Thinking of moving to San Francisco . . . help!

no... wrote:

Flagpole, you truly are a Midwesterner. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but suggesting that the OP live on the Peninsula when he is clearly interested in city life is akin to telling a person that wants to try a SF Mission burrito to eat at Taco Bell.

And Redwood City or San Mateo? You must be joking! Terrible places for a young single.

He can go visit SF frequently. It's a short train ride. He can go up there 4 nights a week or hell every single day if he wants, and it's super convenient to do so without having to spend a ton to LIVE there. He can work in SF if he wants and see as much of the city as he wants. Deciding to live outside the city can be pretty much just be the place where he sleeps. I don't see the cost of living in the city being worth it, though I do understand that some would. I just don't get it though. Even on the peninsula, the weather is still the same (even better in my opinion without the damn fog in the morning), you don't have to deal with homeless people and tourists all the time, etc.

Bay Area Native wrote:

Frisco is a town in Colorado. If you'd ever lived in the area you'd know that NO ONE refers to San Francisco as Frisco.

And to the OP get out here. It's great. You probably want to check out the Mission or Noe valley.

I live in the Bay Area and I ALWAYS refer to SF as "Frisco" just off elitist bungholes like you.

why leave alone? find some roommates and share. it'll be close to half the cheddar. and it's more fun. do it.

mission is great. close to BART, cheap and fun. it'll take you a while to get used to the hipsters, but if you can learn to tolerate them, it's sweet. some parts are a touch shady, with lots of drugged up and crazy homeless people (ie around the 16th st BART station), but as a dude I've never felt unsafe.

other places to try would be the sunset and the richmond (if you can take the fog), or even western addition, lower haight, or panhandle.

You'll probably want to do most of your running in Golden Gate Park, so find somewhere relatively close. The mission is a bit far, so you'll probably only end up doing a few miles in the park on a weekday run.

Pac heights, russian hill, north beach, marina, etc. can be nice but prob. outside of your price range.

parts of oakland and berkely can be fun too, but pretty far from the city and not always that much cheaper. obviously watch where you live in Oakland. 98% is the hood, with a couple of well-off enclaves.

Do not live in san mateo, redwood city, or in the east bay outside of berkeley and oakland. those are the burbs, and that's what you are moving to get away from.

- the truth

Bay Area AREA wrote:

Flagpole,

I think I see this move as a temporary, long-term vacation. I want to enjoy SF whenever I want to . . . whether that be on a weekend, Monday afternoon or Wednesday night. What does Redwood City or San Mateo have to offer? Thanks for the feedback, I would appreciate any more.

1) You're from the midwest. What does Redwood City or San Mateo or any of the little towns on the peninsula between SF and San Jose have? Umm...palm trees, fit people, and awesome weather year round.

2) You want to spend $1,100 a month for rent. As someone else said, in the city you'll be living in a shit hole. Why do that to yourself?

3) I think you're romanticizing about San Francisco a bit too much. It's a great city and my favorite big city, but the novelty of it will wear off very quickly.

4) What is it you want to do so desperately in San Francisco? Bars? Ok. The inside of a bar looks the same in Peoria, IL as it does in SF. Also, once you pay what will be an ungodly high rent, how the hell are you going to pay for any drinks or any fun in the city? If it's the atmosphere of the city and the scenery, then get a job in the city and walk around at lunch, stay for a few hours after work before heading home (on the train to your place OUTSIDE the city). When it's midnight and time to go to bed before work the next day, why does it matter if it's in Redwood City or SF?

5) You want this to be a long-term vacation. Well, it's fun to have money to spend on that vacation is it not?

6) Rent - You want to spend $1,100 a month. Well, at

, there isn't ONE studio apartment available for that low a price. The lowest is a range of $1,199-1,444 (and rest assured that place probably sucks). Go to San Mateo and there are tons in the $900 range. You'll get a better apartment and save at least $300 a month, and likely more than $500 a month.

At a minimum you need to readjust your rent expectations. Plan to spend $1500 or more and live in the city, then maybe you can make it work. Got a job in the city or believe you can find one that will pay you enough to do that? At the maximum, you should think long and hard about why you so desperately want to live in a city you've never been to (I'm assuming you've never been there based on your lack of knowledge, but maybe you were there for a brief time).

