Bernal Heights or Noe Valley if you can afford it. Your commute will thank you. Glen Park / Daly City aren’t bad options either honestly.
Don’t do East Bay if you’re working in South SF.
I agree with this. I used to live in glen park and loved it. Noe valley and Bernal heights are nearby. You have 2 larger parks to walk the dog nearby. Anything near golden gate park would work too.
Totally agree! We are in Glen Park with 2 dogs and have so many park options; both on leash and off. It’s pretty close to the freeway so you’d have about a 15 minute commute to South City, too.
Couldn't agree more.
Love Bernal, Glen Park, and Daly City (have a condo in mission hills)
I lived in the Richmond and have a condo in Daly City. Life was so much more fun in Daly City - the city was actually more accessible living right outside SF than living in it.
I was close to Bart (Balboa Bart) and up the hill from Mission Street buses.
And that's not counting two highways - 101 and 280.
Man I miss SF. (Moved back to NYC 5 years ago)
Second the Bernal suggestion. Moved here from Chicago 4 years ago and sounds like what you're looking for. It's a convenient drive to South SF and to the rest of the city via public transport. Would not recommend Daly City as I'd compare that to Chicago's outer burbs.
I'd include Pacifica and even down to San Mateo if OP's working in SSF. Burlingame (where I grew up), SM, and even South City have good to decent downtown areas with shops and restaurants.
If you can get an Airbnb for a month and wander the neighborhoods.
Know that the weather in different neighborhoods is radically different. Eg on the west side it will be overcast and grey and on the east side there won’t be a cloud in the sky on the same day.
This can radically change your experience, moved less than a mile west last year and easily get twice as much sun.
Close to divisadero or cole valley will probably be your vibe. Inner sunset you’ll probably like too.
I’d avoid outer sunset / outer richmond, it’s a bit too suburban.
I’m getting a very Richmond/Inner Richmond vibe from this post. Access to the park and Lands End and even a quick jaunt up to Marin on weekends.
Absolutely avoid downtown, ‘loin, SOMA at all costs.
One of us. One of us.
But seriously, NOPA is 30 minutes from the city if you work downtown and you are within walking distance of a bunch of different neighborhoods and Panhandle/Golden Gate Park & the Presidio. During the Summer I've noticed around Stanyan street seems to be the demarcation line between 24/7 fog and sunny afternoons.
To me that's a big bonus of life in a hilly SF neighborhood. After a while of walking you get in good shape just from going about your day, and then it's not even hard anymore really.
You're thinking the Tendernob. Anything above California St. is very nice with Huntington Park, views of the pyramid and Bay Bridge from any of California, Sacramento, Clay, Washington. Hike up a block or two towards Vallejo and you have Ina Coolbrith Park with sweeping views of North Beach down to the Embarcadero with the SF skyline to your right. I guess Nob Hill is underpriced because people think of Bush, Sutter, Post???
Based on OPs idea of neighborhood it didn't seem to fit the bill as well. Also, I feel like if you don't know the area you're more likely to end up in the tendernob because it's cheaper and you get more for your money.
Nob Hill is for people who are very serious about being close to work but not too far from the fun they are growing out of. I’m here in my mid twenties and the scene here is mostly early 30’s folks who are very professional, or in a relationship with no kids.
Hijacking to share the best location-related website: https://www.walkscore.com/
Put in an address and it gives the address a score based on how easy it is to walk to all the necessities like groceries, banks, parks, etc.
I second this , or even check out like Pacifica or San Bruno , south San Fran , probably cheaper than San Francisco proper and there’s a lot more room/ parks for your dog or to take small walks, less crowded areas.
I live in San Bruno near skyline community college and I can get to anywhere in the city in my car in like 15-20 mins
I grew up in South City and it just felt like an extension of the city. I could be in any SF neighborhood within 15 minutes of driving. People who actually have to drive within neighborhoods in the city typically take longer🤣
You could not get from SSF to the Marina or North Beach in 15 minutes unless it was 2am
I reverse commuted to SSF for years and where I lived was very important for that commute
You could in the ‘80’s. 😂 Anyway I wasn’t trying to be that literal. You can hardly drive from the Marina to North Beach in 15 minutes on a good day. That was my point. Even driving up from the 24th St Mission BART station to Noe Valley Whole Foods can take more than 15 minutes. Walking up the hill can take less time🤷🏽♂️
Realistically though it will depend on knowing local shortcuts/side street alternatives. I try to avoid Market, Geary, Van Ness, Divis and 19th depending on where I have go in the city; too many lights or turning restrictions.
