‘Living’ at SFO cheaper than renting in the city?
« prev   random   next »


‘Living’ at SFO cheaper than renting in the city?

By Patrick following x   2017 Sep 8, 7:22am 618 views   9 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    


Provided you can tune out the occasional plane taking off, there are benefits: Odds are the neighborhood is nicer than yours, there’s less crime, the BART station is a short walk, and you can sleep on a row of seats and no one rousts you for being homeless. Best of all, you might run into Lilou the Therapy Pig. (On the down side, you can’t keep your own pet, it’s tough to have friends over, and dating might be problematic, but that’s life in the big airport.)
If the only thing stopping a person from living at the airport is not having a place to sleep and shower, it turns out that one of the lesser-known spots at SFO is Freshen Up, a storefront operation in a quiet corner of the International Terminal that offers computer access, every travel-size bath product invented, disposable undergarments and, conveniently, nap rooms and shower rooms. Next door is the Airport Travel Agency, where workers will happily store your luggage, wrap your bag or notarize your documents.

1   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 8, 8:12am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Right. But you're not in the city, so what's the point? Remember: people who live in laundry closets, wooden boxes in their friend's living rooms, converted vans, cars etc. are doing this specifically to live IN THE CITY. SFO is not The City. It's a fucking Millbrae!

Must! Live! In! The! City!!!!
2   BayArea   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 8, 11:36am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

SFO is Millbrae or Burlingame? Both desirable cities I might remind you all :-)
3   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 8, 11:59am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

BayArea says
SFO is Millbrae or Burlingame? Both desirable cities I might remind you all :-)

Not to the kind of people who MUST LIVE IN THE CITY.

Millbrae and Burlingame ain't it.
4   WookieMan   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 8, 12:27pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

PCGyver says

No ... for real, it is San Francisco. Basically and island away from the rest of the city... weird but true

I think SS knows that hence the all caps. While it's part of San Francisco as you mention, it's literally located in a different city or municipality while still being under the control of San Francisco.

It's not the exact same, but O'hare is somewhat similar with Chicago. There's a thin sliver connecting it with the larger city so that makes it a little different but you have to travel through other cities to get to it.
5   jvolstad   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 8, 1:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

When I first started to work in the Bay area, I would live in a extended stay hotel. Not too bad. But then I lucked out and found a small house to rent at a reasonable price.

Now, whenever I have to fly into the area, I stay in guest lodging over at Moffett Field. Not a bad deal for a short stay.

New housing for the SFBA?

7   WookieMan   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 8, 1:50pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

PCGyver says
I know SS knows but bayarea sounded like he didn't.

You know SF wouldn't ever want to give up that revenue stream.

Shit, I'm off today. Thought iwog was calling me a troll in another thread. Thought you were talking about SS. My bad.

And yes, airports are a major league fucking big deal. Especially for the big cities. I suppose even for the small cities. They are a bitch to maintain though I suppose.
8   justme   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 8, 3:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Whoa, SFO now has sofa seating without the "sleep-blocking" armrests for each seat? That's what the photo in sfgate seems to indicate. Radical.

Comment as anon_5530f or log in at top of page: