5 ms·

Yes, rents are high, but if you invest even a little bit of time you can find a fine residence in the Bay Area for a lot less than $4,500. I rent a two bedroom

Yes, rents are high, but if you invest even a little bit of time you can find a fine residence in the Bay Area for a lot less than $4,500. I rent a two bedroom house in Oakland for $2,200. My commute is not too much longer than it would be if I live in certain parts of San Francisco. There's simply little advantage to living right in the heart of a major city. You have to ask yourself: "Instead of renting in a high-profile location, what else could I buy with an extra $24,000 a year?" Yes, average rents are too high, but nobody says you have to pay the average rent.

msutherl 11y ago
There's a lot of room for expansion to the South as well – I pay $1,300 in Bayview.
zzz157 11y ago
Well you also have a significantly higher probability of getting shot when you live in Oakland. So there's always that.
- vosper 11y ago
  It's not like the Mission, Tenderloin or SOMA are especially safe, either. In SF, as in Oakland, there are good spots and bad spots. I haven't felt unsafe in Lake Merritt, and my place is way nicer than what I got for the same price in Cole Valley. And the weather's better (it really is).
- nostrademons 11y ago
  Depends which part of Oakland. Some parts of Oakland (eg. Rockridge, Temescal) are significantly nicer than SF. They aren't exactly cheap, but your safety : price ratio is significantly better than in say, the Mission.
  - mrgordon 11y ago
    They may appear nicer but when I read Yelp reviews in Rockridge and Temescal they occasionally mention the bars on the windows or robberies taking place which I've never seen in San Francisco. Not trying to say the average person will encounter problems but I do think even those areas have more crime than you'd think. As someone who lived in Oakland and now has rent control in the Mission, I would say that my safety : price ratio is significantly higher here in SF after a relatively small period of time.
    - mrgordon 11y ago
      Wow, very surprised to see I got downvoted for sharing a perfectly valid anecdote after living in Oakland and San Francisco. I'm sorry if you feel differently but downvoting comments just because you don't agree with them is rather immature and only serves to limit discourse by discouraging people from sharing their opinions, experiences, and facts. I was polite in my response and even pointed out that the average person is unlikely to encounter problems. Here are some further details for those who care about the facts: 1. This is a representative review for one Thai restaurant that I wanted to go to in Rockridge where I noticed many reviews mentioned them being robbed repeatedly and now the restaurant has to buzz customers through the door because of it (read the first review or search for "robbery"): http://www.yelp.com/biz/saysetha-thai-cuisine-oakland?hrid=uI5-SqeMPAZb1pLojXdaPQ&utm_campaign=www_review_share_popup&utm_medium=copy_link&utm_source=(direct) http://www.yelp.com/biz/saysetha-thai-cuisine-oakland?hrid=u... 2. Here is a recent article about how middle class residents of many neighborhoods including Rockridge and Temescal have resorted to hiring private security forces due to the rampant crime problems: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/5/30/oakland-private-securitypatrols.html http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/5/30/oakland-priv... 3. Here is an article describing why robbers like Rockridge and other "target rich" neighborhoods where it is easy to rob rich people and escape: http://patch.com/california/rockridge/why-robbers-like-rockridge-report-from-the-north-oakland-crime-meeting http://patch.com/california/rockridge/why-robbers-like-rockr...
      - nostrademons 11y ago
        I wasn't the one who downvoted you.
- eastbayjake 11y ago
  You can keep believing that. It certainly keeps the rent on the Oakland side of the Bay a little cheaper than if everyone found out it's spacious, full of artists and great food, and has better weather.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- mtanski 11y ago
  What's the probability of being shot in Oakland in a year as a white male? Esp if you don't have any associations with crime yourself. I lived in both good, bad and transitioning neighborhoods and I feel like people over estimate how much impact this will have on life. Fact is, shit happens everywhere. Happens more often where there is density. You can be mugged in a good part of town (well because that's where people with money are at) and bad part of town. Before I moved back to NYC, my wife would regularly get harassed in SOMA on the street walking to her job.
ianamartin 11y ago
Absolutely this. I have a two-bedroom apt. in Brooklyn that's the size of a small house. No roommate. I just like the space. I pay the same amount as my cousin, who lives in Manhattan in a studio apt that's smaller than my guest bedroom/office. At my current job in the financial district, the commute would be the same. Plus, I live in a historic neighborhood where there are houses with lawns and gardens and trees. And it reminds me of home in Texas. NYC isn't as bad as SF, but it can be really awful if you insist on living in the most "happening" parts of town.
