16 ms·

Silicon Valley’s “megacommute” even worse than L.A

• johan_larson 10y ago
  Tempting though it is to cry, "Let it burn!", we should be beyond such things, and earnestly desist from anything that might be construed as wishing harm (even indirectly) upon our honoured colleagues in the greater San Francisco Bay area.
• smeyer 10y ago
  As someone in Boston but from California, the lack of commutes comparable to the Bay Area or Silicon Valley always makes me grateful, even if there are other downsides. For example, I split a 2 bedroom apartment in a nice, active neighborhood a few minutes walk from downtown and about a 20 minute walk from work for about $1,200.
  • userchris 10y ago
    You have a 2 bedroom in downtown Boston for $1200? Or do you mean $1200 each?
    • smeyer 10y ago
      $1200 each. But it still seems a lot better than my friends in and near the Bay Area (and please correct me if I'm wrong).
      • abritinthebay 10y ago
        It would be in the low end in SF but I know several people paying that there. Granted it's for a 4-600 sq ft place...
        • smeyer 10y ago
          As far as I can tell, the middle here tends to correspond more to the high end there. The only friends I know paying substantially more are living in luxury highrises, whereas on the low end I have friends paying more like $600 a month to do something like a 4 way split of a 4 bedroom apartment a couple of stops out on the T.
    • xeromal 10y ago
      1200 is still reasonable I'd say if it's downtown.
  • davexunit 10y ago
    Boston is too expensive to own a house. I moved west and commute an hour by car to work.
    • ghaff 10y ago
      That's one big difference from the Bay area. I also live a bit under an hour west by either car or train. Near the commuter rail, which I often used for the short period when I worked in the city. These days I work (as I also did previously) for a company on the outer 495 loop which makes for a 25-30 minute commute. It's hard to get out of the "expensive zone" as easily in the Bay area--partly because of geography and partly because it's not just SF and a number of inner suburbs that are sky-high (as is the Boston metro area out to Concord or so) but the whole of Silicon Valley. Exurban-rural town. I don't know exactly what the real estate prices are these days as I've had my place for a long time but I'm guessing $300K or so would get you a decent house.
      • davexunit 10y ago
        Nice to run into people with a similar situation. I recently moved to a place just west of 495 in Worcester county, so finding a job somewhere along 495 would reduce my commute a lot, but I like my current job so I deal with the long commute. I didn't find any houses that were to my liking in the $300k range in towns with good school districts, but once you go into the $400-500k range there is good stuff. Either way, you get so much more for your money than if you bought closer to Boston.
        • ghaff 10y ago
          When I bought I was working in Westboro. There was almost nothing tech-related in Boston/Cambridge at the time. The modern Kendall Square (much less Seaport area) is a relatively recent phenomenon. I know it's probably hard for many on this site to comprehend but relatively few of my classmates--even those who worked closer to Boston--had much interest in living in the city. I imagine you're right about real estate prices. My house is sufficiently "quirky" albeit on a nice and large plot of land that what I see on Zillow probably isn't representative (and Zillow has some details wrong anyway). I'm also not sure our schools qualify as "good" although I have no personal experience.
  • mox1 10y ago
    You haven't lived (or driven) in Boston enough yet if you consider Boston having "a lack of commutes." It most definitely has them, you just are one of the very few lucky people who live there and can walk to work. $2400 is not getting you into a 2 bedroom in any nice / "managed" building in Boston. Thats the going rate for a 1bed in the nice high-rises. So your in a small apt complex or converted house (duplex,triplex, etc.) 1. Minimum to park a car in the city every day is $250-$300 / month. Realistically $350+ 2. Even living inside the "128" loop(so minimum500K house) , expect 45-90 minute commute (snow, rain). OR you can use the train 1. Commuter Rail passes are expensive, $250-$350 a month (add some parking money to park at the commuter rail station ($1-$5 a day). 2. Hope the train runs on time and fits into your schedule (they run on the 30 minutes or on the hour) 3. Takes the same amount of time as driving (45-90 minutes easy). Boston has many of the same problems as SF (housing, commutes), its just been that way for longer and people are used to it.
