405 at 7:00 AM, sometimes 20 miles can take 2 hours. ditto for the 91.
I would go so far as to say SD in general are commutaphobic’s (well at least to someone from L.A.).
The-Shoveler
February 27, 2012 @
3:56 PM
Also I was reading today that Also I was reading today that absent the situation in Iran, we would be looking at 3 dollar gas. whooohooo, where’s that New Ford F-150,(just kidding but I really do need a new small truck, I got stuff to haul).
Coronita
February 27, 2012 @
4:28 PM
Nor-LA-SD-GUY2 wrote:Also I [quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]Also I was reading today that absent the situation in Iran, we would be looking at 3 dollar gas. whooohooo, where’s that New Ford F-150,(just kidding but I really do need a new small truck, I got stuff to haul).[/quote]
Hey don’t nark on the F-150. It’s not as much of a gas guzzler as you think. The ecoboost V-6 packs a pretty good punch, and isn’t that bad on fuel economy. It’s about the same of an Acura MDX…
Plus the MDX requires premium, versus the F-150 takes regular 87…
Coronita
February 27, 2012 @
4:24 PM
Wait. This thread hasn’t Wait. This thread hasn’t devolved into a public versus private sector debate yet? What’s wrong with you people???? 🙂
ocrenter
February 27, 2012 @
5:58 PM
flu wrote:Wait. This thread [quote=flu]Wait. This thread hasn’t devolved into a public versus private sector debate yet? What’s wrong with you people???? :)[/quote]
that can be easily arranged with a statement about public employees and their car allowance (for example, we had a neighbor (Escondido PD) who basically drove the police car home daily. His commute is on our dime. Or rather the Escondido citizens’ dime. Is that appropriate? Do we see other private sector employees with the same previlege?
briansd1
February 27, 2012 @
6:19 PM
Talking about cars, I think Talking about cars, I think that we are getting to back to the days of land-yachts. Back in 1990 the Honda Accord was a small car. Now it’s huge.
I still remember when the Ford Expedition came out. It was huge back then. Now, SUVs that size and bigger are common place.
Huge cars for an overweight population, and even more sprawl. Yea.. that’s the good life in America!
BTW, what’s the point of living out where there’s open space and hiking trails, if you just sit at home watching TV? The data doesn’t lie, an ever more obese population is evidence of that.
ocrenter
February 27, 2012 @
7:12 PM
briansd1 wrote:Talking about [quote=briansd1]Talking about cars, I think that we are getting to back to the days of land-yachts. Back in 1990 the Honda Accord was a small car. Now it’s huge.
I still remember when the Ford Expedition came out. It was huge back then. Now, SUVs that size and bigger are common place.
Huge cars for an overweight population, and even more sprawl. Yea.. that’s the good life in America!
BTW, what’s the point of living out where there’s open space and hiking trails, if you just sit at home watching TV? The data doesn’t lie, an ever more obese population is evidence of that.[/quote]
There’s no question people living in real cities using public transport are more healthy because of their need to incorporate walking as part of their commute. Because of our reliance on cars, we are at a disadvantage. Assuming both a San Diegan and a New Yorker gets home from work at 6 pm, it is safe to assume the New Yorker at least logged half an hour of fast paced walking vs none by the San Diegan.
Coronita
February 27, 2012 @
7:57 PM
briansd1 wrote:Talking about [quote=briansd1]Talking about cars, I think that we are getting to back to the days of land-yachts. Back in 1990 the Honda Accord was a small car. Now it’s huge.
I still remember when the Ford Expedition came out. It was huge back then. Now, SUVs that size and bigger are common place.
Huge cars for an overweight population, and even more sprawl. Yea.. that’s the good life in America!
BTW, what’s the point of living out where there’s open space and hiking trails, if you just sit at home watching TV? The data doesn’t lie, an ever more obese population is evidence of that.[/quote]
Brian this is true. Actually I was comparing the size of an X5 to to a 5 series. Length and width-wise they are nearly the same. Things like the toyota camry are now considered full size cars.
The bigger size though however isn’t just about people getting bigger. For one, a lot of these new ares are german, and made for europeans, and they aren’t bloating like you think Americans are. The current generation 1 series is the size of the previous older generation 3 series. And the 3 series these days are closer to the older 5 series size…Audi/VW is the same way. The days of the current A3 and Jetta is closer to the size of the previous A4 and Passat. I suspect a lot of this new bloat is related to safety regulations. For example, people ask why the latest european cars has such an high hood. It’s related to european pedestrian crash regulations.
Smaller cars might also be more expensive to insure, reducing the potential savings for being a more fuel efficient car…
briansd1
February 28, 2012 @
2:53 PM
flu wrote: For one, a lot of [quote=flu] For one, a lot of these new ares are german, and made for europeans, and they aren’t bloating like you think Americans are. The current generation 1 series is the size of the previous older generation 3 series. And the 3 series these days are closer to the older 5 series size…Audi/VW is the same way. The days of the current A3 and Jetta is closer to the size of the previous A4 and Passat. I suspect a lot of this new bloat is related to safety regulations. For example, people ask why the latest european cars has such an high hood. It’s related to european pedestrian crash regulations.[/quote]
Yes, safety regulations are causing bigger and heavier cars…. but it’s a chicken and egg situation because bigger cars require that the next cars be even bigger for better safety.
I think that many German cars are made for the American consumers though. We are a big market. Cup holders are made for Americans for sure… and even the German cars have them now.
Long term, I’m betting on the Chinese car makers… Through government mandates, subsidies and support, the Chinese car makers will be able to develop new types of automobiles.
I can see a time when China mandates that all cars driven in Beijing and Shanghai be zero emission cars. That would instantly make China a huge market where the technology will be developed.
sdrealtor
February 27, 2012 @
9:51 PM
briansd1 wrote:Talking about [quote=briansd1]Talking about cars, I think that we are getting to back to the days of land-yachts. Back in 1990 the Honda Accord was a small car. Now it’s huge.
I still remember when the Ford Expedition came out. It was huge back then. Now, SUVs that size and bigger are common place.
Huge cars for an overweight population, and even more sprawl. Yea.. that’s the good life in America!
BTW, what’s the point of living out where there’s open space and hiking trails, if you just sit at home watching TV? The data doesn’t lie, an ever more obese population is evidence of that.[/quote]
My neighbor just got a new car. He’s a really big guy and his dad was a Chargers lineman back in the 60’s. For the last 13 years I have seen nothing but GMC Yukons or Chevy Suburbans in the driveway. Now there is some smallish crossover in it. I figured it was a loaner until I saw his plats on it. I asked him if he left his car in the dryer to long because it shrank.
UCGal
February 28, 2012 @
8:34 AM
Can I update my answer for Can I update my answer for rainy conditions.
My 7 mile commute took 1 hour last night.
@#$#@ rain!!!!
As far as gas guzzling trucks. The hubster has an old dodge ram pickup that only gets about 18mpg. But it’s paid for and reliable, and his commute is less than 10 miles.
We can’t justify buying a more gas friendly car when this one is such a reliable workhorse. It sucks that the entire family can’t fit in it (only seats 3 across the bench… no back seat)… but it runs, it’s paid for, requires about $300/year typically in maintenance. Who knows… my kids may end up driving it.
an
February 28, 2012 @
8:53 AM
Wow, 1 hr. UCGal? Even in Wow, 1 hr. UCGal? Even in the rain, my 3 mile commute still only took 5-10 minutes. I guess that’s the difference between freeway and non-freeway.