beambot 11y ago
Did the same math for living in San Jose... With the price difference in rent, you could literally hire a private car plus driver to take you to-and-from the city every weekend. The most insane part is the people who commute down to MTV (eg. Google) and only really get the benefit of the city on weekends anyway...
- hocuspocus 11y ago
  I've just come back from two weeks in the Bay area to see a bunch of friends and they all do that. Even though I find it insane as much you do, I understand. There are a few good reasons though, from our very European and biased point of view: * No need to own car, or at least no need to drive everyday. * For a spouse on a H-4 visa and who thus cannot work, living in the city makes things easier and a lot less boring. * Mountain View / Sunnyvale / Palo Alto / ... have pretty sad downtown areas, they aren't bike/pedestrian friendly, and they make you live in purely residential areas. So they end up spending $3~4000 on rent to live in SoMa and be close to their company shuttle lines or the Caltrain station. Some can work during the commute, some can't. My friends in Berkeley have it better (much nicer residential areas, you can bike to your Bart station). But then of course you need a job in the city or in Oakland (and even though things have supposedly improved a lot, it still looked pretty sketchy to me).
  - mercutio2 11y ago
    Most of the big tech companies have Berkeley buses. You don't have to work in SF/Oakland if you live in Berkeley.
    - hocuspocus 11y ago
      You're right but I've heard it typically takes about 1h30 door to door, that is beyond what I'd consider a reasonable commute.
- CalRobert 11y ago
  Mountain View is expensive, and to many people, boring. SF is at least less likely to be the latter. Remember also that Mountain View despises mixed use and refused to rezone areas currently designated commercial-only in order to let Google workers live near their jobs. Of course, it also would have meant people who bought in the 70's would have some tiny amount of competition for their asset.
ZenoArrow 11y ago
>"There's simply little advantage to living right in the heart of a major city." Depends on the city and what you're after. Living in the centre of a city can bring lifestyle benefits, especially with fast and reliable public transport. Major cities with metro/subway networks can offer a massive playground of activities all without relying on cars. It might sound bizarre, but there's a certain freedom from moving through a city without using a car. In my experience cars rely on a fair amount of responsibility and effort, whereas public transport offers better opportunities to enjoy the journey. In addition to that there's the social aspect. If you live close to where you work it's far easier to be social with your work colleagues after work. This can lead to a better sense if camaraderie with those you work with, especially if they live close to where you work too. Seeing as it's often the case that people work in the heart of a city rather than the suburbs, these are perks you're far more likely to get by living in the heart of a city. There are certainly advantages to living further afield as well, but I hope you can agree the choice isn't one sided.
ssalazar 11y ago
> There's simply little advantage to living right in the heart of a major city. This is a very personal opinion, and can vary depending on one's interests and stage of life. Young single people benefit from being "where the action is" as they are near other young people doing the same thing and can pursue various social and romantic interests. People who aren't interested in those things for whatever reason have much less to gain from living in the heart of a major city.
nsfmc 11y ago
i have a similar anecdote, when i arrived in the bay area in 2011, i was paying the exact same rent in east palo alto, when i left in 2015, my rent had gone up to $2,750. As my lease neared expiration, my landlord decided against renewing it and instead the house was sold because they were looking for a good exit. i don't blame them, everyone has their reasons, but i want to caution you that while it's possible to find a good rental that works out for some period of time, it's not a long term assurance and being forced to move can make it difficult to acquire a place as favorable as the one you have with the combination of commute or rent or other intangibles you've grown accustomed to in your neighborhood. Or you may find one at the price, but it may take a much longer time than you have allotted, especially in this market where qualified renters are plentiful and willing (often out of necessity) to pay high rents for substandard properties. I also asked myself the same question you did, but the conclusion i reached eventually involved me moving out of state last year. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

msutherl 11y ago

There's a lot of room for expansion to the South as well – I pay $1,300 in Bayview.

