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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-17-2020, 11:44 AM
 
Location: As of 2022….back to SoCal. OC this time!
9,297 posts, read 4,610,520 times
Reputation: 7618

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by likealady View Post
So dramatic. It does not take an extra hr on top a normal commute to get from SF to Oakland... unless you live all the way out in the Avenues and have to make multiple connections. But then that wouldn't be urban living either so


It's not dramatic tho....you aren't looking at the O.P's situation IMO. I'm a medical professional too......a traveling speech therapist is going to have to work some afternoons & evenings.........that changes the amount of time alot for the commute.......if it's car or public transportation. They get stuck with the bad shifts & the worst facilities that no one wants.........that's why they are brought in & paid more. It's that way for all of the traveling medical professional jobs...............

It makes no sense for her to live farther away than she has to....an hour commute can turn into 2 hrs super easy with afternoon crowds & traffic. A car is needed MO for safety & off hours commuting.....she can pull directly into the facility's garage & have security at work....& having a car is impossibly expensive in Sf too....so why shouldn't she just find a nicer & cheaper area to live near Oakland....that's closer to her work?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-17-2020, 01:20 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
1,386 posts, read 1,507,072 times
Reputation: 2431
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanoSF View Post
I can't get behind the idea of living in Oakland, if you are someone who loves urban living. While Oakland has a lot going for it in terms of urban amenities like interesting restaurants, bars and a few arts attractions, its best places to live are rather suburban. Oakland's urban core is also pretty dismal and disappointing to people who enjoy the type of walkable, dense and dynamic urban environment that SF has. It does retain lots of the problems you'd find with a much larger city, though, so you'd have all the negatives, with only a few of the positives.
I mostly disagree with this assessment. Oakland is urban from downtown north to KoNo and northeast to the Grand Lake area, and also in the Temescal and Rockridge areas. These parts of town are comparable to many parts of San Francisco. San Francisco is heavily residential last I checked, except in particular business districts. The only parts of SF that are "more" urban are either cost prohibitive to live in for most people, or have crime and quality of life issues that far exceed the ones found in Oakland.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2020, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Wine Country, California
653 posts, read 466,558 times
Reputation: 840
Quote:
Originally Posted by likealady View Post
I will add uptown Oakland is pretty nice and urban. Lake Merritt area too. Around 12 st Bart is a little more rough around the edges but not bad. Close to some good food in Oakland Chinatown and old Oakland. But like I said, commute from SF > Oakland is pretty easy if you're living & working near a transit hub.
Agreed on uptown Oakland, old Oakland and especially Lake Merritt. You’re right to point them out as desirable urban spaces and I meant no slight to Oakland. I was actually hesitant to offer my opinion that this was somehow “non-urban” for fear that it would continue to veer the conversation away from the OP’s question. I was referring more to the connected, dense, walkable urban environment of SF as the bar, which is how I read the OP’s description.

Those areas you list are nice and have a uniquely Bay Area (and yes, urban) vibe to them... Just a different one from SF’s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2020, 02:59 PM
 
18 posts, read 21,558 times
Reputation: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by splizzard View Post
Hi everyone,

I'm wondering if the SF to Oakland commute is bearable, and if so do people usually use public transportation or drive? I'm moving out to the bay area as a traveling speech therapist, and I'm debating a couple of different placements. I'd like to live in SF because the traveling salary will allow me to do that, and it's not permanent so might as well experience it. However, most jobs are in Oakland. Other options are in Colma, Redwood City, Sunnyvale, and Petaluma. When I look at traffic on google maps, they all look pretty rough.

Also considering just living in Oakland and taking an Oakland contract, so feel free to sell me on Oakland. I'm from the east coast and know basically nothing about the bay area. I'm a 28 year old woman, LGBT, and enjoy urban settings.

It's really going to depend where you're located in SF and the final destination in Oakland. It'll be easy if both had BART stations within walking distance let's say. What you probably should know is that the public transit system in SF and Oakland is very disjointed. There are areas in SF and Oakland that will be harder to get to any public transit.

Assuming you're near public transit, the commute is easy. I commute entirely on the BART and it takes me 1 hour door to door using BART from Colma to 12th St Oakland. Although delays can happen, the vast majority of time BART is actually on time. I've only had maybe two major delays in the last year and they were due to closing of some stations because of police activity. Even yesterday when it was pouring rain out, the BART ran on time.

If you don't take public transit and driving then you'll likely see more variance in time. You should also think about parking cost in SF and Oakland because your facility might not have a free garage.

My recommendation is live close to where you work and just go visit SF if you want during your off hours. If you're looking for the urban SF lifestyle then maybe go that route but not sure if it's really worth the hassle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2020, 03:59 PM
 
Location: SF/Mill Valley
8,756 posts, read 3,927,658 times
Reputation: 6126
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanoSF View Post
Depending on where you look in Oakland, it's not that much less expensive for the more desirable neighborhoods.

The OP specifically asked about the SF-Oakland commute, adding that she prefers "urban settings," and states that her traveling salary will allow her to live in San Francisco for this temporary engagement. She said nothing about seeking "cheaper living." She indicated that she was interested in experiencing SF while here.

I get that you feel the need to defend the ditz who responded above for some reason, but as I wrote to her, my response to the OP had nothing to do with her. So, your defense is unnecessary.
I wasn't 'defending' anyone (and it's odd to suggest anyone should need defending in this thread for giving their realistic and honest opinion, simply because they disagree with you).