NotCranky
February 28, 2012 @
9:09 AM
Be careful what you ask for Be careful what you ask for Brian,
The modifications will make the area a major construction site for at least 20 years. I think you are wrong about the infrastructure. It is doubtful that the electrical capacity is there. The sewers are too small and back up into the streets often already. They keep the restaurants smelling nice out front where there is no plumbing but if you go in the kitchens or, especially out in the alleys lots of them stink from bad plumbing/sewers.
briansd1
February 28, 2012 @
5:08 PM
Jacarandoso wrote:Be careful [quote=Jacarandoso]Be careful what you ask for Brian,
The modifications will make the area a major construction site for at least 20 years. I think you are wrong about the infrastructure. It is doubtful that the electrical capacity is there. The sewers are too small and back up into the streets often already. They keep the restaurants smelling nice out front where there is no plumbing but if you go in the kitchens or, especially out in the alleys lots of them stink from bad plumbing/sewers.[/quote]
Cities are a work in progress so construction doesn’t scare me.
The thing is even if we have to upgrade the infrastructure in the city, higher density would allow us to use exiting roads and not have to pave over virgin land.
Cable, Internet, wireless, can be done much better in high density. Shorter distances to provide infrastructure is always more cost effective.
If people lived above the shops on El Cajon Bl and University Ave, there would be so many more retail opportunities, even enough business for large retailers like Target, Home Depot and Walmart to occupy the ground floor levels.
IMHO, there is too much emphasis on “master plans” that benefit big developers such as McMillan (eg Liberty Station), so we end up with stale, boring places.
I can envision small developers putting up 2-10 unit developments all along El Cajon bl and Univ Ave. The neighborhood could grow organically with lots being developed as they become available. Landowners would also benefits as their lots are upzoned.
Anyway, few people agree with me; so I’m only dreaming. I just have to move to Europe. Just talking for fun.
sdrealtor
February 28, 2012 @
10:11 AM
47 seconds this morning 47 seconds this morning
UCGal
February 28, 2012 @
12:41 PM
AN wrote:Wow, 1 hr. UCGal? [quote=AN]Wow, 1 hr. UCGal? Even in the rain, my 3 mile commute still only took 5-10 minutes. I guess that’s the difference between freeway and non-freeway.[/quote]
Yeah – mira mesa blvd to 805 is never pretty after about 3:30 in the afternoon… and last night it was a nightmare. I got off Mira Mesa Blvd and took Barnes Canyon because I could see the back up on MMB from Pacific Heights. But it was 25 minutes to get from near Building K (Karl Strauss) to actually be on the freeway. So a lot of the problem was not the freeway – it was the backed up access too the freeway. Once on the freeway it moved… maybe at 5mph, but it was moving.
On the flip side- 8 minutes to get to work this morning… pretty typical of my commute in.
an
February 28, 2012 @
1:25 PM
UCGal wrote:Yeah – mira mesa [quote=UCGal]Yeah – mira mesa blvd to 805 is never pretty after about 3:30 in the afternoon… and last night it was a nightmare. I got off Mira Mesa Blvd and took Barnes Canyon because I could see the back up on MMB from Pacific Heights. But it was 25 minutes to get from near Building K (Karl Strauss) to actually be on the freeway. So a lot of the problem was not the freeway – it was the backed up access too the freeway. Once on the freeway it moved… maybe at 5mph, but it was moving.
On the flip side- 8 minutes to get to work this morning… pretty typical of my commute in.[/quote]
I know your commute well. I have your commute every morning (except I come from the west end of UC. Traffic in the morning isn’t bad. It only takes a couple of minutes to get on the 805. If I get the the fast lane quick, it moves quite smoothly. I know MM Blvd getting on 805 is a nightmare. Once, it took me 30 minutes to go one block, from Lusk to Scranton. Luckily, my daily commute goes east so I don’t have to deal with that. I know freeway moves, but I count in the onramp as part of the freeway commute. Hopefully for you, once they finish the construction, it might alleviate some of those traffic.
Coronita
February 28, 2012 @
3:49 PM
AN wrote:UCGal wrote:Yeah – [quote=AN][quote=UCGal]Yeah – mira mesa blvd to 805 is never pretty after about 3:30 in the afternoon… and last night it was a nightmare. I got off Mira Mesa Blvd and took Barnes Canyon because I could see the back up on MMB from Pacific Heights. But it was 25 minutes to get from near Building K (Karl Strauss) to actually be on the freeway. So a lot of the problem was not the freeway – it was the backed up access too the freeway. Once on the freeway it moved… maybe at 5mph, but it was moving.
On the flip side- 8 minutes to get to work this morning… pretty typical of my commute in.[/quote]
I know your commute well. I have your commute every morning (except I come from the west end of UC. Traffic in the morning isn’t bad. It only takes a couple of minutes to get on the 805. If I get the the fast lane quick, it moves quite smoothly. I know MM Blvd getting on 805 is a nightmare. Once, it took me 30 minutes to go one block, from Lusk to Scranton. Luckily, my daily commute goes east so I don’t have to deal with that. I know freeway moves, but I count in the onramp as part of the freeway commute. Hopefully for you, once they finish the construction, it might alleviate some of those traffic.[/quote]
I don’t envy you folks. I hate driving on local roads. I drive 18 minutes almost each day, but it’s a nice counter-traffic drive on 56 and 15.
an
February 28, 2012 @
4:26 PM
flu wrote:I don’t envy you [quote=flu]I don’t envy you folks. I hate driving on local roads. I drive 18 minutes almost each day, but it’s a nice counter-traffic drive on 56 and 15.[/quote]
Counter traffic is nice, but shorter distance is nicer :-D. MM Blvd. isn’t too bad between Lusk and Camino Santa Fe. Some times, when I get lucky and hit all the green, I can get home in <5 minutes.
cvmom
February 29, 2012 @
12:45 PM
UCGal wrote: But it was 25 [quote=UCGal] But it was 25 minutes to get from near Building K (Karl Strauss) to actually be on the freeway. [/quote]
Now I am wondering if you work for the same company I do, or if that is just the common vernacular for Karl Strauss…?
UCGal
February 29, 2012 @
1:49 PM
cvmom wrote:UCGal wrote: But [quote=cvmom][quote=UCGal] But it was 25 minutes to get from near Building K (Karl Strauss) to actually be on the freeway. [/quote]
Now I am wondering if you work for the same company I do, or if that is just the common vernacular for Karl Strauss…?[/quote]
I think it’s common vernacular.
I’ve heard it from Qualcomm folks. from CCAD folks, and from Mot folks. I assume it’s widely used.
Just as a hijack… I wonder how much the Green Flash tasting room is cutting into building K’s happy hour business.
poorgradstudent
February 28, 2012 @
9:27 AM
briansd1 wrote:Talking about [quote=briansd1]Talking about cars, I think that we are getting to back to the days of land-yachts. Back in 1990 the Honda Accord was a small car. Now it’s huge.
