San Francisco, I want your equivalent.. (Los Angeles, Sacramento: city hall, condo, house)

[Tiger Beer]

I lived in San Francisco for a year, and absolutely HATED it. Well, sort of hated it. I loved the urban environment, loved the politics, and I loved the demographics mix.

What I hated was everything was way too expensive, and the city just nickels and dimes you left and right for every little thing. Parking in particular, with no alternative as the public transportation shafts you as well. I can understand discouraging cars, but the alternative options just suck, so what kind of encouragement/discouragement is that? (Granted I've lived in New York City & Asian cities for years), so quite use to very extensive subway trains that had stations pretty much in every conceivable place you'd ever want to go.

Additionally, while SF is built pedestrian friendly, there are so many drug addicts and homeless all over downtown SF, the Tenderloin, and City Hall area, that you can't really comfortably walk around at night without denying dozens and dozens of people constantly coming up to you left and right wanting something.

Anyways, I've been back in Asia for quite awhile, (I'm white american), and have been searching extensively for where to live when I get back to the U.S. again. I continually find myself looking for an intellectual, walkable, pedestrian-friendly, and high asian population in the U.S., but S.F. seems to be THE place. But, at the same time, it ISNT. Can't afford it, and the pedestrian-friendly streets aren't really pedestrian.

Where else is there? Most S.F.ers I knew were going up to Seattle or Sacramento. Is that the choice here? Is Oakland a good choice? Is Los Angeles or Honolulu a good choice? Where does one go from San Francisco?

[goozer]

Desirable places (like SF, like NYC, like Tokyo, etc) tend to be very expensive. Less desirable places (like Omaha, like Oklahoma City, like Buffalo, etc) tend to be much less expensive. If you are looking for a place like SF in every way except that you can buy a great house in a nice neighborhood for 200,000...you're not going to find it. I suppose you could try Seattle, Portland, or Sacramento, but you will find that those places (particularly Seattle) are not exactly cheap. I guess it all depends on what your budget is. Good luck.

[uptown_urbanist]

I don't think you're going to find it, although depending on what you're willing to compromise you may find something that you like.

The only other city that you listed that I can comment on as a former resident is LA; certain parts of the San Gabriel Valley in particular may offer what you're looking for. Public transportation isn't bad, but it's certainly nowhere near NYC or some parts of SF. It is cheaper than SF, although that doesn't necessarily translate to affordable. The most walkable highest percentage Asian cities in the SGV aren't on the train line (Gold Line) if that matters, but parking is a lot easier. Parts of Pasadena could count as walkable, intellectual areas (and on the Gold Line) with city amenities but without major parking issues, but the Asian population is a little smaller than the adjacent cities. We lived in South Pasadena, which I really liked; it felt sort of like a small town, and had a downtown core with almost everything we needed within walking distance (I don't drive), plus was on the Gold Line with direct LRT access to downtown LA and to nearby Pasadena. I could get around just fine without a car, although for the majority of people living there who do own cars parking was never an issue. It's the kind of safe place that you can walk around at night without worries. It has a fairly high Asian population, mostly Chinese, although it's lower than some of the other SGV cities. I loved South Pasadena, but again, if you're looking for the same kind of dense urban environment, just with cheaper homes and more parking, you won't find it there. Walkable, lots of Asian residents, easy parking, safe, intellectual, liberal, etc., yes; a mini-San Francisco, no.

Neighboring Alhambra has a higher percentage of Asian residents (and generally cheaper housing than SP), but lacks that Gold Line Station and isn't as pleasant for walking. It's not bad, though, and I certainly think could hold its own against some of the other places you list (Sacramento, Oakland, etc.).

[HowGoesIt]

Just spent the past week in San Francisco for work and absolutely loved it. The people, walkability, weather, and upscale feel is a great change from south Florida. I would love to move there, but it's just too darn expensive. Most professionals in SoFla make low 6 figs and buy homes around 300k. It seems that if you live in the Bay Area, you need to pull in roughly 200k/year to buy a decent home in a decent school district.

