High stress and apartment decisions!

December 11, 2018 6:30 PM

I recently moved to the San Francisco Bay Area, and I'm making the decision on a apartment for the next year. The last few weeks have been extremely high anxiety/high stress for me. Decisions haven't been a strong skill for me lately, but I found two apartments that are good options for me right now. However, I'm finding it very hard to make a choice on either one, and would like a outsider's clear perspective. Which apartment would be the best choice for the next year?

I'm a recent transplant to the San Francisco Bay Area, and moved temporarily in with a partner while I start a new job, get an idea of the area/commute/etc., and find an apartment. It has been a very rough past couple weeks in terms of anxiety/stress, but I'm trying to just take one day at a time.

I finally decided on the location of where I'd like to live for my first year in the area. It wasn't my first ; I had really wanted to live in Oakland to be close to my partner (we don't live together), close to a queer/LBGT scene, and not feel stuck in suburbia. I had asked a previous question about it and received some great advice; I'm in a temporary living situation to try out living in Oakland and commuting, but the entire situation isn't working out at the moment (high stress, work recently changed how they help employees commute and it doesn't work well, difficulties adjusting back to night shift, difficulties adjusting to change in general). I made the decision to compromise on living location to ease the commute at this time until I get myself settled into a new job, life, etc. But, like everything else in my life right now, my anxiety is so amped up that I'm struggling to make a decision without being afraid that it is going to be the wrong one. Honestly, I don't feel like I'm thinking clearly but I do need a home.

Really, what I'm looking for is a clear perspective from outsiders.

Things:
A. Recently moved to the Bay Area; working in Walnut Creek three times per week, 12-hour shifts overnight.
B. Part of the reason I moved was for my partner, so it is important that it is relatively easy to make a life with them while also living apart.
C. My partner has a dog, which is an important factor for B. It is hard to find an apartment that allows pets, and living in a no pet apartment means my partner won't be able to spend the night at my place.
D. Both apartments are in Lafayette, CA; my compromise for a straightforward commute to work (15 - 20 minute drive) and easy to access Oakland (close to BART)
E. I feel rushed since apartment hunting in the Bay Area is not a leisurely activity; apartments rent almost as soon as they are posted, so I do need to be a bit aggressive in my search.

Apartments:

Apartment A: I really like this apartment. It is a one-bedroom apartment, cottage style in a four-plex with one shared wall in the bedroom. Shared washer/dryer for laundry. Has a private patio and garage. It is right behind a shopping center with a CVS, Trader Joe's, etc., right near the main downtown area, and 0.5 miles/10 minute walk to BART. Run by a property management company that has good overall reviews. BUT the only con is no pets allowed, and that is the only reason I'm hesitating.

Apartment B: This is also a one-bedroom apartment, corner top floor unit in a 8-unit building, one shared wall in bedroom. It is still close to the main downtown area, is about 0.8 miles/18 minute walk to BART. It is $200.00 more per month, comes with a washer/dryer in the unit, a dishwasher, and some community amenities: pool, hot tub, small fitness center. I had a small tour of the property itself. Unfortunately, they weren't able to show me the unit itself due to short notice of my tour and the tenant still living in it. Overall decent reviews of the apartment complex, but not as good as A.

I'm really torn. I like the proximity of Apartment A to everything, especially BART. I think the 10 minute walk and the closeness to the downtown is really what is enticing me because it feels like the perfect compromise to getting into Oakland and SF easily via BART while also having a more relaxing commute to work. But, I know if I don't get an apartment that allows pets, my partner will rarely visit me where I live.

Any thoughts? Or just advice for approaching this?

Also as a FYI, I have taking multiple steps to pursue help for my mental health here in the Bay Area. I made appointments with a therapist who specializes in anxiety, and am actively seeking out a psychiatrist. Just tying to get a stable place to call home in the mean time.

posted by Thirty7Degrees to Home & Garden (25 answers total)

Does "no pets" mean "no animals ever" or just "no pets permanently at the apartment?"