I still remember when the Ford Expedition came out. It was huge back then. Now, SUVs that size and bigger are common place. [/quote]
Y’know, I’m not a fan of SUVs and big cars and love fuel efficiency. But I just installed my first car seat in the back of our Honda Civic this weekend (middle position), and I wasn’t prepared for the fact that there’s no way an adult human could comfortably share the back seat with a car seat in our car. We’re not going to run out and buy an SUV (we actually just ran out and bought a FIT), but I’m at least more sympathetic to people with kids who opt for slightly bigger cars. I can only wonder what other trends parenthood will force me to eventually surrender to?
Coronita
February 27, 2012 @
7:58 PM
ocrenter wrote:flu [quote=ocrenter][quote=flu]Wait. This thread hasn’t devolved into a public versus private sector debate yet? What’s wrong with you people???? :)[/quote]
that can be easily arranged with a statement about public employees and their car allowance (for example, we had a neighbor (Escondido PD) who basically drove the police car home daily. His commute is on our dime. Or rather the Escondido citizens’ dime. Is that appropriate? Do we see other private sector employees with the same previlege?[/quote]
Oh geeze… I can always count on you our pri_dk to make a connection 🙂
The-Shoveler
February 27, 2012 @
5:40 PM
Thanks FLU,
Really the F-150 Thanks FLU,
Really the F-150 is too much (too high) truck, something like the stock ranger is about right believe it or not,
Trying to load heavy stuff like bricks or tree’s etc.. is a lot easier in a small truck than a bigger one, and it’s easier to maneuver in tight spots (you can get closer to where you need to unload etc…).
Big trucks really are mostly for show (especially high ones).
Coronita
February 27, 2012 @
8:05 PM
Nor-LA-SD-GUY2 wrote:Thanks [quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]Thanks FLU,
Really the F-150 is too much (too high) truck, something like the stock ranger is about right believe it or not,
Trying to load heavy stuff like bricks or tree’s etc.. is a lot easier in a small truck than a bigger one, and it’s easier to maneuver in tight spots (you can get closer to where you need to unload etc…).
Big trucks really are mostly for show (especially high ones).[/quote]
I’m kinda disappointed they didn’t make a ranger in the U.S….But Come on… How could anyone not like the Ford Raptor?
That’s just one insanely sick truck…
I don’t mind longer commutes I don’t mind longer commutes if it moves.. I hated driving 5 miles in L.A. on the 405.
The-Shoveler
February 28, 2012 @
10:05 AM
I see a minivan, soccer Moms I see a minivan, soccer Moms and a commute into the wilds of suburbia .
Also lining up to deliver and pick up at the school drive through drop off spot.
The-Shoveler
February 29, 2012 @
9:23 AM
Careful you will inspire a Careful you will inspire a entire new generation of realtors to compete against .
I wonder how FLU’s app web site is doing, Got to try that.
ocrenter
February 29, 2012 @
11:47 AM
Looks like the winner is the Looks like the winner is the 10-19 segment. with close to 90% keeping commuting time within 30 minutes. very nice to see!
February 25, 2012 @ 8:59 AM
http://losangeles.cbslocal.co
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/02/25/a-long-commute-can-put-a-short-strain-on-a-relationship-or-marriage/
This was quite obvious, surprised they have not done more articles about the subject.
February 25, 2012 @ 9:19 AM
Mine is 11-15 blocks or ~3
Mine is 11-15 blocks or ~3 miles. Depending on lights, it can be anywhere between 5-10 minutes.
February 25, 2012 @ 9:31 AM
MIne is 16 stairs. Depending
MIne is 16 stairs. Depending upon if I drank wine last night and how much, it can be anywhere from 30 seconds to 30 minutes.
February 27, 2012 @ 3:25 PM
MIne is 16 stairs. Depending
Too bad we can’t like comments here, this one is great.
Josh
February 28, 2012 @ 6:57 PM
barnaby33 wrote:
MIne is 16
[quote=barnaby33]
Too bad we can’t like comments here, this one is great.
Josh[/quote]
I liked this one too!
February 29, 2012 @ 8:49 AM
Been lying in bed watching
Been lying in bed watching Bernanke on cnbc and playing with the iPad. Time for that dreaded commute
February 25, 2012 @ 10:14 AM
One block.
Fill up my gas
One block.
Fill up my gas tank once a month.
February 25, 2012 @ 10:07 AM
seems like a lot of folks are
seems like a lot of folks are telecommuting from home these days, reducing the need to stick to the center of town.
February 25, 2012 @ 10:20 AM
ocrenter wrote:seems like a
[quote=ocrenter]seems like a lot of folks are telecommuting from home these days, reducing the need to stick to the center of town.[/quote]
Humans are social animals.
I’d feel isolated living way out of town.
February 25, 2012 @ 10:23 AM
Yet you sit on a computer all
Yet you sit on a computer all day
February 25, 2012 @ 11:52 AM
Living close to town gives
Living close to town gives more time to do things, including get on the computer.
For outdoor activities, I do have to drive to get there, but it’s worth it. San Diego’s weather makes it possible to schedule regular outdoor sports activities. That’s the best part of San Diego. But
it’s too sunny here though and I have to be mindful of sunburns… I wish the weather were overcast and foggy more often.
February 25, 2012 @ 12:28 PM
briansd1 wrote:Living close
[quote=briansd1]Living close to town gives more time to do things, including get on the computer.
For outdoor activities, I do have to drive to get there, but it’s worth it. San Diego’s weather makes it possible to schedule regular outdoor sports activities. That’s the best part of San Diego. But
it’s too sunny here though and I have to be mindful of sunburns… I wish the weather were overcast and foggy more often.[/quote]
SD is kinda like multiple towns cobbled together. So essentially most of us all live “close to town”. I think most folks end up staying within that 10-20 minute radius for everything they do.
Personally I like the sun. Doesn’t really make sense to have to pay a fog/coastal eddy premium.
February 25, 2012 @ 12:39 PM
briansd1 wrote:I wish the
[quote=briansd1]I wish the weather were overcast and foggy more often.[/quote]You can always move to Seattle. The amount of sunshine is why I love SD.
February 28, 2012 @ 3:49 PM
AN wrote:briansd1 wrote:I
[quote=AN][quote=briansd1]I wish the weather were overcast and foggy more often.[/quote]You can always move to Seattle. The amount of sunshine is why I love SD.[/quote]
It’s too rainy in Seattle.
Sunday was perfect. And today is nice. Last night was perfect. Did you hear that it only rains at night in Camelot?
I love the coastal fog. May Grey and June Gloom are perfect for me.
February 25, 2012 @ 1:40 PM
Sadly, while we were renting
Sadly, while we were renting 5 to 7 minutes. After we bought our place, ~25 min in the morning, and ~ 40 min in the afternoon.
February 25, 2012 @ 4:02 PM
10 miles for me. 12-15
10 miles for me. 12-15 minutes in the car, 45 minutes by bike, 25-30 minutes by Trolley. I try to ride most days.
San Diego’s early boosters designed a “city of villages” – so most people have pedestrian business districts, at least in the older areas. Some in newer areas (post-war) might be able to walk to the strip mall.
February 25, 2012 @ 8:15 PM
So far, 48% of Piggs commute
So far, 48% of Piggs commute 0-10 minutes. Nice!!!
February 25, 2012 @ 10:40 PM
AN wrote:So far, 48% of Piggs
[quote=AN]So far, 48% of Piggs commute 0-10 minutes. Nice!!![/quote]
That’s because Piggs have the jet packs all of us boomers were promised long ago that makes for an easy commute from the far flung areas.
