Oakland or San Gabriel Valley for dense Asian populations? (Los Angeles: low income, real estate)

[Tiger Beer]

Earlier I inquired about Oakland vs Sacramento, and OAKLAND looks like somewhere I am MUCH more interested in - asian areas PLUS some dense walkable areas.

I saw other photos of Oakland's chinatown, and it looks very lively, looks great!

I'm also curious if any Oaklanders or Bay Area residents or anyone also has familiarity with San Gabriel Valley in Southern California?

Places like Monterey Park, Alhambra, etc. have very high Asian populations, yet they are also suburbs. So a plus and minus - unless they are less like suburbs than I assume.

Curious if anyone is familiar with Oakland vs. San Gabriel Valley to do some comparisons, etc.

[uptown_urbanist]

I responded to another posting on another part of the forum that was similar, so I'm assuming that was also yours. I'll just add that when looking at the LA area keep in mind that while places like Alhambra are technically suburbs, that doesn't mean that they are suburban in the stereotypical modern American suburban way you may be thinking of. Alhambra, at least many parts of it, are fairly urban in feel. Not Manhattan dense and urban, but not really suburban, either, depending on definition of suburban. I haven't spent time in Oakland's Chinatown so can't make a direct comparison. One thing Oakland has going for it, though, is better transportation offerings; LA's public transit is far better than people give it credit for, but Alhambra only has bus connections, not train (although it's not too far from a Gold LIne station).

[Tiger Beer]

THanks Uptown_urbanist.

Alhambra does seem to be one that gets mentioned a lot in the valley, I'm going to look more into that one.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

Earlier I inquired about Oakland vs Sacramento, and OAKLAND looks like somewhere I am MUCH more interested in - asian areas PLUS some dense walkable areas.

I saw other photos of Oakland's chinatown, and it looks very lively, looks great!

I'm also curious if any Oaklanders or Bay Area residents or anyone also has familiarity with San Gabriel Valley in Southern California?

Places like Monterey Park, Alhambra, etc. have very high Asian populations, yet they are also suburbs. So a plus and minus - unless they are less like suburbs than I assume.

Curious if anyone is familiar with Oakland vs. San Gabriel Valley to do some comparisons, etc.

yes, those 2 cities are diverse but have a high percentage of Asians, Monterey Park probably more so. Another wonderful area is So Pasadena. It has about everything and is very heavily Asian, don't overlook Arcadia. That is getting a little further away from the Los Angeles scene which could be good or bad, depending on what you are looking for.

I answered you as well a couple of days ago, but am still not quite sure what you are really looking for. So Pasadena certainly is walkable and very safe, but not as diverse if you are thinking cultually as in white, Asain, Hispanic, etc. It is almost totally a mixture of Asian and white.

Nita

[Tiger Beer]

Thanks Nita.

South Pasadena, and I believe that was you on the post, but you really had me intrigued by SO. Pasadena. Alhambra & Monterey Park as well. Actually I was just looking on wikipedia at the demographics throughout San Gabriel Valley which also had average incomes. It seemed like average incomes there were quite modest, and when I later looked at craigslist, renting isn't too bad in those areas either. It seems to only be buying a house that is astronomical.

Arcadia was another I was interested in and saw had high Asian numbers. But looks like the median salary per household was quite high, which somewhat ruled it out for me.

Just curious, would most say that SGV is much better than Oakland all the way around?

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

Thanks Nita.

South Pasadena, and I believe that was you on the post, but you really had me intrigued by SO. Pasadena. Alhambra & Monterey Park as well. Actually I was just looking on wikipedia at the demographics throughout San Gabriel Valley which also had average incomes. It seemed like average incomes there were quite modest, and when I later looked at craigslist, renting isn't too bad in those areas either. It seems to only be buying a house that is astronomical.

Arcadia was another I was interested in and saw had high Asian numbers. But looks like the median salary per household was quite high, which somewhat ruled it out for me.

Just curious, would most say that SGV is much better than Oakland all the way around?