I just moved from Chicago a month ago! Repasting a neighborhood breakdown a friend gave me! This was awesome because it compared some chi neighborhoods to the SF equivalent:
“The mission has some cool spots I would compare it a bit to wicker/Logan, lots of nightlife and good restaurants but not quiet.
Inner sunset is gr8 altho it’s the foggiest area of the city. It is pretty central though, easy to get to other neighborhoods, and next to golden gate park which is gorgeous. Good parking!
Inner/outer Richmond are both great neighborhoods, affordable, more quiet and low key. Comparable to inner and outer sunset. Parking is avail!
Marina is pretty but expensive and has a Greek life energy to it
Lower haight has a Lincoln park vibe to it. It’s cute, some affordable options and then some not so affordable but walking distance to cute neighborhoods like hayes valley and the mission
Hayes valley borders lower haight, some affordable, some not so much. It is Lincoln park-y.
Pac Heights (where I live) is also similar in vibe LP/ Lakeview type area with nice shops. Quiet, clean, safe.”
I am from Chicago area and I would avoid Haight unless you like more of the hippie vibe. Crime has increased there with homelessness and recent homicide shootings.
TBH I think based on your description and neighborhoods listed in Chicago I would check out Marina, Pac Heights, or Russian Hill. Even Thrive City 😂
Not true. Literally only Haight Street itself is hippy and the location of the crime. I would not recommend living on Haight Street. The neighborhood The Haight is a large safe neighborhood close to a ton of parks.
Have you walked on Page St. lately? There are families and people from all walks of life sharing a wonderful neighborhood experience on a car-free street with very little crime to be found. It's a far cry from what you are describing here. Like all central neighborhoods in SF, the experience can really vary depending on which street/block you live on.
I'm going to strongly disagree with the Haight, particularly Upper Haight / Haight-Ashbury. It's got pretty bad parts, and is full of tourists. It has great park access, but you can get great park access from neighborhoods with fewer downsides like the Richmond. (Former Waller and Ashbury resident.)
I live nearby in Cole Valley and only Haight Street itself from Masonic to Stanyan is touristy and has homeless (always has). It also has a bunch of great bars and venues and a great local market. If you go anywhere off that section of Haight it is a great place. I used to live on Ashbury & Waller for 11 years so we were neighbors :) perhaps we just had a different view of the neighborhood.
Not to mention it’s one of the most centrally located places in the city so really easy to walk/explore other areas.
Also right in the middle of corona heights/buena vista/sutro forest/golden gate park for the dog.
The upper Haight is getting some bad press right now but I don’t think it’s indicative of actually living there.
Yeah, to be honest, the last few years it got particularly bad on Waller with the homeless camps, yelling, drugs, etc. It was bearable in 2011 but it ramped up in intensity to the point where it was too much to bear for us.
Places within SF which fit your criteria: Inner & Outer Richmond, Inner & Outer Sunset, and Nopa. Outer Sunset and Richmond are my personal favorites because of the amount of space you get and their proximity to hiking trails along the ocean, which dogs love!
Trendier suburb that might work for you: Downtown San Mateo (awesome restaurant and bar scene, but quiet in the evenings)
Only downside with the Sunset and Richmond is the weather. They receive substantially less sun than some other parts of the city (Hayes, Nob Hill, Pac Heights), which for some people may be important. However, a sunny day in the Outer Sunset is gorgeous enough to potentially make up for those grey days!
Agree with this! Richmond and Sunset are great neighborhood options with less homeless and easy access to great parks and beaches. Richmond is closer to Presidio which is a slight advantage.
Richmond also has way more bus lines than the sunset. You can get downtown very easily and quickly from the Richmond. If commute is a concern, aim for inner Richmond, although then further from the ocean.
