OneSkirt wrote:
Its really interesting how close the margin is on the public question is and also how few votes/low turnout there was on this. I would argue that this is not nearly enough of a public mandate (due to low participation) to merit a switch.

BobNesta wrote:
Quote:

JcDevil wrote:
Quote:

tommyc_37 wrote:
What a shame for Thirty Acres, I wonder why they don't change back to their original format. This was really the first interesting restaurant in JC.

The restaurant has been full every time I've eaten there since the tasting menu change. When you're serving a 2 hour long menu, you are going to have significant numbers of empty tables early in the night no matter what. No idea why people think that they are struggling.

and they're closing...

psyop wrote:
I totally agree with cars blocking bike lanes is a problem, that's assuming that a cyclist is even using the bike lane.

Bicyclists ignoring traffic laws are a bigger problem.
Double parking should take a second seat to people on bikes running through stop signs and riding on sidewalks, I cannot count on two hands how many times i've almost been in an accident with a cyclist doing both of these things vs. a car parked in the bike lane.

brewster wrote:
Yeah, V has no idea what he's talking about with relative appreciations. Gentrification's like when you start a sport or game, you can increase your score tremendously at first, but then you hit a long tail where gain comes much slower. A partially gentrified area has more growth potential than a fully gentrified, in part exactly because it also has risk of loss or poor growth potential. Lafayette and lovely nearby areas like Astor and Monticello and has been breaking investors for decades now with stubborn refusal to get over the hump. I'm sure it's day will come, but that's why the gentrifying game is speculation.

Is the Height's "over the hump" yet? I'm hoping, but my 2004 purchase has not yet definitely risen past purchase price. But "buy and hold" rental investing actually works without appreciation. I calculate over a 9% return on cash for a property that flows no cash with 25% down on a 15 year note. And that's not accounting for depreciation and interest deductions, and rising rents over that time.

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Dumb comment but he was 25 years old and it was 20 years ago. People change. Move along.

I don't know. It is such a rarity that someone says something dumb at the age of 25. We should certainly hold this against him 20 years later and he should be fired.

Why? What if he takes back the comments now?