Live data from Hacker News

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

mercurynews.com

291–300 of 302 posts

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

#291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you trying to buy, rent, or no preference? Do you have a family? Do you need public schools? Do you want a yard or are you OK with condos? What price range are you thinking? I've in Mass my whole life, I'll try and give advice.

$500K budget. 3-beds. Strong public schools. Condo/Townhouse are fine. I'm looking at Acton, Westford, and Andover. Any recommendations would be great. My larger point is I used to live in the 4th largest city in the US and could afford a relatively new, relatively nice house for a pittance, a short distance from my office. I could spend more or less for a better school district, or use the savings for a private scho…

> My larger point is I used to live in the 4th largest city in the US and could afford a relatively new, relatively nice house for a pittance, a short distance from my office.

(For what it's worth, I assume that you know most of what I'm about to write but I'm making the point anyway for others who might read.)

You said in another reply that the city in which you used to live was Houston. The key difference between Houston (or Dallas/Fort Worth or San Antonio or almost anywhere in Texas--yes, including Austin) is that it is a relatively flat, geographically plain metropolitan area. In Houston and in Dallas, housing can sprawl for days. I'm from Texas, the Dallas area specifically, and the areas where housing and other development has been built is staggering to me. The entire DFW metro area has developed across a five-county area that's 1/3rd the physical size of the entire state of Massachusetts. I haven't even run the numbers on the Houston metro area but I'd wager it's a quarter again as large.

Meanwhile, Boston is on a harbor and backs up to an area that was pretty urban back when Galveston was the main hub of Texas commerce and Houston was a sleepy town an hour north on the river. Boston--and San Francisco--are constrained by buildable area, geography (all that water, both on the coast and inland), and many, many years of "we build small areas to live in" type of thinking.

My point is that the oft-made comparisons between east and west coast living to Texas are rather unequal. Texas is generally flat, dry, hot, and almost entirely dirt. You can build pretty much anything anywhere you're willing to connect to water and power. (Though that first bit is pretty hard to come by.) But it also means that a lot of those amenities that people really like are super difficult to access without at least two cars per household and the attendant problems of traffic--and where to put the roads[0] and who gets to pay for them[1]--infrastructure (back to that whole "water is getting scarce" thing), and the rest that come along with them.

0 - The Houston metro area is home to the widest freeway in the country, Katy Freeway, which is 26 lanes at its widest point including service roads.

1 - That's one thing Texas was happy to import from the northeast: toll roads literally everywhere. I don't think TxDOT has built a new or even expanded, taxpayer-funded, limited-access freeway in the past decade.

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

#292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello former neighbor! I used to live on the Bluffs right in the Manor area. I agree with everything you said - but the commute sucked if you didn't have a car or shared a car with a spouse who didn't work in the same area as you. Why? Because the transit out there is terrible . It's served by one single SamTrans bus line that takes 45 minutes to get from Pacifica to Daly City BART (a 5ish minute drive). If it wasn't…

Well being an Okie, I had plenty of cars already. I put less than 1k miles on my truck in the 3 or so years I lived in the area. I really enjoyed the hometown feel of Pacifica, the people were super nice too. And we used to go hiking almost every weekend up at San Pedro Park. Plus, best Taco Bell in the world! ;-)

Most epic Taco Bell in existence

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

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're putting $5k away every month when your take home pay is ~$8k a month? I assume you must live a VERY spartan life in the Bay. Basically pay your rent (which must be shared or very cheap for the Bay) and utilities and not do much else... I mean the average Bay area rent is more than the difference between your take home and your savings... edit: I'm using ADP's calculator, don't know why SmartAsset is different…

Take home is closer to $10k. I'm assuming he's including 401k as part of his savings as well

Might be but most I find 401ks rare in the Bay due to most startups not offering them...

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

#294

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…

  SB 827 died when homeowners protested fiercely
SB827 never got to any "homeowners". It was killed by the Democrat leadership in the legislature.

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

#295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been a fully remote developer for 4 1/2 years. My employer has no physical office. I live in a pleasant medium-sized town, I bought a house for less than a Bay-area toolshed, and I can commute myself downstairs to make a sandwich. If every worker were remote, can you even imagine how hard you'd have to work to justify a physical office to the CFO and potential hires?

