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.
I will say one thing: summers in Seattle are heaven! Beautiful skies and comfortable weather and only occasional days where the temp tops 90 degrees. But discussion of weather aside, the city has changed radically in the past 25 years. They've done studies and the population of Seattle (not King County) has actually remained constant the past 40 or so years. It doesn't really have the awful pollution of some other eastern cities of comprable size. It has some wonderful outdoor festivals, like the folklife festival which is one of the best. The job market is okay. For six months or so out of the year, the area experiences drizzle and overcast skies (in fact, the weather can turn on a dime) but blizzards are rare and snow occurs only every other year or so, and melts after a day or two. So that's the trade off. The mountains and world class ski resorts are a 45 minute drive east.
Portland has its charm as well. The Rose Quarter is the historic district and is similar to Seattle's Pioneer Square district. Downtown Portland is much more pedestrian friendly than Seattle's downtown. Portland has a light rail system; Seattle doesn't. It has similar weather to Seattle but the ocean is only a 60 minute drive west. Seattle's access to ocean is more like three hours. Portland is more progressive, but Oregon public schools are not the greatest. Healthcare and mental health care are dismal. For discussion on Portland, google Portland sucks http://www.knick-knack.com/rants/pla...gon-sucks.html a famous thread started by a disgruntled ex-resident.
Thanks for all of the suggestions and recommendations. I am really starting to love the idea of relocating to the Bay Area, but I still have some reservations. Is the weather in the greater San Francisco area comparable to the weather in the other three cities that I mentioned? Also, is the earthquake risk similar in all of the cities that I'm considering? I was raised in Florida so I'm used to the annual hurricane season. I realize that every region of the U.S. has natural disaster risks associated with it (blizzards, earthquakes, tornadoes, flooding, dust/sand storms, etc.), but I take at least some comfort in the fact that you can see hurricanes coming. I know it sounds foolish, but I'm a little terrified by the prospect of being caught in a major earthquake. Is this rational? I always have this fear of being on a MUNI or BART train during an earthquake.........very scary!
The weather in SF would be warmer overall than the other 3 cities. Although overcast and foggy by California standards, SF is still sunnier and drier than the other 3 by a big margin. Temperatures in winter in SF are in the mid to high 50s (and it almost never gets below freezing). In summer/autumn, in the high 60s. Seattle and Portland actually have warmer summer weather than SF because they are not right on the coast. Vancouver would be maybe only a tad warmer than SF in July and August.
The nice thing about SF is that if you are tired of the fog, you can go 1/2 hour to an hour away and be in warmer weather/sunshine, although going anywhere fun outside the City often requires a car. Berkeley and Oakland across the Bay are accessible by public transit and have fun things to do, but weather wise, they are only a few degrees warmer than SF in summer.
As far as earthquakes go, there is a major fault across the bay called the Hayward Fault, and it is overdue for a major earthquake and a major earthquake across the bay would most certainly have a serious impact on SF. Most people make light of this situtaton, but if there's a major earthquake a lot of them will act shocked.
Be aware that there are major earthquake risks all along the West Coast. SF is probably highest risk, but who knows what the future holds?
You might want to check out the link below with first paragraph of it printed below the link.
On October 21, 1868, a magnitude 6.8 earthquake struck the San Francisco Bay region. Although the region was then sparsely populated, this quake on the Hayward Fault was one of the most destructive in California’s history. Recent studies show that such powerful Hayward Fault quakes have repeatedly jolted the region in the past. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists describe this fault as a tectonic time bomb, due anytime for another magnitude 6.8 to 7.0 earthquake. Because such a quake could cause hundreds of deaths, leave thousands homeless, and devastate the region’s economy, the USGS and other organizations are working together with new urgency to help prepare Bay Area communities for this certain future quake.
^the Hayward fault is the one most in danger of creating the next "big one" but don't forget about the San Andreas fault, which is much longer than the Hayward, much closer to SF than the Hayward, and which was responsible for both the 1906 and 1989 earthquakes. The east bay would be the hardest hit in a Hayward fault earthquake, not SF...though SF would be heavily damaged too.
A little late on this one, but Portland all the way.
You've got rivers, forests, farmland and that small-town feel with big-city amenities.
I drove 18 wheelers for 13 months, Sept '06-Oct '07 and made plenty of pickups and deliveries here.
Whenever I was waiting for a load(usually 1-2 days) I pulled my mountain bike out of the truck and trekked from the terminal in Troutdale and mingled with the cool kids at Zoobomb.
I've been living in the Victor Valley for 22 years and I feel inclined towards PDX simply for the bicycle culture and all the enthusiasm included with it.
Lots of people ride bicycles in both Frisco and Portland, but at least in Portland, people still know how to have a good time on two wheels.
Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver are located in the ring of fire and experience their share of earthquakes but at a lower frequency than San Francisco. From what I understand, being underground is the safest place to be during an earthquake, but don't take my word for it and do the research. Check out the various earthquake maps/info at usgs.gov. The weather in the Bay Area is overall more temperate and warmer than the regions of Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver. It is also sunnier and experiences fewer overcast days. However, summers in the city of San Francisco will be cooler and foggier than the other three cities. If you want warmth in the summertime, you can just drive about 15 miles south, north, or east for some real summertime weather. Any other time of the year, SF will be overall warmer, drier, and sunnier than the other three cities.
I agree with this. If one is afraid of earthquakes, the west coast in general is not the place for them. If you live on the west coast, you're gonna go through earthquakes. San Francisco has them more often than the more northern places. However, the other cities on this list are in the Cascadia Subduction Zone. This zone is nearly identical to the one that's around Indonesia. If a Cascadia quake were to hit, it will be bigger than anything possible in San Francisco. All of the biggest quakes occur in subduction zones. The shaking in Seattle for example could likely last for five minutes! San Francisco is not in a subduction zone, just a hyperactive normal fault zone.