February 25, 2012 @ 11:16 PM
sdrealtor wrote:AN wrote:So
[quote=sdrealtor][quote=AN]So far, 48% of Piggs commute 0-10 minutes. Nice!!![/quote]
That’s because Piggs have the jet packs all of us boomers were promised long ago that makes for an easy commute from the far flung areas.[/quote]
I’m still waiting for my hoverboard. 3 more years to go :-D.
February 26, 2012 @ 11:13 AM
protorio wrote:
San Diego’s
[quote=protorio]
San Diego’s early boosters designed a “city of villages” – so most people have pedestrian business districts, at least in the older areas. Some in newer areas (post-war) might be able to walk to the strip mall.[/quote]
I like the City of Villages concept. It’s not an original plan for the city, but a concept developed only recently to address the problem of sprawl.
IMO, San Diego is just a same version of Orange County (their villages are different smaller cities). San Diego is better because we have a cultural center, Downtown, and Balboa Park.
We talk about the commute, but anyone commute by public transport, foot, or bike?
Navydoc talked about biking from Stonebridge to Mira Mesa and taking the the bus to work. That’s pretty admirable.
I doubt that most people here have ever been to work on bus, so they wouldn’t understand how terribly inconvenient public transport is in San Diego, especially if you work in a business park that is not serviced by a bus line.
February 26, 2012 @ 12:28 PM
Almost 1/3 of piggs work from
Almost 1/3 of piggs work from home. That’s quite different from the general population. I think the statistic on working from home/telecommuting is less than 5% of the general workforce. Of course this site probably pulls in a lot more self employed than the general population as well.
No wonder the prospect of $5 gas doesn’t really matter too much to this group.
In sdrealtor’s defense, I would not consider his driving of clients around town to be commuting. He should be able to fully deduct those drives as work related driving, whereas commute mileage can not be deducted.
February 26, 2012 @ 12:30 PM
ocrenter wrote:Almost 1/3 of
[quote=ocrenter]Almost 1/3 of piggs work from home. That’s quite different from the general population. I think the statistic on working from home/telecommuting is less than 5% of the general workforce. Of course this site probably pulls in a lot more self employed than the general population as well.
No wonder the prospect of $5 gas doesn’t really matter too much to this group.
In sdrealtor’s defense, I would not consider his driving of clients around town to be commuting. He should be able to fully deduct those drives as work related driving, whereas commute mileage can not be deducted.[/quote]
FWIW I think telecommuting is abnormally high in SD overall. Very few large employers for a city this large. Lots of folks who could live anywhere choose to live here for lifestyle.
February 26, 2012 @ 12:47 PM
briansd1 wrote:
I like the
[quote=briansd1]
I like the City of Villages concept.
We talk about the commute, but anyone commute by public transport, foot, or bike?
Navydoc talked about biking from Stonebridge to Mira Mesa and taking the the bus to work. That’s pretty admirable.
I doubt that most people here have ever been to work on bus, so they wouldn’t understand how terribly inconvenient public transport is in San Diego, especially if you work in a business park that is not serviced by a bus line.[/quote]
The city of villages concept also allow for employment centers to be close to housing developments. Hence even though some may consider a place to be far flung, the fact that most everyone in these far flung neighborhoods end up working within the same far flung industrial parks and shop within the same far flung shopping centers end up making the concept of far flung quite dated.
As for public transportation. Problem is people have to be forced into taking public transport. Do you think folks in Tokyo really want to take the subway? The fact that they have no place to park if they drive, along with sky high gas prices, and the slowness due to traffics make the subway the only way to travel and commute. If we create that environment by squeezing all 3 million people in this county into the central city area, we would all be taking public transportation.
February 26, 2012 @ 2:31 PM
It’s all relative ocrenter.
It’s all relative ocrenter.
I have a friend who commutes from Old City Philadelphia to UPenn for work by subway. He could live in the suburbs and drive to work.
He moved to Philly from Houston. I suggested he buys a house 2 miles north of where he lives now, but he said that he doesn’t want to come home to nothing after work.
About the City of Villages, I doubt that people live where they work, unless they telecommute. The way the city is built now, there is not a mix. There are upscale “villages” and lowbrow neighborhoods. People have to commute back and forth depending on their social economic conditions, and their jobs.
As I said before, the “villages” of San Diego is just another Orange County of many cities, except that we have downtown and Balboa Park.
There is less traffic in SD, but there is more sprawl in SD — the distances are greater than in LA and OC.
February 26, 2012 @ 2:45 PM
Your friend doesnt want to
Your friend doesnt want to get shot either which is a distinct likelihood 2 miles North of UPenn.
February 27, 2012 @ 8:37 AM
sdrealtor wrote:Your friend
[quote=sdrealtor]Your friend doesnt want to get shot either which is a distinct likelihood 2 miles North of UPenn.[/quote]
Not 2 miles north of UPenn, but about 1.5 miles north of Old City in Northern liberties. There you can find a brand new house with parking, but compared to Old City, it’s not the same vibe, and not the same walkability. He’s renting a very nice loft in an old 100 yo building.
[quote=ocrenter]
Agree that we do have more sprawl here in SD. Therefore making the city of villages even more essential and true to form.
[/quote]
[quote=ocrenter] More likely, if the employment center grow up along with new housing, the convergence of the living and working spheres tend to happen more.[/quote]
That’s where the City of Villages come in. It’s a work in progress that can only happen with population growth and more density.
I think that urban planning goes in trends… and cities are following the same trend. They go to conferences and all copy each other. IIRC, the woman who came up with the City of Villages concept left to go work for Los Angeles.
LA is trying to use their subway/train to connect all their villages. OC has it’s own cities with their villages.
February 27, 2012 @ 6:56 AM
briansd1 wrote:It’s all
[quote=briansd1]It’s all relative ocrenter.
I have a friend who commutes from Old City Philadelphia to UPenn for work by subway. He could live in the suburbs and drive to work.
He moved to Philly from Houston. I suggested he buys a house 2 miles north of where he lives now, but he said that he doesn’t want to come home to nothing after work.
About the City of Villages, I doubt that people live where they work, unless they telecommute. The way the city is built now, there is not a mix. There are upscale “villages” and lowbrow neighborhoods. People have to commute back and forth depending on their social economic conditions, and their jobs.
As I said before, the “villages” of San Diego is just another Orange County of many cities, except that we have downtown and Balboa Park.
There is less traffic in SD, but there is more sprawl in SD — the distances are greater than in LA and OC.[/quote]
Agree that we do have more sprawl here in SD. Therefore making the city of villages even more essential and true to form.
Also agree that not everyone live close to employment centers and work there. But we do see that pattern. Lots of HP and Sony and previously Nokia folks live in RB, 4S. Qualcomm folks are mostly in CV and Scripps. That’s how these communities ended up having so many Asians and Indians. Carlsbad has its own high tech and biotech cluster and a lot of employees end up buying in the city and adjacent SEH. More likely, if the employment center grow up along with new housing, the convergence of the living and working spheres tend to happen more.
February 27, 2012 @ 12:41 PM
briansd1 wrote:
As I said
[quote=briansd1]
As I said before, the “villages” of San Diego is just another Orange County of many cities, except that we have downtown and Balboa Park.
