3 ms·

I can't understand why the big players like Facebook and Google are not building somewhere like South San Francisco. Most of the employees either live in San Fr

by dsl 14y ago

I can't understand why the big players like Facebook and Google are not building somewhere like South San Francisco. Most of the employees either live in San Francisco or want to, and the difference in real estate pricing could easily be offset by eliminating half the bus fleet.

calbear81 14y ago
I don't think that statement that most of the employees either live in SF or want to is necessarily true and may only be true if you think of those under 30 or are recent college grads. Many folks want to own a home or raise a family outside of the city since it's very cost prohibitive to own or rent in San Francisco. The argument against South San Francisco is that if you're going to build to be closer to San Francisco, then you should make it easily accessible to SF employees. That means it should be a MUNI ride away so you can get to it from anywhere in the city otherwise you're going to either have to drive or deal with a multi-transfer commute. I would suggest the DogPatch or Mission Bay given the access to CalTrain (as a connector to Mountain View HQ) and the availability of large swaths of warehouses or vacant land.
c4urself 14y ago
I disagree, they're in an ideal location for people from both SF and down to San Jose and Fremont. That gives their employees a whole lot more choice for housing and makes it more attractive. Every time I see a company that's in SF offering jobs I shudder at the travel time from the valley. It's wonderful if you've already got a place in SF but makes anyone think twice about joining a company when they consider the crazy living costs in SF.
- drstewart 14y ago
  None of those things are true for me. I shudder when I think about paying crazy bay area prices and then having to live in a typical valley suburb. I might as well move to Ohio and pay 1/4th the rent.
DannyBee 14y ago
Well for starters, it may help to realize that "Most of the employees either live in San Francisco or want to" is absolutely false. :)

by dsl 14y ago

calbear81 14y ago

I don't think that statement that most of the employees either live in SF or want to is necessarily true and may only be true if you think of those under 30 or are recent college grads. Many folks want to own a home or raise a family outside of the city since it's very cost prohibitive to own or rent in San Francisco. The argument against South San Francisco is that if you're going to build to be closer to San Francisco, then you should make it easily accessible to SF employees. That means it should be a MUNI ride away so you can get to it from anywhere in the city otherwise you're going to either have to drive or deal with a multi-transfer commute. I would suggest the DogPatch or Mission Bay given the access to CalTrain (as a connector to Mountain View HQ) and the availability of large swaths of warehouses or vacant land.

c4urself 14y ago

I disagree, they're in an ideal location for people from both SF and down to San Jose and Fremont. That gives their employees a whole lot more choice for housing and makes it more attractive. Every time I see a company that's in SF offering jobs I shudder at the travel time from the valley. It's wonderful if you've already got a place in SF but makes anyone think twice about joining a company when they consider the crazy living costs in SF.

drstewart 14y ago
None of those things are true for me. I shudder when I think about paying crazy bay area prices and then having to live in a typical valley suburb. I might as well move to Ohio and pay 1/4th the rent.

DannyBee 14y ago

Well for starters, it may help to realize that "Most of the employees either live in San Francisco or want to" is absolutely false. :)