COVID-19 Travel Advisory: Stay up to date with the latest on the coronavirus pandemic.   Learn More >

Northern vs Southern?

Old Jun 28th, 2006, 08:05 AM
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11
Northern vs Southern?

Looking to relocate with younger children...
Northern California VS Southern California?...and why?
YoungExplorer is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 08:13 AM
  #2  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10,966
South, if you like sun; north, if you like rain.
happytrailstoyou is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 08:18 AM
  #3  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,189
We don't get that much more rain here in the SF bay area!

I think happytrailstoyou was thinking of Oregon...there you rust instead of tan!

Utahtea
utahtea is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 08:22 AM
  #4  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 846
Go North if you like hippies

Go South if you like implants

(I live in the North)
saps is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 08:26 AM
  #5  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11
What about cost of living, activities, school districts, mindsets??
YoungExplorer is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 08:28 AM
  #6  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 846
Okay to answer seriously provide some info...

- what type of work?
- what price range for a home?
- interests (beach/mountain/desert)?
- big city/little city?
- where are you coming from?

We really need to know this info to provide any meaningful help.
saps is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 08:34 AM
  #7  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11
Work: billing and construction
Renting a home possibly 3bdrm
Interest: warm climate, but close to the beach cool air-but love the view of the mountains
Big/Little City:..a safe/clean neighborhood
Coming from Jersey
YoungExplorer is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 08:46 AM
  #8  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,777
I live in the south, but think the north is more beautiful, would love to live up in north cal.
I think in general, the scenery is much prettier, the populace seems more educated, a little more cultured.
The south here truly is the land of implants! I feel a little out of place sometimes because I don't always have my toes pedicured and big boobs to go with it, lol!
Little_Man is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 08:48 AM
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,777
ok, seriously they are both expensive, but the SF area is more expensive than the south.
Here in Orange County, you can find a decent (middle class, nice not fancy) home for $800,000.
In San Francisco, I think I'd add on another $100 k to that...
Little_Man is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 09:00 AM
  #10  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,379
I think the "California north vs south" dichotomy is a bit exaggerated. I love northern California, but choose to live in the southern half of the state. I actually find MORE culture here (more and much better museums, more and better theatre, more and better live music)-- but I consider LA and Orange Counties to be fair game for my entertainment dollars. If you know where to look, this region is culturally very rich.

You can be happy in either, if you have the money. Schools are a sore spot-- I can't repeat it enough: You MUST research the school districts and individual schools in the areas you're considering.
rjw_lgb_ca is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 09:02 AM
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,041
TWICE+ as many people in the Southland.
For what you asked about, SoCal is the place for you. In NoCal the Beaches aren't for sunbathing.
bbqboy is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 09:09 AM
  #12  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 846
CA has many different areas within the Northern and Southern parts: Sacramento, Napa, Bay Area, San Diego, Inland Empire, Central Valley, LA, etc etc, etc...so one has to make generalizations.

In general Northern CA does get more rain than Southern CA. This March I felt like I was living in Seattle.

Northern CA has more variety of scenery within a shorter driving distance.

Cost of living is high. If you want to live within a reasonable drive to a big city such as LA, SD, SF, SJ then you are going to pay for it. Stay inland and commute and it becomes more reasonable but still higher than 90% of the country.

Don't be surprised to find rent for a 3Bd house at $2000 or higher. Granted you can also find it for less but price is location, location, location.
saps is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 09:31 AM
  #13  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 66,863
What do you mean by "Northern California VS Southern California"?

California is a HUGE place w/ the hottest place in the country, the coldest place in the country, one of the most expensive, crowded counties, and the most sparsely populated county in the country.

SoCal = LA, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Diego, Barstow, Riverside, Orange County, San Bernardino, the Mohave desert, Simi Valley and a thousand other places - each different from the others in prices/weather/job opportunities.

NorCal = SF, Oakland, San Jose, Sacramento, Fresno, Marin, Chico, Eureka, Santa Cruz, Walnut Creek, Davis, Merced, Modoc county, Napa and a thousand other places - each different from the others in prices/weather/job opportunities.

Most "foreigners" think of NorCal as SF and SoCal as LA. Far from it . . . . . . .
janisj is online now  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 09:34 AM
  #14  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 846
Hey Janisj, totally off topic but where in CA is the coldest place in the country??? I have lived here for over 30 years and have not heard of it!
saps is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 09:39 AM
  #15  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,193
saps ~

Coldest is usually Bodie, CA

*Just that odd bit of trivia that pays off on occasion*

Chele60 is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 09:41 AM
  #16  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,674
The most sparsely populated counties in the US can be found in Alaska, Montana, and Texas.
lizziea06 is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 01:01 PM
  #17  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 66,863
I should have qualified all of those things as the "most/least/hotest/coldest" in the lower 48

Actually the coldest place in the lower 48 is often -- Bodie, Truckee, Alturas or Lassen.

we also have the highest, lowest, driest and wetest (in the lower 48)

And there are counties in Texas and Montana w/ smaller populations for sure - but they are also mostly smaller in area. I was talking about "sparse-ness" - pop. per square mile.
janisj is online now  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 01:06 PM
  #18  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,674
How else would one calculate sparseness other than the number of people per square mile? I stand by my statement above;-)
lizziea06 is offline  
Old Jun 28th, 2006, 01:38 PM
  #19  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 66,863
I know there are some counties in Montana w/ only 250 - 400 people. So they may actually be sparser. And our champion (Alpine county) has had a population explosion in the last 3 or 4 years - up to about 1300. So I guess we can scratch that record off the list.

Up until about the year 1999/2000, Alpine county was the lowest populated county in the lower 48 states.
janisj is online now  
Old Jun 30th, 2006, 08:48 PM
  #20  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 72
I grew up in SF Bay Area and have lived in North San Diego for the past 20 years, as well as spending time in the middle (San Luis Obispo). There are definite differences between NorCal and SoCal but as with anywhere, there is good and bad about each.

Northern California is beautiful and varied and there are so many places to visit within a 4 hour drive, so weekend trips can be varied and very doable - countless beaches, Lake Tahoe, Lassen Park, Yosemite, small towns, wine tasting . . . Good skiing is close. Southern California doesn't have as many choices - the desert, Mexico, LA or San Diego or Santa Barbara and that's it. There are better swimming beaches and the water is warmer, but NorCal has beautiful natural beaches which are very nice in the summer and are good for sunbathing and swimming (I did it for years).

NorCal weather is somewhat more varied. Winters are colder than SoCal and there is more rain. NorCal folks are generally more liberal in their thinking and more environmentally aware.

Both are great places to raise kids because there are a lot of things to do. Year round good weather allows kids to spend as much time outdoors as they want. San Francisco is more cosmopolitan than LA and SD.

Cost of living is about the same wherever you live in California - simply put, outrageous. SF used to be much more expensive, but the gap has narrowed. Every metropolitan area has affordable neighborhoods that are quite nice.

I prefer the north because of peoples' attitudes, the landscape, the weather, and its proximity to so much, but I love where I live in SD. We love the small town atmosphere and down to earth folks in our small beach community. An added bonus - good schools. And we can always enjoy what a city has to offer by going into SD - a one half hour drive away.
pmccallum is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

FODOR'S VIDEO