My wife and I visited San Francisco in February this year on our honeymoon, and we were both spectacularly disappointed with the place.
It was a nice city, but we felt there really wasn’t a lot to do, besides visiting Alcatraz (which was great), the Golden Gate Bridge (which is, let’s face it, just a bridge), and going Fisherman’s Wharf, which was a reasonably interesting sort of place.
We were staying in Union Square and were astounded by the number of Homeless People- it made the whole city look seedy and run-down. We didn’t have a car, so that limited our ability to see much of the Bay Area, but overall I felt there was little in San Francisco to hold my interest and, having flown 6,000 miles to get there, I was generally very disappointed with the city.
Oh, I’m sure there are interesting things to see and do in and around San Francisco- I wanted to go the Winchester Mystery House, but without a car that was out of the question- but even the people in the Tourist Offices there were kinda “Have you been to Alcatraz? The Golden Gate? Chinatown? Ridden the Cable Cars? You Have? OK… ummm… there’s this really nice Japanese garden you can visit…”
I’m clearly missing something, but for a “general” foreign tourist with no car and no friends or family in San Francisco, I have to say the city was a let-down and not somewhere I can really recommend any of my friends bother visiting, except as a 3 day stopover on their way to somewhere more interesting…
It would have been worth renting a car for a day to go to the Winchester House. It’s great. You blew it. Sorry. And after the Winchester House, you could have gone to the Egyptian Museum in San Jose.
Aren’t there any historical museums or zoos in the city? Couldn’t you have taken BART around the area?
I’ve got to say, it doesn’t seem like you put a lot of effort into it. It doesn’t seem like you knew what you wanted to see. Are you into history, scenery, nightlife, what? 'Cause there’s all of that there.
I love visiting SF and go there at least once a year, but I do so to visit my friends that live there, not to sightsee. I did all that stuff the first time I was out there, and yeah, it’s a little lacking in that dept. The surrounding area is pretty nice though.
The problem is that you guys drive on the other side of the road, with different road rules to what we have in Australia, and San Francisco is not the best sort of city for me to be trying to adjust to the whole “Driving on the other side of the road and reversed give way rules etc” thing. Hence the lack of car.
Which still doesn’t change the fact there’s surprisingly little of interest in San Francisco itself, IMHO, and all the Official Tourist stuff is geared around Alcatraz, Fisherman’s Wharf, and The Golden Gate Bridge. We went on a sightseeing tour that covered San Francisco itself and the bridge and some lovely Japanese gardens and a few other places, but basically we were struck with a sense of “Meh” about the entire place. It seemed a lot like Brisbane, but without the palm trees or the Casino.
I think SF might be one of those places that is more entertaining to live in than to visit as a tourist. That said, you couldn’t pay me to live there, but the same goes for most big cities for me.
There are a mess of museums, including one about animation!
The Presidio?
Trolleys! I’ve been to SF 3 times now and haven’t been on a cable car yet, but I ride the trolley at least once a trip, usually more.
Bus tour leaving Fisherman’s Wharf, heading to Napa/Sonoma. You can hit 3 wineries, have lunch, and have a designated driver to haul your ass home! Bus tour to Muir Woods, see the awesome redwoods.
Ferry to Sausalito?
Haight-Ashbury!
I’m something of a “beer tourist” so for me, the beer places to go in SF are Anchor Brewing Co, the Rogue Bar on… damn, forgetting the name of the square, but it’s off Columbus), the Toronado, 21st Amendment, and plenty more.
Dont’ tell me you missed out on Golden Gate Park! When it was first proposed, they wanted to hire the folks responsible for Central Park in New York, but they wrote the project off as “impossible.” The pikers. Inside the park you can find The deYoung Museum, one of the finest art museums in the world, which just re-opened recently after extensive rennovations. Just next door is The Academy of Sciences, although like the deYoung, it’s been closed for renovations for the last few years. It reopens this month. The “really nice Japanese garden you can visit” would be The Japanese Tea Garden, a San Francisco fixture for over a century. That’s three major, can’t-miss attractions all literally within a couple hundred yards of each other.
Anyone with an interest in things military should check out the Jeremiah O’Brian, the last surviving Liberty Ship from WWII.
There’s The San Francisco Museum of Modern Art downtown, and at the Palace of Fine Arts you can find the The Exploratorium, a “hands on” museum dedicated to teaching the basic principles of physical science in fun and interesting ways. Ostensibly, it’s for children, but I’ve found I’ve got a lot more out of it since I’ve been back as an adult, and am better able to understand the point of the exhibits.
That’s kind of what I meant but didn’t really articulate in my post. When I go out there, I most enjoy just hanging out with my SF resident friends and doing what they do.
Ah, you’re right, I didn’t think of that. I would be as equally not as home attempting to drive in your neck of the woods.
That said, and reverting to my earlier question, what do you like? Why did you choose San Francisco? What in San Francisco did you think you would like?