    • smeyer 10y ago
      I'm plenty familiar with Boston commutes and that they can be pretty crappy, my point is mostly that things seem an order of magnitude better than in the Bay. Commutes are still bad and rents are still expensive, but my point was that examining the problems around SF makes me grateful that things aren't as bad here. On the note of a "nice/managed building", you're right that I live in a smaller setup. Having previously lived in one of the luxury high-rises, I find my current apartment and management preferable even before considering the differences in rent.
• moultano 10y ago
  Literally everyone I know in the bay area who doesn't already own a house is considering leaving. As extreme as the shortage of housing is the shortage of childcare. 150 person waitlists for 50 kid day-cares are common.
  • cx1000 10y ago
    When I visited the Seattle area, locals were complaining about all the Bay Area people moving up there and driving the rent up. I wonder how big a problem that might become for places that are appealing to Bay Area residents like Seattle, Austin, Denver, etc.
    • amyjess 10y ago
      Locals in Dallas are similarly complaining. We've had a lot of companies move here in the last few years, and housing prices have skyrocketed as a result. So far, rents haven't gone up quite as much as purchase prices, but they're going up too, and it's only a matter of time before rent catches up. We used to be one of the cheapest cities in the country, and while we're still cheap compared to California, the gap has noticeably narrowed. (edit: I've also heard of Californians moving here who make an offer for well above the asking price, just to make sure they get it, which contributes to the skyrocketing prices)
      • ryandrake 10y ago
        > I've also heard of Californians moving here who make an offer for well above the asking price, just to make sure they get it, which contributes to the skyrocketing prices Maybe that's all Californians know. It's normal out here. I put in an offer on a home that received 45 other written offers, 1/4 of them all-cash and above asking price. If you're financing, you need to go much higher than 25% above asking. It's insanity. Then we go move to different parts of the country and forget that you don't need that aggressive approach everywhere.
    • chiph 10y ago
      It's already a problem. It's not uncommon for home sales in Austin to be all-cash, and 10% over the asking price. It's not all Californians though - a coworker reports Chinese investors buying 3 homes in his neighborhood. Combine the inflow of new residents with the existing stressed road system and city & county council inaction on mass transit, and traffic is ugly. It can take me 35-40 minutes to go 8.5 miles some days.
• ohstopitu 10y ago
  Just out of curiosity: How's the public transport situation in the same area? (I mean, Public Transport + car pooling would help reduce this issue no?)
• js_what_ 10y ago
  Interesting that there is a claim of ~5% mega commuters in bay area. The 2012 census bureau study (using 2006-2010 data) had that number at about 2% [1]. On that note, you'll see that traffic/commute is worse than L.A. in many cities. I think L.A. just gets the publicity but there are a lot of people around the country suffering in silence. [1] https://www.census.gov/hhes/commuting/files/2012/Paper-Poster_Megacommuting%20in%20the%20US.pdf https://www.census.gov/hhes/commuting/files/2012/Paper-Poste...
  • bagacrap 10y ago
    percent "megacommutes" is a pretty odd metric. LA is "leading" in total time wasted in traffic[1]. [1] http://inrix.com/scorecard/ http://inrix.com/scorecard/
• Tempest1981 10y ago
  Let's all work from home 1 or 2 days a week. But I suspect things still aren't bad enough to consider any changes.
  • cmdrfred 10y ago
    I heard a executive scream "but face time!" somewhere in the distance. Results only workplaces would make this possible but I don't see that happening.
    • norea-armozel 10y ago
      I never understood the need for face time in positions that aren't sales and the like. When I write code it's mostly at my workstation without the need for chit-chat. And meetings I do have can be done over a Skype conference call or some shared whiteboard app. If anything, there needs to be a tax on employers who force tech workers to be in an office.
      • Tempest1981 10y ago
        Long commutes = workers arriving at work exhausted. Not a great way to start the day. The other day, I worked from home... Made coffee, and was coding away at 8am. By noon, I had a ton of work done. That never happens on a commute day.