There is less traffic in SD, but there is more sprawl in SD — the distances are greater than in LA and OC.[/quote]
You are right about “City of Village” being recent. Maybe I confused the content of a California history course with reading the newspaper.
The big difference is how the “villages” here are close together. I ride my bike easily to many of them – North Park, Normal Heights, La Mesa, Hillcrest, University Heights, Mission Hills, Lemon Grove, OB, Kensignton, etc. They all have central, walk-able business districts with eateries, bars, cafes, Main St.-style associations and usually independent businesses (jewlers, lawyers, shoe repair, etc). Then there’s Downtown, the costal cities with their little strips, etc.
Its the business parks – starting in Kearny Mesa, and up through Sorrento Valley and beyond, and the attached sprawl in North County that hiccups things. But that was “modern progress” for the middle class after the war – moving toward a bright future of the automobile, freeways, larger homes, modern technocratic jobs in specialized productivity complexes, privacy, and shopping malls divorced from the spaces they draw customers from.
Study after study shows people want pedestrian culture. Who comes back from Europe saying, “I missed sitting on the 805 in my car. Damn all those trains, trams, and people-watching cafes!” So, the core neighborhoods have become magnets for money and people, and I can only imagine that will increase.
The big cowardice of the city/county is not running the Trolley up University Ave. and up the coast. Instead, the Mission Valley line (which I ride often – living on the Trolley line was a key consideration in my housing search) serves malls and empty stadiums along the route.
Its great to see so many people here work from home – I hope they have a nice cafe to walk to. Maybe something more heterogenous than Starbucks.
February 27, 2012 @ 12:46 PM
protorio wrote:
Its great to
[quote=protorio]
Its great to see so many people here work from home – I hope they have a nice cafe to walk to. Maybe something more heterogenous than Starbucks.[/quote]
actually, it is great to see the overwhelming majority here commute at less than 30 minutes. I doubt the same can be said for LA/OC.
February 27, 2012 @ 3:10 PM
protorio wrote:
Its the
[quote=protorio]
Its the business parks – starting in Kearny Mesa, and up through Sorrento Valley and beyond, and the attached sprawl in North County that hiccups things. But that was “modern progress” for the middle class after the war – moving toward a bright future of the automobile, freeways, larger homes, modern technocratic jobs in specialized productivity complexes, privacy, and shopping malls divorced from the spaces they draw customers from.[/quote]
I absolute agree with you.
The reason people moved to the suburbs is for better houses and lower ppsf. I can understand that. However, building technology has changed. We can now have roomy, airy homes in the city, if there is the will to build them.
For example, when I look at El Cajon Bl, and University Ave, I see so many missed opportunities for condo living right above the shops, using the same roads and the same infrastructure.
As I mentioned before, urban planning goes in trends. The post war culture created planning where businesses were completed separated from housing estates built around the car.
You said it really well about visiting European Cities. We generally have fun in the urban core, or the main business drag of the cities. We do not visit the suburbs.
I would never expect American cities to have the density of European capitals. When I think a a liveable urban environment that could be a model for America, I think of Neuilly, outside Paris (a place tourists never visit because it’s considered suburban).
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sugexp=ernk_fspiked&gs_nf=1&tok=AcOAWFOkE5di1CuQe9QSYQ&cp=17&gs_id=3y&xhr=t&q=neuilly-sur-seine&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&biw=1449&bih=852&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=ogZMT5uSKYWmsAKU_NAB
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuilly-sur-Seine
Some new developments I like in SD are the Egyptian in Hillcrest, 1 Mission in Mission Hills, and La Boheme in North Park. Those developments are not cheap but I believe that prices would fall if they were duplicated thousands of times over in the city. I’d also like to see 3-4 story townhouses with garage built in the city.
I know, most Americans would think of my ideas as snobbish and crazy. So I think that we are condemned to eternal sprawl. When the hydrogen and long-range electric cars are invented, then we can sprawl out even more.
February 27, 2012 @ 3:27 PM
“long-range electric cars are
“long-range electric cars are invented”
Long range electric cars are here, even 76 mile per gallon Fords are here,
BUT!!! They really have no interested in selling cheap economic cars in the U.S. , They want to market 30-50K gas guzzlers and exotic electric hybrids, or fancy 100K 300 mile range electric sports cars.
But Yea, Sprawl, get used to it. The Cities are great for younger (or young at hart) grownups but they are lousy for rising kids or having a nice patio with a view at a reasonable price too.
February 27, 2012 @ 9:48 PM
briansd1 wrote:protorio
[quote=briansd1][quote=protorio]
Its the business parks – starting in Kearny Mesa, and up through Sorrento Valley and beyond, and the attached sprawl in North County that hiccups things. But that was “modern progress” for the middle class after the war – moving toward a bright future of the automobile, freeways, larger homes, modern technocratic jobs in specialized productivity complexes, privacy, and shopping malls divorced from the spaces they draw customers from.[/quote]
I absolute agree with you.
The reason people moved to the suburbs is for better houses and lower ppsf. I can understand that. However, building technology has changed. We can now have roomy, airy homes in the city, if there is the will to build them.
For example, when I look at El Cajon Bl, and University Ave, I see so many missed opportunities for condo living right above the shops, using the same roads and the same infrastructure.
As I mentioned before, urban planning goes in trends. The post war culture created planning where businesses were completed separated from housing estates built around the car.
You said it really well about visiting European Cities. We generally have fun in the urban core, or the main business drag of the cities. We do not visit the suburbs.
I would never expect American cities to have the density of European capitals. When I think a a liveable urban environment that could be a model for America, I think of Neuilly, outside Paris (a place tourists never visit because it’s considered suburban).
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sugexp=ernk_fspiked&gs_nf=1&tok=AcOAWFOkE5di1CuQe9QSYQ&cp=17&gs_id=3y&xhr=t&q=neuilly-sur-seine&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&biw=1449&bih=852&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=ogZMT5uSKYWmsAKU_NAB
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuilly-sur-Seine
Some new developments I like in SD are the Egyptian in Hillcrest, 1 Mission in Mission Hills, and La Boheme in North Park. Those developments are not cheap but I believe that prices would fall if they were duplicated thousands of times over in the city. I’d also like to see 3-4 story townhouses with garage built in the city.
I know, most Americans would think of my ideas as snobbish and crazy. So I think that we are condemned to eternal sprawl. When the hydrogen and long-range electric cars are invented, then we can sprawl out even more.[/quote]
Brian
Just so you know the hardest properties to sell that i have ever listed are 3 story townhouses. They are the kiss of death. Even in the boom of the bubble market no one wanted them. Now you say 4 story townhouses??? I say good luck!!
February 28, 2012 @ 10:25 AM
sdrealtor wrote:Brian
Just so
[quote=sdrealtor]Brian
Just so you know the hardest properties to sell that i have ever listed are 3 story townhouses. They are the kiss of death. Even in the boom of the bubble market no one wanted them. Now you say 4 story townhouses??? I say good luck!![/quote]
I could believe that few would want these in SD County as they are like living in a multi-level “traincar.” However, they are very common in SF but are not as narrow as a 14′ “traincar.” Each floor constitutes a “flat” and the vast majority of these buildings have no HOA. The garages are on the bottom. Most were built post-fire (1907-1917).