It’s a great walking city (and I need the workout, considering how great the food is!). We have kids, so we ride cable cars, go to museums and the Exploratorium, walk through Fort Mason and down along the water from Fisherman’s Wharf to the bridge, cruise Chinatown, Little Italy, the Haight and the Castro… we even go over to Alcatraz once in a while! Then there’s the Yerba Buena Gardens, sundaes at Ghiradelli’s, tons of galleries,
The best thing is the food- Sam’s Grill, Scala’s, Hunan Home’s, the Buena Vista (touristy but breakfast rocks), brunch at the Palace…
Two of which were closed when we visited. The actual park itself was lovely, though, as were the Japanese Tea Gardens.
The one in Fisherman’s Wharf? Yes, we saw that. Along with the Cable Car Museum, too. I also enjoyed the Clam Chowder from all the Boudin bakeries throughout the central city, too.
I’m not a big fan of Art, although I did like the National Gallery in London…
Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t hate San Francisco. I just didn’t think it was that interesting and left the city feeling rather disappointed by it all. As others have said, it strikes me as a great place to live, but not so much to visit as a tourist, and I’d agree with that.
We chose San Francisco because Air New Zealand had just inaugurated an Auckland-San Francisco service (alongside the long-running Auckland-Los Angeles service), we were going to the US on our honeymoon, and neither of us had been to San Francisco before. The city was supposed to be interesting and different and Alcatraz was there, so we figured why not? I figured there would be more Museums full of interesting historic stuff (and not Modern Art), and just lots of Interesting Stuff To See & Do like there is in Melbourne or Sydney. It turned out I was mistaken, but Alcatraz was worth the trip and I’m glad I’ve at least been to San Francisco.
So if I go to Melbourne or Sydney someday, what do I get to see or do? Either in the cities proper or in the area.
Seriously, I’m not trying to slam you on this. I just really don’t think you thought it through, nor - especially in this day and age of the Internet - did you investigate it through. Well, now you know, try Denver next time.
I’ve lived in the Bay Area for nearly 50 years; almost half of the time in San Francisco.
I still think it’s interesting, and beautiful.
But it may be one of those cities that sometimes gets a bigger, more fascinating reputation than it could ever live up to.
I’ve known many people who have moved here, only to leave a few years later, sometimes very disappointed. Maybe because it didn’t live up to their preconceived notions of what it was going to be.
Well, it is a lot smaller than most world-renowned cities. So that may be part of it–people go there expecting there to be more “stuff” than there is. We’ve got lots more “stuff” of all kinds down here in L.A., like specific museums, theater, performing arts, and so on. In other words, ‘attractions’ of one sort or another, to which you go, spend some time, and then leave.
But I’m actually very fond of S.F. It seems to me that what you have there are not really ‘attractions’ that you wouldn’t find anywhere else, but rather a culture in the way people live there. Somebody painting their Queen Anne house magenta is not an ‘attraction’, but when a lot of people do that sort of thing it adds up and becomes really interesting. And since it’s such a great walking city, you really have a chance to see things like that.
I love the city, and I’d live there (at least on a part-time basis) if it were economically feasible. It isn’t even about the tourist activities (although Fisherman’s Wharf is way overblown, an exemplar of the tourist trap), but just the city itself has a lot of character. And it’s a walking town; it is one of the most amenible cities to pedestrians in North America. I can–and have–spent a day just walking up and down Golden Gate Park, from taking in the de Young to having beer at the Beach Chalet Brewery to spending a pleasent afternoon looking at girls in the Aboretum. And all of the cool little hole-in-the-wall restaurants–the ones where you bring your own wine because they don’t have their liquor license yet–reminds me so much of Boston, only without the smell of the Charles River. San Francisco is a city that has managed to grow and yet maintain its heritage at the same time, unlike, say, Los Angeles, where landmarks are demolished on a regulated eight year cycle.
The problem with San Francisco, such as it is, is that it really isn’t a tourist’s city; the convenient-but-confusing public transit system, the large number of innoculous but opprobrious panhandlers, and the “You need to check out this place that just opened up last week!” aesthetic requires a native guide or at least a very up-to-date guide book in order to navigate effectively. It isn’t like San Diego, Washington D.C., or Omaha insofar as pandering to the visitor; San Francisco is a city that will eat you up alive if you are unwary or unprepared. It is a city for explorers, people who aren’t unwilling to try new things and end up vomiting in the alley behind.
I unabashedly love San Francisco, no matter how schizophrenic their government is. Next visit, recruit a native; else, go to Portland, Oregon, which is like a toy version of San Francisco (also cool, but not nearly as intimidating, and the Max light rail system even makes sense and doesn’t threaten to throw you down a hill).
I wouldn’t go to San Francisco without an in with the locals. I have a bunch of friends out there so it’s not that tough to get into it, but you’ve gotta be immersed in the local culture to really take advantage.
Also, only the terminally insane drive in San Francisco. I drive into the city (counting up the collective damage the streets are doing to my suspension) and park in front of my friends’s house on a street with an approximate grade of 2.5, and then leave my car there until I’m ready to leave or the City of San Francisco decides to randomly tow it away. Fortunately, there are train lines running every which way, including to San Jose (Caltrans), from which you can take a bus to go to the Winchester House (curious, but overall meh).
I’m kind of curious as to whether you actually visited San Francisco or where scammed by the air line into vistiting Sacremento. They sound kind of similar if you slur the words.