I believe you will see a modest income because of parts SGV are very modest to working class..Yes, ARcadia is upper middle class as is So Pasadena and of course San Marino.I do not think San Marino has a very high Asian population. Temple City is another area you may want to consider. It is south of ARcadia and a little less affluent but certainly not working or lower middle class by anymeans. like Alhambra and Monterey Park, San Gabriel will be a little more diverse and a little less affluent.. Of course SGV, like San Fernando Valley takes in many miles and many cities not even mentioned. Some are low income, a few higher..

[BayDude]

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

Earlier I inquired about Oakland vs Sacramento, and OAKLAND looks like somewhere I am MUCH more interested in - asian areas PLUS some dense walkable areas.

I saw other photos of Oakland's chinatown, and it looks very lively, looks great!

I'm also curious if any Oaklanders or Bay Area residents or anyone also has familiarity with San Gabriel Valley in Southern California?

Places like Monterey Park, Alhambra, etc. have very high Asian populations, yet they are also suburbs. So a plus and minus - unless they are less like suburbs than I assume.

Curious if anyone is familiar with Oakland vs. San Gabriel Valley to do some comparisons, etc.

WTF why do you keep posting these asian population threads? WTF is your problem? ***in wierdos.

[KRISTINsf]

I'd opt for the San Gabe Valley area. It's much larger and has more peeps since it encompasses about four different cities/towns.

Both areas, San Gabe valley and Oakland, you will need a car; San Gabe valley, because it's so spread out and Oakland because after dawn, it will be dangerous to venture out of Chinatown proper in search of public transportation.

[pbergen]

to the OP:

didn't you say in another post that your wife is a filipina? if so, you may want to look into daly city, which is just south of san francisco. huge population of filipinos plus a lot of chinese. and it's pretty easy to get into sf from there.

oakland is another good choice. i'm a fan of its diversity, walkability, and unpretentious feel.

the san gabriel valley in southern california is a solid area for the most part (some cities more than others), but it really isn't walkable other than pasadena, south pasadena, and a handful of other spots. and you really do need a car to get around, even if you live in the walkable areas - that is, unless you plan on spending virtually all of your time in your specific neighborhood.

mass transit in the LA area is somewhat underrated, as the other poster mentioned, but it really depends where you live. for instance, the metro offers reliable transit service via heavy rail and light rail from downtown LA to some of the neighboring urban areas like hollywood and (soon) east LA. at the same time, suburban areas are hit-or-miss. there are large swaths of the region, including the bulk of the san gabriel valley, that are only serviced by buses - and sometimes those buses don't come all that frequently and/or exclusively operate M-F during rush hour. the SGV only has rail access in a handful of spots (pasadena, south pasadena, el monte, covina, etc) with spotty-to-decent bus service everywhere else.

so like i said, even if you were to live in a relatively walkable section of the SGV, you'd still need to commit yourself to a driving lifestyle if you wanted to enjoy all of the offerings in that area. the majority of the asian businesses in the SGV are located in strip malls that are scattered in various independent cities, and you'll be missing out on most of them if you were to live in, say, south pasadena or alhambra and limit yourself only to that area.

another issue to consider is that purchasing real estate is not cheap in any of these places. it's one thing if you're ok with renting long-term, but it's another story if you're looking to buy. also, it's important to note that many of the heavily asian san gabriel valley cities do not have a whole lot of rental apartment buildings for whatever reason. they're suburban communities that tend to be dominated by strip malls and detached houses with yards.

as you know, california's metropolitan areas with large asian populations tend to be really expensive. it's going to be very challenging to find a place to buy in a heavily asian neighborhood if you have a modest income. i mentioned this in response to another one of your posts, but you may want to look into a city like houston, which also has a large asian population and offers much better value for your dollar. as a matter of fact, i've actually looked into texas myself, but decided against it for the time being, as i'm still unmarried and am content with renting for the short term. once i'm hitched and looking to buy, though, i may look into it again.

i guess you just have to decide if renting for an indefinite period of time in a place like the bay area or southern california is worth it, long-term.

[pbergen]

Originally Posted by KRISTINsf

I'd opt for the San Gabe Valley area. It's much larger and has more peeps since it encompasses about four different cities/towns.

the SGV encompasses way more than four municipalities.