        • norea-armozel 10y ago
          When I was stuck using the buses in Minneapolis to get to my job in Shoreview that was the hardest commute I've ever done. I just couldn't get much done. I was so tired.
  • stillworks 10y ago
    I think that is the practical solution. Even public transit systems have to go suffer rush hours ! Capacity of a transit system be it public or individual will never match the load. If the employers only ask the employees to come in 2 days a week or only when necessary, there should be a significant improvement in the situation. This could be even tried as an experiment for a while to see how it plays out. I have been commuting in London for about 7 years now and I cry when I see how much the commute costs me and the sub-par service that I have to deal with on the services feeding into the main hub I have to get to to be able to use the tube. The tube service itself is not so bad but I cannot afford to live inside the zones where I only have to use TFL services. The best solution is for the companies in SV (or other major employment nerve centers) to realise that making all of your employees commute everyday into work is the root cause. Just chiming in here with this example since I have had the chance to use the VTA for about a month and I have first hand experience of a well established transit system i.e. London. I personally loved the VTA trams since very few people used them even in rush hour, they always travel at ground or above ground level (underground travel does get a bit depressing for me), effective air conditioning (never experienced a fart-attack although my time spent on VTA is very little), always get a seat and there's "free" Wifi. Most local coworkers who I knew there were driving and they were driving in early and leaving early to avoid the back up on 101 or the 280 routes. That's what I do on my commute on the public transport system even. But if everybody managed to learn that trick, then it's the same situation in the end.
• FT_intern 10y ago
  the commute is very relaxing if you're on a corporate bus
  • Tempest1981 10y ago
    It would help with the larger companies increased the number of buses they run, and expand the routes for broader coverage. It could be done immediately, whereas expanding BART will take years, and be focused on a small area.
  • orian 10y ago
    As far as being forced to sit in corporate bus for over hour is relaxing ;-)
    • amyjess 10y ago
      Bring a book (or an e-reader) or a handheld gaming console. Don't think of it as a commute; thinking of it as blocking out two hours every day to play video games!
      • orian 10y ago
        Glad you find it that way :-) I used to walk to work around 2.5km, <30 minutes. Through a green neighbourhood, I think I've never appreciated it enough.
      • splintercell 10y ago
        I have an hour commute daily, and I use that time to read technical books, papers, watch videos (like Lynda.com training videos), or even code (if I can get place to sit during off peak hours).
• gist 10y ago
  I was surprised to find out about a 58 year old programmer that just got a job at Google. When I asked them where they were living they said they found a 55 plus community. I am wondering if that actually was one of the reasons they were hired.
  • hox 10y ago
    Why would you even ask this? Please don't contribute to the ageism debate. My hunch is the programmer was qualified for the job.
    • gist 10y ago
      Don't tell me what to do. I didn't say only reason I said one of the reasons. Something that separated the applicant from the pack of otherwise qualified people. In any case unclear to me why it's a bad thing to note that someone older has a better chance of getting hired because it's easier for them to find living accommodations.
  • cloudjacker 10y ago
    A community that was close or far from Google? Because that's what this article is about
  • URSpider94 10y ago
    Any reputable employer (like Google) would NEVER ask an interviewee about their age or where they are living, much less bring them up in the hiring discussion.
    • gist 10y ago
      Sure because it's difficult to figure out approximately how old someone is when you meet them by their work history and/or the way they look. There is a housing in SV. Certain housing is set aside for 55+. That housing is less expensive and better located. Makes total sense that that would present a hiring opportunity and be an enhancement to someone's qualifications. This is no different than getting into a top school. Anyone who gets in is qualified but someone within a special group knocks out others with the same qualifications.
• Schweigi 10y ago
  Better public transport would solve a lot of those problems. For such a dense area the current offering is a joke. I live in San Mateo and work in the south bay. By car it takes me 35-40min (with no traffic) but with public transport it would be over 2h. After six there isn't even any option available to go back home. No surprise that so many people choose a car to commute.