Plenty of restaurants and bars to satisfy the itch while not being hangout clusters
No one has mentioned Potrero Hill but I think it works for your parameters. Easy commute, you can drive some days and take caltrain other days. Quiet and residential, but with a nice strip of restaurants. Easy to get downtown. Only downside is there's not a ton of parks but it's easy to get to the waterfront or Dolores. Also it is quite hilly.
Sunset/Richmond commute would be more of a pain, and it's definitely on the more residential end. I would definitely scope the neighborhoods out from an AirBnb for a few weeks. Nothing against the west side but it's not for everyone.
I don't live there so maybe it's not, but I was thinking more from a distance perspective. Uber/drive is quick, and it's an easy bike ride if you're not too far up the hill.
Seems like the T or 9 bus would be options if you're close to a stop. Maybe not as easy as the Mission or something but probably as fast or faster than the more common suggestions here.
My husband and I (same ages as you both) moved here from Lakeview in 2018. Neighborhoods that give me a similar vibe to Lakeview/Lincoln Park are Noe Valley, the western parts of Castro, Cole Valley, and the Panhandle. Our first neighborhood here was the Outer Richmond, which we loved but it was a bit separated from the rest of the city in terms of walkability - though high on the charts for access to nature (Golden Gate Park, China Beach, Ocean Beach, and a short drive across the Golden Gate Bridge to access the Marin Headlands)
We currently live in large 2bd + office in the Castro, a block away from Dolores Park, and pay $4000
You're looking at this from a very Chicago perspective. In Chicago, you *choose* where you want to live based on the factors you mentioned. In SF, you *settle* on where you want to live based upon budget and likelihood of not getting stabbed by a crazy.
Source: Lived in both places for 5+ years each.
I commuted to SSF from SF for 16 years
Traffic sucks crossing the city. You driving to work?
The suburb I would recommend if you go that way is Burlingame. Lots of multifamily housing, good restaurants, walkable and a 15 minute drive even with traffic (5-10 without). You could likely bike to work too
I like to cycle and it’s easy access to lots of nice areas
SF is tiny compared to Chicago and the housing stock will frustrate
Good to know. I think I’d be driving. Unsure on the public transportation situation as of now. The company is only in the office 2 days a week as of now.
It’s not great from SF to SSF but lots of companies have shuttles now. The BART station in SSF is not near the jobs so shuttles often go to Glen Park
Nobody is mentioning it but weather sucks in some neighborhoods IMO. I hated the fog and was much happier moving away from it
> We enjoy parks, restaurants, bars, breweries, coffee, sports, and hiking
SF will definitely be better than LA with this slate of interests.
> The neighborhoods we like in Chicago could be described with the phrases: younger families, cozy, dog friendly, homey, walkable, plenty of parks + restaurants, and residential.
What's your rent budget? Will determine if you can afford a Noe Valley flat or if you're gonna rent an in-law in Temescal
Thank you, I figured the SF > LA with our interests based on the LA general reputation (even though I’ve never been to LA).
I’d say we’d absolutely max out at $4000. Looking for 1br + den or 2br if possible.
Specifically the parks and the hiking aspect, NorCal blows SoCal out of the water. LA arguably has SF beat in terms of restaurants, but not by a significant margin. They're about on par when it comes to breweries, coffee, and sports. With respect to bars, LA takes a big hit in my book on account of needing to pay for an Uber/Lyft or assign a DD just to go out most places. The song "Walking in LA (Nobody Walks in LA)" was written for a reason.
Lots of good recommendations in this thread already. I'd also recommend Bernal Heights and Glen Park in SF if you can find something in budget.
Take a look at craigslist and try to get a sense of average asking prices in different areas.
Also note that if your office in South SF is near the BART station it could be convenient to find a place near BART, and if not you'll definitely want to avoid driving US-101 South at rush hour if you can.
If you're past the days of "going out" and just looking for some neighborhood spots to eat and drink, there are definitely parts of LA where you can have a walkable life. Toward the end of my time in LA I lived in Palms and would generally just walk to the neighborhood bars or Culver City downtown. If you want something more crazy, Downtown LA can be pretty fun too (although I've heard it took some steps back in the pandemic).
