Which of the following cities has the best suburbs (in terms of cost of living, space, accessibility)?

[Zachj7]

SF bay area.

Despite SF being extremely urban, there are secluded "countryish" places without 20-30 min away because of the topography. I would reccomed East bay in the Oakland hills or nestled behind them in La Morinda area.

SF is probably more laid back however the secluded places in the east bay tend to be expensive.

[semicollante]

Originally Posted by Zachj7

SF bay area.

Despite SF being extremely urban, there are secluded "countryish" places without 20-30 min away because of the topography. I would reccomed East bay in the Oakland hills or nestled behind them in La Morinda area.

SF is probably more laid back however the secluded places in the east bay tend to be expensive.

Thank you for the helpful info. Would you say those areas are significantly cheaper than San Francisco? How is the cost of living compared to SF's other suburbs?

[Zachj7]

The cost of living is high everywhere in the bay area. It's still very high in those places I mention specifically because it's surrounded by nature and sparsely populated yet extremely urban pretty darn close. With that said, you feel more in the nature and it feels a little more country ish. Compared to cities in the east bay like pleasent hill and walnut creek, it's expensive. It's hard to tell because there is such diverse topography that you can only build urban areas in certain places then more sparse country ish areas nested in the east bay hills. It might worth a look.