U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-25-2012, 01:45 PM
 
Location: anywhere but Seattle
1,082 posts, read 1,609,966 times
Reputation: 964

Advertisements

Lets face it, Oakland is the armpit of the bay area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-25-2012, 01:57 PM
 
15 posts, read 30,802 times
Reputation: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmode View Post
Sorry, don't agree. Oakland is the best value only for a very limited demographic It certainly not the best value for most people in the bay area. For example:
- Family with kids looking for good public schools
- People with a career in Silicon Valley (Oakland is too far a commute)
- Zillionaire, billionaire and millionaire with lots of money. They would probably choose Los Altos, Atherton, Woodside, Pac Heights, Sausalito etc.
- People from safe suburbs
- People scared of diversity
- People who desire a suburban life
So on and so forth
For your first point, disagree Oakland has some good public schools you just have to pick the right neighborhood.

For #2 I would have to agree, although that also applies to SF. If you work in SV and want to live in one of the Bay Area's "urban" cities you will have to face up to 1:30-2:00 hours on public transit, or over an hour of hellish traffic jams to get to work. If your job is in Northwest SV (Palo Alto, etc) or near the Caltrain line and you can afford SF then it would be the better choice. Hopefully the BART extension to SJ will make Silicon Valley jobs more accessible for East Bay residents.

For your #3 I don't think that applies. I think the term "best value" implicitly excludes Zillionaires, Billionaires and Millionaires...

#4-6 are correct.

So what you seem to be saying is that "most people in the bay area" either work in SV, are zillionaires, or want to live in safe non-diverse suburbs. I don't agree with that.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2012, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
24,952 posts, read 24,733,082 times
Reputation: 22675
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunDevil1212 View Post
Couple points:

On the parks: I don't know when the last time you visited a park in SF was, but I've literally never seen what you are describing and I've been to almost every park, multiple times. My primary point on the parks was the accessibility. In San Francisco there's great parks smack in the middle of great neighborhoods. You can get off work in the FiDi, and either ride a bike or hop on a MUNI route and be in the middle of the Presidio, GGP, the Marina Green, Dolores etc...in less than 30 minutes.

Most of the places you mentioned (Dimond Canyon, Lake Temescal, Redwood Regional, Joaqin Miller, Lake Chabot) are either up in the hills or on the other side of the hills. I guess your preference here largely depends on whether you have a car or not. I don't have a car, so getting to most of those parks in Oakland would be a major pain.

Blight: Its not just West Oakland. Up and down International Blvd, a good portion of Downtown/Uptown, the whole area around the Coliseum, etc...obviously SF isn't perfect (mid market, BV, etc...) but on a whole it definitely has a lot less blight than Oakland.
Hmm, but there are still parks that are easily accessible without a a car. The Dimond Park is only a couple blocks from the 57 bus route (a very popular one) and the Rose Garden is easy to get to as well. There are also routes to half of the parks that run reasonably frequently. And there is also the Shoreline Park in West Oakland, and the waterfront all through Jack London through to the Bay Trail. Easily accessible.

I think people see what they want to see. Downtown Oakland actually has quite a few parks outside of the Lake. I forget the names, but there are a couple in Chinatown, in Old Oakland, the Kaiser Center Park and snow park that are great urban parks. In my neighborhood, I have the Rose Garden and a mini park off of Temescal Creek within 4 blocks and another creek side park about 3/4 of a mile away. If I go a mile, I get Lake Merritt. Not to shabby in my book.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:11 PM
 
218 posts, read 390,784 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
Hmm, but there are still parks that are easily accessible without a a car. The Dimond Park is only a couple blocks from the 57 bus route (a very popular one) and the Rose Garden is easy to get to as well. There are also routes to half of the parks that run reasonably frequently. And there is also the Shoreline Park in West Oakland, and the waterfront all through Jack London through to the Bay Trail. Easily accessible.

I think people see what they want to see. Downtown Oakland actually has quite a few parks outside of the Lake. I forget the names, but there are a couple in Chinatown, in Old Oakland, the Kaiser Center Park and snow park that are great urban parks. In my neighborhood, I have the Rose Garden and a mini park off of Temescal Creek within 4 blocks and another creek side park about 3/4 of a mile away. If I go a mile, I get Lake Merritt. Not to shabby in my book.
Jade, I seriously hope that you're paid by city of Oakland to defend their city, because I'm not sure why a sane person would spend so much time and energy defending a city that isn't even their hometown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:18 PM
 
Location: yeah
5,718 posts, read 13,523,847 times
Reputation: 2784
Quote:
Originally Posted by evergraystate View Post
Lets face it, Oakland is the armpit of the bay area.
How are you still posting this crap?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2012, 03:26 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
24,952 posts, read 24,733,082 times
Reputation: 22675
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCtoSF View Post
Jade, I seriously hope that you're paid by city of Oakland to defend their city, because I'm not sure why a sane person would spend so much time and energy defending a city that isn't even their hometown.
I try to limit my opinions to places I have experienced. But it's ok, we know you won't be headed to "the Town" anytime soon. With all the "undesirables" and all. I know it is hard for you to fathom that Oakland is a nice place to live.

