Walnut Creek or Pleasanton? Family of 5 (Oakland, Berkeley: home, neighborhoods, buying)

[Ceece]

I'd start with WC but don't fret if you end up Pleasanton/Dublin. There is no "perfection" in any of these places and I treat the whole area from Danville to Livermore like one big city when doing stuff anyway. Schools may vary a bit but there's nothing horrible anywhere.

[davdaven]

I would choose Alameda or Albany over either of those, as they are much closer in and offer what you are looking for. However, if you insist on moving out to the hinterlands, I do recommend Walnut Creek. WC is a thriving city with good shopping, restaurants, and cultural amenities to be had. Pleasanton is a bit, uh, lacking in those things. WC is also closer to SF than Pleasanton is, plus it has much more BART service.

[TheseGoTo11]

Walnut Creek is closer to SF and a lot more interesting. Pleasanton's fine, but less distinctive. The main reason to choose Pleasanton would be easier, though not easy, commutes to the South Bay.

[MechAndy]

I work in San Francisco and live in Danville.
From my door (about 3 miles east of El Cerro) to Mission Bay (just south of Pac Bell Park) is just under 35 miles.
I drive it near very day unless I have to go to to our home office in Union City and that has the same commute.
My regular hours are 6:00 am to 1:30 pm.
The commute is 35-40 minutes in the morning with a coffee stop.
The afternoon commute home is about an hour.
This all changes drastically if I’m working late by an additional hour for the trip home.
It might cost a bit more than WC and more on par with Pleasanton but you might consider Danville.
Best of luck to you.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by davdaven

I would choose Alameda or Albany over either of those, as they are much closer in and offer what you are looking for. However, if you insist on moving out to the hinterlands, I do recommend Walnut Creek. WC is a thriving city with good shopping, restaurants, and cultural amenities to be had. Pleasanton is a bit, uh, lacking in those things. WC is also closer to SF than Pleasanton is, plus it has much more BART service.

I endorse this. And I think Alameda is a little more affordable than Albany, and more picturesque. Plus, you get to take the ferry to SF, instead of BART.

[marcopolo666]

My thoughts are that this question (or one very, very like it) has been asked so many times that the answer to your question(s) can be found by using the search functionality of this site. THEN, for *specific* questions a post might provide new, directed info ("I read that XYZABC .... do you really find that to be the case", for example).

[aslowdodge]

Originally Posted by MechAndy

I work in San Francisco and live in Danville.
From my door (about 3 miles east of El Cerro) to Mission Bay (just south of Pac Bell Park) is just under 35 miles.
I drive it near very day unless I have to go to to our home office in Union City and that has the same commute.
My regular hours are 6:00 am to 1:30 pm.
The commute is 35-40 minutes in the morning with a coffee stop.
The afternoon commute home is about an hour.
This all changes drastically if I’m working late by an additional hour for the trip home.
It might cost a bit more than WC and more on par with Pleasanton but you might consider Danville.
Best of luck to you.

While Danville is farther from Bart, it is one of my favorite cities. A great downtown that isn’t as crowded as Walnut Creek. West side is especially nice.

[capoeira]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Alameda has 4 br. homes in your price range, is located on the Bay, and has ferry service to the Embarcadero. Good schools, great family area. Take a look, OP; you may not need BART at all.

https://www.realtor.com/realestatean...-10843?view=qv

https://www.redfin.com/CA/Alameda/23.../home/12114524

https://www.redfin.com/CA/Alameda/49...home/143024075

Those Alameda homes are in a liquefaction zone!

http://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/vi...er/0&source=sd

I would not even consider gambling on the purchase of a home in a liquefaction zone, especially with small children.

[marcopolo666]

Most of the bay area (well, close by the water) is in a liquefaction zone. Especially those areas built on landfill, including parts of SF (built on old sailing ships - I kid you not) and parts of redwood city. And a bunch of other places (not that they want to live in East Palo Alto).

[NewbieHere]

I agree, most of the Bay Area is in liquefaction zone. More nonsense from people online to say I won’t buy house because of this reason.