  • mc32 10y ago
    No two ways about it. In many parts of the bay area taking public transit is a non-starter because attempting it means hours-long commutes, whereas driving is almost bearable in comparison. But even in San Francisco, unless you're going inbound/outbound the crosstown commutes are horrible. Try getting from Ingleside to Richmond, or Richmond to Dog Patch in a reasonable time frame --impossible. They are all less than 7 miles as the crow flies, but try getting to and fro with public transit that takes less than an hour for what amounts to roughly 5miles... The transit system in SF is based on the assumption people are going to and from "downtown" and does not accommodate other commute streams.
  • orian 10y ago
    But if you look, only some parts of SFO are dense, the rest is a joke. Paris: 55,673 ppl/sq mi New York City: 27,016.3 ppl/sq mi San Francisco: 17,179.2 ppl/sq mi Zurich: 12,000 ppl/sq mi Vienna: 11,205 ppl/sq mi San Bruno: 7,505.0 ppl/sq mi Mountain View: 6,034.8 ppl/sq mi San Jose: 5,256.2 ppl/sq mi Cupertino 5,179.1 ppl/sq mi Menlo Park: 3,271.3 ppl/sq mi
    • ChuckMcM 10y ago
      Your point on density is a good one. And one could argue (and I have tried to at times) that cities could benefit by sending transit to their "density points" preferentially. That would maximize the value for commuters. When I see plans for a station or train stop with fewer than 10,000 people within a mile of it, I wonder if that will be useful or not.
      • orian 10y ago
• 11thEarlOfMar 10y ago
  And even the coffee shops are more crowded as folks hang out waiting for traffic to ease before heading home in the evening.
• orian 10y ago
  Oh, from the european perspective, the SV housing / transport seems little... weird. If you look at urban design & public transport it's amazing how well it works despite all obstacles. Public transport doesn't make sense in low population density areas and wide road make the distances even bigger. I mean, some US cities managed to realize a car-utopia Houston with 11 lane highway or Phoenix. The question is, does it make sense? I'm surprised that no one tried to buy a shit lot of land and create a more-cityish city. In this context SFO is city with a city life, especially some older districts.
  • cx1000 10y ago
    Agreed, the area is suburban and has been growing into having a large city-level population without the necessary infrastructure. Kind of like if Google added a little php to their backend after becoming the most popular search engine.
  • amyjess 10y ago
    Because a lot of people don't want to live in a more-cityish city. Some of us prefer the suburbs. A place like Houston or Phoenix is perfect for me. Actually, I live in suburban Dallas (and I work farther out in the suburbs), and I have no desire to move. Though it's possible I might have to move out of state next year, in which case I'm seriously looking at St. Paul, MN.
    • chrisper 10y ago
      Yeah, but a "suburb" like San Jose is just annoying. It has the population of a city, but the life of a suburb (=nothing going on). So basically the worst of both. I mean, I am like you, that I would rather live in a smallish community where it's calm and everything over a city, but if you combine that feature with "there are people everywhere" then it is not that great.
      • orian 10y ago
        Try visit Zurich. It's very much like village-city by an America' standards. Slow life, quiet, know your neighbours etc. with all good inventions from XXI century ;-)
• overcast 10y ago
  Every time I read these articles, I feel like I made the right decision staying in the Northeast and not chasing the startup culture of the West. Sure I make less money on paper, but my office is five minutes away, my large house is only $1200(including the $6000 in escrow taxes!), only 36.5 hours a week, no on call, totally flexible working hours, I get to travel all over the world, and I live like a king. All that free time saved from virtually zero commute, and no overtime required, adds up to A LOT of time for my personal projects, and vacations. As I get older, I'm definitely valuing that over "being in the industry".
  • japhyr 10y ago
    Where in the northeast are you?
