Hacker News Reader

Comment by breck | Hacker News Reader

> There is, I’ve found, precious little to do here, particularly if you’re not inclined towards sports or the outdoors.

but if you are inclined towards sports or the outdoors, SF is the best place in the country. i went surfing and hiking last week. also went on a couple of double digit bike rides. not too many places back east like that.

View on HN

I don't think that's true. You can do everything you just said in pretty much every city in Southern California.

Yet I don't have to contend with massive over population. In fact, I live in a suburb of Los Angeles and am no more than 20 miles away from everything you mentioned. But my city has a population density of only 2,137 people per square mile. While San Francisco on the other hand has a population density of 17,000 people per square mile.

So I wouldn't throw around "best place in the country" so liberally.

SF proper is terrible for most outdoors activities: you have to drive at the very least across the golden gate to do much of anything. Maybe it's ok for a Big City, but that's another reason why I wouldn't want to live in a Big City. I like outdoors activities, and don't like dealing with traffic just to participate in them.

Of course if you're comparing with 'back east', sure it's probably not so bad, but if you've ever lived in a place that's really good for outdoors sports, SF isn't all that great.

Yeah. In Portland you don't have to first drive out of the city to start your experience. I can start on a bike trail in Portland, and riding out of the city is part of my activity.

(Sidebar to visitors: check out the Springwater Corridor. Cyclists/walkers/horse riders)

Don't forget that the weather here means you can comfortably go running year round. In fact, the san francisco half is in January. That's a huge advantage that SF-proper has. Soccer, running, and cycling are all activities you can do every single day in SF-proper.

Yeah, the weather is definitely a huge point in favor of SF in my opinion. It's nearly perfect, aside from the chilly summers.

SF proper is not nearly large enough or traffic-free enough to do serious cycling in, though.

Yes, but you can commute in it year-round. And with a fixie or single speed, the hills add at least a modicum of challenge.

There's no reason to say that SF proper is too small to take advantage of; I think the appeal is that here, you have year-round, every day exercise. That little bit adds up, just like every day of brutal cold in Chicago or NYC changes you.

That effects people's psyche, and I think that's a major reason why the attitude out here is different.

SF proper is way too small to go for a nice 140k ride.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com