That said, I was 'defending' the many people who have to (or want to) live in Oakland and commute to SF; it's incredibly common (and a part of Oakland could most definitely be considered 'urban living', but that's not even the relative point). You state 'the better neighborhoods' of Oakland will be more; but at least there isn't the cost (or time) of commuting as well (and also easier to find a nicer place). One will pay an incredibly steep price for a comparable apartment (if available) in or around downtown SF, its urban core, just to pay for an expensive (and longer) commute. That would be ditzy for most people considering the OP could easily access SF (and the rest of the Bay Area) when she has time off.

Point being - not many people choose to spend their time commuting (in most cases it's relative to one's budget/affordability and time constraints), especially in such a high COL area. That's why it's called a 'reverse commute', not many can afford to do it (or would want to, if they could). Aren't you the one always referencing how few people are on the ferry with you, lol?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2020, 04:57 PM
 
Location: Wine Country, California
653 posts, read 466,558 times
Reputation: 840
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy View Post
I wasn't 'defending' anyone (and it's odd to suggest anyone should need defending in this thread for giving their realistic and honest opinion, simply because they disagree with you).

That said, I was 'defending' the many people who have to (or want to) live in Oakland and commute to SF; it's incredibly common (and a part of Oakland could most definitely be considered 'urban living', but that's not even the relative point). You state 'the better neighborhoods' of Oakland will be more; but at least there isn't the cost (or time) of commuting as well (and also easier to find a nicer place). One will pay an incredibly steep price for a comparable apartment (if available) in or around downtown SF, its urban core, just to pay for an expensive (and longer) commute. That would be ditzy for most people considering the OP could easily access SF (and the rest of the Bay Area) when she has time off.

Point being - not many people choose to spend their time commuting (in most cases it's relative to one's budget/affordability and time constraints), especially in such a high COL area. That's why it's called a 'reverse commute', not many can afford to do it (or would want to, if they could). Aren't you the one always referencing how few people are on the ferry with you, lol?
So, in this, you admit that your point was to further some agenda toward my post, rather than to provide anything substantive to the OP’s straightforward question.

Noted. Thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2020, 05:18 PM
 
Location: SF/Mill Valley
8,756 posts, read 3,927,658 times
Reputation: 6126
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanoSF View Post
So, in this, you admit that your point was to further some agenda toward my post, rather than to provide anything substantive to the OP’s straightforward question.
Actually, I answered you (and responded to her thread title as well) - though I'm not sure why you appear to be taking everything personally. Apparently you didn't read my post in its entirety; I spoke directly to cost/livability/practicality/desirability in a SF to Oakland commute.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2020, 08:02 PM
 
Location: Wine Country, California
653 posts, read 466,558 times
Reputation: 840
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy View Post
Actually, I answered you (and responded to her thread title as well) - though I'm not sure why you appear to be taking everything personally. Apparently you didn't read my post in its entirety; I spoke directly to cost/livability/practicality/desirability in a SF to Oakland commute.
Yes, which had nothing to do with her question.

Your post was all about your girlfriend (great catch, by the way) and trying to salvage some kind of relevance in her incoherent rant.

You two derive some entertainment in this, so carry on, I suppose...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2020, 09:01 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,876 posts, read 26,418,164 times
Reputation: 34086
Quote:
Originally Posted by splizzard View Post
Hi everyone,

I'm wondering if the SF to Oakland commute is bearable, and if so do people usually use public transportation or drive? I'm moving out to the bay area as a traveling speech therapist, and I'm debating a couple of different placements. I'd like to live in SF because the traveling salary will allow me to do that, and it's not permanent so might as well experience it. However, most jobs are in Oakland. Other options are in Colma, Redwood City, Sunnyvale, and Petaluma. When I look at traffic on google maps, they all look pretty rough.

Also considering just living in Oakland and taking an Oakland contract, so feel free to sell me on Oakland. I'm from the east coast and know basically nothing about the bay area. I'm a 28 year old woman, LGBT, and enjoy urban settings.
Given the choice I'd live in Oakland for sure, the weather is absolutely perfect, whereas San Francisco gets too cold for me. Oakland has a diverse accepting community without being Berkeley weird and there's lots to do. Temescal is very nice, but my son's fiance has a condo real close to Lake Merrit and she loves it there. No matter where you settle in the bay area make sure you go to Texas Rose in Oakland, my 65 yr old+ LGBT friend lives in Petaluma now but she still drives up to Texas Rose on "LGBT women's night"

I hope you find the perfect place, please stay in touch with us and let us know how it goes!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2020, 09:03 AM
 
Location: SF/Mill Valley
8,756 posts, read 3,927,658 times
Reputation: 6126
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanoSF View Post
Yes, which had nothing to do with her question.

Your post was all about your girlfriend (great catch, by the way) and trying to salvage some kind of relevance in her incoherent rant.

You two derive some entertainment in this, so carry on, I suppose...
Her question was in re: SF to Oakland; and I gave my honest, concise opinion (and reasons why), while you apparently want to personally discuss me and other posters in this thread (which is bizarre).

You don't sound happy; maybe that commute via cable cars and the ferry (in addition to walking) isn't relaxing you as much as you thought it was. This is why I state; most people, given the choice - choose the shortest and least expensive commute available to them, especially when there is such a big difference between the cost, type and size of apartments which would be available to them as well.

In fact, many people in the Bay Area like Oakland more and/or dislike SF to live (but love exploring on the weekends). For most people, however, regardless of what they seek, it comes down to compromise when you're dealing with a high COL. OP - good luck.
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 2000-2022 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.

© 2005-2024, 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