    • overcast 10y ago
      Rochester, NY. Cost of living is super cheap, lots of good food, you've got the great lakes, finger lakes, all kinds of outdoors shit, tons of festivals, and most importantly everything is only 15 minutes away on expressways. Only real issue is winter, but the change of seasons is enjoyable.
      • NegativeLatency 10y ago
        And the humidity.
        • overcast 10y ago
          Haha, yes, for a month!
        • InitialLastName 10y ago
          I think you think Rochester is somewhere near (and has similar weather to) NYC. In the 5 years I lived there, there was about a week of nasty-hot/humid weather per summer. A big improvement on NYC or Philadelphia. Edit: For a better description of the problem with Rochester's weather, see GP's name.
• Tempest1981 10y ago
  Will self driving cars be the panacea? Or merely a tool to make painful commutes more tolerable, for those who can afford them?
  • ssharp 10y ago
    Assuming every person replaces their car with a self-driving car, how much would roadway throughput improve as a result of smarter communal driving? The assumption is that the self-driving cars are a 1:1 replacement of human-driven cars and ride sharing does not increase or decrease.
    • amyjess 10y ago
      The idea is that you'd use your commute time to do something other than drive. You could read a book, watch a TV show, play video games, etc. You could even take a nap if you wanted to.
      • sampo 10y ago
        So buying a house behind even a 2-3 hours commute will become doable. So people will start doing it. Perhaps briefly wake up after 5 hours of sleep, hop on and get the rest 2 hours of sleep in the car.
  • imh 10y ago
    I'd bet it's somewhere in between. I think the determining factor is nuisance. People will put up with certain long commutes and high prices for a given reward. If tech makes it so we can accommodate more people going further at the same nuisance level, we'll probably do that instead of the same number of people at a lower stress level. People will keep moving in until it gets shitty enough to overcome their desire to be here, right? If so, then the level of shittiness is constant over time and tech.
  • sampo 10y ago
    When commute becomes more bearable, more people will buy houses behind an even longer commute, so the total amount of miles commuted daily will increase.
• 11thEarlOfMar 10y ago
  Public transportation is not going to come to the rescue. The communities involved won't tolerate the additional taxes, nor will they cooperate in making an efficient system. Can we pin any hopes on fully autonomous vehicles?
  • CaptSpify 10y ago
    > ...nor will they cooperate in making an efficient system. You mean like the rest of the world has already proven to be doable? What makes this area unique?
• CydeWeys 10y ago
  Anyone know what the % drag on SF's economy caused by the lack of housing is up to? SF has had a shortage of housing for decades, and it just gets worse and worse. Is there any point at which the NIMBYs will be defeated and zoning policy adjusted to allow real densification? Or is power stacked so much in their favor that it will never happen?
• honkhonkpants 10y ago
  The article makes disingenuous claims about measure B. The county plans to spend nearly all of that money on freeways, which history has shown will not relieve traffic. Their plan calls for almost nothing for public transit.
  • toast0 10y ago
    > The county plans to spend nearly all of that money on freeways, which history has shown will not relieve traffic. Additional freeway lanes improve throughput, but don't remove congestion at peak: it will reduce the duration of congestion. If you want to handle peak traffic without congestion, you would have to build a lot more capacity than is reasonable (or significantly reduce demand). Since demand for transit is increasing continuously (as more people move to the area), and supply of transit increases slowly and only in steps, it's no surprise that the new supply is quickly matched with demand. Lots of people would like to go places during rush hour, but the freeways are full for several hours, and Caltrain is too.
• noahlt 10y ago
  Fortunately, the election's just around the corner, and if you'd like to help solve these problems, you can do so with your ballot. http://www.sfyimby.org/endorsements-nov-2016 http://www.sfyimby.org/endorsements-nov-2016 Is a good pro-housing voter guide for San Franciscans.
• dkhenry 10y ago
  After visiting the Palo Alto region for work I don't understand why anyone would drive anywhere. It was so extremely friendly to biking, I could get from Menlo Park to Redwood city and even across the bay to Freemont with no trouble whatsoever.
