Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Culture:
Public School Systems (for those with children):
Economy:
Food:
Cost of living:
Crime:
Infrastructure/transportation:
Urbanity:
Desirable suburbs:
Climate:
Definitely one of the more interesting face-offs we've done, they're so different.
Fresno is like a Rust Belt city in the middle of California, for better and worse. It has the boarded-up buildings downtown, the relatively high crime rate, the staunch core-suburbs divide, the low population from out-of-state, the older and less homogenized architecture, and the extensive walkable street grid. It felt very familiar to me coming from the Midwest.
Unfortunately, it doesn't offer a lot in my field --- again, like much of the Rust Belt. Indeed shows me 48 software dev jobs in Fresno vs. 1,927 in Irvine.
I think I'd like my neighbors more in Fresno, I can't relate super well to suburban careerist types. In Irvine, I probably wouldn't even know mine --- lots of walls around the developments, no porches for people to hang out on, I'm guessing not much foot traffic.
I hang out in cafes a lot, and Fresno --- surprisingly, to me --- has a few more of them. Irvine (and especially nearby Westminster) does have a lot of Asian grocery stores, which are nice to have.
The big advantage to Irvine would be having LA nearby. It's far enough away, though, and the LA area's traffic is bad enough, that I probably wouldn't be over there very often. So I think Fresno wins this for me.
All of Fresno city is suburban as well even the downtown isn't exactly urban.
Understood, but I said "suburb", not "suburban". It's a subtle difference but "suburban" is usually understood to mean having the characteristics of a suburb. Most cities in the US have areas that are suburban within city limits, very often the large majority of the city is suburban.
A suburb is more literally a satellite city. Fresno has them, Irvine does not.
Understood, but I said "suburb", not "suburban". It's a subtle difference but "suburban" is usually understood to mean having the characteristics of a suburb. Most cities in the US have areas that are suburban within city limits, very often the large majority of the city is suburban.
A suburb is more literally a satellite city. Fresno has them, Irvine does not.
You could easily say that Costa Mesa, Santa Ana, Tustin, Fountain Valley, Laguana Beach are satellite cities of Irvine. For example, I know a UC Irvine professor who lives in Laguna Beach.
Most medium to large cities have satellite cities regardless if they are "suburban" or not.
The entire city of Fresno is 95% "suburban", including its few "satellite" cities.
Status:
"Worship the Earth, Worship Love, not Imaginary Gods"
(set 17 days ago)
Location: Houston, TX/Detroit, MI
8,439 posts, read 5,580,059 times
Reputation: 12440
These two cities have literally nothing in common other than both being in California.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