Each “flat” ranges from 1300-2600 sf (2-4 bdrms), depending on how wide the lot it sits on is (residential buildings did not need side clearance back in the day). Their facades often sport 1-2 “real” bay windows (where the REAL wood floor is actually half of a hexagon – NOT A KIT) and have hot-water heat! Open stairs in front lead to the second-floor flat (over the garages) with closed stairs leading to subsequent-floor flats.
This type of housing is not common in SD County and I don’t see it ever being adopted. Urban residents in SD enjoy more of an outdoor lifestyle and enjoy their yards year round. Sitting out there on a collection of “rocks,” SF is windy with chilly nights at least ten months per year (yes, even in July). I’ve been there when wind gusts were 150 mph and many thousands of discarded x-mas trees and trash/recycle carts rolled 1+ mile downhill. The warmest months in SF are September and October.
February 28, 2012 @ 12:27 PM
There is a certain orthodoxy
There is a certain orthodoxy to the suburban lifestyle that people are used to and unwillingness to change.
On the part of the planners there’s also unwillingness to permit anything that doesn’t have certain number of parking spaces per 100 residents, setback, etc…
The 3 story townhouses that sdrealtor mentions are not useful. It also depends on location.
Now imagine 4 story townhouses built to the curb, to the lot lines, with no HOA or MR. Garage on the bottom and 1000sf per floor. The garage might be 600sf so there would be 400sf at the bottom. That makes a 3400sf house with bay windows and balconies on every floor, and roof top terrace with a view of the city.
Sell those houses for $200/sf in North Park, Normal Heights, Hillcrest, Mission Hills, Bay Park, on the edge of downtown, and they would sell like hotcakes. People would move from the suburbs. *
Some houses could have garages, other could have shops or living space.
The problem, in my view, is people won’t allow any building and changes that don’t conform the the existing old wood bungalows.
Cities are made to change, to be town-down and rebuilt to fit the needs of the new citizens.
* edit: I changed moving “back” from the suburbs because, people never moved away to the suburbs. They know nothing but the quasi suburban lifestyle built around the car, even if they lived within the city borders.
February 28, 2012 @ 3:02 PM
These days politicians talk
These days politicians talk about the “public square” a lot.
Where the heck is the public square? I sure hope that we can drive to it and that there’s free parking for everyone.
February 25, 2012 @ 9:15 PM
Usually just under 10 mins in
Usually just under 10 mins in the morning… usually around 20 mins on the way home. It’s only 7 miles but Mira Mesa Blvd to south 805 totally sucks in the afternoon/evening.
February 26, 2012 @ 10:52 AM
My case is more an outlier
My case is more an outlier situation, sometimes I drive, sometimes I don’t, sometimes I am on a plane and I can have a commute of 16-20 hours.
I am sure some piggs drive as part of their jobs, so does commuting occur all day in this case or does the commute end when they walk to their cars to start the day ?
(Really realtors don’t need to drive ?)
February 26, 2012 @ 11:01 AM
Nor-LA-SD-GUY2 wrote:
(Really
[quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]
(Really realtors don’t need to drive ?)[/quote]
Apparently, the main part of a Realtor’s job it not showing houses but sitting a home doing paperwork. 😉
In this case, is the drive considered a commute?
February 26, 2012 @ 12:29 PM
briansd1 wrote:Nor-LA-SD-GUY2
[quote=briansd1][quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]
(Really realtors don’t need to drive ?)[/quote]
Apparently, the main part of a Realtor’s job it not showing houses but sitting a home doing paperwork. 😉
In this case, is the drive considered a commute?[/quote]
LOL, I drive constantly but commute to office is the stairs
February 27, 2012 @ 9:04 AM
I average about 25 minutes,
I average about 25 minutes, but that’s because I’m not willing to shift my schedule slightly to avoid traffic. Today was closer to 20 minutes.
February 27, 2012 @ 11:10 AM
I drive about 30 min.
But my
I drive about 30 min.
But my schedule is such that I don’t hit traffic.
I only wish my commute were shorter.
If you think in terms of distance, it’s amazing how much we generally drive. In many communities, 5 miles to get to the freeway is normal.
February 27, 2012 @ 2:14 PM
One point for Brian, Seems
One point for Brian, Seems The car companies cannot keep up with demand,
Whatever the average commute for L.A. is I am sure it is longer, there is nothing like trying to make time on the 405 at 7:00 AM, sometimes 20 miles can take 2 hours. ditto for the 91.
I would go so far as to say SD in general are commutaphobic’s (well at least to someone from L.A.).
February 27, 2012 @ 3:56 PM
Also I was reading today that
Also I was reading today that absent the situation in Iran, we would be looking at 3 dollar gas. whooohooo, where’s that New Ford F-150,(just kidding but I really do need a new small truck, I got stuff to haul).
February 27, 2012 @ 4:28 PM
Nor-LA-SD-GUY2 wrote:Also I
[quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]Also I was reading today that absent the situation in Iran, we would be looking at 3 dollar gas. whooohooo, where’s that New Ford F-150,(just kidding but I really do need a new small truck, I got stuff to haul).[/quote]
Hey don’t nark on the F-150. It’s not as much of a gas guzzler as you think. The ecoboost V-6 packs a pretty good punch, and isn’t that bad on fuel economy. It’s about the same of an Acura MDX…
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32123
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/31947.shtml
Plus the MDX requires premium, versus the F-150 takes regular 87…
February 27, 2012 @ 4:24 PM
Wait. This thread hasn’t
Wait. This thread hasn’t devolved into a public versus private sector debate yet? What’s wrong with you people???? 🙂
February 27, 2012 @ 5:58 PM
flu wrote:Wait. This thread
[quote=flu]Wait. This thread hasn’t devolved into a public versus private sector debate yet? What’s wrong with you people???? :)[/quote]
that can be easily arranged with a statement about public employees and their car allowance (for example, we had a neighbor (Escondido PD) who basically drove the police car home daily. His commute is on our dime. Or rather the Escondido citizens’ dime. Is that appropriate? Do we see other private sector employees with the same previlege?
February 27, 2012 @ 6:19 PM
Talking about cars, I think
Talking about cars, I think that we are getting to back to the days of land-yachts. Back in 1990 the Honda Accord was a small car. Now it’s huge.
I still remember when the Ford Expedition came out. It was huge back then. Now, SUVs that size and bigger are common place.
Huge cars for an overweight population, and even more sprawl. Yea.. that’s the good life in America!
BTW, what’s the point of living out where there’s open space and hiking trails, if you just sit at home watching TV? The data doesn’t lie, an ever more obese population is evidence of that.
February 27, 2012 @ 7:12 PM
briansd1 wrote:Talking about
[quote=briansd1]Talking about cars, I think that we are getting to back to the days of land-yachts. Back in 1990 the Honda Accord was a small car. Now it’s huge.
I still remember when the Ford Expedition came out. It was huge back then. Now, SUVs that size and bigger are common place.
Huge cars for an overweight population, and even more sprawl. Yea.. that’s the good life in America!
BTW, what’s the point of living out where there’s open space and hiking trails, if you just sit at home watching TV? The data doesn’t lie, an ever more obese population is evidence of that.[/quote]
There’s no question people living in real cities using public transport are more healthy because of their need to incorporate walking as part of their commute. Because of our reliance on cars, we are at a disadvantage. Assuming both a San Diegan and a New Yorker gets home from work at 6 pm, it is safe to assume the New Yorker at least logged half an hour of fast paced walking vs none by the San Diegan.