  • chrisper 10y ago
    Because you can't get anywhere without a car here. At least in San Jose. And to be honest, I would not ride a bike here after seeing how people drive around here. How do you get your stuff home from Costco? I mean there is delivery, but still.
    • dkhenry 10y ago
      I was able to get everywhere I needed to go, granted I was staying at an AirBnB so I didn't need to go shopping, but I rode past a safeway during my adventures and I can put plenty of stuff in saddle baskets. About the people driving, I also found that there are tons of roads right off the main through fairs that are very very bike friendly, very little traffic and lots of bike lanes. I think you underestimate just how far you can get on a bike in a reasonable time. Like I said I commuted from Menlo park to Redwood city and to Freemont ( across the bay ) with no trouble whatsoever.
• ChuckMcM 10y ago
  It would be interesting to understand where they work. Back in the dot com days there were people living in Livermore and driving into San Jose (aka "the South Bay") but now it seems more people with "long" commutes are driving into San Francisco. And one of the people who worked for me (at an office on the peninsula) was thinking about moving to San Francisco, even though they currently lived much closer because they enjoyed the more urban lifestyle offered there. As a result of all these different forces I realized how challenging it is to not have some bad commutes. And in Sunnyvale we're in the midst of a debate started about choices the city council has made to allow more local housing to be developed. There are a lot of apartments and condos being built and some residents are complaining about traffic and change. It will be interesting to see if folks approve additional transit dollars.
• justinzollars 10y ago
  I had to sell my house in Berkeley because my commute to San Francisco was eating up 3 hours every day - the time I allocated to side projects. Our politicians have given up, no one even talks about making our transit system better. Total losers. (12 miles)
  • HillaryBriss 10y ago
    California's state and local governments are probably unable to solve these problems. The legal structure, rather than supporting a solution, seems to actually make these problems quite likely. I suspect that, in a democracy which places an emphasis on freedom of career choice, free rights of personal movement (from pretty much anywhere to pretty much anywhere else), essentially unregulated road and highway access, the high cost of infrastructure creation and maintenance, the high cost of government workers, combined with relatively strong individual property rights -- gridlock and skyrocketing housing costs are truly unavoidable. > “If the economy tanks, then we won’t create jobs the way we used to, but nobody wants the economy to tank,” Hancock said. “We don’t really have a fix for this problem right now..."
  • Tempest1981 10y ago
    We should assign the problem to engineers, instead of politicians. Are there any such efforts? Or have they given up just because of the costs?
    • justinzollars 10y ago
      Exactly. This is exactly the problem. In the 50's congress was made up of Engineers today its made up of attorneys.
      • punctilio 10y ago
        Source for "In the 50's congress was made up of Engineers"?
  • muzz 10y ago
    Transbay bus is around 45 minutes to SF and BART is not much longer, so you must be going to somewhere other than downtown
• natch 10y ago
  Just choose where you live carefully (and pay the big bucks and sacrifice space) and work close. I've never had a bad commute in SV but then I don't live in a palace.
• 11thEarlOfMar 10y ago
  I'm wondering specifically about the Warm Springs District in Fremont. This is where: - A new BART station is set to open shortly, and, - Across the street, a new single family housing development with 4,000 (yes, four thousand) new housing units is under construction [0], - And, next door, Tesla will be building 500,000 Model 3s annually with 3,000 additional workers. The AM commutes via I-680 / Pleasanton and I-880 / Oakland are already Hell on Earth. It's going to get much worse before it gets better. [0] https://www.fremont.gov/1515/Warm-SpringsSouth-Fremont https://www.fremont.gov/1515/Warm-SpringsSouth-Fremont
  • ryandrake 10y ago
    Still ultra-expensive. That area is highly desirable due to the factors you listed. Cheapest homes you're going to find in that area start at $1M. Check out this charming little starter home: [1] 1: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Fremont/47040-Havasu-St-94539/home/1789960 https://www.redfin.com/CA/Fremont/47040-Havasu-St-94539/home...
