Worst city in the Bay Area to live in? (Los Angeles: theatre, casinos)

[californio sur]

Originally Posted by Parti Rhinocéros

The factories aren't pervasive in neighborhoods in Hercules or Pinole like they are in Martinez and Pacheco. Besides, would you rather live in Martinez or in Richmond?

Just out of curiosity, do you find anything outside of Contra Costa County to be uninhabitable? lol

I remember some oil refineries along the San Pablo bay; I thought they were in the cities I named. I thought Pacheco was down in Santa Clara county or actually San Benito county? Contra Costa county seems nice especially inland around the San Ramon valley. Alameda county south of Oakland has some sort of drab cities also like San Leandro\ San Lorenzo. But honestly, there don't seem to be that many cities in the Bay Area that are unlivable.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by californio sur

I remember some oil refineries along the San Pablo bay; I thought they were in the cities I named. I thought Pacheco was down in Santa Clara county or actually San Benito county? Contra Costa county seems nice especially inland around the San Ramon valley. Alameda county south of Oakland has some sort of drab cities also like San Leandro\ San Lorenzo. But honestly, there don't seem to be that many cities in the Bay Area that are unlivable.

Those refineries are in Richmond. Richmond almost completely surrounds San Pablo. The city boundary of Richmond looks almost as if it were decided in a civil war, especially it's border with El Cerrito. Pinole and Hercules are actually rather nice.

[Stephen1110]

Jobs being created in Oakland as I post.

+ 8,000 jobs in Oakland
Community and Economic Development ~ City of Oakland, California (http://www2.oaklandnet.com/Government/o/CEDA/OAK022303 - broken link)

+ 6,000 jobs in Oakland
Operator To Create 6,000 Jobs At Port Of Oakland - News Story - KTVU San Francisco

+ 2,500 jobs in Oakland
Alta Bates Summit Medical Center Breaks Ground for New Patient Care Pavilion

+5,300 to 9,000 jobs in Oakland
BART - Oakland Airport Connector

+ 3,000 jobs + 12,000 jobs over the next 20 years
Port of Oakland redevelopment has potential to revive Oakland | San Francisco Bay Area News - Crosscurrents from KALW

"We focused on key sectors including: trade and logistics, green technology, healthcare, emerging markets, food and entertainment industries and the digital arts and media. This approach has contributed to the net gain of 5,295 jobs in Oakland from 2007 to 2009—a 2.8% growth in jobs. Oakland’s job growth occurred during a period when the East Bay lost 6.9% of its jobs and the Bay Area lost 5.3% of its jobs."
Community and Economic Development ~ City of Oakland, California (http://www2.oaklandnet.com/Government/o/CEDA/OAK022303 - broken link)

"Oakland’s job growth strongly outperformed the region and the country in the last decade."
Big day for Oakland’s economy « FutureOakland

[Taboo2]

Originally Posted by californio sur

I would say the worst place to live in the Bay Area would probably cities like Richmond, San Pablo for crime and poverty. Also the small cities north of Richmond like Pinole, Hercules for the oil refineries. Vallejo isn't very attractive in my opinion and some of the small towns in the Suisun bay like Pittsburg and Port Chicago look drab and heavily industrial.

My husband wants to move to those cities. Rodeo I think is his fave, he likes the refineries. I tell him they have air quality issues and every so often are on lockdown etc...

I think Green Day being from there has something to do with it.

Richmond itself up by the bridge is oily.

[calbear11]

Admittedly, I did not read through this entire thread, but I see that Oakland is being discussed at great lengths and I have a problem with that in context to this thread.

When comparing cities and attempting to determine which is the "worst," it is rather difficult using big cities such as Oakland or San Francisco. Any major city has its "good" areas and "bad" areas (I am assuming most people are using the term "worst" to mean areas with crime). Big cities have good and bad areas. Claiming an entire city to be the "worst" based on only bad neighborhoods or a city to be the best based on only the good neighborhoods does not paint a completely accurate picture. For example, Oakland has more crime than San Francisco overall, but I would definitely rather live in the best neighborhood in Oakland than the worst neighborhood in San Francisco. I think that the original poster should amend this question to worst neighborhoods in the bay area.

On a side note, this is why I have a problem with lists such as "safest city" or "most dangerous city." These lists cause people to make generalizations about an entire city. City boundaries are mostly just invisible lines. Imagine if I were to draw a line around the worst neighborhood in SF and made that a city. It completely skews statistics. I'm just saying that you have to take some of these things with a grain of salt.

[Stephen1110]

"Oakland doesn't deserve to be discussed in the company of those cities. There is a reason it's called the "San Franciso Bay Area" and not the Oakland Bay Area." - Mr. Fantastic


Do YOU even know why it's called San Francisco Bay Area? Rhetorical question.

San Francisco was originally called Yerba Buena. And at this time In History, San Francisco Bay was ALREADY the name of the large body of water, originally called, Bahia de San Francisco.

The town of Yerba Buena then changed it's name to San Francisco, in the next century.

So, what point was you trying to make.

[krudmonk]

Ha, got told.

[ssmaster]

Originally Posted by Mr. Fantastic

I never claimed S.F was a middle class friendly city. Is Paris, or London a friendly middle class city?

Oakland doesn't deserve to be discussed in the company of those cities. There is a reason it's called the "San Franciso Bay Area" and not the Oakland Bay Area. Oakland is a feeder city for San Francisco where no middle class exist. Do you finally understand why the Oakland economy sucks now?

oakland is 8 miles away from san francisco(a city with high housing prices) and according to the U.S. census part of the same metropolitan statistical area. with it's proximity and transit options it is illogical to expect the desirable parts of oakland to not also have high housing prices.employers don't decrease your salary because you choose to live in okland.i make the same as my coworkers who live in sf and you expect my house to cost 80% less because i live 8 miles away? get real.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

Ha, got told.

Took the words right out of my postLOL

[lmk1707]

Originally Posted by Parti Rhinocéros

The factories aren't pervasive in neighborhoods in Hercules or Pinole like they are in Martinez and Pacheco. Besides, would you rather live in Martinez or in Richmond?

Just out of curiosity, do you find anything outside of Contra Costa County to be uninhabitable? lol

Hercules and Pinole are interesting places, I barely knew they existed until I decided to go for a wander in my car and see what there is on 80 between Richmond and Martinez I'm surprised there aren't more recs for living there on the forum; they are somewhat difficult for commuting to the city, but are sleepy, inexpensive towns with a bit of charm (Pinole moreso than Hercules, in my opinion). Then again, I am partial to Crockett and Port Costa also as they seem to be throwbacks from another era and very un-Bay Area-like. Port Costa is a bastion of small-town life in the otherwise urban and suburban Bay Area sprawl. Not to mention the fact that you can stay in a former bordello for $27/night while partying across the street at the Warehouse Bar

The refineries in Martinez are prevalent, and pungent. When I worked in Martinez we would get some interesting smells when the wind blew a certain way. The Reliez area of Martinez is quite pretty though, and downtown Martinez is surprisingly charming (near the court area).