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

21–30 of 302 posts

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

#21

Post by djrogers »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #5

I realise new buildings are carbon intensive, but does anyone have the knowledge to do a back-of-the-envelope comparison of carbon emissions if these super-commuters were to move in to high-density housing that enabled them to walk or cycle to their jobs.

That presumes they'd want to live in high-density housing, doesn't it? There is high density housing available with shorter commute times already at costs similar to low dessnity housing further out. Granted, it's not zero commute, but I' not sure how much difference that would make.

Some people choose a lifestyle for their families that differs from what might be optimally efficient, for reasons that other's don't prioritize as highly.

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

#24

Post by WhompingWindows »

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.

For those who aren't aware, many of Boston's intersections and squares are terrible intersections, remnants of the crossings due to actual cow-paths. There's also a massive amount of old housing property and relatively little new housing stock. There are high density apartment or condo buildings sprouting up here and there, but by large, you're going to be paying over 1 million for a small/old house in/around Boston, possibly 2 million depending on the location. If you're willing to commute 1.5 hours, you can get a fixer upper in a semi-rural area for around 300-400k. If Amazon came to Boston, it would be compound this problem exponentially, though whoever owns property currently would definitely make a good return.

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

#26

Post by chrischen »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #5

I realise new buildings are carbon intensive, but does anyone have the knowledge to do a back-of-the-envelope comparison of carbon emissions if these super-commuters were to move in to high-density housing that enabled them to walk or cycle to their jobs.

New buildings sequester carbon, especially if it doesn’t use recylced wood.

Additionally high density housing and cities are vastly more energy efficient than sprawling suburbs based on at least one simple factor: cars.

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

#27

Post by gresrun »

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.

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

#29

Post by hkarthik »

The picture in the article is from the I-580 exit in Dublin/Pleasanton about 5 minutes from my house.

The real estate here is booming as many people have settled here due to BART proximity and the fact that it's one of the few communities building lots of new housing. All the FANG companies are also sending their shuttles here.

It's also a way better commute for more lower income folks coming from Stockton, Modesto, etc since it's on the way to San Jose so you can actually have a labor force to staff restaurants, hotels, hospitals, schools, etc.

However, there has been a recent wave of NIMBYism coming through as the development has been unchecked and they haven't built enough public services (like schools) to support the housing growth. Many locals also do not like the efficient land use through zero-lot-lines and multi-story townhomes that the developers are flattening hills to build. I hear a lot of jeers calling my neighborhood "an eyesore" full of "cookie cutter homes". My hope that this all gets resolved in the next few years as people come to their senses but it's clear that Californians really have no idea how to plan urban development to match their growth.

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

#30

Post by ducster696 »

seibelj wrote: post #14
replicatorblog wrote: post #6

FWIW, this is also true in Boston. I commute from southern NH to Harvard Sq. every day. Unless you have two substantial incomes, or are ok with sub-par schools and a tiny space, it's hard to live close to most economically dynamic cities.

No, this is because you chose to live extremely far away! There are plenty of places in Massachusetts that are closer and affordable, with decent schools. Every employee I've had who commuted from NH to Boston wound up pretty miserable because of the commute.

There aren't that many places left out there between NH and Boston that are on the affordable scale. Do you have a couple towns in mind that are fairly affordable still? I have been looking in the suburbs of Boston and when I switched it up to look at Southern NH it was crazy the changes in prices as well as how long the houses have been on the market.
Post reply on HN