Rejoice my Loudoun Brethren (Fairfax, Vienna: theater, living in, prices)

[FindingZen]

There are those who will define their independence by commuting on the Silver Line while others define their freedom by driving to work. At least now people will have the liberty to choose between the two options instead of waiting for eminent domain to widen Route 7.

[CaliTerp07]

Metro has never made sense to me. Just too expensive since none of my employers have ever paid any transportation costs, but did pay for parking (or offered free parking). It would definitely have cost me more to take metro.

I generally drove around 20 miles (round trip) to get to the office. That's $11/day. Metro costs more than that at just the ticket price, not counting the bus fees or parking fees or the time to take the apartment complex to the shuttle (different options at different houses).

It makes the least sense on the weekends though. The last few times we've gone downtown for festivals or concerts or sporting events or theater productions, we've driven. The cost of parking is soooooooo much less than 2 people on the metro (plus the time cost of waiting for the trains).

The *only* time I used metro was when I could walk to it from my house in Crystal City. After that, the cost/time effectiveness of it was gone.

[tysonsengineer]

Originally Posted by ViennaSausages

34 miles at 240 days a year is about 8,000 miles a year. Nowhere near the 20,000 you came up with. That alters the depreciation and maintenance expense significantly.

Per year yes, per mile no.

Regardless of whether you drive 8000 miles or 20000 miles in a year, every 20000 miles you have a certain amount of maintenance that can be anticipated. Driving less would actually like increase your per mile because you might start having to do routine maintenance based on time rather than mileage (for instance if you do oil changes every 3 months it would be only 2000 miles driving, as opposed to typical 4000-6000 miles between oil changes). Now obviously miles 0-80000 are gonna be great miles for a car, so you could make the point that you can get the benefit of the car for longer because you dont drive it as much and therefore avoid the pitfalls of maintenance that occur between 80000-200000 miles. Therefore using a 20year life term of the car isn't fair because most people get rid of car earlier than that... that being the case though depreciation cost would now go up. Because even though you can trade in your car for more worth (with less miles) if you are deciding to buy a new car after 10 years regardless you are incorporating the cost of replacing your asset more often per mile also. Depreciation of the first 80,000 miles is FAR more radical than the second 80,000 miles.

Clearly what kind of car you get, used vs not used (how many miles when you get it), and a thousand different factors still apply. But I still think using 10 cents for both maintenance and depreciation is very low. 50% split that would mean you only spend 400 dollars per year on maintenance on your car? Can you let me know who your mechanic is because you are getting really good rates. Also that anticipates only 400 dollars of depreciation per year that you have that car... I'd also like to know the name of the dealer or third party you are selling this to who will pay $16,000 for your 2002 Honda Accord with 80,000 miles

[tysonsengineer]

Originally Posted by CaliTerp07

Metro has never made sense to me. Just too expensive since none of my employers have ever paid any transportation costs, but did pay for parking (or offered free parking). It would definitely have cost me more to take metro.

I generally drove around 20 miles (round trip) to get to the office. That's $11/day. Metro costs more than that at just the ticket price, not counting the bus fees or parking fees or the time to take the apartment complex to the shuttle (different options at different houses).

It makes the least sense on the weekends though. The last few times we've gone downtown for festivals or concerts or sporting events or theater productions, we've driven. The cost of parking is soooooooo much less than 2 people on the metro (plus the time cost of waiting for the trains).

The *only* time I used metro was when I could walk to it from my house in Crystal City. After that, the cost/time effectiveness of it was gone.

If you get free parking thats a different discussion. Thats a benefit your employer is providing. If you are working in the burbs the worth of that benefit is basically nothing. If you are working in DC along K street, trust me it is a cost that the company you are working for is paying and therefore is a benefit that is being paid to you one way or another. For instance, if your company owned the building, they could theoretically be selling those parking spaces to others and making a TON of money, parking is big money in a city. If they are renting the building, then believe me they are paying far higher lease rates than in a building that doesnt have free parking. Either way, the money they use on that purpose is money that comes out of profits that could be providing you other benefits like better health care, bonuses, or higher wages.

Clearly if they are providing free parking, then take advantage of it, but if there was a question of would you rather have free parking or lets say 350 dollars more per month, most people would like 350 bucks to spend as they would like instead.

[ViennaSausages]

Originally Posted by tysonsengineer

Per year yes, per mile no.

Regardless of whether you drive 8000 miles or 20000 miles in a year, every 20000 miles you have a certain amount of maintenance that can be anticipated. Driving less would actually like increase your per mile because you might start having to do routine maintenance based on time rather than mileage (for instance if you do oil changes every 3 months it would be only 2000 miles driving, as opposed to typical 4000-6000 miles between oil changes).

I change my oil every 5,000 which means twice a year - once in fall with heavier weight oil and once in spring.

Originally Posted by tysonsengineer

Now obviously miles 0-80000 are gonna be great miles for a car, so you could make the point that you can get the benefit of the car for longer because you dont drive it as much and therefore avoid the pitfalls of maintenance that occur between 80000-200000 miles. Therefore using a 20year life term of the car isn't fair because most people get rid of car earlier than that...

