Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 302 posts

Re: 90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

#61

Post by BrainInAJar »

nathan_long wrote: post #18

Oh, tech companies. If only there were a way to have conversations about, create, and transmit computer programs using some kind of long-distance network. Maybe we could break the data up into "packets". Just thinking out loud here. Then maybe everyone creating textual output for a living wouldn't have to transport their physical body to an office. We can dream.

Not everyone can work remote. In fact I'd wager a majority, including many of those who think they can work remote, cannot. And teams dealing with remote workers is also a source of friction.

Remote work is only part of the solution. Urbanism, prioritizing transit & deprioritizing cars, increasing density are also parts

Re: 90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

#62

Post by nathan_long »

GuiA wrote: post #50
nathan_long wrote: post #18

Oh, tech companies. If only there were a way to have conversations about, create, and transmit computer programs using some kind of long-distance network. Maybe we could break the data up into "packets". Just thinking out loud here. Then maybe everyone creating textual output for a living wouldn't have to transport their physical body to an office. We can dream.

The article interviews a restaurant manager and a construction site superintendent. Non tech workers are significantly more affected than tech workers, because they cannot afford to live closer to their place of employment, and do not have access to the perks (work from home, shuttles, etc.) that tech workers have.

Yes, I feel sorry for people whose jobs actually require them to go somewhere, and who are stuck in traffic behind a thousand nerds whose jobs arbitrarily demand a commute, and who have to compete with those highly-paid nerds to buy a house.

Re: 90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

#63

Post by jpao79 »

I think the key that legislatures should focus on is up-zoning industrial lots near transit with large state tax incentives (i.e. capital gains tax exemption) for owners of 100 acre industrial lots near transit if multiple land owners sell at the same time to make room for high density schools, etc.

The Fremont Warm Springs project had few complaints from neighbors about overcrowded schools, etc. because they Lennar is building a new school. https://www.mercurynews.com/2015/03/17/fremont-approves-lenn...

The Google San Jose will be transformative as up until now all of the FANG offices have been planted in suburban office parks with horrible access to transit. https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/04/10/google-says-its-getti...

Re: 90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

#64

Post by timr »

sampo wrote: post #33
spyspy wrote: post #16

The sad fact is that long as people are willing to put up with this nothing is going to change. The crazy rents and terrible commutes sound insane to anyone living elsewhere but people are continuously more than happy to continue doing them to work at companies that haven't been priced out yet either. It's not an issue of social mobility either, since people living in the bay area are some of the most socially mobile…

> it'll only stop when everyone says enough is enough and leaves Or, alternatively, when enough people start voting in politicians who would allow building lots of new homes in central locations. Manhattan has 3.9× the density of San Francisco. At Manhattan density, the City of San Francisco could house 2.5 million more people.

This is such a tiresome argument. Even if you could suddenly build all of the housing required to reduce prices on a short timescale, you'd have to solve the infrastructural problems that come with it (roads and transit), and convince developers to build into a massive loss (i.e. I am a developer, and you expect me to build and finance at today's costs, and pay for it with tomorrow's lower rents).

Construction is a solution that takes long amounts of time to find a lower equilibrium, because nobody knowingly finances real estate projects into a falling market. In contrast, companies can build branch offices quickly. Spread the love.

Re: 90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

#65

Post by eecsninja »

gresrun wrote: post #27
spyspy wrote: post #16

The sad fact is that long as people are willing to put up with this nothing is going to change. The crazy rents and terrible commutes sound insane to anyone living elsewhere but people are continuously more than happy to continue doing them to work at companies that haven't been priced out yet either. It's not an issue of social mobility either, since people living in the bay area are some of the most socially mobile…

I know I chose to move out here because it was the best career move I could make. Having a FANG company on my resume plus the ridiculous salary and equity while I'm here would be foolish to pass up.

I grew up in the Bay Area. Spent several years at a FAANG company. About 2/3 of the time, I lived with my parents. The remainder was with housemates. In my early 30s, I decided that I couldn't continue living with parents, while there wasn't any place in the BA that I cared to pay money to live in.

Now I live in NYC, same salary, but finally have my own place that's not shared with others. I live in a 30th floor studio apartment in Manhattan, take the subway to work, and pay less rent than my friends in the Bay Area who live in 1-bed apartments.

Re: 90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

#66

Post by rtkwe »

blang wrote: post #9
pm90 wrote: post #7

Wouldn't this be a prime target for new mass transit options?

Yes, but I would put housing density above mass transit in efficacy.

Without a good public transportation (either through trains/busses or having the buildings close enough to jobs to walk bike [and counting on enough people to do that]) you're just jamming more people into an already congested system.

Re: 90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

#67

Post by WhompingWindows »

tjridesbikes wrote: post #44
WhompingWindows wrote: post #24

This is increasingly common in the Boston area as well. Cambridge/MIT is a massive biotech hub, meanwhile we have huge companies with many large offices in the downtown or in surrounding suburbs. Many workers live in RI, NH, or Central Mass, and getting to work for 9 am consistently will involve leaving at 730 for many, many workers due to congestion, construction, and the god-awful mess that is Boston infrastructure…

This is the exact reason I don't commute by car. I live in Jamaica Plain and work in Kendall Square. Driving takes 45 minutes to go 4 miles. Taking the T takes 40 minutes. I ride my bike and my commute is 17 minutes each way, no matter the hour, traffic, or weather.

Ah, nice! I lived in Arlington and my commute to Cambridge was literally 2X faster on a bike than any other possible method. It's crazy to ZOOM down the bike lane at 15 mph while the cars are idling at 0mph waiting for the very slow traffic cycles to progress.

Re: 90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

#68

Post by ryanSrich »

thirduncle wrote: post #42
gresrun wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know I chose to move out here because it was the best career move I could make. Having a FANG company on my resume plus the ridiculous salary and equity while I'm here would be foolish to pass up.

the ridiculous salary and equity while I'm here would be foolish to pass up So - how much of the "ridiculous" salary is left after subtracting living costs and taxes, actually?

Average FANG salary is $200k with roughly another $200k in equity each year spread out over 4 years. So that's roughly $400k per year in total comp. Conservatively 40% of that is going to taxes, so take home is closer to $240,000.

While $240,000 is a nice salary it's not even close to what you'd need to afford a house in SV. And that's just housing. All in all it feels like a bad deal.

Re: 90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

#69

Post by _m8fo »

chrisseaton wrote: post #49
_m8fo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would buses contribute to the problem? Assuming every person who takes the bus would otherwise drive, a single bus would wipe out dozens of cars on the roads.

> Assuming every person who takes the bus would otherwise drive This assumption is where the problem is. For example, Google employees live in central San Francisco but commute to work in Mountain View because a bus service was added. They wouldn't be attempting that commute in a car in the first place. These busses have added to traffic, not reduced it.

Sure, but how would they get to work if there were no buses? A fraction of them would drive, no? Buses are a net positive.

Re: 90-minute ‘super commutes’ more common as Bay Area housing shortage intensifies

#70

Post by moultano »

chrischen wrote: post #41
Analemma_ wrote: post #2

It's time to start acknowledging that this is never going to be fixed. SB 827 died when homeowners protested fiercely, and it doesn't look like any proposed replacements are going to get traction either. People just have too much of their equity tied up in their homes. I hate it, but I can also see where they're coming from: if you had a savings account that accounted for most of your net wealth and was appreciating…

When did it die? I thoughti t is being brought to vote later this year.

It didn't make it out of its first committee.
Post reply on HN