|
I don't get that, though. When I'm in the Tenderloin, I go grab a quick bite to eat at a bangin' Burmese place (not Burma Superstar, so I get it, I'm making an unfashionable decision). Then I wander down to a loving awesome beer bar. Get pretty blackout. If I want, there are two pretty solid music venues, so I can go that direction. Personally, I usually don't, but that's because I'm not a big music guy. So, I grab a good kebab or some bangin' tacos. How is that any different from the Mission?
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 06:17 |
|
|
lower chance of seeing a tranny with a knife chasing after a nude homeless man.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 06:30
|
|
|
etalian posted:lower chance of seeing a tranny with a knife chasing after a nude homeless man. Anyone have an actual source for neighborhood by neighborhood (or ZIP) crime rates? I'm drawing a blank.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
It's anecdotal, but in my experience the Tenderloin has the highest concentration of feces/vomit per square foot of sidewalk in the nation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 06:33
|
|
|
I dunno. All of SF is pretty gross. But for me, the Mission is a lot grosser than the Tenderloin. Every time I go to the Mission, I feel like people are in hate-mode.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Anyone have an actual source for neighborhood by neighborhood (or ZIP) crime rates? I'm drawing a blank. lol 
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
That's like, 90% drug possession though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 11:40
|
|
|
Kenning posted:That's like, 90% drug possession though. Actually looking at a crime map it's a whole lot of assault. There seems to be a lot of property crime everywhere in SF but violent crime is really concentrated in the tenderloin to a large extent. Also the tenderloin seems to be the only place where there's a whole lot of muggings during the day in SF.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
Rah! posted:The huge increase in gentrification and the growing gap between the haves and the have-nots sure is having a 100% positive effect on San Francisco: Corona once again proving that the Inland Empire is better than the Bay Area in every way
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:I don't get that, though. When I'm in the Tenderloin, I go grab a quick bite to eat at a bangin' Burmese place (not Burma Superstar, so I get it, I'm making an unfashionable decision). Then I wander down to a loving awesome beer bar. Get pretty blackout. If I want, there are two pretty solid music venues, so I can go that direction. Personally, I usually don't, but that's because I'm not a big music guy. So, I grab a good kebab or some bangin' tacos. How is that any different from the Mission? My friend lived in the TL while going to UC Hastings and said there were people doing heroin in her building's entrance area every single day. And needles littering the ground everywhere. Also I can only assume you're not female because if so I seriously doubt you would feel so comfortable in the area. I don't have any issues visiting the area but living there is a completely different experience.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Actually looking at a crime map it's a whole lot of assault. There seems to be a lot of property crime everywhere in SF but violent crime is really concentrated in the tenderloin to a large extent. Also the tenderloin seems to be the only place where there's a whole lot of muggings during the day in SF. Yeah Market street and the tenderloin in general are notorious for things like strong arm robbery.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
I like how some people seem to think that if you can get some food and go to a bar with no trouble that a neighborhood must be perfectly fine...as if you're gauraunteed to get robbed and/or shot whenever you step foot in a high crime area. The tenderloin didn't get its reputation for no reason. Sure it has some good cheap food and bars, a lot of families, immigrants, cool architecture, and even some hipster and yuppie types...and it also has a lot of people just passing through during the day, on their way to other parts of the city, as well as lost tourists wandering around. So its obviously not all bad. But it has serious problems too: tons of poverty, slumlords, the highest concentration of parolees in the city, high violent and property crime rates (including the highest robbery rate in the city), tons of drug dealers, homeless people, addicts, pimps and prostitutes, gang members, crazy people, hustlers, etc. Its also got no shortage of people smoking crack/meth or shooting up in public, and no shortage of people making GBS threads on the sidewalk. It's one of the most grimy and violent neighborhoods in the state/western US. Do a search for "tenderloin" on a news website and see what you get. Here are a few examples from the past month: http://m.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/man-critically-injured-in-stabbing-early-saturday-in-the-tenderloin/Content?oid=2912207 http://m.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/man-fatally-stabbed-in-tenderloin-identified-five-suspects-at-large/Content?oid=2912202 http://m.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/man-shot-in-leg-in-tenderloin-over-gambling-debt/Content?oid=2911606 http://m.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/dog-stolen-from-car-thrown-in-dumpster-to-be-reunited-with-owner/Content?oid=2911438 http://m.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/man-shot-in-back-in-tenderloin/Content?oid=2911291 http://m.