Is Sacramento (or east Orange County) a better fit for me?

[pistola916]

Originally Posted by HILife09

Well obviously you don't travel much. KC doesn't really need a basketball or hockey team since it has both the NFL and MLB (something Sac will never in its wildest dreams have). Also KC was originally selected to host the super bowl this year (again something Sac will never do). Like I said, it's a city that acts much, much bigger than Sac.

Orlando draws people from all around the county with its theme parks (again something Sac will never do). When you start traveling more and learning about other cities, you'll start to realize how far Sac is behind other similar sized cities. Great for families given that it is a small town, very boring for singles and young people looking for a vibrant place to be.

Huh, KC can't host the Super Bowl and never will unless they decide to build a new stadium to replace outdated Arrowhead. SB's are usually held in warm weather cities. This year's Super Bowl is in Arizona. Next year Santa Clara will host SB 50.

[cignalife]

Have you considered living in Davis and commuting to Sac for work?

Originally Posted by merchie

Hello!
Thanks for looking at my question. I am a 30 year old single, multicultural, black female professional. I currently live in Washington DC, where I am from. I lived in Southern Cal for school (SD area) and loved it but preferred LA because it was more diverse. Anyway, I have been trying to get to LA (manhattan, venice beach, santa monica or south bay area) or even the Oakland/Berkeley area in northern cal for years now because I feel those areas are the best since they are major cities where my profession exists and they are very chill, laid back and liberal, which is important to me. I make a decent salary (low six figures) and enjoy nature, good weather, working out, travel, meditating, etc. I am single and also want to be able to date diverse individuals who are open minded and well rounded.

Well I just have two potential opportunities through my company that can place me in Moreno Valley or Sacramento. I am trying to decide which of the two, if any, are a better fit. I certainly would not want to live in Moreno Valley or Riverside, however, because I would be going the opposite of traffic I figure I would live in eastern OC like Fullerton or Anaheim Hills and commute about 30-40 minutes to work in the Moreno Valley location. This would also put me about 30-45 minutes to a nice beach and an hour or so to LA for weekends. The other option would be to go to the Sacramento location and simply live in the city of Sacramento. I've been to Sacramento alone for a meeting once and found it to be pleasant with friendly people but it lacked a lot of the appeal that California has to me. However, it was affordable, I enjoyed the restaurants in midtown, and its close to more desirable locations like SF, Napa, Berkeley, Tahoe etc. However, I worry that my day to day would be in this small town that seemed to have limited dating options for me. I like Oakland/Berkeley but cannot imagine commuting from there to Sacramento for work. I also worry that I would feel isolated living in OC and commuting to MV for work everyday. If I could describe the perfect location for me, where I really fit in, it would be Seattle (with better year round weather) or even Oakland (without the astronomical cost of living).

So all in all, given this info, which location is the better fit for me?

Thank you!!

[wburg]

If she doesn't want to live in a small town, why would Davis be a better choice? Davis is about an eighth the size of Sacramento, and most of the dating pool are college students.

[wburg]

Originally Posted by HILife09

Well obviously you don't travel much. KC doesn't really need a basketball or hockey team since it has both the NFL and MLB (something Sac will never in its wildest dreams have). Also KC was originally selected to host the super bowl this year (again something Sac will never do). Like I said, it's a city that acts much, much bigger than Sac.

Apparently Kansas City was under the impression they needed a basketball or hockey team, since they built a brand-new stadium (okay, so now it's not so brand-new anymore) without a tenant with the hopes of getting one--no doubt they were told how Sacramento was so far ahead of them, having stolen the Kings from them back in the 1980s, to the point where they went a few hundred million in debt to build a stadium with the hopes of attracting one.

Orlando draws people from all around the county with its theme parks (again something Sac will never do). When you start traveling more and learning about other cities, you'll start to realize how far Sac is behind other similar sized cities. Great for families given that it is a small town, very boring for singles and young people looking for a vibrant place to be.

I travel quite a bit and make an effort to learn about what other cities are doing, and I'm still not seeing it. Sounds like your main priority is on professional sports teams--other than that, I'm not really seeing any specific examples of how these cities are somehow culturally superior to Sacramento. Is it really that simple for you--more sportsball equals more vibrant?

I don't know, never really felt much urge to visit Orlando and don't care much for theme parks. Nor Kansas City--just not on my bucket list, sorry.

[HILife09]

Originally Posted by wburg

Apparently Kansas City was under the impression they needed a basketball or hockey team, since they built a brand-new stadium (okay, so now it's not so brand-new anymore) without a tenant with the hopes of getting one--no doubt they were told how Sacramento was so far ahead of them, having stolen the Kings from them back in the 1980s, to the point where they went a few hundred million in debt to build a stadium with the hopes of attracting one.

I travel quite a bit and make an effort to learn about what other cities are doing, and I'm still not seeing it. Sounds like your main priority is on professional sports teams--other than that, I'm not really seeing any specific examples of how these cities are somehow culturally superior to Sacramento. Is it really that simple for you--more sportsball equals more vibrant?

I don't know, never really felt much urge to visit Orlando and don't care much for theme parks. Nor Kansas City--just not on my bucket list, sorry.

Sports is one of many components. The problem with downtown sac and midtown is that everything is disconnected. There are a few nice restaurants or bars on one corner here and there, but nothing is continuous. When you visit other cities you see interconnected stretches of bars, restaurants, clubs, shops etc... this creates a vibrant/energetic feeling in the city and makes places like I previously mentioned more attractive. Sac lacks that and subsequently has little energy in its downtown core. Also Sac has no interesting museums or theater to speak of (don't mention the railroad museum or crocker art museum, that's silly). All of the state museums such as the california academy of science are in SF or LA (there's a reason for that and it's a sad reflection on sac as the state capitol).

I bring up cities like KC and Orlando because they are nationally relevant and Sacramento is definitely not. Sac fails on so many levels... why do you think there's been such a huge push to revitalize downtown, maybe because it's completely embarrassing? Nah.. sac is perfect right?

[Chimérique]

Originally Posted by HILife09

Also Sac has no interesting museums or theater to speak of (don't mention the railroad museum or crocker art museum, that's silly).

What’s silly is a narrow limited point of view about Sacramento. The Crocker Art Museum is a very well respected art museum in the Art world.

Outside of LA proper and SF there really is no other Art museums as comprehensive in it’s collection and offering such a satisfying art experience in California.

Nothing as nice as the Crocker in Portland, KC, Phoenix, even Seattle does not have as an interesting and comprehensive Art Museum as Sacramento’s Crocker.

Crocker collections are house in a historic 143 year old mansion connected to a show piece of contemporary architecture. A day at the Crocker is a very satisfying experience.