OC vs LA vs SF (Los Angeles, San Francisco: apartment, rentals, crime)

[denversquishy]

I am a single, 35 year old woman considering a job that can be located in Walnut Creek (SF), Sherman Oaks/Glendale (LA) or Irvine (OC). I have traveled to all 3 areas extensively, but always on business or vacation.

I live in Denver, CO now. I have 2 dogs that are used to having a yard. I have a car. I can buy or rent. The job has excellent pay by any standards. However, all three of these cities will be a big increase in cost of living.

I am pretty normal. I like great food, restaurants, fitness, travel, and time with friends. I enjoy all three of these locations for different reasons.

I am not in a relationship currently, although I date pretty actively and would like to eventually get married and have kids...with the right man.

The major downside to SF is that the job would be in Walnut Creek, which seems more suburban and "married with kids." Also, to live in the city, a yard for the dogs would be tough. However, there are so many other things about the area I love, that is still in the running.

Any thoughts on which area might be best for me and where I should consider living within that area?

Thanks!

[bradleyyo]

Mark Twain said the coldest he had ever been in his life was June in San Francisco. Living in the Los Angeles area depends on where you like.

Both have their pro's and con's. But the most defining factor of each is geography. S.F. is limited while L.A. is expansive. The weather is obviously different as well but you probably know that.

My experience is that San Franciscans really love their city where Angelenos don't have that same kind of passion. LA is incredibly diverse in terms of cultures but S.F. seems to be a bit more integrated.

Each have great food, L.A. has more entertainment options and in terms of crime it really depends on where you go. L.A. is a completely different kind of city because it is so spread out. Some areas are incredibly safe and others aren't. So crime is a little more random in S.F.

But here's the best quote I've ever found about the differences between the two. Not sure where I read it but the crux of it was, "In Los Angeles you step outside and have to make something happen. In San Francisco you step outside and something happens to you."

Either way, you'll dig California. Best State in the country in my opinion.

Housing:

You'll have more options in Los Angeles. Geographically, San Francisco is only slighter larger than Manhattan. The apartment blocks and townhouses are almost as dense too. A single-family home is the norm in L.A., while in San Francisco it's a luxury. In other words, you can forget about having a private pool or lawn in San Francisco. The city does try to compensate with two huge public parks (Golden Gate and Presidio), however.

[EscapeCalifornia]

bradleyyo - The job is in Walnut Creek, not SF. Different worlds.

[Bunjee]

I'd say the Irvine option might be the cheapest, and how can you deny your dogs access to the beach? But I'd actually go with Glendale or Walnut Creek. Walnut Creek is very family-settled as you noticed. I think it's half married, half single. San Francisco is tough if your dogs need a yard.

The town of Montrose near Glendale might be a good option. It's on average cheaper than Walnut Creek by maybe $100K so you can probably get a pretty nice house, relative to the NorCal option. It's a really charming town too, with more singles in your age range, a historic downtown with a farmers market (that sort of lifestyle-y thing), and good access to L.A. night life. There's easier access to the funkier hoods like Atwater and Eagle Rock too. But is the L.A. option either Glendale or Sherman Oaks, or both?

[denversquishy]

Thanks for the responses. The additional perspective is very helpful.

In LA there are 2 potential jobs, one is in Sherman Oaks, the other in Glendale. As much as I would love to live by the ocean, I am probably not ready for that commute on a daily basis in LA. I definitely like the farmer's market type of thing as well as the great restaurants.

As for SF, the job is in WC, but I am not sure I would live there. I think I am more of a Pacific Heights, Cow Hollow type of girl, but I am not sure I can pull of that commute. There doesn't seem to be a straight route from that area of SF to WC. Is there an option I am missing?

Are there any East Bay communities I should consider? I am afraid I am not liberal enough for Berkeley. (I know the Bay area is mostly liberal. I am an extremely tolerant, fiscal conservative type. My impression of Berkeley is that you need to bleed blue. True?)

