5 ms·
I believe this is exactly my current dilemma: I live in San Jose, I commute to SF 3 days a week (super thankful for the chance to work remote 2x a week). My cu
by spike021 9y ago
I believe this is exactly my current dilemma:
I live in San Jose, I commute to SF 3 days a week (super thankful for the chance to work remote 2x a week). My current apartment (a 1BR I live in by myself) costs a bit less than 1k a month and is rent-controlled. The equivalent in SJ is probably worth 2-2.5x as much per month, and in SF (or somewhere in-between) it can be worth anywhere from 2.5-4x as much.
I've been hunting for an apartment more on the peninsula since I don't necessarily need or want to live right in the city, just closer (especially in case I switch jobs eventually), but I definitely want to halve the commute time at least (Caltrain plus door to door is nearly 1.75hrs each way).
But why would I want to leave my rent-controlled steal and be spending over half my monthly income for the equivalent? It's ridiculous.
So now it's a matter of figuring out the cost analysis of moving into a better area that's closer to work, and therefore an increased quality of life, or stay where I'm at where I can save much more money and have a rather crappy quality of life (I don't care for where I live now strictly other than the cheap price of the rent).
- fossuser 9y agoAre you willing to live with housemates? That's the only way you're going to come anywhere near your current rent. As a bonus you'll get more space generally and some community.
- spike021 9y agoNot particularly. I've had that experience before and much prefer being on my own now. I find my community elsewhere. I prefer to think of my apartment as my own space, whereas a house (or shared multi-room apartment) would require having a communal kitchen/living room.
- joejerryronnie 9y agoReal question, why not look for a different job closer to San Jose?
- adrianratnapala 9y agoAnd here we see nerfhammer@ point being made. Your question is good. And that shows that the laws discourage people from seeking work far from where they currently live.
- spike021 9y agoI'm relatively fresh out of school (just over a year full-time at my current job) so I don't know that it'd be as easy to just switch now without looking like I hop job to job.
- house9-2 9y agomaybe you could swing 3 remote days a week at some point?
- spike021 9y agoPossibly; my manager basically already does that, but then he's a manager so he has the rank to do it.
- joejerryronnie 9y agoYou should use the long commute as leverage, i.e. you need to either work one more day a week from home or start looking for something closer to SJ. You won't come off as looking disloyal to the company because everyone understands how brutal that commute is.
- zghst 9y agoA year in is a perfect time to hop IMHO.
- dhzjxnbzn 9y agoMoving jobs after a year is very common in tech. If you have any co-workers who left, asking them for referral (if they like the new gig) is a great way to go about it. Lots of companies pay referral bonuses so your old co-worker will be happy about it too. I'm on my third job after graduating and have more than doubled my income in 3.5 years.
- closeparen 9y agoSure, but in the counterfactual non-rent-control world, staying in SJ at $1000 isn’t even an option. Maybe efficiencies bring down prevailing rents a little bit, but enough to matter? The more interesting question is, why are the 50 miles between SF and SJ reserved for sparsely packed single family homes and one story strip malls?
- zghst 9y agoThat’s changing. They’re building higher up in Redwood City, South SF, and the surrounding areas. It’s costly to replace the older model of American development from the 50’s. They waited until the last minute to start working on the issue.
- shostack 9y agoRedwood City has been interesting to watch. I hope they get more diverse retail with the added increased density. Right now it is a lot of restaurants and bars, which while nice to have, means that it misses out on a lot of the foot traffic and such that other Peninsula cities like neighboring San Carlos, or Mountain View, etc. have. Redwood City is also nicely positioned as a mid-point between SF and South Bay. Beyond that, it seems the entire El Camino corridor is being heavily developed with retail and high-density condos and apartments.
- closeparen 9y agoInteresting. I looked at some of these complexes - similar rents to new construction in downtown SF (and similar unit sizes). Why? Schools, maybe?
- spike021 9y agoMany complexes along El Camino on the peninsula seem to be increasing rent wherever possible. They "renovate" (add stainless appliances basically) and it lets them increase rent for a unit by a few hundred dollars at least. They also charge 200-300 more for a parking spot (I've spoken with complexes before where one unit without parking was 200-300 less than another with one spot, or a unit with an extra/second spot). Some of these areas (Redwood City in this case) are next to major Caltrain stations with Baby Bullet stops. But they're also convenient (technically speaking) for going on 101S/N to work, etc.
- zghst 9y agoI have a friend in Oakland paying $1200 for his own place (rent controlled). Might be near impossible to find, but it’s out there!
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- muzz 9y agoHow exactly do you get a rent controlled steal in San Jose? Those 8% annual increases add up (multiply up) very quickly.
- spike021 9y agoFound a small, privately-owned 8 or so unit apartment building that a coworker of mine was living at back when I was in school. She recommended me to the apartment manager/owner, who then gave me a good deal on a unit that needed things re-done (carpet, paint, etc.) by not renovating it as planned. Since it's rent-controlled they've only increased my rent by a small amount twice in my 5 years living there.
- muzz 9y agoif they only increased it twice, then that's not due to rent control, which allowed for 8% each year (recently changed to 5%)
- spike021 9y agoNo. You misunderstand what I said. My unit is rent-controlled. However, the owner of the building has only increased rent twice, both being the max they could under the rent control limit. They just haven't continually increased it on an annual basis because apparently they haven't needed to.