The trend of cities banning cars

General Discussion about electric vehicles.
miro13car   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1724
Joined: Mar 26 2007 1:30pm
Location: Calgary, Canada

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by miro13car » Feb 10 2020 5:45pm

" A preference for sprawl and waste is built into all our legal structures. Ecovillage pioneers are either at odds with the law and risk having things torn down, or are forced into building overly large, energy wasteful compliant solutions though "

couldnt agree more..
NAmerica city bylaws promote waste and overbuild.
No developer can build small below say 600sqfoot houses
banks rule our lives .
Eplus, Bionx

billvon   1 GW

1 GW
Posts: 3051
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by billvon » Feb 10 2020 7:20pm

miro13car wrote:
Feb 10 2020 5:45pm
No developer can build small below say 600sqfoot houses
banks rule our lives .
They can easily do that. No one buys them when they can buy a 1200 sq ft house for just a little more.
--bill von

miro13car   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1724
Joined: Mar 26 2007 1:30pm
Location: Calgary, Canada

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by miro13car » Feb 11 2020 9:21am

I am not gonna argue with you why small houses are not build in NAmerica.
fact is that property taxes are based on sqfoots, right? heating bills,etc.
belive me
many people would live in small houses but developers dont build them, why?
because they make less money on them.
Eplus, Bionx

CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING   10 W

10 W
Posts: 89
Joined: Jun 15 2019 8:40pm

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING » Feb 11 2020 11:47am

The reason for the car-bans can be easily summed up with a random discussion I had with a co-worker from Greece; she told me the real "I'm not in Europe" moment for her was when she was on an interstate and saw American Graveyards. They simply don't have the space in Europe, so most of the dead are cremated.
And that's literally the whole reason. Most of these cities looking at partial car bans in specific areas are doing so because they were simply not built for cars and getting rid of them would just be *better* than shoving a big, square peg into a tiny hole.
miro13car wrote:
Feb 11 2020 9:21am
I am not gonna argue with you why small houses are not build in NAmerica.
fact is that property taxes are based on sqfoots, right? heating bills,etc.
belive me
many people would live in small houses but developers dont build them, why?
because they make less money on them.
No, its because unless you build the home for very cheap (i.e. you did most the work yourself) it makes little fiscal sense to build a 600 sq/ft versus say, 1200 sq/ft after factoring labor costs and future "sell-ability" of the home. Lurk Tiny House forums and you'll find plenty of them are basically just mobile homes for rich old whites and they tend to stay in them for about ~5 years.

billvon   1 GW

1 GW
Posts: 3051
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by billvon » Feb 11 2020 11:57am

miro13car wrote:
Feb 11 2020 9:21am
because they make less money on them.
In a way, yes. Developers choose profit margins for all their homes. But since few people want small homes compared to large homes, they can't sell very many and therefore don't make as much money on them.
--bill von

User avatar
Dauntless   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 8314
Joined: May 29 2010 1:49am
Location: Coordinates: 33°52′48″N 117°55′43″W

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by Dauntless » Feb 11 2020 3:56pm

miro13car wrote:
Feb 11 2020 9:21am
I am not gonna argue with you why small houses are not build in NAmerica.
Don't worry, he'll do fine without you.
fact is that property taxes are based on sqfoots, right? heating bills,etc.
belive me
many people would live in small houses but developers dont build them, why?
There's more to it. We have a little neighborhood of old 600sqft. or less my sister wanted to buy in but they did not become available. Owners put relatives into apartment sized without the crowding but with a small yard of its' own. Just blocks from me there are many under 1,000 sqft. homes on under 4,000sqft. lots that sell easily, for noticibly less than the not much bigger on still bigger lots. Many of these were built more than 100 years ago. In my neighborhood you get the terribly inflated price by waiting patiently for someone who can pay it to come along.