I'm not ripping on San Francisco...it's a GREAT city. I just don't think you need to live in it to experience its greatness. LOTS of other things to do in Northern California too, so save your money to do those things:

1) Rent a car and drive the Pacific Coast Highway. Stop in Monterey and Big Sur.

2) Visit Yosemite (especially in the spring to early summer so you can see the waterfalls going).

3) Go to wine country.

4) Go hiking just about anywhere.

Being house poor in San Francisco would suck. I wouldn't do it, and as I said before, your rent expectations are WAY too low.

Then he can rent a room and split a house or an apartment with other people. Not everything is about money (in other words, maybe it's worth it to him to live closer). There are tons of options on craigslist right now.

absolutely beautiful city. what are you looking for in a neighborhood?

rent is entirely relative. do you need to live by yourself? like in any city in the country, you can get a cheap room if you live with people from craigslist. my buddy just got a room for $400 a month in the richmond.

there are so many great places in the city.

outer sunset and outer richmond are right near the ocean, below and and above golden gate park. mostly asian neighborhood, mostly houses. little coffee shops and bars. very safe and nice area, beautiful vistas of the city. inner sunset and inner richmond are divided from outer by the park presidio. similar neighborhoods, closer to the more city-like part of the city.

the haight is the hippie area. lot of street wanderers. lot of alternative lifestyle folks, but that is everywhere. some fascinating people, some straight-up drug addicts. close to GG park, close to hotspot of haight street.

the castro is the gay neighborhood, and it borders noe valley and the mission. absolutely beautiful little downtownish areas. castro is a milder version of haight street with a gay twist. the mission and noe valley are hilly, beautiful vistas of the city, amazing little shops, awesome cross section of people.

pacific heights and russian and nob hill are the other places i would really reccomend living. they are north of the haight, between the presidio and the marina/north beach. more high class living here. really, really nice neighborhoods. some of the houses in pac heights, bordering the presidio, with an overlook of the ocean, are the most beautiful i have ever seen in my life.

i'd recommend against living downtown, or in the southeastern part of the city. the tenderloin is the "bad" neighborhood, but it is not that bad, just no reason to live there when you can pay the same rent in the sunset or the richmond, or probably other places as well.

take it from someone who lived there for a while - it is worth it to live in the city. just thinking about SF - the crisp salty breezes, the fog, the great food, the feel of community - makes me wish i was there still right now.

one thing that isn't that great there, after a while, is running. but running in any city, no matter how nice, is tough. if you access to a car, marin county is right there, which is great for running. otherwise though, you do not need a car to live in this area.

fdfgzdfgf wrote:

Then he can rent a room and split a house or an apartment with other people. Not everything is about money (in other words, maybe it's worth it to him to live closer). There are tons of options on craigslist right now.

You're right not everything is about money. Who the hell wants to live with other deadbeat roommates who will eat your food and not pay the rent? Not me.

Where did you live in the city? I've got to say, I disagree that the running isn't that great there after a while. In some places, yes. In others (ie the Richmond), it really doesn't get much better. I've run in a lot of cities, and SF not only trumps them all, but I think it trumps most non-cities and some "running" towns. That's my take anyway.

sanfranny wrote:

Where did you live in the city? I've got to say, I disagree that the running isn't that great there after a while. In some places, yes. In others (ie the Richmond), it really doesn't get much better. I've run in a lot of cities, and SF not only trumps them all, but I think it trumps most non-cities and some "running" towns. That's my take anyway.

Where do you run in the City? There seem to be lots of routes in and around the park, around Lake Merced, and around the edges of the City (Presidio, Marina, Embarcadero) - and to Marin. But in the heart of the City (besides the park), where can you run that doesn't involve crossing lots of busy intersections?

If I were to move back up to SF, it might be to the Mission, but ... that seems terrible running territory. Please tell me I'm wrong.

Hey, why are you guys assuming that I am straight?

Have not your mamas told you that when you assume, your an ass?