zzz157 11y ago

Well you also have a significantly higher probability of getting shot when you live in Oakland. So there's always that.

vosper 11y ago
It's not like the Mission, Tenderloin or SOMA are especially safe, either. In SF, as in Oakland, there are good spots and bad spots. I haven't felt unsafe in Lake Merritt, and my place is way nicer than what I got for the same price in Cole Valley. And the weather's better (it really is).
nostrademons 11y ago
Depends which part of Oakland. Some parts of Oakland (eg. Rockridge, Temescal) are significantly nicer than SF. They aren't exactly cheap, but your safety : price ratio is significantly better than in say, the Mission.
- mrgordon 11y ago
  They may appear nicer but when I read Yelp reviews in Rockridge and Temescal they occasionally mention the bars on the windows or robberies taking place which I've never seen in San Francisco. Not trying to say the average person will encounter problems but I do think even those areas have more crime than you'd think. As someone who lived in Oakland and now has rent control in the Mission, I would say that my safety : price ratio is significantly higher here in SF after a relatively small period of time.
  - mrgordon 11y ago
    Wow, very surprised to see I got downvoted for sharing a perfectly valid anecdote after living in Oakland and San Francisco. I'm sorry if you feel differently but downvoting comments just because you don't agree with them is rather immature and only serves to limit discourse by discouraging people from sharing their opinions, experiences, and facts. I was polite in my response and even pointed out that the average person is unlikely to encounter problems. Here are some further details for those who care about the facts: 1. This is a representative review for one Thai restaurant that I wanted to go to in Rockridge where I noticed many reviews mentioned them being robbed repeatedly and now the restaurant has to buzz customers through the door because of it (read the first review or search for "robbery"): http://www.yelp.com/biz/saysetha-thai-cuisine-oakland?hrid=uI5-SqeMPAZb1pLojXdaPQ&utm_campaign=www_review_share_popup&utm_medium=copy_link&utm_source=(direct) http://www.yelp.com/biz/saysetha-thai-cuisine-oakland?hrid=u... 2. Here is a recent article about how middle class residents of many neighborhoods including Rockridge and Temescal have resorted to hiring private security forces due to the rampant crime problems: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/5/30/oakland-private-securitypatrols.html http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/5/30/oakland-priv... 3. Here is an article describing why robbers like Rockridge and other "target rich" neighborhoods where it is easy to rob rich people and escape: http://patch.com/california/rockridge/why-robbers-like-rockridge-report-from-the-north-oakland-crime-meeting http://patch.com/california/rockridge/why-robbers-like-rockr...
    - nostrademons 11y ago
      I wasn't the one who downvoted you.
eastbayjake 11y ago
You can keep believing that. It certainly keeps the rent on the Oakland side of the Bay a little cheaper than if everyone found out it's spacious, full of artists and great food, and has better weather.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
mtanski 11y ago
What's the probability of being shot in Oakland in a year as a white male? Esp if you don't have any associations with crime yourself. I lived in both good, bad and transitioning neighborhoods and I feel like people over estimate how much impact this will have on life. Fact is, shit happens everywhere. Happens more often where there is density. You can be mugged in a good part of town (well because that's where people with money are at) and bad part of town. Before I moved back to NYC, my wife would regularly get harassed in SOMA on the street walking to her job.

ianamartin 11y ago

Absolutely this. I have a two-bedroom apt. in Brooklyn that's the size of a small house. No roommate. I just like the space. I pay the same amount as my cousin, who lives in Manhattan in a studio apt that's smaller than my guest bedroom/office. At my current job in the financial district, the commute would be the same. Plus, I live in a historic neighborhood where there are houses with lawns and gardens and trees. And it reminds me of home in Texas. NYC isn't as bad as SF, but it can be really awful if you insist on living in the most "happening" parts of town.

