I need real POVs re: Berkeley CA (San Francisco, Oakland: houses, to buy)

[silverkris]

Originally Posted by sliverbox

In regards to allergies, well everyone is going to be different, but I've had worse allergies since moving out here from the East. The problem I personally have is that there's almost always something blooming year-round. There are a lot of semi-tropical plants that grow out here that didn't grow back home. This time of year is bad for me because all the trees are blooming. Secondly, it stops raining in March or early April and it won't rain again until October. In that time everything- the grass, roads, ground... everything dries out to dust. Towards the middle of the summer there's a lot of dust in the air. Cars become dusty in a few days. My allergies go nuts at that time.

That said, after having been out here for 11 years I think I've acclimated to the different plant species because I seem to have allergies than I used to. Everyone is going to have a different reaction. It might be just fine for you. Its also a lot warmer out here and seldom gets below freezing.

Don't forget that Berkeley is adjacent to the Bay, so the humidity from the fog/mist helps damp down some of the pollen and dust, which may mitigate allergies. I lived in Berkeley as a student and grew up in Santa Clara County, and my allergies were worse in the San Jose area because it's a valley. Your reactions may vary depending on your sensitivities, of course.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by jade408

Ashby and Sacramento are also annoying. Northwest Berkeley can be a pain too, try taking the side streets up to 4th street. I think Cedar or Hearst, one of those forces an unwanted right turn around Sacramento. Oh and don't get me started on the nightmare that is the Gilman freeway exit!

Sounds like they've added a lot more since I've lived there. I remember if you were on Sacramento, there wasn't an issue between Alcatraz and Dwight. Between Dwight and University was a nightmare. Similar situations were on McGee with those same streets. So every side street is now blocked like that?

[jade408]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Sounds like they've added a lot more since I've lived there. I remember if you were on Sacramento, there wasn't an issue between Alcatraz and Dwight. Between Dwight and University was a nightmare. Similar situations were on McGee with those same streets. So every side street is now blocked like that?

It cracks me up, because Berkeley is "so close." One of my friends lives at Sacramento/University. On a good day it takes 15 minutes to get there on the Freeway. The streets are almost faster. In the time it takes to get to her house I could go to Alameda or San Leandro, even though it is only 5 mi from my place.

Between Alcatraz and Dwight on Sacramento is pretty good. Pretty much every side street between Sacramento and San Pablo is out for one reason or another. North of University is a out until you get to Cedar if you are heading west. The new Berkeley Bowl is wreaking havoc on that part of town on the surface streets.

Football game days are ridiculous. Walking from the stadium to Rockridge BART is faster than taking any surface street route.

The problem with Berkeley is nothing is actually close to the freeway (this is also true in Oakland), but at least in Oakland there are more entrances/on ramps unless you are way up in the hills. Berkeley, not so much, you are stuck on one heavily congested road the whole way there.

[sliverbox]

I actually rode a bike a lot when I lived in Berkeley ( which is what I think they want you to do) but it was nerve-wracking. For a city that prides itself on being progressive I was surprised at how few bicycle lanes there were. Bicycling on any of the main streets was pretty bad. I seldom did it.

Going places where you needed a car- like to the grocery store- took forever. I remember one day heading to the closest grocery store. It was about 3 miles away. It took me over 30 minutes to get there.

Also- the freeway going alongside Berkeley is almost always jam- packed. Sometimes it took me 30-40 minutes just to go the 2 miles on that one stretch of freeway.

[80skeys]

It sounds like you'd like Berkeley and it would be a good fit for you. Berkeley has got a hippy vibe and it also is pretty dense and would remind you a little of NYC ( on a small scale.)

As for people, since it's got a major university you might find some amount of arrogance as somebody else said. You know that comes with the territory when there's a bunch of young people trying to make their stamp on the world.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by jade408

It cracks me up, because Berkeley is "so close." One of my friends lives at Sacramento/University. On a good day it takes 15 minutes to get there on the Freeway. The streets are almost faster. In the time it takes to get to her house I could go to Alameda or San Leandro, even though it is only 5 mi from my place.