February 27, 2012 @ 7:57 PM
briansd1 wrote:Talking about
[quote=briansd1]Talking about cars, I think that we are getting to back to the days of land-yachts. Back in 1990 the Honda Accord was a small car. Now it’s huge.
I still remember when the Ford Expedition came out. It was huge back then. Now, SUVs that size and bigger are common place.
Huge cars for an overweight population, and even more sprawl. Yea.. that’s the good life in America!
BTW, what’s the point of living out where there’s open space and hiking trails, if you just sit at home watching TV? The data doesn’t lie, an ever more obese population is evidence of that.[/quote]
Brian this is true. Actually I was comparing the size of an X5 to to a 5 series. Length and width-wise they are nearly the same. Things like the toyota camry are now considered full size cars.
The bigger size though however isn’t just about people getting bigger. For one, a lot of these new ares are german, and made for europeans, and they aren’t bloating like you think Americans are. The current generation 1 series is the size of the previous older generation 3 series. And the 3 series these days are closer to the older 5 series size…Audi/VW is the same way. The days of the current A3 and Jetta is closer to the size of the previous A4 and Passat. I suspect a lot of this new bloat is related to safety regulations. For example, people ask why the latest european cars has such an high hood. It’s related to european pedestrian crash regulations.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/tag/pedestrian-crash-standards/
And unfortunately, having a bigger car can be a safer thing…I would never drive a Smart for Two for a lot of reasons… Physics…..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExQUGk12S8U
Smaller cars might also be more expensive to insure, reducing the potential savings for being a more fuel efficient car…
February 28, 2012 @ 2:53 PM
flu wrote: For one, a lot of
[quote=flu] For one, a lot of these new ares are german, and made for europeans, and they aren’t bloating like you think Americans are. The current generation 1 series is the size of the previous older generation 3 series. And the 3 series these days are closer to the older 5 series size…Audi/VW is the same way. The days of the current A3 and Jetta is closer to the size of the previous A4 and Passat. I suspect a lot of this new bloat is related to safety regulations. For example, people ask why the latest european cars has such an high hood. It’s related to european pedestrian crash regulations.[/quote]
Yes, safety regulations are causing bigger and heavier cars…. but it’s a chicken and egg situation because bigger cars require that the next cars be even bigger for better safety.
I think that many German cars are made for the American consumers though. We are a big market. Cup holders are made for Americans for sure… and even the German cars have them now.
Long term, I’m betting on the Chinese car makers… Through government mandates, subsidies and support, the Chinese car makers will be able to develop new types of automobiles.
I can see a time when China mandates that all cars driven in Beijing and Shanghai be zero emission cars. That would instantly make China a huge market where the technology will be developed.
February 27, 2012 @ 9:51 PM
briansd1 wrote:Talking about
[quote=briansd1]Talking about cars, I think that we are getting to back to the days of land-yachts. Back in 1990 the Honda Accord was a small car. Now it’s huge.
I still remember when the Ford Expedition came out. It was huge back then. Now, SUVs that size and bigger are common place.
Huge cars for an overweight population, and even more sprawl. Yea.. that’s the good life in America!
BTW, what’s the point of living out where there’s open space and hiking trails, if you just sit at home watching TV? The data doesn’t lie, an ever more obese population is evidence of that.[/quote]
My neighbor just got a new car. He’s a really big guy and his dad was a Chargers lineman back in the 60’s. For the last 13 years I have seen nothing but GMC Yukons or Chevy Suburbans in the driveway. Now there is some smallish crossover in it. I figured it was a loaner until I saw his plats on it. I asked him if he left his car in the dryer to long because it shrank.
February 28, 2012 @ 8:34 AM
Can I update my answer for
Can I update my answer for rainy conditions.
My 7 mile commute took 1 hour last night.
@#$#@ rain!!!!
As far as gas guzzling trucks. The hubster has an old dodge ram pickup that only gets about 18mpg. But it’s paid for and reliable, and his commute is less than 10 miles.
We can’t justify buying a more gas friendly car when this one is such a reliable workhorse. It sucks that the entire family can’t fit in it (only seats 3 across the bench… no back seat)… but it runs, it’s paid for, requires about $300/year typically in maintenance. Who knows… my kids may end up driving it.
February 28, 2012 @ 8:53 AM
Wow, 1 hr. UCGal? Even in
Wow, 1 hr. UCGal? Even in the rain, my 3 mile commute still only took 5-10 minutes. I guess that’s the difference between freeway and non-freeway.
February 28, 2012 @ 9:09 AM
Be careful what you ask for
Be careful what you ask for Brian,
The modifications will make the area a major construction site for at least 20 years. I think you are wrong about the infrastructure. It is doubtful that the electrical capacity is there. The sewers are too small and back up into the streets often already. They keep the restaurants smelling nice out front where there is no plumbing but if you go in the kitchens or, especially out in the alleys lots of them stink from bad plumbing/sewers.
February 28, 2012 @ 5:08 PM
Jacarandoso wrote:Be careful
[quote=Jacarandoso]Be careful what you ask for Brian,
The modifications will make the area a major construction site for at least 20 years. I think you are wrong about the infrastructure. It is doubtful that the electrical capacity is there. The sewers are too small and back up into the streets often already. They keep the restaurants smelling nice out front where there is no plumbing but if you go in the kitchens or, especially out in the alleys lots of them stink from bad plumbing/sewers.[/quote]
Cities are a work in progress so construction doesn’t scare me.
The thing is even if we have to upgrade the infrastructure in the city, higher density would allow us to use exiting roads and not have to pave over virgin land.
Cable, Internet, wireless, can be done much better in high density. Shorter distances to provide infrastructure is always more cost effective.
If people lived above the shops on El Cajon Bl and University Ave, there would be so many more retail opportunities, even enough business for large retailers like Target, Home Depot and Walmart to occupy the ground floor levels.
IMHO, there is too much emphasis on “master plans” that benefit big developers such as McMillan (eg Liberty Station), so we end up with stale, boring places.
I can envision small developers putting up 2-10 unit developments all along El Cajon bl and Univ Ave. The neighborhood could grow organically with lots being developed as they become available. Landowners would also benefits as their lots are upzoned.
Anyway, few people agree with me; so I’m only dreaming. I just have to move to Europe. Just talking for fun.
February 28, 2012 @ 10:11 AM
47 seconds this morning
47 seconds this morning
February 28, 2012 @ 12:41 PM
AN wrote:Wow, 1 hr. UCGal?
[quote=AN]Wow, 1 hr. UCGal? Even in the rain, my 3 mile commute still only took 5-10 minutes. I guess that’s the difference between freeway and non-freeway.[/quote]
Yeah – mira mesa blvd to 805 is never pretty after about 3:30 in the afternoon… and last night it was a nightmare. I got off Mira Mesa Blvd and took Barnes Canyon because I could see the back up on MMB from Pacific Heights. But it was 25 minutes to get from near Building K (Karl Strauss) to actually be on the freeway. So a lot of the problem was not the freeway – it was the backed up access too the freeway. Once on the freeway it moved… maybe at 5mph, but it was moving.
