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've been a city-data lurker for a while and have a question for the D.C Community (posting to SF community as well):
I'll be graduating next year (May 2010) from an ivy-level east coast school next year and luckily have a solid job offer for the upcoming year. It is with a consulting firm which means most weeks I will hop on a plane Monday morning to fly to whatever city the client for my current project is located and then return on Thursday afternoon/evening with Friday in the home office. A rather typical consultant schedule with probably 60ish hour weeks.
It is a fairly generous offer for a new graduate with a base salary of 70-80k which combined with an expected bonus puts the yearly pay at 90-100k starting out with a nice benefits package. I'm just happy to have landed a decent job (or any job) in the current market.
I have the choice of living in either Washington DC or San Francisco and I'm trying to decide what city would fit me better (although I think they are both great options).
Most of my current friends and family are based in the Northern Virginia region as that is where I grew up. However, many of my friends will be scattered around the country after graduate wherever the jobs they find take them (although most will stay east coast, with a lot around New York City/Philly/Northern Virginia Area).
Here is what I'm looking for in a city:
-Diversity and density. Growing up in the suburbs and having no interest in living in them (although very nice for raising children) I'm looking for a city that provides me with a great deal of diversity in choices, options, food, culture, lifestyle. The only way to provide this is with a population that is dense and diverse enough to demand such options and for it therefore to be economical to develop neat "niches" to satisfy such diversity.
-Community. I'm a fan of city pride and really being civically involved in a community. Related to this I'm really looking for a walkable community and am a fan of Jane Jacobs and New Urbanism.
-Intellectualism. Cultural events, ideas, books, interesting conversations, a community that cares about what is going on in the world and wants to take part in it.
-Bigness. I'm looking for both a sort of "local" community feel but still a sort of "bigness" associated with any powerful city where you really feel like you are living where the action is and where things are happening all around you.
-And finally I actually just really like city lights/skylines and beautiful architecture.
A bit about myself:
As a kid I always wanted to live in the city. I would read my New Yorker every week and my Washington Post every day and always wanted to be involved in what was going on and where the action was. I've also really always been into high technology and have had experience in the past with entrepreneurship and internet based startups. I always wanted to either live in New York (which seemed to always be the "center of everything") or San Francisco (for the entrepreneurial tech based start-up community). I never saw myself initially living in D.C, but perhaps that is just because I grew up in the Northern Virginia area and always thought D.C was a bit more of an uptight and boring city (a bias I think from being young and forced to see the White House every year on the same school field trips). I don't think this is so much the case, especially with the huge influx of young people that seem to have been flooding the city as of late. I'm also a bit of a political and news "economist/atlatnic monthly" reading junkie so D.C fits me in that way as well.
Long long term I see myself doing something entrepreneurial and really trying to make my mark on the local community I call home. So in the back of my mind the best place to develop the networks and connections to eventually start a business is also important to me.
The good news is that I'm really young and if I don't like a place after giving it my best shot I can always pack up and try to move someplace else. I'm also technically only in my "home" city for Thursday-Sunday night.
San Francisco was always one of my "dream" cities, however I've actually yet to visit it (besides read a ton about it over the years walk through it via google streetview) and will be doing so in the next month or so. D.C on the other hand I know a lot more about as I grew up in the region and is where I will have a bit more of a base. However, I'd sort of appreciate being able to get away from that and really start almost completely anew (although this is a tad bit scary as well). In both cities I would also be living "in the city" (to really get the walkable community) and not on the outskirts.
Secondly, where do you think I should live if I were to live in either SF or DC (with the salary constraints I have)?
If you've always dreamed of living in San Francisco, I'd go there. Even though both DC and SF have the qualities you're seeking, I'm a strong believer in checking out lifelong dreams. Otherwise you'll always wonder if you missed out on something. Plus, when you're a new graduate there's a lot to be said for exploring a new city far from family and familiar environments.
Plus, when you're a new graduate there's a lot to be said for exploring a new city far from family and familiar environments.
^^ That's pretty much my view. DC is great, but when you're young and able that's the best time to give a new area a shot, especially if you've always dreamed of it. DC and Northern Virginia will always be here.
^^ That's pretty much my view. DC is great, but when you're young and able that's the best time to give a new area a shot, especially if you've always dreamed of it. DC and Northern Virginia will always be here.
People like you are leaving California in droves because of high taxes and the state's massive budgetary woes. If you haven't already done so, run the numbers on how much money you will have left after taxes before you make your decision. San Francisco is a wonderful city to visit and perhaps in which to live, but it's not really a high-tech start up location (that would be the San Jose area). And my guess is that the cost of living (excluding taxes) is even higher than in DC.
But if you're willing to live there for a few years without necessarily committing to long-term residence, then go for it. If nothing else, it is a fabulous jumping-off point for trips to awesome West Coast locations.
I've lived in San Francisco and I now live in DC. Based on all of your criteria, I think SF would be a better fit, although of course no one can really know what you will like. Good on paper doesn't mean it will be a good fit in reality.
For cost of living, I found DC and SF to be pretty similar. If anything, SF might be a little less. I've met a lot of DCers who think the cost of living here is 'normal' for a city. But even New Yorkers I've met are astonished at rent prices here.