You could ask the property management company if adding an extra security deposit would make it okay for you to have your partner's dog to visit a few nights a month.
posted by kdar at 6:34 PM on December 11, 2018

If the pet isn’t living with you I don’t think it should matter to the landlord who visits. Let them notice and tell if you the dog can’t come over anymore and then tackle that problem at that time. It probably won’t happen.
posted by bleep at 6:52 PM on December 11, 2018 [15 favorites]

Is your partner’s apartment a comfortable place for you physically? Like, I know that staying there now is probably stressful because you just moved across the country and don’t have your own space and stuff, but would it be a perfectly fine place to spend the night? Honestly if you and your partner go out and do stuff together, those events will be closer to Oakland/Berkeley and it will make more sense to stay there anyway. You could view your place in Lafayette as almost more of a crash space near work for when you’re working.
posted by needs more cowbell at 7:01 PM on December 11, 2018

Best answer: Just wanted to remind you that neither one will be terrible, either one will probably be okay, you won't destroy your life by making the wrong choice, and you can always move again next year.
posted by praemunire at 7:22 PM on December 11, 2018 [34 favorites]

$200 a month is a ton of compromise for a partner you’re not living with just so they can occassionally crash at your place. How much is that worth to you, on a per month basis? What are the other things (dishwasher, etc) worth to you? Do you want to spend $2400 over the year for those things, especially since it also means a longer commute? Are there other things you could spend the money on instead that would mean as much or even more to support the relationship?

This internet stranger’s vote is apartment A but i hate, hate, hate commuting and would be resentful of the cost and commute to accomdate my partners dog — and im a huge pet lover!! I myself would never live in a place that didn't allow pets but thats me, and not what youre asking. Unless you secretly want a dog or cat and will get one in apartment B. Then that changes my vote :)
posted by cgg at 7:29 PM on December 11, 2018 [6 favorites]

Ooh, yeah, dog-friendly apartment hunting in the Bay Area. No wonder you're stressed.

I'd try to figure out whether you really need a dog-friendly place by trying to think through the logistics of hanging out with your partner. When is your partner actually going to come over? Or when are you going to go over there? How will you travel? Etc.

Example: she gets off work at 5 pm in SF and takes BART home and gets there at 5:45. Then she's ready to come see you, but oh, she probably can't take the dog on BART, so does she have a car? But anyway, it's still rush hour, so does she rest and take the dog on a walk until 7 or so? At that point, is she going to bring the dog knowing she'll have to bring it home again in time to get back to work by 9 am and would be driving in morning rush hour? Hmm, maybe not, so would she bring it and leave it with you all the next day so she could take BART directly to work? Or would she come without the dog so she could take BART and then BART home in the morning to give it a quick walk?

I tend to think that, given your more flexible schedule and non-standard commute times, you're going to be going to her a lot more often. On the other hand, if she could leave the dog with you for a day or so, that does open up more options for her to visit.

I mainly see things along the same lines as needs more cowbell does. Also, in general, you sound far more positive about Option A, so I think it's a better solution. Neither is going to make it super easy to integrate your life with your partner -- I tend to think you need to live much closer to do that -- but this is a good stepping stone and will give you time to figure out your next move.
posted by salvia at 7:41 PM on December 11, 2018 [2 favorites]

No question I'd go with apartment B: you get so much more for only 200 bucks (in-unit laundry is worth it alone, not to mention a dishwasher). The extra walking time to BART is a feature not a bug (I wouldn't want to live too close to BART), and having a pool and fitness center are real bonuses. Apartment B seems to have a whole lot more on the plate than Apartment A.

However, I would definitely need to see the apartment prior to agreeing to start the application process.

Seconding praemunire upthread.
posted by joseph conrad is fully awesome at 8:13 PM on December 11, 2018 [2 favorites]

It sounds like the only reason you don’t want Apartment. S is related to your partner. Can you talk to them about ways to find a compromise that would enable you to take Apartment A? I agree that it should be OK to have a dog overnight 1x/week even in a pet-unfriendly apartment.
posted by samthemander at 8:19 PM on December 11, 2018

I would pick A, personally. Did you decide not to look in Rockridge? The BART ride is only 15 minutes to Walnut Creek; even if you had to tack on extra time at each end to get to and from BART, it wouldn't be a painful commute. I think I said this in your last question, but the trains generally aren't as crowded after Macarthur and Rockridge stations for that commute in the evening.
posted by pinochiette at 8:32 PM on December 11, 2018

Response by poster: I have a temporary place in Rockridge that isn't working out for me. I am still looking in the area, but haven't found anything else at the moment.

The commute hasn't been bad. About a 10 minute walk to Rockridge BART and 15 minutes to Walnut Creek. BART is standing only but not too crowded. But I'm having issues from getting to Walnut Creek BART to work. My work place no longer does Shuttle; instead, it gives taxi vouchers, which would be fine. But so far my experience has been late taxi twice forcing me to take an uber to get on time to work, and ubers aren't usually close to work at 7 in the morning when I'm heading home, so I'm waiting for them to arrive and then drive to BART. So it ranges from 30-sonething minutes at best to over 45 at worst.

