|
|
|
|
|
by rorski
3920 days ago
|
|
As someone who used to do the "reverse commute" from SF to Oakland for a couple years, I'd add that it's pretty attractive for SF residents who like a slightly less crazy pace as well. I mean, you can actually go places for lunch and get in, and not pay $14 for a sandwich. And going the opposite direction of traffic (or taking the opposite BART) sure beats sitting on the 101. But most people I worked with were definitely in the boat you describe - East Bay dwellers who really, really didn't want to deal with trying to fight their way into SF. And who can blame them? I think this is a great move for Oakland and Uber. |
|
Last year, my 95th percentile commute at 10am was 35 minutes door to door, and the median was about 25-30. This year, the 95th is more like 45, and the median is more like 35 at that time. To arrive at 9am, it's dramatically worse -- basically an hour 95th, and sometimes up to 90m (once or twice a year), and the median is about 45m (BART is 50m door to door, but is absurdly crowded at that time, and I'm uncomfortable walking around with a laptop bag at 5-7pm in Oakland after 2 people got their laptops stolen in front of me in one week).
I usually try to go in really late and wfh in the mornings so it's 20-25m, but it's still usually 30-40m on the way back at 7-8pm. If I have to be in at 9am, I have to leave at 7:45 to be comfortably on time with high confidence. And the traffic basically starts between 0530 and 0600, so being early is almost impossible; it's full-bad around 0630-0700.