On the flip side- 8 minutes to get to work this morning… pretty typical of my commute in.
February 28, 2012 @ 1:25 PM
UCGal wrote:Yeah – mira mesa
[quote=UCGal]Yeah – mira mesa blvd to 805 is never pretty after about 3:30 in the afternoon… and last night it was a nightmare. I got off Mira Mesa Blvd and took Barnes Canyon because I could see the back up on MMB from Pacific Heights. But it was 25 minutes to get from near Building K (Karl Strauss) to actually be on the freeway. So a lot of the problem was not the freeway – it was the backed up access too the freeway. Once on the freeway it moved… maybe at 5mph, but it was moving.
On the flip side- 8 minutes to get to work this morning… pretty typical of my commute in.[/quote]
I know your commute well. I have your commute every morning (except I come from the west end of UC. Traffic in the morning isn’t bad. It only takes a couple of minutes to get on the 805. If I get the the fast lane quick, it moves quite smoothly. I know MM Blvd getting on 805 is a nightmare. Once, it took me 30 minutes to go one block, from Lusk to Scranton. Luckily, my daily commute goes east so I don’t have to deal with that. I know freeway moves, but I count in the onramp as part of the freeway commute. Hopefully for you, once they finish the construction, it might alleviate some of those traffic.
February 28, 2012 @ 3:49 PM
AN wrote:UCGal wrote:Yeah –
[quote=AN][quote=UCGal]Yeah – mira mesa blvd to 805 is never pretty after about 3:30 in the afternoon… and last night it was a nightmare. I got off Mira Mesa Blvd and took Barnes Canyon because I could see the back up on MMB from Pacific Heights. But it was 25 minutes to get from near Building K (Karl Strauss) to actually be on the freeway. So a lot of the problem was not the freeway – it was the backed up access too the freeway. Once on the freeway it moved… maybe at 5mph, but it was moving.
On the flip side- 8 minutes to get to work this morning… pretty typical of my commute in.[/quote]
I know your commute well. I have your commute every morning (except I come from the west end of UC. Traffic in the morning isn’t bad. It only takes a couple of minutes to get on the 805. If I get the the fast lane quick, it moves quite smoothly. I know MM Blvd getting on 805 is a nightmare. Once, it took me 30 minutes to go one block, from Lusk to Scranton. Luckily, my daily commute goes east so I don’t have to deal with that. I know freeway moves, but I count in the onramp as part of the freeway commute. Hopefully for you, once they finish the construction, it might alleviate some of those traffic.[/quote]
I don’t envy you folks. I hate driving on local roads. I drive 18 minutes almost each day, but it’s a nice counter-traffic drive on 56 and 15.
February 28, 2012 @ 4:26 PM
flu wrote:I don’t envy you
[quote=flu]I don’t envy you folks. I hate driving on local roads. I drive 18 minutes almost each day, but it’s a nice counter-traffic drive on 56 and 15.[/quote]
Counter traffic is nice, but shorter distance is nicer :-D. MM Blvd. isn’t too bad between Lusk and Camino Santa Fe. Some times, when I get lucky and hit all the green, I can get home in <5 minutes.
February 29, 2012 @ 12:45 PM
UCGal wrote: But it was 25
[quote=UCGal] But it was 25 minutes to get from near Building K (Karl Strauss) to actually be on the freeway. [/quote]
Now I am wondering if you work for the same company I do, or if that is just the common vernacular for Karl Strauss…?
February 29, 2012 @ 1:49 PM
cvmom wrote:UCGal wrote: But
[quote=cvmom][quote=UCGal] But it was 25 minutes to get from near Building K (Karl Strauss) to actually be on the freeway. [/quote]
Now I am wondering if you work for the same company I do, or if that is just the common vernacular for Karl Strauss…?[/quote]
I think it’s common vernacular.
I’ve heard it from Qualcomm folks. from CCAD folks, and from Mot folks. I assume it’s widely used.
Just as a hijack… I wonder how much the Green Flash tasting room is cutting into building K’s happy hour business.
February 28, 2012 @ 9:27 AM
briansd1 wrote:Talking about
[quote=briansd1]Talking about cars, I think that we are getting to back to the days of land-yachts. Back in 1990 the Honda Accord was a small car. Now it’s huge.
I still remember when the Ford Expedition came out. It was huge back then. Now, SUVs that size and bigger are common place. [/quote]
Y’know, I’m not a fan of SUVs and big cars and love fuel efficiency. But I just installed my first car seat in the back of our Honda Civic this weekend (middle position), and I wasn’t prepared for the fact that there’s no way an adult human could comfortably share the back seat with a car seat in our car. We’re not going to run out and buy an SUV (we actually just ran out and bought a FIT), but I’m at least more sympathetic to people with kids who opt for slightly bigger cars. I can only wonder what other trends parenthood will force me to eventually surrender to?
February 27, 2012 @ 7:58 PM
ocrenter wrote:flu
[quote=ocrenter][quote=flu]Wait. This thread hasn’t devolved into a public versus private sector debate yet? What’s wrong with you people???? :)[/quote]
that can be easily arranged with a statement about public employees and their car allowance (for example, we had a neighbor (Escondido PD) who basically drove the police car home daily. His commute is on our dime. Or rather the Escondido citizens’ dime. Is that appropriate? Do we see other private sector employees with the same previlege?[/quote]
Oh geeze… I can always count on you our pri_dk to make a connection 🙂
February 27, 2012 @ 5:40 PM
Thanks FLU,
Really the F-150
Thanks FLU,
Really the F-150 is too much (too high) truck, something like the stock ranger is about right believe it or not,
Trying to load heavy stuff like bricks or tree’s etc.. is a lot easier in a small truck than a bigger one, and it’s easier to maneuver in tight spots (you can get closer to where you need to unload etc…).
Big trucks really are mostly for show (especially high ones).
February 27, 2012 @ 8:05 PM
Nor-LA-SD-GUY2 wrote:Thanks
[quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]Thanks FLU,
Really the F-150 is too much (too high) truck, something like the stock ranger is about right believe it or not,
Trying to load heavy stuff like bricks or tree’s etc.. is a lot easier in a small truck than a bigger one, and it’s easier to maneuver in tight spots (you can get closer to where you need to unload etc…).
Big trucks really are mostly for show (especially high ones).[/quote]
I’m kinda disappointed they didn’t make a ranger in the U.S….But Come on… How could anyone not like the Ford Raptor?
That’s just one insanely sick truck…
I’ll take one in orange, thank you.
http://www.fordraptor.net/
February 27, 2012 @ 8:04 PM
I don’t mind longer commutes
I don’t mind longer commutes if it moves.. I hated driving 5 miles in L.A. on the 405.
February 28, 2012 @ 10:05 AM
I see a minivan, soccer Moms
I see a minivan, soccer Moms and a commute into the wilds of suburbia .
Also lining up to deliver and pick up at the school drive through drop off spot.
February 29, 2012 @ 9:23 AM
Careful you will inspire a
Careful you will inspire a entire new generation of realtors to compete against .
I wonder how FLU’s app web site is doing, Got to try that.
February 29, 2012 @ 11:47 AM
Looks like the winner is the
Looks like the winner is the 10-19 segment. with close to 90% keeping commuting time within 30 minutes. very nice to see!