The 1.7 miles between BART and work are a pain.

My only concern with sneaking the dog into the apartment is that he is a barker. Makes it hard to be incognito.

Anyhow, thanks to everyone for your thoughts.
posted by Thirty7Degrees at 8:48 PM on December 11, 2018

I would go for B because of the dog. Not worth the stress to sneak an animal in to a no pet apt. Also having a fitness center is a plus esp if your friend can use it too.
posted by DixieBaby at 9:13 PM on December 11, 2018

First let's define patio - is this like a 3' x 8' enclosed space off the living room, or is this like a 10' x 10' outdoor "room" type of space? If so, would it be possible to make an agreement with the landlord that the dog would be welcome on the patio? This seems reasonable, if the LL won't budge on a pet deposit.

As for apartment B; you aren't looking for a place where you will live for the next 10 years. Between the long shift and partial time at partner's place, plus all of the walking, I wonder if you will truly get any use out of those amenities. I wouldn't factor them into the decision-making. The only true advantage I see in apt B is the laundry, but you might be able to get past that (few people are doing laundry at 7 or 8am, and in apt A you will have less parties to negotiate with.)

A seems to be a winner in my book.
posted by vignettist at 9:19 PM on December 11, 2018

If you could manage the 1.7 miles, would that let you live closer to your partner? Because that would be huge. Would something like one of those Hover scooters make it feasible? Are there secure bike lockers at the Walnut Creek BART station? Could you get a parking pass that would let you leave your car there? It's a real bummer that they cancelled the shuttle!
posted by salvia at 9:35 PM on December 11, 2018

Welcome to the bay! I empathize with your anxiety -- it's so easy to twist one's self up in knots over housing/commute logistics here. I agree with the folks above that both options sound fundamentally workable, and that you can always move in a year if it's not working for you; I bet you'll start feeling much more relaxed once you're settled in somewhere more stable!

If I were in your situation, I would stay in Rockridge and then bring a bike on BART and use it to ride the 1.7 miles at the end. I used to commute from Oakland to a far-from-BART location in SF that way, and although it was a bit annoying to lug the bike around, ultimately it was totally manageable and worthwhile in order to live where I wanted to. It is allowed as long as you are courteous about not trying to shove your way into cars that are already packed, and don't bring the bike on escalators or in the first car of the train. A used folding bike could be a good option if you're worried about the crowding, but I did this every weekday for 4 years with a standard road bike and only very occasionally encountered a train that was too full for me.

Out of the two options you're considering, A sounds better. I find that the psychological difference between a 10min walk to BART and an 18min walk to BART is vast, and given the cultural appeal of Oakland, I suspect you'll end up spending the majority of your couple-time there regardless.
posted by introcosm at 10:52 PM on December 11, 2018

Welcome! I know the area well and know that BART station very well. Given the hills involved, and the generally unwalkable-ness of Lafayette once you get too far off Mt Diablo Blvd, I would go with A, regardless of pupperoo. When I was in a similar situation to your partner, I would come home from work, walk and play with my dog for a good while, then put her to bed and go see my partner, then get up early to walk her again and give her some extra love in the morning. Ideally, my partner would have traded off also coming to stay with me, but situation changed before that became practical.

Feel free to hit my MeMail if you want to discuss further, I'm happy to share my experiences in the area!
posted by assenav at 11:33 PM on December 11, 2018 [2 favorites]

I agree with assenav that it would be noticeably better to live in an area with any walkability, because Lamorinda is extremely car-oriented. I know time is running out, but I'd suggest making a last stab at finding an Apartment B in Apartment A's neighborhood. In-unit laundry would be worth $100/mo to me, and half that much for a dishwasher. More than a half-mile walk for groceries is too far, I'd say.

As far as culture goes, you'll be going into Oakland for that, but honestly, BART will be faster than driving and goes to most of the main areas one way or another.