Big time liberal cities tend to have an extremely high tax burden and are very expensive in general (which is a shame). You'll run into the same situation if you live in Boston, NYC, WashDC, Seattle, etc. There are some small cities scattered throughout the US that might suit you. I would look into Burlington, VT or Madison, WI. Both are fun, cheap, and have a lot of cultural amenties.

[Jonotastic]

I love San Francisco. Many of the problems you mentioned will be found in any other similar city.

You might want to check out Boston.

You will not like Sacramento, I guarantee it. Seattle is a nice city, but you may get bored after living in NYC, Tokyo or Hong Kong, or San Francisco.

[E14]

dealing with homeless and beggars is part of living in a city
if you cant handle that, live in the suburbs

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

I lived in San Francisco for a year, and absolutely HATED it. Well, sort of hated it. I loved the urban environment, loved the politics, and I loved the demographics mix.

What I hated was everything was way too expensive, and the city just nickels and dimes you left and right for every little thing. Parking in particular, with no alternative as the public transportation shafts you as well. I can understand discouraging cars, but the alternative options just suck, so what kind of encouragement/discouragement is that? (Granted I've lived in New York City & Asian cities for years), so quite use to very extensive subway trains that had stations pretty much in every conceivable place you'd ever want to go.

Additionally, while SF is built pedestrian friendly, there are so many drug addicts and homeless all over downtown SF, the Tenderloin, and City Hall area, that you can't really comfortably walk around at night without denying dozens and dozens of people constantly coming up to you left and right wanting something.

Anyways, I've been back in Asia for quite awhile, (I'm white american), and have been searching extensively for where to live when I get back to the U.S. again. I continually find myself looking for an intellectual, walkable, pedestrian-friendly, and high asian population in the U.S., but S.F. seems to be THE place. But, at the same time, it ISNT. Can't afford it, and the pedestrian-friendly streets aren't really pedestrian.

It's funny you mention you like the politics of SF. The irony is a lot of the things you hate about it are at least partly the result of SF politics (cost of living, nickel & diming, homelessness).

[Tiger Beer]

Originally Posted by E14

dealing with homeless and beggars is part of living in a city
if you cant handle that, live in the suburbs

Didn't have it in in New York City. Actually I've also lived in Asia, South America and Europe the last 10 years.

San Francisco was more worse than a third-world country. I get harrassed a whole lot less in Rio de Jainero, Bangkok, Las Paz, Jakarta, Lima, Beijing, than I did working down by CIty Hall in SF for a year and walking along Market Street.

A little bit is to be expected, but San Francisco is excessive. All they have to do is put up signs 'no soliciting'. I occassionally use to walk over to Wendys from CIty Hall for lunch break, one time I had 5 separate homeless walk in off the street to ask me for a $1 while I was eating my already cheap dinner in the fastfood joint.

Had I been in Jakarta, Manila, Caracas, Brasilia, that would have been completely unacceptable behavior.

Don't get me wrong, I love my home country, and I love California, and I love San Francisco...but if third world countries and New York City, I've felt completely comfortable with miniscule homeless bothering me once in awhile, than SF should be fine too...but it's on another level there much worse than third world countries.

Anyways, I've never lived in a suburb with no intention to, so that's not an option.

[David Aguilar]

Chicago?

[Tallysmom]

I think we as a country, we haven't grown into a walkable city neighborhood kind of place. We went outwards, onto farms at first (think early colonist America) and then after WW1 & 2, when people came into the cities to support the war efforts, and left the farm, we fled the cities for suburbia. Right or wrong -- and this is one of those hot button things that cause flame wars -- it is what it is.

I live in a very urban area -- it is not at all walkable. Well -- that's not specifically true -- you can walk all you want, but you ain't gonna get nowhere...

But -- all those places you mention? They had a thousand years or more to grow into what they are. The major lack of transportation meant that they HAD to have good local shops in the area. It's one thing to farm and load up the cart and hitch up the horses and bring it in to town, but another thing to have stables for everyone to own a horse and sulky or cart to go out to the local "Ye Olde Picke and Paye"...

And I can bet there are cities that don't have housing in the downtown at all. Growing up near Pittsburgh PA, I know that the physical downtown Pittsburgh geographic area only had the Chatham Towers condo complex.

You couldn't live downtown anywhere else. It was still that way until recently...