edit: and I'll add SF seemed actually significantly below NYC prices now. To get a similar level of apartment to what I have in SF I'd either pay 2-4 hundred extra or move out far enough that it doesn't seem obvious to me I'd have more amenities and public transit within say 30 minutes of me.
In general comparing cities will always be somewhat like comparing sports teams: everyone has a favorite, for different reasons, and there's no right answer. But too many times since I've gotten here I've seen people try to compare SF to places like NYC and LA. I don't even like LA, but I'm not going to try and compare SF to LA because that'd be like comparing an NBA team to a "G League" team. People keep asking me stuff like "SF is just like a mini-NYC right?!" upon hearing where I came from, and I humor them to be nice, but no. It's really not at all.
You're describing a 4 mile journey.
A comparable journey in NYC is SoHo to Central Park.
At best, that's a 30 minute commute in NYC on transit. Probably similar in a car. In LA it's a drive no matter what.
NYC distances just feel longer because they pass more stuff (which to be fair is an argument for NYC).
And this isn't some untouchable problem either: better signage and markings, better separation (I still wince driving past where I fell because people are riding just a couple of feet away from tracks that will injure them), rubber strips that trains can go over while preventing the tracks from swallowing wheels things like bikes and wheelchairs.
This honestly speaks to that problem with the attitude of most of the people who have been here for a while: they just seemed to accept that this awful problem exists, but it's almost treated like a rite of passage. In other cities I feel like there'd be real widespread outrage at the whole situation and something more would happen, yet it's absolutely effortless to find hundreds of cases per year where people are seriously injured and in some cases even killed.
In NYC you can live in an outer borough and commute in for your job, eat cheap (and tasty) in Chinatown, a bodega, a slice shop, or a halal cart, not waste time driving or parking… it all adds up.
In NYC you can live in an outer borough and commute in for your job
But if you leave at 8:30 thinking that you have a 30 minute ride, traffic backs up so badly that taking a bus 25 stops clean across the city to Market and Church, so you can then take a subway is the recommended option, turning it into a 43 minute ordeal.
-
In no reality would you ever need to ride 25 stops to get to a subway station from an outer borough in NYC.
Midtown to wall st is 30 minutes of subway riding
You’re overcomplicating the commute. Take the 132 Southbound, about 15 mins during morning rush hour.
My guess, though, is you’re not really complaining about a specific commute as much as the paucity of rail in SF, and other faster commute options than bus. Relatively crummy public transport in SF is a valid gripe.
But in larger context, it seems you’re just not happy in/with SF. Could also be you’re just not happy.
If you’re looking to improve your experience, you might do well to consider that SF probably won’t be “fixed” inside our lifetimes.
I haven't had the opportunity to see let alone take that new line. I'll have to check it out.
That said, the route Marina to FiDi (mentioned in GGP) is at a right angle and about half a mile south of the Chinatown Rose-Pak station.
you have to take a bus backwards for 3 stops just to get to a subway entrance
Consolation prize of a city priced like it came in 1st. I really dislike it.
Muni coverage is a joke
the fact that the Van Ness Corridor is the only real rapid transit bus line
in the entire city is insane
For actual diverse food there are clusters of places in places like parts
the Mission, but with such crappy transportation actually getting to those
clusters is a massive pain.
The city mostly shuts down at an absurd hour. Trying to run errands at 10pm
feels like trying to run them at 3 am in most major cities.
If you couldn't piece it together, I'm tolerating living here for things other than the sake of my enjoyment...
> within ¼ mile of a Muni stop
So is that why half of your bus lines make so many stops that they're practically unusable?
Most of your comment is about detailed improvements and rationale behind that system... I'm not a transportation planner: instead I just look at the reality that getting 2.6 miles from my neighborhood by the Panhandle to the Mission is a 15 minute drive, but a 35 minute bus ride that takes 24 stops.
And it's not that's some unusual thing, I shared the example above, that Marina District to Financial District goes from a 30 minute with ~3 miles of transit a 40 minute ride ~7 mile ride across half the city to skirt around car traffic.
-
That's what indicates to me that this city needs more BRT lines: Interruptions are one thing, but you're not going to find yourself needing to travel halfway across most major cities in the wrong direction because traffic messes up the direct route every single day
> I think you're conflating New York with most major cities here. Even the London and Tokyo metros don't run 24x7. Most cities, big or small, tend to shut down at night. New York is very much an outlier.
I think you're misreading the comment: The point is that for most major cities "at 3 am you expect a most things to be closed" is a such an obvious concept. But here in SF 10 pm might as well be "3 am".
And it's not that's some unusual thing, I shared the example above, that
Marina District to Financial District goes from a 30 minute with ~3 miles
of transit a 40 minute ride ~7 mile ride across half the city to skirt
around car traffic.
I think you're misreading the comment: The point is that for most major cities
"at 3 am you expect a most things to be closed" is a such an obvious concept.
But here in SF 10 pm might as well be "3 am".
- The city mostly shuts down at an absurd hour. Trying to run errands at 10pm feels like trying to run them at 3 am in most major cities.
This threw me off so much. I feel like you have so many late night option choices in NYC... but that just doesn't exist in SF.
- The crime itself is a dead horse, but the actual general populace just seems to have such a depressing attitude about it,
I hate how SF doesn't try to enforce laws. Yes, we should be extending compassion to the less fortunate... but that doesn't mean we should embrace people committing crime and making it an okay behavior. I feel so unsafe walking around SF.
I wish Target stayed open past 6pm, but for nightlife if you go out on Friday, you don't have to go to sleep until midday Saturday (if your wallet is fat and you're a club rat). Not quite Berlin's Friday -> Monday morning, but that's too much for me.
I wish Target stayed open past 6pm
- Public transportation is absolute garbage compared to great cities. Muni coverage is a joke, the fact that the Van Ness Corridor is the only real rapid transit bus line in the entire city is insane
- Nowhere near the prettiest city in the country. My balcony overlooks a good half of the city all the way out to across the Bay and there is so much ugly sprawl between major neighborhoods. For every breathtaking view on a hill overlooking the water there's 10 more that are just ugly.
- Bike unfriendly tracks running everywhere. I broke my leg and felt like I had done something stupid. Then every single person in the hospital was able to call out the street where I was hurt without prompting and confirmed they see people daily from the same few streets.
- The food scene is the worst parts of a major city food scene with none of the upsides. If you want diversity prepare for a pretentious reinterpretation meant to extract extra money from yuppies. For actual diverse food there are clusters of places in places like parts the Mission, but with such crappy transportation actually getting to those clusters is a massive pain.
- The city mostly shuts down at an absurd hour. Trying to run errands at 10pm feels like trying to run them at 3 am in most major cities.
- The general attitude about crime: The crime itself is a dead horse, but the actual general populace just seems to have such a depressing attitude about it, like people casually trading stories about how their homes have been broken into as if it's a badge of honor or something. NYC's loudest detractors are average New Yorkers, while SF's average populace almost seems to treat it as a taboo... I guess only fringe groups like rich people, politicians, and outsiders are allowed to hate on the situation in this city?
Overall, coming from NYC I'm used to expensive, but this city is just way too expensive for what it is. The rent is insane when you take into account the fact people are seriously asking for NYC money to live in this place.
If I had to describe this place in one sentence: Consolation prize of a city priced like it came in 1st. I really dislike it.