Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
 
Old 03-01-2013, 01:14 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
28,226 posts, read 36,883,248 times
Reputation: 28563

Advertisements

The problem is, let's say our Bay Area designation is within 35 miles of SF or San Jose (ignoring Oakland at the moment).

Well Livermore and Dublin are technically only 30ish miles from San Jose. Livermore is further from SF but closer to San Jose.

Peninsula places more than 30 miles from SF, would fall in line with 30 miles from San Jose. But if you limited it to 30 miles from SF, then Palo Alto would actually by excluded, and we all know it is solidly in the Bay Area.

Concord is about 30 miles from SF. And Santa Cruz is only 30 miles from San Jose. Do we limit the direction the radius goes? How exactly should we set the boundaries. BART? Freeways? Natural borders?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-01-2013, 01:20 PM
 
6,802 posts, read 6,715,308 times
Reputation: 1911
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
The problem is, let's say our Bay Area designation is within 35 miles of SF or San Jose (ignoring Oakland at the moment).

Well Livermore and Dublin are technically only 30ish miles from San Jose. Livermore is further from SF but closer to San Jose.

Peninsula places more than 30 miles from SF, would fall in line with 30 miles from San Jose. But if you limited it to 30 miles from SF, then Palo Alto would actually by excluded, and we all know it is solidly in the Bay Area.

Concord is about 30 miles from SF. And Santa Cruz is only 30 miles from San Jose. Do we limit the direction the radius goes? How exactly should we set the boundaries. BART? Freeways? Natural borders?
Well, stories of going to nude beaches work, ya never know what might appeal. I have no hard and fast rule.

Normally I use mountain ranges though. Which was vital in the Concord decision.

When checking on Stockton I consider other factors. Such as Stockton smells and is to far away as the crow flies even though they have a port. So I exclude them. And I'd hate for Stockton to get vainglorious about being "Bay area". We'd never hear the end of it.

Last edited by Senno; 03-01-2013 at 01:42 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2013, 01:47 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,211 posts, read 107,904,670 times
Reputation: 116159
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
The problem is, let's say our Bay Area designation is within 35 miles of SF or San Jose (ignoring Oakland at the moment).

Well Livermore and Dublin are technically only 30ish miles from San Jose. Livermore is further from SF but closer to San Jose.

Peninsula places more than 30 miles from SF, would fall in line with 30 miles from San Jose. But if you limited it to 30 miles from SF, then Palo Alto would actually by excluded, and we all know it is solidly in the Bay Area.

Concord is about 30 miles from SF. And Santa Cruz is only 30 miles from San Jose. Do we limit the direction the radius goes? How exactly should we set the boundaries. BART? Freeways? Natural borders?
Judge, how about jade for your new court clerk, to replace the Lafayette spy? She's got it goin' on!

Mountain ranges is a good one (as long as the Berkeley Hills don't count), which would explain Santa Cruz being out, along with Half Moon Bay. Gilroy is also out, based on the cow town criterion. (Cow town/rural status trumps proximity.)

I can't believe the court would even consider Stockton! Anyplace considered a satellite of Sac'to is automatically out. And aren't there slaughterhouses in Stockton? ew Presence of any "ew" factors disqualify a place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2013, 01:56 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,211 posts, read 107,904,670 times
Reputation: 116159
Any towns listed on California Central Valley maps are excluded from "Bay Area" status, whether they're in Bay Area counties or not.
California Central Valley Map - Mapsof.net

Note that this includes Pittsburg, a BART destination, as well as self-declared cowtown, Vacaville.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2013, 01:59 PM
 
6,802 posts, read 6,715,308 times
Reputation: 1911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
Judge, how about jade for your new court clerk, to replace the Lafayette spy? She's got it goin' on!

Mountain ranges is a good one (as long as the Berkeley Hills don't count), which would explain Santa Cruz being out, along with Half Moon Bay. Gilroy is also out, based on the cow town criterion. (Cow town/rural status trumps proximity.)

I can't believe the court would even consider Stockton! Anyplace considered a satellite of Sac'to is automatically out. And aren't there slaughterhouses in Stockton? ew Presence of any "ew" factors disqualify a place.
I just mentioned Stockton as others have, lol. Considered and rejected.

Cow town itself is not disqualifying unless it is sufficiently rural though. But I don't consider Gilroy to be Bay Area personally. I consider it shopping on the way to the Bay Area or SC.

Doc is ineligible as he's got a civil judgement against him.

Sadly I'm not hiring a clerk.

Easy on that "ew" factor though. The court might consider live sex shows in SF as adverse evidence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2013, 01:59 PM
 
Location: San Jose, CA
7,688 posts, read 29,156,794 times
Reputation: 3631
Map of the Real Bay Area – Investor Free [Burbed.com]

There you go. Problem solved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2013, 02:08 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,211 posts, read 107,904,670 times
Reputation: 116159
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonarrat View Post
I move that the court temporarily adjourn to consider this new evidence.

Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 03-01-2013 at 02:20 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2013, 02:56 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, CA
2,518 posts, read 4,010,977 times
Reputation: 624
I don't think anyone who lives in "Fresno" can determine what cities are in the Bay Area. This cow town court has no authority.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2013, 02:59 PM
 
10,920 posts, read 6,912,422 times
Reputation: 4942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
Mountain ranges is a good one (as long as the Berkeley Hills don't count),
Although I think mountain ranges/hills can do a good job of outlining the "inner" Bay Area from the "outer" Bay Area. For the most part, if you're crossing a hill/mountain range, you're leaving/entering the core of the Bay Area (most accurate in the East Bay, not as accurate in North Bay).

Last edited by HockeyMac18; 03-01-2013 at 03:12 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2013, 03:15 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,211 posts, read 107,904,670 times
Reputation: 116159
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyMac18 View Post
Although I think mountain ranges/hills can do a good job of outlining the "inner" Bay Area from the "outer" Bay Area. For the most part, if you're crossing a hill/mountain range, you're leaving the core of the Bay Area (most accurate in the East Bay, not as accurate in North Bay).
It works for the North Bay insofar as it would define Stinson Beach and Bolinas as being outside the Bay Area, which I agree with.

RE: East Bay regions, it raises some tricky questions. I don't think there's ever been a question that Orinda, Lafayette and WC were part of the Bay Area. Concord is also included, now. However, points south of WC along 680 haven't been considered part of the Bay Area in the past (Dublin, Alamo, Pleasanton, etc.). If we use hills and 680 as a definition of "not Bay", or "Outer Bay", then we'd have to treat WC and Concord the same as Dublin, Livermore, etc. The judge has ruled WC and Concord as "in". It remains to be clarified whether the towns south of WC along 680 qualify as Bay Area.
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:11 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top