As far as weather, I agree again. San Francisco's climate is still considered semi-arid despite the fact that it's cool most of the year. Summers aren't hot normally but are very dry with no rain falling between mid April to at least mid October in a normal year. The bulk of the rain falls there between November and March. Also unlike the northwest, when it's not raining the days are often very clear and beautiful.
I'm not knocking the northwest, in fact I love Seattle.
I feel qualified to respond to this one since I now live in Portland, and have been here for 5 years. Before that, lived in SF for 7. My partner lived in Seattle for 8 years before we met, and we go up a lot because he has a lot of friends up there still. Don't know Vancouver as well, but have visited it several times, and got married there (thanks Canada!) a couple of years ago.
There are great things about all of these cities, many of which have already been stated. I'll list a few random pluses and minuses of the places I've actually lived.
Portland:
Pluses: day to day life is very relaxed, people are friendly and drivers don't honk at you. Great restaurant/food scene. Amazing farmer's markets. Good cultural opportunities for a city it's size. Although the natural beauty is not as dramatic as the other three, after you live here a while, Oregon grows on you, and you realize that it is a very special place. You can be at the coast in 90 minutes, and in the Cascades in an hour. You can drive through rolling hills with vineyards and verdant greenery in the same amount of time. In a 2-3 hour drive, you can be in the high desert, which has a stark beauty of its own. All of these are more accessible than equivalents in the other cities, either because they are closer, or the traffic to get there is not as bad.
Downsides: the economy is moribund. Expect to have more trouble finding a job here than you ever have, and to make less money than you could make almost anywhere else. The winters are difficult - I grew up in Chicago, and lived in Wisconsin for a while, and would take a midwestern winter over Portland. I've gotten somewhat used to it after five years, but it is still hard to take those endless stretches of grey, drizzly days with highs in the 40s. If you are thinking of moving to Portland, rent "Drugstore Cowboy". That movie captures perfectly what Portland looks and feels like in the winter.
SF:
Pluses: Great weather. Beautiful natural setting, and reasonably close to some of the most beautiful places on earth (e.g. Big Sur). Great restaurants. Lots of cultural diversity. Lots of intelligent people. Etc.
Minuses: Ungodly expensive. Too crowded. Drivers are incredibly rude. It's extremely hard to park in most neighborhoods. No news here, really.
As it happens, my partner and I will be moving back to the Bay Area next year - he'll be working in Oakland and we'll probably look to live in Berkeley. At this point, I prefer the East Bay over SF proper - not quite as expensive and crowded. I'll really miss Portland, but I'm looking forward to the CA weather, and some aspects of living in a bigger city. As I mentioned, day to day life in Portland is a lot easy, but it can be provincial in some ways.
hi all, i am seriously considering relocating to one of the three aforementioned cities. I am currently doing dissertation research and am waiting until i get my ph.d. To move. I am very liberal/progressive. I am interested in transitioning to a car free or much less car dependent lifestyle. I am also interested in martial arts (especially nei jia, or internal martial arts. Like tai chi, ba gua, hsing-i, etc. I like to garden, cook, hike, ride bikes, etc. I am studying sustainable development initiatives, transit oriented development, multi modal transportation networks, etc. I would prefer to live in an area that is urban, dense, walkable/bikeable, and vibrant with good parks, pubs, restaurants (especially vegetarian), bookstores, etc. I know that san francisco, vancouver, and to a lesser extent seattle are expensive. If money wasn't an option, which city would suit me best.
If you have a lot of money, SF wins. For most people, it's off limits these days like JayeSF said. The rich took it over and though there are still people making it, they're getting a bad deal for their money. NYC is better if you want good public transportation and left-leaning people (though it's extremely diverse). LA has affordable areas, more diversity, better weather. Portland is really the new SF of the Northwest as well as Oakland. The hippies and artists can't really afford SF anymore unless they have super wealthy parents. Also heard the dating situation in SF is quite bad. Vancouver is in a different country so moving there will be complicated. I imagine it's quite nice overall as a city, maybe less gritty than SF, less liberal overall than SF and Portland (though the government services available are more left), but they have insane rain drenched weather for about 6 months. I don't know what it would do to you mentally to live with weeks of constant rain and cloudiness.
Funny when searching through city data threads didn't find this one. Actually Googled SF-Portland-Seattle and this thread was result. Anyone seeking info for west coast options this is a good thread.
Mid 50's gay couple moved from San Diego to New Mexico in 2008. Long story but we were financial able and were up for a change from SoCal. Live halfway between Santa Fe and Albuquerque. Great at first. Mountains, outdoors, 320 days a year of sun. We love hiking and the outdoors so seemed like a great mix. 5 years later, not so much. Culture here is either Mexican Catholic or Native American. If you call that diversity, fine, but if you are anything else you are totally in a reverse racism type environment. Not that there's anything wrong with that...But its boring as hell. The educated here are engineer types that work at the one of the many labs or Intel, which might flee from here in the next few years. Otherwise the biggest thing thats important is if a new Target opens or a Mexican restaurant offers a 5 pound burrito dinner for half price. People here are huge, simple and want to emulate Kim Kardashian or the Jersey Shore troop. Okay, enough sarcastic humor here.....obviously we are starving for more than cowtown culture!
Want a new chapter and not favoring a move back to San Diego. NoCal, Portland or Seattle...all have some degree of green, water, close to coast, real diversity, educated, secular, religiously guilt free and less domestically crime ridden.
So the only other place we might consider is Sacramento...close to Bay Area but less expensive and not quite as populated. Any thoughts on that?????
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.