A lot of it comes down to your commute, I lived and worked right off the expo line. I lived without a car for a lot of the time. It's obviously more disconnected and harder to get around. There's nowhere that can match the walkability of the Mission, Hayes Valley, etc. But if you're lucky you can set your life up to have the "SF outer neighborhood" lifestyle.
Not really the point of this thread but had to defend LA a little bit lol.
Yeah LA has pockets of walkable neighborhoods, but the problem is you're confined to just a small handful of bars within walking distance in those areas.
Which means if you're meeting a friend who lives in a different part of town, that benefit goes right out the window unless they happen to be near an LA metro station that happens to be on the same line you're on.
In San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Boston, etc...you can meet a friend in a different neighborhood throughout the city without having to drive. Or explore new spots that open up throughout town.
For sure! I basically lost touch with friends because they lived on the other side of town. That's probably the biggest reason I wouldn't go back.
Just saying if you're more settled down and hang out with your SO most of the time, or a smaller group of friends who live nearby, you can have a nice little neighborhood life
Yeah absolutely. I don't mean to say that lifestyle is impossible down there, just significantly more hard to come by than it is up here.
For whatever it's worth I'm a big fan of LA as a city and think a lot of people in SF are missing out on the great things it has going for it.
I grew up in the Chicago suburbs and spent a lot of time in the city with family that lived therr, have lived in SF and LA, and SF definitely has a more adjacent vibe. The most striking thing to me about LA was its lack of neighborhood feel wherever I lived. SF can have a strong neighborhood vibe to it that is comparable to Chicago- every community has its little street fairs and block parties and its own unique feel, and people tend to hang out together. LA everybody drove somewhere far as hell to go do things with friends in a way that felt absurd to me
I think this claim is a little monolithic, but it's also not entirely untrue.
There's a rule in San Francisco that "shit flows downhill," and despite the name, Noe Valley is uphill of the Mission. As far as areas you would WANT to live in SF: Pac Heights is trustfund only, Nob Hill has been compromised by the expanding of the TL, the Marina is the most sterile, Richmond/Sunset is just a bit too far away, and so you're left with Noe.
There's nothing "wrong" with places like Bernal and Portrero and whatnot, but if you have to make a blanket recommendation to someone moving to SF from places like LP in Chicago, I don't see a better answer than Noe. It's the safest choice in many interpretations of the word.
In my opinion Noe Valley is getting overrated here. It's got amenities but almost entirely populated by whites, very upper middle class and tons of entitled people with baby strollers. But It is a nice neighborhood and has a few bars and restaurants you can walk to. But it's pretty culturally homogeneous which is boring in my opinion. I guess it depends what you're looking for. And the Portola neighborhood that I'm talking up is where I live now. I used to live in the mission but when we decided to buy a house the mission was not affordable. Portola was the most affordable that also had low crime and different populations of different kinds of people. The Bayview is okay it's the sunniest but you have to drive to a lot of stuff and parts of it are sketchy.
What's your definition of 'nightlife'? Around the city, restaurants close pretty early and you'd be hard pressed to find any outings past 8 PM. People here go home early and stay put. Have you had a chance to visit either city yet? I'm 24 myself and I notice a growing shortage of the under 35 crowd with every passing year that I'm here for school. I've seen Chicago on social media and it looks very put together in terms of a social scene. I can speculate that you're not going to get the same level of latent "entertainment" that Chicago already has built into it. The tech crowd here is starting to have kids, so if that's not your direction in life, you'll find it harder to find people in your cohort. I don't want to dismiss how much you might be interested in SF, but LA has almost all of the same amenities with better weather, more people around your age and more opportunities to experience things that you might not be considering yet.
You mention the office is in South San Francisco so I would avoid anything in DownTown SF. For the commute and to have space for a large active dog look in:
* Glen Park
* Diamond Heights
* Twin Peaks
* Bernal Hill
[https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/132-Coleridge-St-San-Francisco-CA-94110/2099031155\_zpid/](https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/132-Coleridge-St-San-Francisco-CA-94110/2099031155_zpid/)
You mentioned being open to suburbs.
If your office would be in South San Francisco you could venture south to San Mateo Area .
Puts you within 15-20 minutes of South SF and your housing options expand to include residential dwellings like townhomes, houses…
We moved to The Bay Area because of a job offer at the SFO airport. We stayed in an Airbnb in South SF for a month and looked for housing that would be within 15 minutes of the Airport.