I've been remote for 5 years. I know about all the benefits, but I'm always curious how others are dealing with the drawbacks. I've written about it a few times here on HN: - Social isolation How do you ensure that your social brain is exercised? If I don't make a conscious & deliberate point of it, I can go an entire day without leaving the house, sometimes multiple days. Working from home can mean 8 solid hours of…

My plan is to use after-work activities to make up for the social isolation. Though I'm more on the introverted side to begin with, I figure I'll find more people I enjoy spending time with by doing activities with people who like to do those same activities than I would by socializing with my co-workers. Plus even remote it's not like you can't socialize with co-workers over video and chat.

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

#296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not. But if all the nerds spread themselves out over the rest of the country, the restaurants and construction projects wouldn't all be crammed up in Traffic Jam City, either.

The reason restaurants exist is BECAUSE the nerds are all stuck in the same place and they need food.

You know that there are restaurants in towns across America, right?

I'm about to go vote for taco makers to have the pleasure of not living in a big city right now.

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

#297
post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately not every company is that close-minded. I work in a remote office, and I collaborate every day with my team in Dallas (and most company members are distributed mostly all through the U.S. but also Canada, the UK and India). There's a LOT of collaboration tools, we use Slack (well, we were forced on Microsoft Teams now), Jira, Skype, e-mail, WhatsApp... I still appreciate meeting in person, they flew me on…

I would not really call that close-minded. It's established practice that has worked very well when building many, many non-trivial, innovative, technologically complex things. There have been ginormous cost overruns, not to mention real technological problems and delays getting to market when collaboration has not been close. For example, the Airbus A380 (and to a larger extent the Boeing 787) were both massively de…

From personal experience, I disagree. You're assuming we cannot carry out non-well scoped work just because we're remote?

The project I'm currently leading definitely gives lie to your assumption, and I'm a member of an offshore team.

I'm not saying that projects with substantial manufacturing components don't benefit from proximity. Also, those project you mention had huge political issues (not great examples).

And yes, the ideal situation is to have everyone on-site. But the disadvantages are that you have to pay them ridiculous wages to offset cost of living, and compete with a smaller subset of talent, or they have to do 90 minute super-commutes.

Many people can't move to the Bay Area for various reasons. Does a top developer that leaves the U.S. magically become worse? Or is a top developer bad just because he hasn't tried hard enough to get into the U.S.?

Even YCombinator believes that founders don't have to be physically present if it doesn't make sense.

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

#298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was the difference (in policy or whatever) that allowed your colleagues to remote in but you not?

Not GP, but many companies have a policy allowing employees to live in remote places, but if you live in the same city as the office, you're not allowed to work from home. The idea seems to be that remote employees are expected to establish a little mini-outpost of that company within their own home, while local employees who "work from home" are more often than not really handling errands or lounging or whatever. It…

Thank you for the explanation.

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

#299
post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would not really call that close-minded. It's established practice that has worked very well when building many, many non-trivial, innovative, technologically complex things. There have been ginormous cost overruns, not to mention real technological problems and delays getting to market when collaboration has not been close. For example, the Airbus A380 (and to a larger extent the Boeing 787) were both massively de…

From personal experience, I disagree. You're assuming we cannot carry out non-well scoped work just because we're remote? The project I'm currently leading definitely gives lie to your assumption, and I'm a member of an offshore team. I'm not saying that projects with substantial manufacturing components don't benefit from proximity. Also, those project you mention had huge political issues (not great examples). And…

Your personal experience may have been different, but it does not change the fact that almost no major commercial product has come out a fully-distributed company.

Individual anecdotes that support one case or another are easy to dig up, but you would be hard-pressed to find large pieces of really innovative software products developed without people in close proximity (you could claim that the Linux Kernel is a big project but that's an open source software that is not really a commercial product).

Everybody can not move to the Bay Area, and good developers do not become bad by moving away or not being there, but the simple fact remains: there are no (financially) large and successful software companies have been fully distributed from the ground up.

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

#300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They wouldn't be attempting that commute in a car in the first place. I think that's an unfounded assumption. I know plenty of people who do in fact drive daily from SF or Oakland down to MV/SJ.

> I think that's an unfounded assumption Well so was the original assumption!

The original assumption is supported by the fact that the buses could only be introduced because a large enough number of people was _already_ driving. I doubt any company started an empty shuttle line to use as a recruiting tool. They must have sufficient number of people with that commute already in the population for the economics to make any sense.
Post reply on HN