In my city, probably in most, you cannot subdivide residential lots less than 6,000sqft. This dictates a typical 1,500sqft. build. Cities ruthlessly force the most expensive build possibles to force the highest property tax they can. Blood money. Oh gee, why are so many employed people homeless? I think the property taxes say my house is worth about 8% of the value of my lot. Build 2 hhalf sized houses on my lot split in half and the property tax should be plenty, but that would require politicians admitting they're wrong, wouldn't it? Look at the politician dance Buttiggieg is doing over his time as mayor, doesn't want to admit. . . .
Any sufficiently advanced technology is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC!
- Arthur C. Clarke

billvon   1 GW

1 GW
Posts: 3051
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by billvon » Feb 11 2020 9:58pm

CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING wrote:
Feb 11 2020 11:47am
And that's literally the whole reason. Most of these cities looking at partial car bans in specific areas are doing so because they were simply not built for cars and getting rid of them would just be *better* than shoving a big, square peg into a tiny hole.
Yep. And that's true of some US cities as well. Boston was built for cows, not cars, and has endless problems with traffic. But Phoenix, which has seen most of its expansion after 1950, was designed with cars in mind.
--bill von

CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING   10 W

10 W
Posts: 89
Joined: Jun 15 2019 8:40pm

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING » Feb 12 2020 10:59am

Dauntless wrote:
Feb 11 2020 3:56pm
miro13car wrote:
Feb 11 2020 9:21am
fact is that property taxes are based on sqfoots, right? heating bills,etc.
belive me
many people would live in small houses but developers dont build them, why?
There's more to it. We have a little neighborhood of old 600sqft. or less my sister wanted to buy in but they did not become available. Owners put relatives into apartment sized without the crowding but with a small yard of its' own. Just blocks from me there are many under 1,000 sqft. homes on under 4,000sqft. lots that sell easily, for noticibly less than the not much bigger on still bigger lots. Many of these were built more than 100 years ago. In my neighborhood you get the terribly inflated price by waiting patiently for someone who can pay it to come along.

In my city, probably in most, you cannot subdivide residential lots less than 6,000sqft. This dictates a typical 1,500sqft. build. Cities ruthlessly force the most expensive build possibles to force the highest property tax they can. Blood money. Oh gee, why are so many employed people homeless? I think the property taxes say my house is worth about 8% of the value of my lot. Build 2 hhalf sized houses on my lot split in half and the property tax should be plenty, but that would require politicians admitting they're wrong, wouldn't it? Look at the politician dance Buttiggieg is doing over his time as mayor, doesn't want to admit. . . .
Check this out Dauntless- the Mayo Pete Platitude Generator! I cannot wait to see him at super Tuesday.
mayopete.io

Property Taxes are the mistress of the political world; you love them, but can't show you do. They're a guaranteed check that's as reliable as gravity and TONS of work goes into doctoring them to extract the most milk from the smallest amount of moo. Tons of places have tax brackets that penalize smaller and smaller homes that aren't apartments in the name of "keeping our neighboorhood nice/consistent/ect." but in reality it's just a method of gentrification. It's one of the things I think Texas (and now the capital of Minnesota) did well was having no Zoning commission, though that does mean you have the odd high-rise apartment in a neighborhood.
billvon wrote:
Feb 11 2020 9:58pm
Yep. And that's true of some US cities as well. Boston was built for cows, not cars, and has endless problems with traffic. But Phoenix, which has seen most of its expansion after 1950, was designed with cars in mind.
Yup! I remember seeing those parts in the quarter when I was there nearly 20 years ago- and much of the east cost is that way too. It's probably the genesis of my interest in odd EBikes and weird 3-wheelers; realizing how reliant us in the rust belt are on cars.

CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING   10 W

10 W
Posts: 89
Joined: Jun 15 2019 8:40pm

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING » Feb 12 2020 11:00am

Dauntless wrote:
Feb 11 2020 3:56pm
miro13car wrote:
Feb 11 2020 9:21am
fact is that property taxes are based on sqfoots, right? heating bills,etc.
belive me
many people would live in small houses but developers dont build them, why?
There's more to it. We have a little neighborhood of old 600sqft. or less my sister wanted to buy in but they did not become available. Owners put relatives into apartment sized without the crowding but with a small yard of its' own. Just blocks from me there are many under 1,000 sqft. homes on under 4,000sqft. lots that sell easily, for noticibly less than the not much bigger on still bigger lots. Many of these were built more than 100 years ago. In my neighborhood you get the terribly inflated price by waiting patiently for someone who can pay it to come along.