Both are probably equally diverse and dense.
For new urbanism, Jane Jacobs, and community, SF is definitely your place. DC doesn't even know what these things are.
For skyline, definitely SF. DC's 'skyline' is the Washington monument and that's it.
I think SF is more intellectual than DC. DC's intellectualism focused on politics and ambition. SF's intellectualism is more about the exchange of ideas merely for ideas' sake.
With your salary, honestly you aren't all that restricted on where you can live. If you only spend 25% of your 70k income on rent, you've $1500 a month. That gets you a 1 bedroom in many neighborhoods without having to search too hard.
DC: U Street Corridor, Cleveland Park, Capitol Hill. Maybe Shaw or Atlas District if you like a little grit in your walkability.
San Francisco: Mission District, SOMA, Noe Valley, North Beach, Cole Valley. Maybe Richmond or Castro, again depending on what flavor you like.
One concern I would raise is transport. Yes, San Fran has SFO, SJC, and OAK for finding flights across the country, but basically you have rather limited options for getting to the Midwest/East Coast after 12:00 noon. You either fly early, thus 'wasting' a whole day in travel to your business, or you fly red eye and arrive wasted for your meeting the next morning. The DC airports offer you a lot of choice (IAD/DCA/BWI) especially up and down the East Coast and to the Midwest (Chicago, etc). You also are a bit closer to Europe and more options to get there, if it is something you might need.
I think San Fran is a bit more closed minded, especially when it comes to politics. It's essentially a one-party city and some of the ideas are a bit uninspiring. My friend, a huge Obama supporter (helped raised money for him and all that) moved to San Fran from DC and suddenly found himself 'the most conservative person I know'. I think the homeless and 'street people' scene has driven him to the point of actually telling a few healthy young folks to 'get a job' when they ask him for cash.
I don't think you'll make a 'bad' choice with either city. I think just out of college is a good time to experience either. I would consider some long term financial planning (i.e. seriously discuss buying a place after you are sure you 'like it' enough to spend a few months there) as you can really burn a great deal of money on rent in the next few years. In addition, when you do have kids and a family in 10 years or so, having a place to sell will give you some good cash for a down payment on the mega-mansion in the city of your choice.
For new urbanism, Jane Jacobs, and community, SF is definitely your place. DC doesn't even know what these things are.
Huh? As far as I know the DC area has some of the best examples of new urbanism and transit oriented development in the country. Tons of metro stations have city centers being built around them. I can't name anything like that in the SF area, although I don't research the area often and I've never been there. There's a reason that the DC area public transportation network is the second highest used per capita population in the nation.
For skyline, definitely SF. DC's 'skyline' is the Washington monument and that's it.
Only if your definition of a "skyline" is tall structures, which is a pretty narrow definition. Personally, I find coming over the 14th Street or Memorial bridges and seeing the monuments, memorials, Capitol dome and others structures lit up at night to be a pretty exceptional skyline. Certainly one of America's unique cityscapes.
Quote:
I think SF is more intellectual than DC. DC's intellectualism focused on politics and ambition. SF's intellectualism is more about the exchange of ideas merely for ideas' sake.
Tell that to the tens of thousands of people who work for non-profits, associations and think tanks here in DC, who harbor no political ambitions and are merely propagating ideals as a means of promoting good policy and an exchange of ideas. And what's wrong with intellectualism built upon ambition? Does that somehow detract from it? Are a bunch of people sitting around a cafe distilling Chomsky over organic free trade coffee somehow a "better" form of intellectualism? Please.
Huh? As far as I know the DC area has some of the best examples of new urbanism and transit oriented development in the country. Tons of metro stations have city centers being built around them. I can't name anything like that in the SF area, although I don't research the area often and I've never been there. There's a reason that the DC area public transportation network is the second highest used per capita population in the nation.
If you haven't been to San Francisco you are definitely not in a position to argue that DC is better in any regard. The DC forum seems to be populated with lifers who've never been anywhere else. That is a great resource who want only to know facts about DC. But when someone wants a comparison or information in relation to some place else, you should let people answer who actually have experience in other places. It isn't fair to the person asking the question to guess or be dishonest about your experience, just because you have an abundant affection for your hometown.
Furthermore thenewgraduate is looking for both New Urbanism and Jane Jacobs' principles. They are not the same thing. DC's plethora of brutalist architecture is the antithesis of Jane Jacobs urban planning ideals.
Quote:
Only if your definition of a "skyline" is tall structures, which is a pretty narrow definition. Personally, I find coming over the 14th Street or Memorial bridges and seeing the monuments, memorials, Capitol dome and others structures lit up at night to be a pretty exceptional skyline. Certainly one of America's unique cityscapes.
A skyline is something you can see. It is a collection. A montage. One building is not a skyline. If not seeing any building and only sky is what you want, that's fine, but it isn't urban, it is suburban. thenewgraduate said they wanted an urban living experience.
Quote:
Does that somehow detract from it?
Yes, it does. No question. Intellectualism for competitiveness' sake, intellectualism as a commercial product to be bought and sold--does detract from the value of it.
Last edited by kodaka; 11-29-2009 at 10:57 PM..
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.