Providing additional perspectives on Oakland is just another way to defend against stereotyping and misconceptions. After a lifetime of being stereotyped I am more than a little sensitive about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2012, 05:58 PM
 
Location: The Bay
6,920 posts, read 10,889,175 times
Reputation: 3017
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunDevil1212 View Post
Couple points:

On the parks: I don't know when the last time you visited a park in SF was, but I've literally never seen what you are describing and I've been to almost every park, multiple times. My primary point on the parks was the accessibility. In San Francisco there's great parks smack in the middle of great neighborhoods. You can get off work in the FiDi, and either ride a bike or hop on a MUNI route and be in the middle of the Presidio, GGP, the Marina Green, Dolores etc...in less than 30 minutes.

Most of the places you mentioned (Dimond Canyon, Lake Temescal, Redwood Regional, Joaqin Miller, Lake Chabot) are either up in the hills or on the other side of the hills. I guess your preference here largely depends on whether you have a car or not. I don't have a car, so getting to most of those parks in Oakland would be a major pain.

Blight: Its not just West Oakland. Up and down International Blvd, a good portion of Downtown/Uptown, the whole area around the Coliseum, etc...obviously SF isn't perfect (mid market, BV, etc...) but on a whole it definitely has a lot less blight than Oakland.

I don't have a car either. It's not a pain to get to any of them via the bus.

What do you mean by "blight"? Grit or empty storefronts? Saying "up and down International Boulevard" is completely false if you mean the latter. If you mean grit, then I don't know what parts of SF you're hanging in where you got the idea that BVHP and mid market are the only blighted strips... Mission Street, Ocean Avenue, Leland Avenue, etc. are all very gritty commercial districts. If you're talking more generally about neighborhoods, then yeah obviously Oakland has more blighted neighborhoods than SF.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2012, 06:01 PM
 
Location: The Bay
6,920 posts, read 10,889,175 times
Reputation: 3017
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt345 View Post
I agree with what you're saying. IMO San Francisco has better urban parks, while Oakland has better nature parks, if that makes sense.

^This is true


I prefer nature parks so I don't agree that the parks in SF are "better". If we're talking about urban parks though then yeah SF has better parks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2012, 06:09 PM
 
Location: South Korea
5,242 posts, read 10,464,653 times
Reputation: 2915
SF has some great parks that are really accessible without a car and they're spread around the city pretty evenly, though I think GG Park is really really overrated. Oakland really doesn't have many accessible parks other than Lake Merritt. Where I live in the flatlands of North Oakland there aren't really any parks, there's little playgrounds here and there, and there's FROG Park which is right underneath a highway, but that's it. Nowhere nice to sit and read a book unless you schlep down to Lak Merritt. Oakland has a lot of cool parks up in the hills but if you don't have a car they're basically off limits, same with Berkeley.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2012, 06:32 PM
 
Location: The Bay
6,920 posts, read 10,889,175 times
Reputation: 3017
Quote:
Originally Posted by mayorhaggar View Post
SF has some great parks that are really accessible without a car and they're spread around the city pretty evenly, though I think GG Park is really really overrated. Oakland really doesn't have many accessible parks other than Lake Merritt. Where I live in the flatlands of North Oakland there aren't really any parks, there's little playgrounds here and there, and there's FROG Park which is right underneath a highway, but that's it. Nowhere nice to sit and read a book unless you schlep down to Lak Merritt. Oakland has a lot of cool parks up in the hills but if you don't have a car they're basically off limits, same with Berkeley.
East Oakland has tons of accessible parks. North Oakland not so much, but there's no shortage of them around where I live. I don't notice a shortage of them in West Oakland or DT Oakland either.

Here's a list I just made of the "urban parks" in East Oakland that I've been to:

  • San Antonio Park
  • W.D. Wood Park
  • Brookdale Park
  • Central Park
  • Peralta Hacienda Historical Park
  • Clinton Square
  • Union Point Park
  • Maxwell Park
  • McCrea Memorial Park
  • Peralta Park
  • Bella Vista Park
Here's the nature parks I've been to in East Oakland/the hills:


  • Dimond Park
  • Dimond Canyon
  • Joaquin Miller Park
  • Leona Heights Park
  • Redwood Regional Park
  • Knowland Park
  • Chabot Park
  • Shepherd Canyon Park
  • MLK Regional Shoreline


Here's urban parks in DT and West Oakland I've been to:

  • Lake Merritt
  • Harrison Square
  • Madison Park
  • Kaiser Rooftop Garden
  • Ogawa Plaza
  • Lafayette Square
  • Jefferson Square
  • Snow Park
  • Lowell Park
  • Marston Campbell Park
  • DeFremery Park
  • Mandela Greenway
  • South Prescott Park
  • Poplar Park
  • Wade Johnson Park
Here's nature parks in DT/West Oakland I've been to:

  • Middle Harbor Shoreline
  • Rose Garden
  • Oak Grove Park


That's why when y'all say that Oakland doesn't have very many accessible parks, I don't really understand what you mean by that. North Oakland is somewhat of an exception, but the rest of the city is definitely not "under-parked". Even in North Oakland there's Bushrod Park, Mosswood Park, Lake Temescal, Merriwood Park, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2013 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top