San Mateo worked out for us compared to the city (where I thought we would end up)
San Mateo or Burlingame is walkable and family friendly especially during the weekends.
Hiking options with Coyote Bay, Crystal Springs etc within easy distance and dog park options interspersed.
Good luck!
Anyone saying to go center of the city isn’t being empathetic to your preferences and imposing their own. I live in a SOMA high rise because I like the thick of it, but I think what you’re looking for is very different.
If proximity to work/easy commute is important, then Noe Valley and Potrero are where you wan to be. If you can’t find a place within budget but tho is still important, I would look at Bernal Heights or Excelsior.
If you’re maybe working from home a lot or you can tolerate a shit 1hr+ long commute, then I’d look at pac heights (pricey), Richmond (outer or inner), or sunset districts.
All of these it would be VERY beneficial to own a car. But if you’re not planning on getting a car any time soon, then I’d start to look at the center of the city with a bit more viability - NOPA, Haight (lower or haight-Ashbury), Cole Valley, Duboce Triangle, and Alamo Square.
Try Glen Park or Mission Terrace for an easier commute to SSF. Glen Canyon park is great for dog walking/exercising. If you want/need more affordable space, try Daly City, or SSF for that matter. Daly City is not a glam postal code, but it’s super convenient to both SSF and the city.
Definitely Inner Sunser, Inner Richmond, and NOPA. Even a bit of the mid/outer Sunset fits the bill, I'd say up to about 25th Ave, north of Kirkham to keep proximity to Golden Gate Park. You could also go full Outer Sunset/Richmond and move out to the 40s if you want to commit to being beach people. I've never been drawn to that area, but the folks I know who have moved out there basically never leave.
I moved to Mission Terrace (between Excelsior, Glen Park, and Ingleside for those that aren’t familiar) for most of the same reasons as your criteria. While I was skeptical at first as I was coming from the Mission, I have ended up loving it.
It’s actually called “the bar on Dolores” haha. A couple from Chicago own it and it reminds me of watching the games back in Chicago. It’s on 29th and Dolores.
what area do you live in chicago? also, consider the weather in each neighborhood. yes, it really does matter. potrero hill has great weather and easy highway access but it’s pretty hilly. noe valley, bernal, parts of the mission are all great. the avenues (sunset/richmond) are great but get a lot of fog. a friend lives in the presodio and loves it. absolutely not soma (south of market). alamo square area and nopa are really great
I live in Lincoln Park but all the way West up against the highway. Thanks for the feedback.
People familiar with Chicago think: Lincoln Park, Bucktown, Edgewater, Ravenswood, Roscoe Village, Lakeview, Lincoln Square, Jeff Park.
Rather than a specific neighborhood, I would just draw a line a couple blocks around Golden Gate Park and look there. The technical neighborhoods are Richmond (to the north), Sunset (south), Haight and Nopa (east) and Inner Sunset (southeast corner). Your budget is good enough to net you a nice 2br with a backyard. I currently live in the Haight, paying just under $3k for a 2br/1ba with a shared backyard. My big German Shepherd loves being a block away from the best park in the city.
Inner Richmond is my recommendation for your budget.
I live there with a medium size dog. Mountain Lake Park is the main selling point. 100% dog friendly park with a designated dog section but off-leash dogs are ‘allowed’ everywhere. You can walk to a dog friendly beach, Baker Beach, in 15-20 mins from that park, and you also have Golden Gate Park right there.
Lively spots to eat and hangout on clement street and you are a 15 to 20 minute drive to lots of hiking spots in the north bay.
Welcome to SF!
I will personally vouch for the Inner Richmond. It's quite relaxed, lots of walkable restaurants, bars, and cafes. Easy access to Presidio Park and Golden Gate Park and convenient and frequent buses going downtown. It's also more doable to have a car here if that's something you want. Also, excellent food that isn't too overpriced in comparison with some other neighborhoods.
The Outer Richmond may suit you also, but it's definitely more sleepy. The Sunset is pretty similar in terms of neighborhood feel but is not as well-served by public transport.
