I appreciate your point, but housing prices in Mountain View and Palo Alto are every bit as brutal as SF -- for the same NIMBY reasons -- and Oakland is catching up quickly. It's a shame that so much of downtown Oakland remains underdeveloped because the BART corridor could support so much more density without everyone needing to own cars like Daly City / South SF / San Bruno.

The best symbol of California's crazy development red tape is the empty lot on the south corner of 12th and Broadway in Oakland... an overgrown field at the corner of the city's commercial center, at a BART station, waiting for approval and construction of a skyscraper. It's crazy that there aren't any cranes over downtown Oakland right now, building high density on top of public transportation where it doesn't block anyone's view of the Bay.

> I appreciate your point, but housing prices in Mountain View and Palo Alto are every bit as brutal as SF

There are several other cities in the metro that are more affordable. I just figured that people have more opportunities to rent rooms there since it's slightly cheaper those cities

> without everyone needing to own cars like Daly City / South SF / San Bruno.

You don't really need to own a car even if you live in Fremont or Dublin, as long as you live reasonably close to Bart. A bike is good enough. I've done that as well and again it's very healthy since you're forced to do more exercise. Most places that are close to Bart are also close to a supermarket or two. I would also argue that it's way safer to bike outside of SF rather than in it. I also forgot to mention Caltrain as well.

Couple things:

* BART is straining these days. During commute hours, it's basically at capacity. The Bay Bridge is also at or over capacity.

* Housing within walking distance of BART stations in Oakland that are also somewhat close to restaurants, shops, etc., costs just as much as in San Francisco, at least until the BART ride gets up over 40 minutes to Downtown.

> BART is straining these days. During commute hours, it's basically at capacity.

Then do as I did. Don't use it during commute hours. Leave earlier. If you have a smart company, ask to conference to early meetings or schedule them later in the day if you want to leave later. After work either leave earlier, work later, or do Happy Hour and leave later.

> Housing within walking distance of BART stations in Oakland

There are other cities with Bart stations that are more affordable. You can also use a bike which lets you live a little farther away where there's cheaper housing. As I've already mentioned I did that in Fremont and Dublin.

BART and Caltrain only work because very few riders bring bikes. The platforms, the doors, and the seats are all too small to accommodate many of those things. Widespread use would require a redesign that probably couldn't accommodate today's demand, plus a huge number of showers installed at downtown employers.

Well then don't use either Bart or Caltrain during high commute times. Is it not viable to leave earlier or later?

> plus a huge number of showers installed at downtown employers.

Is this an impossible endeavor?

One one hand, depending exclusively on Bart means you dont get to have SF at night. Being far away makes it expensive to Uber (Figure a 3xUber twice a weekend).

Its also not much cheaper, unless you start getting away from transport.

Oakland has bigger commute, and lots of shady areas, including some eventful bart stations. Its also way more sparse to go out at night.

If you live in Palo alto and work in San Francisco, you are going to have a hell of a daily commute.

> One one hand, depending exclusively on Bart means you dont get to have SF at night

You can just go to SF earlier and crash at your friends. For me I did a combination of crashing at friend's places and carpooling for the ride back.

I also going to guess that using Uber once in a while would still be cheaper than renting or owning in SF.

> Oakland has bigger commute, and lots of shady areas, including some eventful bart stations

Just like SF, you don't have to live in Oakland. There are many other cities in the Bay Area metro. Also Oakland is gentrifying. Not too long ago, a lot of places in SF were sketchy as well.

> If you live in Palo alto and work in San Francisco, you are going to have a hell of a daily commute.

Wake up a little earlier and use Caltrain. It's great for bikes too.

Living outside of SF isn't super hard. It's just not as easy as making up a million excuses as to why you need to live within SF.

Crashing on friends houses is not really a solution, its something some people can sometimes do. Using Uber for long distances: figure 10 rides a month (which means you only go out twice a week at night) at 60 bucks each is 600 dollars a month. Most of your rent advantage from being in many places in SF in comparison to Daly city is going to be kept by the expensive commute.

I mention Oakland because of the parent post. Its a place many people go to because Bart gets there, but its far from being a panacea.

Even with Caltrain you have commute issues: you have limited time options, and it still takes a long time. And Palo alto is not cheap either.

You don't HAVE to live in SF, almost nobody does. The point is that all the other options have a high price of convenience which is up to people's lifestyle.

I made friends with several people in Oakland and the commute was always an issue in designing where to go for drinks or dinner, because either part gets locked in the other zone after Bart is out.

> Using Uber for long distances:

If you live far away, there's a high probability that you'll also make friends where you live. There's also a decent probability that one of them will have a car and will want to hang out with you in SF on the weekend from time to time. If you live in a place like Palo Alto, there's also a strong chance that you're not going to want to hang out in SF every weekend as well.

> I mention Oakland because of the parent post... And Palo alto is not cheap either.

There are many other cities in the Bay Area that are accessible with either Bart or Caltrain. Like you I only mentioned Palo Alto because of a parent comment.

> The point is that all the other options have a high price of convenience which is up to people's lifestyle.

Well I felt that the way people were complaining about not being able to live in SF is like they were going to be homeless. The price of a little convenience is not high when you are flexible and adaptable.

My only real point is that if you have a problem, you'll probably find a decent solution for it.

I get the sense that people feel entitled to live in whatever city they want, and SF is clearly the cultural center of Northern California.

Parking? If I have to drive into SOMA for work I'm not sure how much cheaper those areas are when you factor in time and parking.

Parking just adds $200-$300. (I could be wrong but I feel that it's also tax deductible if you keep the receipts.) It's still a lot cheaper by approximately $1000 depending on your living situation (It's even cheaper if you just rent / sublet a room outside of SF: $600-$900 including utilities). I used to do the same thing even though I could have taken Bart instead which would make it a lot more affordable and healthier from all the walking.

As for time my drive was about 15-20 min one way and I used it to listen to podcasts and audiobooks. For Bart, I would either work, sleep, or listen to podcasts plus I saved a lot of time and money that I would have used for a gym.