There are some good restaurants in Walnut Creek and down 680, though, especially if you like Indian and other cuisines that depart from the historical demographics of the area (but match the current ones). There's some other cool things to do out that way, and the Tri-Valley is closer to more nature stuff than Oakland is.
posted by rhizome at 12:31 AM on December 12, 2018

I vote A. You sound more excited about it and it sounds like the real reason you're considering B is the dog. But as others have noted, you are more likely to stay at your partner's place than the reverse due to its location in Oakland and your job schedule. It would be good to sit down and think realistically, given your schedules, how often your partner would come to stay with the dog - if it's legitimately often then MAYBE apartment B is worth it. Even so, I agree with others that an occasional visitor with dog is not the same as having your own pet full time and I would think this would probably be ok.

A point I haven't seen mentioned yet: if I took an apartment I didn't like as much, with a longer commute, and that cost $200 more per month, and then for whatever reason my partner didn't wind up bringing the dog over, I'd be hella resentful. (Maybe that's just me though!)
posted by sunflower16 at 12:54 AM on December 12, 2018 [8 favorites]

I particularly agree with sunflower16’s last point: I’d really resent Apartment B if my partner weren’t able to bring the dog over every so often.

Maybe I’m in the minority here, but if I were another tenant in the complex where A is located, I’d be really annoyed to have a barking dog show up in a nearby apartment every so often. That strikes me as profoundly discourteous to anyone who chose that complex to be free from dogs.

Forgive me if this isn’t realistic, but could you pick Apartment A and, on nights when your partner chooses to stay with you, have your partner board the dog at a kennel near the partner’s place? You’d be saving $200/month to live in your preferred location, so you could perhaps offer to defray some of the cost if this option were used every so often.
posted by cheapskatebay at 4:04 AM on December 12, 2018 [9 favorites]

Ah yeah, I amend my earlier response - cheapskatebay is totally right, you will piss off all your neighbors with a barking dog in a pet-free complex. Somehow I didn't factor the barking into my original answer. But I still vote A for all the other reasons!
posted by sunflower16 at 5:28 AM on December 12, 2018 [1 favorite]

I agree with others that say “no pets” means no pets living there. For example, my place allows 1 pet, which I have. It has never once occurred to me that my friend can’t come over and visit with his dog, as that would bring the number to 2. I would choose the first apartment.

Apartments are not pet free for the comfort of the residents. It’s because the landlords don’t want to deal with the destruction they cause living there year-round. No one living in Bay Area apartments expects silence from neighboars. And if they do, they’re being precious. I could tear my hair out from the noise from my neighbors’ children ( on 3 sides!!) but we all just have to deal with it. That’s apartment living. An occasionally visiting dog is *nothing* in the grand scheme.

And you can move in a year if it turns out not to be ok.
posted by greermahoney at 6:43 AM on December 12, 2018 [4 favorites]

No question I'd go with apartment B: you get so much more for only 200 bucks (in-unit laundry is worth it alone, not to mention a dishwasher).

Agreed with this wholeheartedly on this point alone, dog policy or no policy. I live in DC, which isn't SF but it is an overcrowded and overpriced rental market, and I would pay $200/mo more in a heartbeat for in-unit laundry. The amount of time and effort saved is almost priceless to me.
posted by capricorn at 9:46 AM on December 12, 2018 [1 favorite]

Have you had a heart-to-heart with your partner about this? They might be able to provide more information about the logistics of when they expect to be able to bring the dog over, whether they would ever want to be able to leave the dog alone at your place, etc.

I was in a similar position (but I was your partner, and my dog had significant enough separation anxiety that it was hard to leave him at my place ever, which compounded things) with my SO and it was something we had to figure out as a team. It worked out awesomely - and I'm sure it'll work out for you, too. Best of luck.
posted by mosst at 10:03 AM on December 12, 2018

Another option for the commute would be biking from the Pleasant Hill Bart via the canal trail and Heather farms. It would be farther but avoids the hills and traffic on Ygnacio Valley. Might be less stressful than waiting for taxi or uber and you get some exercise to boot. According to Google maps it's a 15 min ride.. You could lock the bike in a bike link cage overnight if bart is too crowded.
posted by morchella at 12:09 AM on December 13, 2018

Response by poster: Unfortunately, biking is currently out of the question because I'm woefully out of shape. And idea of biking my chubby self before and after a 12 hour shift doesn't seem like a good one.

I'm aiming to improve my fitness level over the next year so that I can bike a reasonable distance and make the future commute from BART to work easier.

Thanks for all the answers and thoughts on the subject. I really appreciate it!
posted by Thirty7Degrees at 12:42 AM on December 13, 2018

I Memailed you :)
posted by second banana at 12:54 PM on December 13, 2018