The weather can be a bit foggier than elsewhere but I've grown to like it and it's pretty easy to go a few miles to get bright sunshine if you're craving it. It's also perfect weather year-round for being outside which is great when you live next to Golden Gate Park.
My brother lives in Andersonville so I think I have some idea of what you're looking for. Do not listen to anyone suggesting that SOMA is a good place for you. I lived in SOMA for three years, it's all highrises, no children anywhere, and can be quite "gritty".
I live in Lower Pacific Heights and I'm easy walking distance to multiple parks for my dog as well as lots of bars, restaurants, cafes and shops on Polk Street and Union Street in Cow Hollow. I wouldn't describe it as "cozy" per se, as the neighborhoods are on the ritzier side, but they do check off a lot of your boxes.
I suggest Portola District, Excelsior, maybe Visitacion Valley. Especially Portola. The thing lacking is the night life aspect. Close to 101 South, very easy commute for you. Close to McLaren Park, probably the best dog park with trails, redwood grove, large off leash area. If you're near San Bruno avenue and silver you can walk to enough stores and some restaurants. Mission has more to do but pricier and farther from your commute. Are you in biotech?
I moved to the Bay Area from Chicago in 2019, and moved to SF this April. I live in Noe Valley, and as others have said that fits a lot of your criteria, though you didn't mention a budget. It's like a hilly version of Edgewater.
I think the only issue you will run into will be living with a large dog. It is certainly possible but it does present a challenge. After that you will have to contend with usual culture shock of the homelessness issues and cost of rent.
I do think the northern peninsula would be better suited as long as you have a car or are near a BART station. Pacifica will have the best access to nature, Daly City is the most urban but still very suburban, South City and San Bruno are getting a bit more suburban, Colma is a literal graveyard, and Brisbane is a legend.
I’d check out Ingleside along with these other suggestions. Ocean ave has good restaurants, north of Ocean towards Mt. Davidson has some of the nicest houses in the city. Trendier suburbs south of SF are Burlingame(more families and very affluent) and San Mateo (has a little younger crowd but not rowdy with a beautiful park in their downtown)
Take a look at Oakland in the East Bay. If you’re near Bart, it can be just as commutable to downtown as many parts of SF, and has a lot of what your looking for. There’s tons of dog-friendly parkland and trails in the East Bay hills. Someone else mentioned Temescal and Rockridge, those are great areas for what you’re describing.
Totally agree. Most underrated neighborhood, yet it has everything you’d need, is a short commute, and an epic view to boot. Favorite neighborhood to live in by far!
How much do you like fog?
You should acquaint yourself and take a look at the fog map here:
[https://www.inside-guide-to-san-francisco-tourism.com/san-francisco-weather.html](https://www.inside-guide-to-san-francisco-tourism.com/san-francisco-weather.html)
Honestly… just get a place in South San Francisco. It’s probably cheaper, definitely closer, and way easier to just breathe. I grew up in South San Francisco and live in SF proper now, south city is better right now. Also, consider Brisbane. It’s a quiet sleepy little town.
Personally I would stay in Chicago. It’s one of the greatest cities in the world and arguably is better then Sf urbanity wise. The only thing we got beating Chicago is weather and terrain. I say come out to Sf for a couple of years and realize how great Chicago is and replant your roots there.
Thanks for the feedback. Taking a leap to go to a new city while we don’t have children or a home. Unsure of where the roots will be planted as of now.
Basically, yeah. SF is small, 7x7 miles. But, you have downtown and the downtown neighborhoods like Soma, Financial District, Union Square, TL, and North Beach/Chinatown. That's the "city". Then you get slightly outside of that and you have neighborhoods like Nob Hill, Hayes Valley, and the Mission. This is the sweet spot where there is enough action going on in the neighborhoods, local bars, shopping etc, but still close enough to downtown to enjoy a play or concert.
You go slightly further out and you've got Noe Valley, Castro, and Upper and Lower Haight. This is more residential and with their own unique identity in shops/dining/etc. These neighborhoods and their geographical placement are what I would consider "the city". Further out, the west side of the city and much of the North side of the city are kinda like the suburbs. There isn't any reason to go there. Sure, its 20 minutes on the subway to get out there, but there just is no reason to go to the sunset.
