SummitPost.org

I am thinking about relocating to California from Arizona. My wife was offered a transfer there and given some choices about which region she would cover.

The choices are:

San Fran/ Sacramento
San Jose
Fresno
Bakersfield
Covina/ Pasadena
Orange City/ Riverside
San Diego

She likes being close to city/ culture and I like the outdoor pursuits. We also have 3 young children. Cost of living/ housing is a factor but not a huge one we both pull decent incomes.

Livermore / Dublin / Pleasanton is a nice area IMO. You're close to SF and San Jose, but not right in the city. Good hiking, cycling, kayaking (Del Valle), some climbing in Mt. Diablo State Park. You'll still have to drive a few hours to the mountains, but it'll be quite a bit better than if you were in SF or Silicone Valley. there are also quite a few wineries in the area and different cultural events.
Livermore has also an excellent outdoor store Sunrise Mountain Sports.
If you want to be closer to the mountains you'd have to choose one of the Central Valley locations. I haven't lived in that part of the state, so I can't tell you much about it though.

I live in Monrovia, just east of Pasadena on the edge of the San Gabriel Mtns. There is excellent trail hiking and Mtn biking right here.

The mountain and desert rock climbing areas to the east, Tahquitz/Suicide and Joshua Tree are 2-2.5 hours drive. The Sierra east side is not bad from here either when the Angeles Crest/Angeles Forest highway is open. I figure on 3.5 to Lone Pine. Right now it is closed due to landslides secondary to the recent Station Fire, so going up that way on a Friday eve means running the traffic gaunlet of the 5-405-14 interchange.

Monrovia has nice houses, cool old neighborhoods, good schools, good police and fire, and is a lot less expensive than Pasadena. We scored an exceptional house here on a nice bit of land which we could not have afforded were it a few miles west in nearby Pasadena.

If you/she decides on the Pasadena-Covina district you should check out the smaller incorporated cities just to the east: Sierra Madre, Arcadia and Monrovia. Look at the neighborhoods on the north side of town up against the mountains. Get bear proof gargbage cans...

That said, San Diego has a thriving climbing community, some local areas, decent access to Tahquitz and Josh. But you'll be doing some hard driving if you want to do much in the Sierra. Folks do it, but it's a push.

You have a couple of choices that appear pretty broad: SF/Sacramento and OC/Riverside. There's LOTS of wiggle room in those choices. Still assuming SF means either the City or East Bay, it's pretty hard to go wrong with that area from a culture and outdoor perspective. Berkeley/Oakland hills, Mt. Diablo. Good hiking, some bouldering. Good mt. biking but it's all on chewed up fire roads sadly. Great road riding. I'd avoid anything east of Mt. Diablo like the plague.

If you're looking further south, Pasadena is real nice though it gets hot and smoggy in the summer. Pluses are that it's right at the foot of the San Gabriels and has a really nice downtown area: good restaurants, shopping, the world class Norton Simon Museum, Rose Bowl, kind of feels small townish, though you're close enough to enjoy all the cultural benefits of being in LA.

I live and work in Pasadena. (As ksolem mentioned the neighboring areas are much cheaper.)

In Pasadena I am very close to great cultural activities. I regularly take the Gold Line (metro) into downtown for concerts, etc. And, I often start a hike in the San Gabriels from my apartment door. This involves about 3 miles of walking through Altadena to get to the nearest trailhead.

From LA, you have great access to the Eastside of the Sierra (though it does take longer with the Angeles Crest closed.)

Pasadena or Orange County. I personally don't like how busy LA county is, so OC was the best option for me. And the clean air and beach is a bonus.

San Diego = too far south
Bakersfield/Fresno = no culture

San Jose/Sacramento area could work but is further from the east side than LA.

Also keep in mind that there are a lot of differences within Socal itself. Riverside vs. coastal OC = huge difference. The latter sees *maybe* 3 weeks a year in the 80s, so that's a drastic change from AZ as well.

OP here

Thanks for all the replies so far it helps. I like the beauty of the outdoors first and climbing second. So for me mountaineering is high on the list and having the sierra accessible is important. I can do the bishop in 8 hours from phoenix, wouldnt want anymore than that prefer less. Other activities in descending order rock climbing, skiing, road biking, mountain biking. I think we would both like to be near the ocean again also after the desert living.

We are originally from Oregon before we moved to AZ so i think we could handle (and miss) some moister/ colder weather.

This is kind of the consensus around the household so far:

San Fran/ Sacramento: top of the list
San Jose: not sure
Fresno: not enough 'culture'
Bakersfield: ditto
Covina/ Pasadena not sure
Orange City/ Riverside: not sure
San Diego: we have enjoyed visiting but seems pretty low on the 'culture' level and seems pretty far south

scottmitch wrote:OP here

Thanks for all the replies so far it helps. I like the beauty of the outdoors first and climbing second. So for me mountaineering is high on the list and having the sierra accessible is important. I can do the bishop in 8 hours from phoenix, wouldnt want anymore than that prefer less. Other activities in descending order rock climbing, skiing, road biking, mountain biking. I think we would both like to be near the ocean again also after the desert living.