  • muzz 10y ago
    Infill development of single family homes basically makes the exurbs (like Pleasanton) become "farther" since traffic becomes worse
• ryandrake 10y ago
  I live in Livermore, and my commute to the South Bay averages about 2 hours each way. It sucks, but I've gotten used to it and you just have to accept it because there's really nothing you can do about it. There are only a few major road arteries, and the public transit options are a total joke--it takes LONGER because you need to drive to the train station, then bike or take a bus from the other train station to your work. Honestly I have no idea what the solution is. Build more lanes on the highway and more people will choose to commute, quickly using those new lanes up.
  • goostavos 10y ago
    >2 hours each way Jesus, man. That's time you don't get back. I'd factor that into your salary, take the difference off, and move somewhere sane.
    • ryandrake 10y ago
      I've lived in sane places. Problem there is you've got a handful of tech employers in most of these places. If you lose your tech job in the Bay Area, you can interview at dozens of local companies a week pretty much forever until you find something. If you lose your job in SaneTown, USA, you can exhaust the entire local hiring market in a week and if you come up empty you're moving (probably to a different State).
      • istorical 10y ago
        In NYC you can find tons of employers but rent a room for 800-1000 (living with roommates) with a 20-40 minute subway commute.
  • istorical 10y ago
    You could move to a new apartment or a new city.
• Tempest1981 10y ago
  We need to encourage clustering/density/jobs in more remote areas where housing is cheaper, instead of downtown SF/SJ/Oakland. Wouldn't that help? Or just result in broader sprawl -- I'm picturing LA.
• 1_2__3 10y ago
  Anyone living here could have told you this years ago.
• 1_2__3 10y ago
  It's hard not to see this as a life-and-death struggle between people who think public transportation is the way of the future and people who think cars are the future. I know which way the HN crowd leans, but I feel compelled to point out that while pro-transit folks may feel comfortable being ideologically "correct", in practice this has just not worked out in the US and any argument about why sounds like someone hammering a bell upon which is inscribed "no true scotsman". Either there's been a multi-decade cabal holding the entire country in its grip and preventing us from leaping into our beautiful public transportation future... Or Americans just do not want it, kicking and screaming about sustainability to the contrary.
  • davidw 10y ago
    > Either there's been a multi-decade cabal holding the entire country in its grip and preventing us from leaping into our beautiful public transportation future... Or Americans just do not want it, kicking and screaming about sustainability to the contrary. Zoning, basically. It makes density illegal in enough places that transit isn't terribly practical. It also makes even walking to a corner store something that is no longer an option in many new developments. If you'd like to read all about it, this book is very thorough: http://amzn.to/2fz1hPI http://amzn.to/2fz1hPI If you'd like something a bit more tl;dr, these are good: http://amzn.to/2erOJXL http://amzn.to/2erOJXL http://amzn.to/2fyXrpG http://amzn.to/2fyXrpG
    • ghaff 10y ago
      But "Zoning" (to the degree that's the central reason) was also not created by a "multi-decade cabal". It's largely the summation of the preferences of residents in different areas.
      • davidw 10y ago
        > It's largely the summation of the preferences of residents in different areas. Yes. With the complicity of states/feds/courts etc... who have allowed neighbors to run rampant over others' property rights to a degree that I think has lead to a number of terrible consequences.
• beachstartup 10y ago
  > "even worse than LA" people in the bay area loves chiding LA like this. but you are quickly starting to understand first hand how exactly LA came to be the way it is. it was/is a mixture of extremely powerful political, economic, and social forces exerted over generations. unfortunately SF/the bay is doing nothing to fix it -- at long last LA is building new housing, mixed-used real estate, and new light rail and other public transit very aggressively. it will probably take the bay area another 2-3 decades to overcome the resistance, just like LA.