beambot 11y ago

Did the same math for living in San Jose... With the price difference in rent, you could literally hire a private car plus driver to take you to-and-from the city every weekend. The most insane part is the people who commute down to MTV (eg. Google) and only really get the benefit of the city on weekends anyway...

hocuspocus 11y ago
I've just come back from two weeks in the Bay area to see a bunch of friends and they all do that. Even though I find it insane as much you do, I understand. There are a few good reasons though, from our very European and biased point of view: * No need to own car, or at least no need to drive everyday. * For a spouse on a H-4 visa and who thus cannot work, living in the city makes things easier and a lot less boring. * Mountain View / Sunnyvale / Palo Alto / ... have pretty sad downtown areas, they aren't bike/pedestrian friendly, and they make you live in purely residential areas. So they end up spending $3~4000 on rent to live in SoMa and be close to their company shuttle lines or the Caltrain station. Some can work during the commute, some can't. My friends in Berkeley have it better (much nicer residential areas, you can bike to your Bart station). But then of course you need a job in the city or in Oakland (and even though things have supposedly improved a lot, it still looked pretty sketchy to me).
- mercutio2 11y ago
  Most of the big tech companies have Berkeley buses. You don't have to work in SF/Oakland if you live in Berkeley.
  - hocuspocus 11y ago
    You're right but I've heard it typically takes about 1h30 door to door, that is beyond what I'd consider a reasonable commute.
CalRobert 11y ago
Mountain View is expensive, and to many people, boring. SF is at least less likely to be the latter. Remember also that Mountain View despises mixed use and refused to rezone areas currently designated commercial-only in order to let Google workers live near their jobs. Of course, it also would have meant people who bought in the 70's would have some tiny amount of competition for their asset.

ZenoArrow 11y ago

>"There's simply little advantage to living right in the heart of a major city." Depends on the city and what you're after. Living in the centre of a city can bring lifestyle benefits, especially with fast and reliable public transport. Major cities with metro/subway networks can offer a massive playground of activities all without relying on cars. It might sound bizarre, but there's a certain freedom from moving through a city without using a car. In my experience cars rely on a fair amount of responsibility and effort, whereas public transport offers better opportunities to enjoy the journey. In addition to that there's the social aspect. If you live close to where you work it's far easier to be social with your work colleagues after work. This can lead to a better sense if camaraderie with those you work with, especially if they live close to where you work too. Seeing as it's often the case that people work in the heart of a city rather than the suburbs, these are perks you're far more likely to get by living in the heart of a city. There are certainly advantages to living further afield as well, but I hope you can agree the choice isn't one sided.

ssalazar 11y ago

> There's simply little advantage to living right in the heart of a major city. This is a very personal opinion, and can vary depending on one's interests and stage of life. Young single people benefit from being "where the action is" as they are near other young people doing the same thing and can pursue various social and romantic interests. People who aren't interested in those things for whatever reason have much less to gain from living in the heart of a major city.

nsfmc 11y ago

i have a similar anecdote, when i arrived in the bay area in 2011, i was paying the exact same rent in east palo alto, when i left in 2015, my rent had gone up to $2,750. As my lease neared expiration, my landlord decided against renewing it and instead the house was sold because they were looking for a good exit. i don't blame them, everyone has their reasons, but i want to caution you that while it's possible to find a good rental that works out for some period of time, it's not a long term assurance and being forced to move can make it difficult to acquire a place as favorable as the one you have with the combination of commute or rent or other intangibles you've grown accustomed to in your neighborhood. Or you may find one at the price, but it may take a much longer time than you have allotted, especially in this market where qualified renters are plentiful and willing (often out of necessity) to pay high rents for substandard properties. I also asked myself the same question you did, but the conclusion i reached eventually involved me moving out of state last year. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