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.
LA will continue to grow, because it is the only part of the Metro willing to greatly densify and change its land use.
Places like Downtown, Hollywood, Koreatown, keep building more and taller.
Anyway, I think LA has a lot of affordable areas in South LA, all areas surrounding Downtown LA, Koreatown, Central and east San Fernando Valley. They may not be the most desirable areas like Bel Air, Brentwood, Hancock Park, Hollywood hills, Woodland hills, Sherman Oaks or even neighbor cities of Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, Burbank, Pasadena, Manhattan, etc. But in these poorer areas you can find a decent home for $250K-$400K and cheaper rents.. Trade off, is less amenties more crime, poorer schools. But if that doesnt bother you, then you can live in LA city with all it has to offer like location, weather, mountains, beaches, sports, museums, universities, theme parks, entertainment, nightlife and whatever else.
I think LA is a steal right now for what it will become. I remember finding 200K lofts in DTLA back in 2010-12, even at double the price now they are still a deal imo. Unlike the Bay Area, there are still pockets of greater LA that are affordable (by Californian standards) within a reasonable distance to job centers. Add in being one of the best (if not the best) food cities in the world and the cultural offerings/output, it gets my vote based on this list.
Really the way to approach and explore such cities (excluding L.A. of course), and Seattle definitely has a big shoulders vibe that the other two lack. As medium small cities they really shine when you stick to the Metro, historic core, great parks, museums, theater and local haunts if you can get the scoop. All the better when you can walk, bike and transit through much of it in a reasonable time which of course is much harder in huge and spread out cities.
When you go to a city like London or NYC (been to Seoul but never to Hong Kong, but I still give it to Western cities) which are both in a class by themselves and so much beyond just about any place else and try to compare your own or similar smallish metro to them you will always be disappointed. But just as the fabulous, unique and more human scaled neighborhoods of huge cities define themselves as their own a great place to explore without getting overwhelmed, so too do these and other smaller cities exhibit with their own certain charm and cachet all wrapped up in one metro.
Of course when you get off the west coast you can get some similar lifestyles and urban areas for so much less.
What I like about San Diego, Seattle, and Portland is that they are compact cities. What I mean by that is that all of their prominent offerings and amenities are condensed into a controllable amount of area. Physical area that is not just easy to traverse but almost carefree and free flowing.
For example, from Downtown San Diego to La Jolla is 12.4 miles and everything a person would ever want, need, have a desire for, or have a craving for that San Diego has to offer can be found between Downtown to La Jolla. All of the city's best parks, best tourist attractions, best nightlife areas, best historical areas, prime coastal areas, all of these things can be found somewhere in those 12.4 miles between Point A (Downtown) and Point B (La Jolla).
Throw in the fact that San Diego is not a highly traffic clogged city nor a highly congested city, you're able to get anywhere you want to be in that city in "30 minutes or less" as a local told me the last time I was there. I had my rental car too, so I put his theory to test and was impressed that what he had to say was true. On top of that the city is more on the intelligent side with regard to its population, people work in various biotech, nanotech, tech, medical, defense, government jobs there. All being fields that are right up my alley and again, the population is decently to solidly well educated, more on the intelligent side as compared to much of America. Ohh and it's pretty politically diverse too, which is incredible. Then there are perks like having few rough areas, among the nation's lowest crime rates across the board, an increasingly diverse demographic pool, standard California (and Coastal California) culinary offerings, terrific weather, likable topography (much of which can be reached in 30 minutes or less), an excellent location for Downtown (right on the harbor, the waterfront, the coast), and a days drive from other interesting locations - should you ever need them.
I'm also a Singaporean born Asian, so it goes without saying the cleanliness of a city's reputation goes a pretty far way for me. For me, I find it humiliating when I talk to cousins and mention that they should come and visit and their response is "yuck, that city is very dangerous and ghetto, why would we waste our time and money going there? Just visit us instead." Not that my cousins have ever done that to me, but I have seen them do that to other family members before. For me I could care less if crime is concentrated in "pockets" of the city, I'd prefer to live in a city where crime is absolutely hard to find in general and where crime hasn't ruined the city's reputation at all. A nice and clean image. I do have two or three exceptions to that, worldwide, but those are just rare exceptions (Miami, New Orleans, Las Vegas).
As you can see, San Diego fits me like a stretchable glove fits everyone's hand. Comfortably.