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/man-accused-of-murder-in-tenderloin-car-theft-collision-back-in-court/Content?oid=2911037 If you keep searching news archives you can read about drug warfare, running gunbattles, tourists getting killed by stray bullets, snitches getting kidnapped and burned alive, people getting shot for bumping into other people, etc. Just like any other high crime american neighborhood with serious drug and poverty issues. That being said, the crime rate is dropping, just like so many other parts of the city/country. And keep in mind that your chances of being a victim will always be higher if you live there, especially if you're a minority and/or poor, and even more so if you're involved in a life of crime. When it comes to high crime neighborhoods, I do think the tenderloin might be kind of unique in that it's so busy during the day, is surrounded by upscale touristy areas/is in the middle of downtown, and has plenty of interesting stuff to make it an attraction, despite the fact that its also a grimy high crime area that can be dangerous at times. And that probably throws some people off, causing them to think that the TL must not really be that rough. Rah! fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Nov 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
The dubious reputation means it's the last bastion against gentrification since it lacks rich white people appeal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
etalian posted:The dubious reputation means it's the last bastion against gentrification since it lacks rich white people appeal. True, but not entirely...It's not the last bastion against gentrification in SF, and it's not like it completely lacks rich white appeal/gentrification either. There's just less of it than most other parts of the city. There are new luxury condos getting built in the tenderloin as we speak, which isn't surprising given the crazy property prices here and the central location. Like I said in my last post, the Tenderloin really does have an attractive side to it despite the crime/poverty/drug problems: It's relatively cheap, has tons of amenities, is in the middle of downtown, has great public transit service, cool historic architecture, etc. It's pretty much always been a rough neighborhood and the main reason it didn't start gentrifying 50 years ago is because people worked to keep it a working class/poor area, with building height restrictions and a ban on converting apartments/SROs to luxury hotels (or something similar, can't remember exactly), both of which were a reaction to large hotels getting built on the periphery of the tenderloin and union square in the 1960s and 1970s. Then the city concentrated tons of social and homeless services there. Add lots of drugs to the mix, and you get the current day version of the Tenderloin. It would be like a cross between nob hill and union square by now if that anti-gentrification campaign never happened ...expensive, and full of tourists and fancy people. Rah! fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Dec 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
Not to mention it has studio apartments for the reasonable price of $2000. Pretty much the last place in the city that has rentals for $1500-$2000.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
etalian posted:Pretty much the last place in the city that has rentals for $1500-$2000. UNINHABITABLE DUE TO SAND AND FOG Oh wait, its not the 1850s anymore.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:UNINHABITABLE DUE TO SAND AND FOG Even in the ironically named Sunset district, it's hard to find rentals in the sub $2000 price range. It's basically a hosed up city that doesn't have any good fundamentals like solid mass transit to justify the huge price premium.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
etalian posted:
What do you even mean by "good fundamentals", and how exactly does SF not have any of them? Housing prices are hosed up in SF, but other than that it's a great city. And it has better public transit than 99% of America.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 04:45
|
|
|
Rah! posted:What do you even mean by "good fundamentals", and how exactly does SF not have any of them? Housing prices are hosed up in SF, but other than that it's a great city. And it has better public transit than 99% of America. Please, there's only a MUNI bus stop within a few blocks of every address in the city. That's hardly usable. Also this city with 8x the population has a bigger mass transit system, what's up with that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Rah! posted:What do you even mean by "good fundamentals", and how exactly does SF not have any of them? Housing prices are hosed up in SF, but other than that it's a great city. And it has better public transit than 99% of America. The whole SF muni system is wreck with the average bus speed being around 8 mph, lots of muni worker absenteeism, inadequate capital investment/old rolling stock and also being part of the city government means Muni is useful piggy bank for other parts of city government.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
etalian posted:The whole SF muni system is wreck with the average bus speed being around 8 mph, lots of muni worker absenteeism, inadequate capital investment/old rolling stock and also being part of the city government means Muni is useful piggy bank for other parts of city government. Muni also has 2x the number of people boarding per mile compared to other similar metro services, so its understandable that it would be slower.  You can read more here: http://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/agendaitems/6-3-14%20Item%2011%20City%20Services%20Benchmarking%20Report.pdf
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
MUNI is terrible until you compare it to every other US public transit system that isn't in Manhattan. Now the Bay Area generally has poo poo public transit if you don't live near a BART/Caltrain stop (and where you need to go is on the same system).