As for OC, where are areas that single 30 and 40 somethings live? I will have a house, but I don't want to be completely surrounded by Super Targets and strollers. I would like some single people nearby. My office there would be near the airport.

When I visit, I usually spend time in Newport Beach, Corona del Mar, Laguna Beach and the Monarch Beach area. They are all great for vacations, but are they more tourists than locals?


In Denver, I spend winter weekends skiing in the mountains, and summers biking, running, and exploring local restaurants and farmer's markets. I live in Cherry Creek, which is near downtown, in a charming, older home close to boutiques and restaurants. I don't expect to match the skiing...just trying to give you an idea of my lifestyle.

Thank you all so much!

[legal_eagle]

I grew up in OC and have lived most of my adult life in SF proper. I am now seriously working toward moving back to OC, although still not completely convinced that will be where I end up. Here are my thoughts:

Having 2 dogs in San Francisco would be a very big challenge, unless you bought your own place where they were allowed. If you have $1 million+ (literally) to buy a house with a yard, you might be able to swing that, however. I think you will be frustrated quickly if you have to commute to Walnut Creek. The Bay Bridge going in that direction is almost always jammed. At best (i.e., Sunday afternoon), it takes about 40 minutes to get from Pac Heights to downtown WC. Logistically, I find SF life to be a big challenge. And I agree with what another poster said above about something "happening to you" as soon as you step outside in SF. It's quite "in your face." Of course, there are great restaurants, and all that stuff happening is stimulating and never lets you feel bored.

WC is suburbia, like OC, but without the great beaches, so I would, personally, would not want to live in Walnut Creek.

I think OC is an easier place to live, logistically. People really know how to drive ... fast, and the freeways are wide. Of course there are jams (frequently during rush hours) but at other times it is much easier to get. Getting around in the Bay Area is difficult because of all the hills, bridges, and expanses of water. I can't remember the last time I went to the East Bay unless required to for work.

I think OC people are bit friendlier than SF people, who have something of a superiority complex.

I'm not a fan of LA, because (okay, now I'm going to sound like an SF snob) it is probably one of the ugliest cities in the US. Horrible to look at and, for me, depressing as hell. But there is a lot going on there, so going up for entertainment from OC would be a plus.

[Glenview94602]

There are a lot of fiscal conservatives in the Bay Area, esp closer to Walnut Creek Tri Valley and further south in the Silcon Valley. There aren't a whole lot of other types of conservatives (not too many social conservatives or strong libertarians) out here. But, if you are tolerant and friendly, then people won't mind.

[sdflip]

I agree with most of what legal eagle said. WC is very conservative and almost all families. Ironically, it reminds me of parts of Orange county and not all the good things about it. It has a lot of gated communities, neo conservative religions, and a lot more plastic surgery patrons than you'll find in SF. I found most of the East Bay to be out of step with SF and Peninsula communities. Hard to think of a perfect match in SF Bay area for your situation. I would pull for Sherman Oaks or Glendale to work and maybe Studio City to live in. Lots of professionals, easier access to hiking and beaches and nice choices to go out from Silver Lake through to Westside.

[BRinSM]

FYI, you can live near the ocean and commute to sherman oaks, i did this for a while last year. it's definitely a reverse commute. i would say your commute would be anywhere from 25-45 minutes depending on which beach you live near and traffic on any given day. there are days where it can take longer, but it's not normal. my average time from marina del rey to sherman oaks was 30-35 minutes, which was manageable for me. however beach to glendale is a different story. having said that, there are some great neighborhoods in the valley, it just gets quite warm in summer (usually 90-100 degrees during the day). you get a lot more bang for your buck in the valley as well. prices aren't all that different for apartment rentals but valley units tend to be larger, newer and nicer.

as for irvine, some people love OC and others not so much. generally irvine and environs is family friendly, new and nice. for a single person, the beaches are where the action is, but the scene is considerably smaller than in LA. from a cost perspective, OC is generally slightly cheaper than comparable nice neighborhoods in LA.