Between Alcatraz and Dwight on Sacramento is pretty good. Pretty much every side street between Sacramento and San Pablo is out for one reason or another. North of University is a out until you get to Cedar if you are heading west. The new Berkeley Bowl is wreaking havoc on that part of town on the surface streets.

Football game days are ridiculous. Walking from the stadium to Rockridge BART is faster than taking any surface street route.

The problem with Berkeley is nothing is actually close to the freeway (this is also true in Oakland), but at least in Oakland there are more entrances/on ramps unless you are way up in the hills. Berkeley, not so much, you are stuck on one heavily congested road the whole way there.

haha not much has changed looks like. Berkeley has always been like that. It shuns stuff that might make it look like an actual city. In Oakland there are about 4 freeways in various places around the city. In Berkeley, there's only the Eastshore. The city never wanted freeway structures or any kind of structures. It's the reason BART dives underground at MLK and Adeline and remains there until out of the city. It's also in part why there are only two buildings of reasonable height in the city, right there on Center and Shattuck.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by sliverbox

I actually rode a bike a lot when I lived in Berkeley ( which is what I think they want you to do) but it was nerve-wracking. For a city that prides itself on being progressive I was surprised at how few bicycle lanes there were. Bicycling on any of the main streets was pretty bad. I seldom did it.

Berkeley (and Oakland) have Bicycle boulevards where they encourage bicyclists. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem that bicylusts got the memo. Basically quiet residential streets 1-2 blocks away from the main street have been designated as bike boulevards. <rant> Of course, I never see any bicyclists on those streets. They are always trying to ride up and down packed Telegraph, or College and complaining about the hazards of parked cars, buses and people opening their doors. </rant>

*** I am fine with sharing the road with bicyclists, as a pedestrian or a driver. As long as bikers don't try to straddle the fence of traffic rules. I.E. pretending to be a pedestrian on the sidewalks or running the traffic lights or signs because it is convenient. Or not using the bike lanes and riding 4 people tandem.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by jade408

Berkeley (and Oakland) have Bicycle boulevards where they encourage bicyclists. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem that bicylusts got the memo. Basically quiet residential streets 1-2 blocks away from the main street have been designated as bike boulevards. <rant> Of course, I never see any bicyclists on those streets. They are always trying to ride up and down packed Telegraph, or College and complaining about the hazards of parked cars, buses and people opening their doors. </rant>

*** I am fine with sharing the road with bicyclists, as a pedestrian or a driver. As long as bikers don't try to straddle the fence of traffic rules. I.E. pretending to be a pedestrian on the sidewalks or running the traffic lights or signs because it is convenient. Or not using the bike lanes and riding 4 people tandem.

Why any biker would risk their lives on a busy street in Berkeley is beyond me. It's the only city where double parking seems to be accepted LOL

[sliverbox]

Well, the problem with the bike lanes is that they aren't practical for actual commuting. If you wanted to get from one end of the city to another it wasn't easy to do it on the bike lanes. That pretty much left University, Ashby, and other main streets. That was always sort of nerve-wracking because people double parked all up and down Ashby. Where I live now has full bike lanes from one end of town to another. Very nice.

[mayorhaggar]

I've never minded biking in Berkeley and Oakland. The bike lanes are pretty useful and it's very nice that they're there, they make biking a lot less stressful, though even when you're on a busy multi-lane street without a bike lane, drivers will almost always give you a lot of space, unlike in SF where they will drive way too close to you and be aggressive. It's true though that the bike lanes seem pretty random in terms of which streets have them. Telegraph has one that is really useful but it cuts in and out here and there at weird points. Also you can always ride on the side streets which is a lot less stressful though it can be annoying if the cross traffic doesn't at least have a stop sign so you have to wait until traffic clears before you can cross the street. Shafter is a pretty good route through the Temescal and Rockridge because cross streets seem to at least have stop signs and it's a pretty quiet side street.

And if you see someone riding a bike on the sidewalk, tell them it's illegal if you can. It pissed me off when people would ride on the sidewalk and endanger anyone on foot when I lived in SF, I don't really see people do it nearly as often in the East Bay.