In my city, probably in most, you cannot subdivide residential lots less than 6,000sqft. This dictates a typical 1,500sqft. build. Cities ruthlessly force the most expensive build possibles to force the highest property tax they can. Blood money. Oh gee, why are so many employed people homeless? I think the property taxes say my house is worth about 8% of the value of my lot. Build 2 hhalf sized houses on my lot split in half and the property tax should be plenty, but that would require politicians admitting they're wrong, wouldn't it? Look at the politician dance Buttiggieg is doing over his time as mayor, doesn't want to admit. . . .
Check this out Dauntless- the Mayo Pete Platitude Generator! I cannot wait to see him at super Tuesday.
mayopete.io

Property Taxes are the mistress of the political world; you love them, but can't show you do. They're a guaranteed check that's as reliable as gravity and TONS of work goes into doctoring them to extract the most milk from the smallest amount of moo. Tons of places have tax brackets that penalize smaller and smaller homes that aren't apartments in the name of "keeping our neighboorhood nice/consistent/ect." but in reality it's just a method of gentrification. It's one of the things I think Texas (and now the capital of Minnesota) did well was having no Zoning commission, though that does mean you have the odd high-rise apartment in a neighborhood.
billvon wrote:
Feb 11 2020 9:58pm
Yep. And that's true of some US cities as well. Boston was built for cows, not cars, and has endless problems with traffic. But Phoenix, which has seen most of its expansion after 1950, was designed with cars in mind.
Yup! I remember seeing those parts in the quarter when I was there nearly 20 years ago- and much of the east cost is that way too. It's probably the genesis of my interest in odd EBikes and weird 3-wheelers; realizing how reliant us in the rust belt are on cars.

User avatar
wturber   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2125
Joined: Aug 23 2017 8:52pm
Location: Fountain Hills,AZ
Contact:

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by wturber » Feb 20 2020 10:11am

billvon wrote:
Feb 11 2020 11:57am
miro13car wrote:
Feb 11 2020 9:21am
because they make less money on them.
In a way, yes. Developers choose profit margins for all their homes. But since few people want small homes compared to large homes, they can't sell very many and therefore don't make as much money on them.
Right. Put another way, they build larger homes because people want larger homes. You generally make more money if you build the type of home that people want.
"Commuter - DC Booster"
Iron Horse 3.0 hardtail - 48V / 1000W / 470rpm generic Chinese DD Hub motor (ebay)
8 x 36v 4.3ah 10s 2P battery packs - 1500W 30A DC Boost Converter delivers 54v and about 1000 watts peak
53T/42T Sakae Road cranks - 30mph+ on flats
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=90369

JackFlorey   100 W

100 W
Posts: 244
Joined: Feb 19 2020 7:22pm

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by JackFlorey » Feb 20 2020 11:10am

wturber wrote:
Feb 20 2020 10:11am
Right. Put another way, they build larger homes because people want larger homes. You generally make more money if you build the type of home that people want.
Exactly.

The problem is not that out-of-touch developers won't build the tiny homes that people demand. The "problem" is that people don't want tiny homes so developers don't build them.

User avatar
Danny Mayes   1 kW

1 kW
Posts: 320
Joined: Feb 16 2011 10:17pm
Location: Perth, Australia

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by Danny Mayes » Feb 21 2020 5:49am

I thinks it is all just the UN Agenda 21 aint it?

User avatar
Dauntless   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 8314
Joined: May 29 2010 1:49am
Location: Coordinates: 33°52′48″N 117°55′43″W

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by Dauntless » Feb 21 2020 3:02pm

JackFlorey wrote:
Feb 20 2020 11:10am
The problem is not that out-of-touch developers won't build the tiny homes that people demand. The "problem" is that people don't want tiny homes so developers don't build them.
Just another example of people looking for what they want and being told they can't have it because they don't want it. How is it that there's a 'Tiny House Movement' by all these people who don't want one? I have been findiing this fascinating, reading from my 2,700 sqft. home.