I like San Diego's size the way it is. Look, it'll sound incredibly mean spirited and selfish for me to say this but I actually hope San Diego stops growing with regard to its population altogether. It's the perfect size now, more people and all those perks I mentioned may start to disappear and become more like other, more traffic choked and congested areas of California (a place like, say, the San Francisco Bay Area). Being between 3-5 million is the sweet spot in America; large enough to offer everything needed, small enough to enjoy without having to mismanage your time, resources, and money. Ohhh, it's a nice bonus feature that San Diego is a nice, tidy, and clean city too. I like cleanliness, I'm okay with gritty but the grittiness has to be polished and clean (see Boston or Seattle as examples). San Diego fits that well. Like I mentioned, a very solid and respectable standard of living. I like that.
Everything I mentioned about San Diego also applies to Seattle and Portland too for me. I've enjoyed visiting these cities over the years, enjoyed them immensely, if every city in America was like them, I would be a fan of America's collection of cities but it isn't that way. I look forward to seeing these cities again one day and if I were ever presented with the opportunity to live in any of these three cities (San Diego, Seattle, Portland) there wouldn't be any hesitations at all from my end. I know how good people have it in all three and I wouldn't mind joining in on that too. My least favorite cities in America and the world in general are all the American metropolises that have more than 5 million people, except for Miami and New York. You couldn't really ever pay me to live in those places, honestly, especially because I know better fits for me exist.
So yeah, nothing wrong with cities being medium sized at all. Don't get me wrong, I'm as big city as a person can be, but just not with America. In America I prefer all of the medium sized areas to all of America's larger areas (again, Miami and New York being exceptions). Outside of America? Big cities all the way.
Last edited by Trafalgar Law; 01-25-2017 at 02:19 PM..
There are a lot of cities, even a few non-coastal ones that I would cede offer more for the money than San Diego, but overrated Portland is not one of them, I have to take a stand here.
As far as COL, a one bedroom in a prime urban area would be about 1800 SD/1500 Portland.
Portland is 80 plus miles inland, San Diego is known worldwide for it's coastline and a downtown right on the bay (not 14 miles inland and hot like Los Angeles). San Diego matches or beats Portland in things they are supposedly so awesome in, like beer, music, comedy, and coffee.
In San Diego, you take light rail to the border to go Tijuana, the fifth largest city in Mexico.
In Portland, you drive across the border to go to Vancouver, Washington.
What is Portland's equivalent to Shelter Island, Balboa Park, La Jolla, Coronado, The Coaster, The Sprinter, Old Town Station or Santa Fe Depot (two intermodal European Style train stations in one city)?
Yes San Diego did lose the Charges, but still has more facilities for major events all over the county.
Please tell me how Portland is winning this, even in all of their "vibrany."
Portland as a city is a lot more walkable and cohesive than San Diego. It feels a bit more gritty and has a substantially more pedestrian-friendly environment.
It also has a much better distribution of bars and restaurants throughout the city. I would say that outside of Downtown, San Diego has nodes of activity with clusters of bars and restaurants but in Portland, pretty much every block seems to have some new establishment to try. Portland lacks anything with the critical mass of the Gaslamp or PB/MB, but the citywide quantity of bars and restaurants is much higher, and the quality of the food in Portland is better too.
I'd also say Portland has more of a distinct personality and a bit more character than San Diego - although San Diego certainly has personality and character as well. Also, re: the categories you mention - for Beer they are tied, coffee is definitely better in Portland, comedy is definitely better in San Diego, and for music I might give the slight edge to Portland.
Portland as a city is a lot more walkable and cohesive than San Diego. It feels a bit more gritty and has a substantially more pedestrian-friendly environment.
It also has a much better distribution of bars and restaurants throughout the city. I would say that outside of Downtown, San Diego has nodes of activity with clusters of bars and restaurants but in Portland, pretty much every block seems to have some new establishment to try. Portland lacks anything with the critical mass of the Gaslamp or PB/MB, but the citywide quantity of bars and restaurants is much higher, and the quality of the food in Portland is better too.
I'd also say Portland has more of a distinct personality and a bit more character than San Diego - although San Diego certainly has personality and character as well. Also, re: the categories you mention - for Beer they are tied, coffee is definitely better in Portland, comedy is definitely better in San Diego, and for music I might give the slight edge to Portland.
Yup for being so close to LA, SD has a really sub par foodie scene at outrageous prices. Pretty pathetic,IMO.
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.
