Walnut Creek vs. Danville; Which is better? (San Francisco, Oakland: apartments, condos)

[runner456]

I noticed that Danville has a much newer housing stock and newer better condition streets than Walnut Creek, yet $ for $, you get more money for a Danville house than for an older cruddier Walnut Creek house? Why is this?

[DocGoldstein]

Better in what way? Schools? Nearly even (I think Danville might have the edge). Both are low in crime. Both are family oriented. Walnut Creek has by far the better night life. Weather they are nearly equal (Danville is slightly hotter).

I think perception wise, Danville might be seen as the higher end community. A lot of Silicon Valley and San Francisco CEOs/Executives call the city home.

[ttocs99]

I really like both towns. Danville is a great town, really beautiful. I think Walnut Creek has it beat as far as restaurants/shopping, and also mass transit (BART in downtown Walnut Creek, and close by in Pleasant Hill). Walnut Creek is also a beautiful town.

[socalinnorcal]

Originally Posted by DocGoldstein

Better in what way? Schools? Nearly even (I think Danville might have the edge). Both are low in crime. Both are family oriented. Walnut Creek has by far the better night life. Weather they are nearly equal (Danville is slightly hotter).

I think perception wise, Danville might be seen as the higher end community. A lot of Silicon Valley and San Francisco CEOs/Executives call the city home.

Yep.

[sav858]

Danville is simply wealthier and more prestigous than Walnut Creek. The homes are bigger and there are far less apartments/condos. But it has less amenities, isn't as "diverse", and isn't quite as convenient as WC transportation wise. It has a pretty decent downtown for it's size though.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by runner456

I noticed that Danville has a much newer housing stock and newer better condition streets than Walnut Creek, yet $ for $, you get more money for a Danville house than for an older cruddier Walnut Creek house? Why is this?

Housing in Danville is cheaper because it's farther from the Bay and SF. Danville used to be the sticks, it used to be farmland.
Newer doesn't necessarily mean quality. It could be cheap construction. Be careful.

[sera]

Originally Posted by sav858

Danville is simply wealthier and more prestigous than Walnut Creek. The homes are bigger and there are far less apartments/condos. But it has less amenities, isn't as "diverse", and isn't quite as convenient as WC transportation wise. It has a pretty decent downtown for it's size though.

Agree with the above. Having not lived near Walnut Creek in nearly 20 years, I would still not consider it "cruddy". It had some wonderful restaurants and fine shopping, are you familier with Nordstroms?

Will make the suggestion if you should start another Thread or Post, especially about people and places, you not use derogatory adjectives such as cruddier. Thank you.

[ttocs99]

Originally Posted by sera

Agree with the above. Having not lived near Walnut Creek in nearly 20 years, I would still not consider it "cruddy". It had some wonderful restaurants and fine shopping, are you familier with Nordstroms?

Will make the suggestion if you should start another Thread or Post, especially about people and places, you not use derogatory adjectives such as cruddier. Thank you.

I moved from Walnut Creek back to NYC in 2006, and have visited WC both in 2009 & 2011, and can attest that Walnut Creek is far from cruddy. I may be biased though, I love Walnut Creek and hope to move back within the next 10 years.

[Taboo2]

Originally Posted by runner456

I noticed that Danville has a much newer housing stock and newer better condition streets than Walnut Creek, yet $ for $, you get more money for a Danville house than for an older cruddier Walnut Creek house? Why is this?

Danville is way nicer, better schools too.

[jrb724]

Originally Posted by runner456

I noticed that Danville has a much newer housing stock and newer better condition streets than Walnut Creek, yet $ for $, you get more money for a Danville house than for an older cruddier Walnut Creek house? Why is this?

Geographic location is part of the answer. WC is closer to large job centers (and other amenities) in Oakland & San Francisco and has a BART station.

WC was developed much earlier than Danville so it has older housing stock. WC has more restaurants, shopping, & nightlife. Although Danville has more than you would think, it's a fraction of WC.

WCgets a lot more traffic from surrounding areas as it is much more visible from the freeway. Danville was designed to be isolated. This is a good thing to some, bad to others. If you are passing through Danville on 680, you wouldn't even know they have a Denny's and a gas station (or any stores for that matter).

Take a look at the demographics and school scores. I'd guess Danville has small edges on income, schools, home ownership rate, single family homes vs apartments, crime (mainly due to not having as much retail - residential areas are probably similar). WC is still more expensive though b/c geographic location trumps those slight edges.