I should post a dozen links.

https://thetinylife.com/what-is-the-tin ... -movement/
Last edited by Dauntless on Feb 21 2020 5:46pm, edited 1 time in total.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC!
- Arthur C. Clarke

JackFlorey   100 W

100 W
Posts: 244
Joined: Feb 19 2020 7:22pm

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by JackFlorey » Feb 21 2020 3:22pm

Dauntless wrote:
Feb 21 2020 3:02pm
Juust another example of people looking for what they want and being told they can't have it because they don't want it.
No one is being told they don't want it.
How is it that there's a 'Tiny House Movement' by all these people who don't want one?
Because there are hundreds to thousands of people who want a tiny house. There are hundreds of millions who want a large one. Which market will a smart developer cater to?

User avatar
Dauntless   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 8314
Joined: May 29 2010 1:49am
Location: Coordinates: 33°52′48″N 117°55′43″W

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by Dauntless » Feb 21 2020 5:45pm

JackFlorey wrote:
Feb 21 2020 3:22pm
Dauntless wrote:
Feb 21 2020 3:02pm
Juust another example of people looking for what they want and being told they can't have it because they don't want it.
No one is being told they don't want it.
I''m responding to posts saying they don't.
JackFlorey wrote:
Feb 21 2020 3:22pm
How is it that there's a 'Tiny House Movement' by all these people who don't want one?
Because there are hundreds to thousands of people who want a tiny house. There are hundreds of millions who want a large one. Which market will a smart developer cater to?
That's like saying the reason that pretty much all new house construction in the LA area is way above the median house price and way out of reach for most buyer because it's what they want. No, builders are NOT catering to demand at all. They are bowing to political pressure.

If you mean in the U.S., there's not hundreds of millions, there's probably less than a million in the market for a house at any time. A smart developer responds to market forces, which includes the quick, low interest build and sale of the small houses on less land. IF there is not a local government preventing it. Which there is. The people who want are out of luck.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC!
- Arthur C. Clarke

JackFlorey   100 W

100 W
Posts: 244
Joined: Feb 19 2020 7:22pm

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by JackFlorey » Feb 21 2020 6:02pm

Dauntless wrote:
Feb 21 2020 5:45pm
That's like saying the reason that pretty much all new house construction in the LA area is way above the median house price and way out of reach for most buyer because it's what they want.
Of course. Lots of people want things they can't afford. Take a poll here and ask who wants a Tesla; good chance you'd get more people who want one than can afford one.
No, builders are NOT catering to demand at all. They are bowing to political pressure.
Nope, sorry. Builders want to make money; that's what drives them. And they can make more money building (and selling) medium and large houses than tiny ones, because more people want medium and large houses than tiny ones.
If you mean in the U.S., there's not hundreds of millions, there's probably less than a million in the market for a house at any time.
Of course. And there are hundreds of millions who WERE in the market for a house and got close to what they wanted. Most of them, anyway. A recent poll by Trulia asked what size home people wanted if they were to move within a year. The answers were 37% larger, 32% same size and 23% smaller. (Not tiny, but smaller.) Demographically this is broken down largely into new home buyers, who generally want a larger home than they can afford, middle age buyers who are often happy with what they have, and retirees who want to downsize.
A smart developer responds to market forces, which includes the quick, low interest build and sale of the small houses on less land.
Absolutely. And there are developers building smaller homes and condos. But we were talking specifically about tiny homes, which are detached homes under ~400 sq ft. And most people who want a 400 sq ft place to live get a condo or an apartment. Some want a real detached tiny home - but those people are relatively rare from a market perspective. Case in point - the <400 sq ft houses here take months to sell, even though they are some of the cheapest houses on the market here.

User avatar
Dauntless   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 8314
Joined: May 29 2010 1:49am
Location: Coordinates: 33°52′48″N 117°55′43″W

Re: The trend of cities banning cars

Post by Dauntless » Feb 21 2020 10:31pm

The U.S. has less than 100 million houses, townhomes, etc. People buy the little condo usuually because they're stuck. My sister bought bigger because she had to. What people do for lack of choices really isn't a choice. and government prroves again and again they don't want you to have a choice about then sticking you witth something bad. Obamacare proves that.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC!
- Arthur C. Clarke

Post Reply