According to BTS, the average age of a car is 10 years. My "commuting" car is 11 years old and has 86,000 on it.

Originally Posted by tysonsengineer

that being the case though depreciation cost would now go up. Because even though you can trade in your car for more worth (with less miles) if you are deciding to buy a new car after 10 years regardless you are incorporating the cost of replacing your asset more often per mile also. Depreciation of the first 80,000 miles is FAR more radical than the second 80,000 miles.

Depreciation of anything is typically higher in the initial period. That being said, a vehicle will depreciate if it is driven to death or sits in a garage. I ran KBB on a theoretical 10 year old car - one with 100,000 miles and one with 25,000 miles. Both have lost at least half of their original value. So, if you own a car, much of the depreciation issue vis-a-vis Metro is moot. You already own the car, so the cost is sunk to begin with - regardless of how much you drive it. Same, to a large extent, with insurance. While there are variable rates based upon how much you drive, a lof of the coverages and deductibles are weighted such that you pay a majority of the premium based regardless of if you drive 5,000 a year or 15,000 a year.

Clearly what kind of car you get, used vs not used (how many miles when you get it), and a thousand different factors still apply. But I still think using 10 cents for both maintenance and depreciation is very low. 50% split that would mean you only spend 400 dollars per year on maintenance on your car? Can you let me know who your mechanic is because you are getting really good rates. Also that anticipates only 400 dollars of depreciation per year that you have that car... I'd also like to know the name of the dealer or third party you are selling this to who will pay $16,000 for your 2002 Honda Accord with 80,000 miles

I change my own oil; rotate my own tires; change my own cabin filter. I let the mechanic do the 30,000 - 60,000 - 90,000 maintenance runs save for those that I've already done.

[tysonsengineer]

Thats fine, and you clearly save a lot of money by doing a lot of it yourself but depreciation of 400 bucks and maintenance of 400 bucks per year is still pretty remarkable. What the per mile cost should be is clearly dependent on many factors, but you havent convinced me it is 10 cents per mile (excluding gas of course).

In many cases cars are the best way to get to work, and in many cases it is not. If you have to transfer its an issue, if you have issues getting to the station itself, its an issue. Then again if you are driving and there is a toll road involved, its an issue. If you have to pay the going rate for parking in Arlington or DC, closer to 15 bucks, its an issue. If it takes you 90 minutes to do your commute instead of 50 minutes, its an issue. Lots of variables.

[ViennaSausages]

Originally Posted by tysonsengineer

Thats fine, and you clearly save a lot of money by doing a lot of it yourself but depreciation of 400 bucks and maintenance of 400 bucks per year is still pretty remarkable. What the per mile cost should be is clearly dependent on many factors, but you havent convinced me it is 10 cents per mile (excluding gas of course).

In many cases cars are the best way to get to work, and in many cases it is not. If you have to transfer its an issue, if you have issues getting to the station itself, its an issue. Then again if you are driving and there is a toll road involved, its an issue. If you have to pay the going rate for parking in Arlington or DC, closer to 15 bucks, its an issue. If it takes you 90 minutes to do your commute instead of 50 minutes, its an issue. Lots of variables.

Indeed. I've been getting around the commute issue by leaving at 9:00. Get into the garage by 9:45.

[cdmurphy]

Originally Posted by gutter2d

On a side note, I'm surprised a 50/50 democrat/republican county like Loudoun has an all-Republican board of supervisors. Are the supervisor districts heavily gerrymandered there? Although that doesn't seem likely as the democrat voters obviously aren't "packed" anywhere since they don't have any seats on the board.

Not only is my district (Blue Ridge) absurdly gerrymandered but the LCDC didn't run anyone against the independent incumbent (redistricting was a real drama and the Dems who used the process to make a power play on behalf of one of the incumbents were all voted out), so we took our chances with the Republican because at least we'd have a shot at improving our infrastructure and traffic problems. But she voted against Metro, so many people in Brambleton are very unhappy with her.

[Leaving4Ca]

@tysonsengineer,

I see you have a rebuttal for every comment, and apparently you live in your own bubble. Many people do not care about the expense! or the environment! or how long they sit in traffic!!!! They like the convenience and safety of their cars! No amount of convincing from you or others will change it. Period.

[tysonsengineer]

Thats fine, but you said something ridiculous, that Metro is unsafe, when statistically it is LITERALLY the complete opposite. You are in more danger walking outside your door to pick up your mail than riding on WMATA's metro. 12:4000000000 shows that is the case. You are in WAY more danger in your car, biking, or even plane. To say otherwise is plain old lying about facts.

I could give a $hit about the "environment", I care about economy and people being able to live the life they want if they work hard and save money. I just think that is propagated by better more efficient transportation options, less dependence on fuel being made by terrorists, and a progressive attitude that any crisis today can be solved by a solution tomorrow instead of relying on the easy and temporary solution that we already have.