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Muni also has 2x the number of people boarding per mile compared to other similar metro services, so its understandable that it would be slower. I'm suprised San Jose isn't the asymptote on that chart. I never see anyone on that train, as I ride the carpool lane past 4 gridlocked regular lanes on Hwy 85.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 06:12
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:I'm suprised San Jose isn't the asymptote on that chart. I never see anyone on that train, as I ride the carpool lane past 4 gridlocked regular lanes on Hwy 85. That's for buses. Mainly SF is just an outlier in terms of public transit use for a city of its size. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 06:19
|
|
|
I am not sure I understand the San Jose - Southern Peninsula freeway system. The non-carpool lanes on 85 and 280 are always a breath away from becoming total cluster fucks while the carpool lane is always empty. Have carpool lanes been shown to be effective at traffic reduction?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
nm posted:MUNI is terrible until you compare it to every other US public transit system that isn't in Manhattan. Yeah was basically a low density area that never made wise future thinking investments such as running BART to palo alto or Marin county. Now it has a big population surge without adequate mass transit coverage or even coherent central planning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 06:30
|
|
|
Boot and Rally posted:Have carpool lanes been shown to be effective at traffic reduction? Mounting evidence suggests High Occupancy Vehicle lanes are useless http://www20.csueastbay.edu/news/2013/11/edmontonsun-ProfKwonJaimyoung-103013.html People that want to privatize roads and allow access to fake "carpool" lanes via fees like them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
etalian posted:Yeah was basically a low density area that never made wise future thinking investments such as running BART to palo alto or Marin county. BART wanted to run to Marin, but Marin didn't want it to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 06:34
|
|
|
I feel like the AC Transit buses work fairly well? I know when I was going to school and didn't have a car I definitely rode them a lot and it was not too bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 06:37
|
|
|
Another thing about the Bay Area is that biking is king. Bikes can be great in your neighborhood but aren't really compatible with the subway. There is always some rear end in a top hat doing it (especially in Brooklyn), but the system isn't really designed for it the way it is here. South Bay is a little hosed, but I've ferried over and made it work. Not ideal, but it beats the pants off driving. AC transit is great too. Beats the poo poo off buses in the Bronx.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
Yeah I live in Richmond and work in Oakland and it is a really easy, safe bike ride to work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
The Ohlone greenway is beautiful! But combining that with the BART would probably be easier.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 07:55
|
|
|
It would be, but the exercise isn't as good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:It's anecdotal, but in my experience the Tenderloin has the highest concentration of feces/vomit per square foot of sidewalk in the nation. It most certainly does 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
Kenning posted:I feel like the AC Transit buses work fairly well? I know when I was going to school and didn't have a car I definitely rode them a lot and it was not too bad. AC transit quality (at least W/R/T scheduling and timing) seems to vary pretty wildly with the particular route, for whatever reason.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
The routes in my hometown are all "every 45 minutes" which is pretty infrequent compared to what I got in Berlin. At least with somewhere like downtown Berkeley there are so many bus routes it's easy to just take one and get somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
Mission and Tenderloin: both super poopy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
etalian posted:lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Does this control for population density though? Without that it's kind of meaningless. All you need to know despite the yuppie invasion places like the Mission district, Market Street and tenderloin can be really exciting places late at night.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 06:17 |
|
|
This further confirms my creeping suspicion that my personal experiences are a completely suitable replacement for suitable data.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:11
|
|