Looks like OC (or LA area) would be your best bet for the 3 reasons highlighted. The Sierra is closer than San Fran/Sacramento, world class rock climbing in J Tree and you are near the ocean (and will still be cheaper than San Fran).

If you do pick Norcal, I'd go with Sac town; SF is just too expensive. However, you will be further away from the Sierra and there's no ocean.

If you like the ocean San Francisco proper is pretty cool both literally and figuratively. You are never more than a couple of miles from the ocean, and the weather is always comfortable, though some neighborhoods are foggy. The food and culture are among the best in the US. Sacramento is a shorter drive to the mountains but is more than an hour to the ocean as well, doesn't have as much going on culturally, and is basically in the middle of nowhere (the Central Valley). San Jose doesn't really have an urban center to speak of; it's more a sprawl. There's some OK culture and food and you can always drive to SF and other parts of the Peninsula, but the nicer places to live if you are there are the 'burbs, like Los Gatos, Saratoga, Los Altos, etc. Los Gatos can be attractive because it has a cute little town with lots of upscale shops and restaurants, and you're at the foot of the Santa Cruz mountains and a short drive from good hiking and rock climbing there (e.g., Big Basin and Castle Rock State Parks) and about 20 miles from Santa Cruz; the downside is it's 70 miles from SF. If you live midpeninsula you can commute either to San Francisco or San Jose.

Luciano136 wrote:Pasadena or Orange County. I personally don't like how busy LA county is, so OC was the best option for me. And the clean air and beach is a bonus.

San Diego = too far south
Bakersfield/Fresno = no culture

San Jose/Sacramento area could work but is further from the east side than LA.

Luciano and I are neighbors in coastal OC, and apparently he is as happy with where he lives as I am.

OC is centrally located for access to beaches, mountains and desert.

The downside is you still have to drive an hour or two to get to those mountains and deserts. If you drive early in the morning it's no big deal, but then you always have to drive through the crap to get home.

OC is highly congested (Luciano and I aren't the only people who like it here). If I didn't work walking distance from my home, I doubt I would be able to stay here. YMMV

HandjamMasterC wrote:

Looks like OC (or LA area) would be your best bet for the 3 reasons highlighted. The Sierra is closer than San Fran/Sacramento, world class rock climbing in J Tree and you are near the ocean (and will still be cheaper than San Fran).

If you do pick Norcal, I'd go with Sac town; SF is just too expensive. However, you will be further away from the Sierra and there's no ocean.

Sacramento is NOT further from the Sierra - east or west side - time wise, than LA. In fact, to Cedar Grove / Kings Canyon, it is the exact same amount of time from Hwy 50 near Placerville as from Torrance / San Pedro area in LA. - 5 hours. Bishop - same thing. LA is closer to Lone Pine / Whitney. Sac is closer to Yosemite ( much closer ) / Mammoth Mtn etc. If you figure Friday night LA traffic into the mix, it can take much longer to get to Bishop from LA than Sac. I should know - I've driven it from both locations many many times.

Just FYI.

Depends what area you're interested in. If you're looking for mountaineering in the High Sierra, you'll spend most of your time in the Lone Pine/Bishop area, which is a bit closer. I also don't drive on traffic hours and sit maybe 10 minutes in slower traffic around the Santa Monica area on the way up; none on the way back. I drive Saturdays and come back Sundays.

Distance wise to Bishop, it's similar but you can drive a good chunk of the way pretty fast since there are more major fwys before you get to the 395 (doesn't seem to be that way for Sac). You hardly have any towns slowing you down either; pretty much just Lone Pine and the jerky place (Cartago?). It takes me 3.5h-4h to Lone Pine and 5h to Bishop from Orange County. If you live more north in the LA area, you can pretty much cut another hour off.

Bottom line for the OP, if you like Yosemite and the northern Sierra, Sacramento is a good choice. If you like the High Sierra in the LP/Bishop area better, you should probably stick to the LA area.

Another good point brought up above is that you indeed need to make sure you like the location you live in, not just judge its proximity. After all, you spend most of your time around your home.

Luciano136 wrote:Bottom line for the OP, if you like Yosemite and the northern Sierra, Sacramento is a good choice. If you like the High Sierra in the LP/Bishop area better, you should stick to the LA area.

Meanwhile, I spend by far the majority of my high elevation time in the nearby San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains, no more than two hours from OC. In the summer, I do a weekend backpacking trip nearly every weekend.

I wouldn't do that if I had to drive three or four hours each way every time.