• bsimpson 10y ago
  I'd be curious to know if distance is a factor they accounted for. Traffic in LA is straight-up gridlock (or at least it was when I lived there). You could spend an hour going 10 miles, and that's not even during commute hours. If you spend 90 minutes driving from SF to Mountain View, traffic definitely makes it slower/worse than it would otherwise be, but it'd still be a 45 minute drive without traffic. People may spend more time driving in SF/SV, but that's largely a factor of how far apart desirable housing and jobs are for many people. I wouldn't be surprised if traffic on the Peninsula made commutes 2-3x longer than they'd be without it, but in LA the factor's more like 6x.
  • muad 10y ago
    LAX is a perfect example. It can take you over an hour to get from the off ramp to your terminal. Less than 1 mile.
• rckclmbr 10y ago
  I'm surprised nobody has mentioned e-bikes. As far as I can tell, that is the answer to the bay area traffic. Since I bought one roughly 5 months ago, I've commuted almost 3000 miles. My commute is the same every day, and it is a lot faster than a bad day of traffic. The bonus is that I don't have to change into bike clothes or shower. Details: 12 mile commute 40 minutes by ebike, every day 25 minutes by car, best day 50 minutes by car, average day 1 hour 40 minutes by car, average day
  • schoen 10y ago
    (Daily cycling commuter here) Two things that discourage people from commuting by bike that would still apply to ebikes: You get really wet in the rain. You get injured in a typical collision with a car. Two specific issues with ebikes: They're rather expensive compared to a bike, and even compared to some used cars. I see a risk that they could someday become regulated and licensed as mopeds.
  • Mekkanox 10y ago
    That's definitely a viable option for biking around a city that doesn't have favorable spring or summer weather. Can you store your bike inside instead of locking it up on the street? I imagine an e-bike would be at greater risk of theft than a regular bike. That might be an issue for folks who commute by bike but have to lock it up outside.
    • rckclmbr 10y ago
      Yea, I lock my bike inside the office (where I charge it as well). I also keep it in the garage. Additionally, I have a GPS on it, so if it does get stolen, it's a lot easier to locate
  • closeparen 10y ago
    What's the draw of an ebike vs. a low-end motorcycle? Also, one very simple answer is that the Bay Bridge isn't passable on anything short of a 250cc motorcycle and won't be until 2018.
• iblaine 10y ago
  By 2010, the commute in SF was worse than LA. While caltrain & bart do help in SF, when it breaks, you got problems. Bart is pretty reliable but Caltrain seems to break or hit something/someone a few times a month.
• bluedino 10y ago
  Remember Scott Collins (of Netscape) commute in 'Code Rush'? He lived in Michigan and commuted via airplane every 2 weeks to Silicon Valley
  • ghaff 10y ago
    Some variant of that is actually not especially unusual. In my experience, there's a sizable group of people who work remotely (or at least remotely from the HQ office) but they fly in on a regular basis.
  • johan_larson 10y ago
    The LA area has people who fly in every week from someplace further east, maybe Nevada. They spend the week in shared apartments that probably contain nothing but bunk-beds and a microwave. Then they fly home for the weekend, and still come out ahead.
• forbin_meet_hal 10y ago
  When I was in the Bay Area during the '90s dot-boom, it took me 90-100 minutes to get from Fremont to Palo Alto. During the dot-bust, it was more like 40 minutes. I cannot imagine what it's like now. I regret that I didn't use that time to learn Japanese or something.
• johnoneil 10y ago
  Are you a business man or a woman? Do you need money to start your own business? Do you need loan to settle your debt or pay off your bills or start a nice business? Do you need money for your project? We offer secured loans of any amount and anywhere in the world (individuals, businesses, real estate and legal persons) in our rate of 3% excellent. For application responses and to send more information to the following email address: johnoneil945@gmail.com
• johnoneil 10y ago
  Are you a business man or a woman? Do you need money to start your own business? Do you need loan to settle your debt or pay off your bills or start a nice business? Do you need money for your project? We offer secured loans of any amount and anywhere in the world (individuals, businesses, real estate and legal persons) in our rate of 3% excellent. For application responses and to send more information to the following email address: johnoneil945@gmail.com
• eip 10y ago
  If you sit in traffic for hours to get to and from work where you sit in front of a computer all day then you are living in the past.