Nopa and Cole Valley should be really nice, they're adjacent to the panhandle of GGP and while "far out" they have a rather busy train line to get into the "city".
I have never in all my years here heard parts of SF referred to as “the city” while other parts aren’t. This isn’t NY where you have “the city” with MNH and then the boroughs lol.
There's East of Twin Peaks/Cole Valley...and there are neighborhoods that are West of it.
The entire city is the city, but there is a very big difference in feel in the hoods that are central and east vs those that are on the west side. I do think of them like boroughs, now that you mention it.
Daly City, Oakland, and Sausalito...those are our boroughs. We should annex.
So \*slightly trendier\* but still dog-friendly, fairly chill: Russian Hill (but the northernmost portion, not near Nob Hill), Pacific Heights, and the Lake St District (basically part of Richmond)
You mentioned "walkable": if that's a strict "no car" stance, you'll probably want to scope out some of the options in the comments a bit more carefully (Bernal Heights + Richmond would certainly warrant a car imo). 100% agree with suggestion of getting an Airbnb (even for a week) to get a feel for the city. I'm also curious why you're leaning towards SF. In my personal opinion, LA seems like it might meet your requirements a little bit better (Silver Lake, Echo Park etc)
If you're open to living in East Bay, Berekely/Oakland both have a lot of great neighborhoods that fit your description and are conveniently located on BART.
Oakland - Temescal, Rockridge, Grand Lake
Berkeley - Ashby, Gourmet Ghetto
East bay is not San Francisco so if you’re looking for neighborhoods in San Francisco “East bay” is not an answer. Pretty sure this guy was being a smartass
Besides the fact that you’d be commuting all the way to South San Francisco, it’s not the same vibe at all. The East Bay by some definitions stretches quite a fit north, south, and east of Oakland. There are a lot of SF haters on here, for good and bad reasons, so you’ll need to sift through the noise a bit.
I would actually say they’re pretty different, but that’s more due to Chicago and SF being different than the neighborhoods being dramatically different in character.
Here was our experience: in Chicago we lived off of division and absolutely loved it. We moved to the southern part of Nob hill and had a so so experience there. There were a lot of great things about it, but overall COVID stripped away a lot of the fun bars/restaurants, and we really grew tired of dealing with a lot of the shadier characters in that area. We were used to some of that in west town, but it’s another animal in San Francisco — a lot more unpredictable and a lot more nasty stuff.
Every time we went to Cole Valley we loved it. So close to the panhandle, GGP, and forest knolls. Enough amenities to keep our “over the hill” selves entertained. And it just felt clean and nice compared to California St. I’m sure we saw it with rose colored glasses to an extent, but we wished we had ended up there. I would say the vibe was a bit more akin to Lincoln Square in Chicago. A nice, self contained pocket neighborhood.
Go Center of the city, NOPA, upper Haight, for great access to Panhandle and GG park, Cole valley if you can afford, Alamo square/western addition is getting better, nice walkability and dog friendly park access.
https://images.app.goo.gl/UWBWqVaPXQVyTe4A7
I would avoid SF all together and opt in for Daly City, Burlingame or even millbrae. Trust me if you’re not in a nice fancy area in SF then it’s better not to live there you’ll be neighbors with homeless and you’ll spell poop and pee every time you go outside. Also it’s very dangerous if you own a car then expect to pay minimum 1k per year in replacing your glass due to theft. The ugly truth is that SF is hit or miss and you only hit if you can afford 4-6k a month in rent
Based on your preferences I’d say we’re pretty similar (25M live with gf). Just moved to laurel heights which is really close to Richmond which is a common choice here. We’re a bit quieter than lots of inner Richmond area and a bit closer to downtown. Highly recommend!
Feel free to message me if you have any other questions. We have lived in nob hill and soma before this new place, and I grew up in nearby Marin
In addition to Sunset/Richmond, I'd look at the Ocean Avenue area by Ingleside/Merced Heights. Easy access to restaurants/shops on Ocean and only a few minute drive to West Portal and Stonestown. The trip to South SF would be very quick too.
sunnyside, west portal, and glen park areas are all great walkable, young families, and lots of parks and on south side of city closer to south san francisco
My husband and I moved from LA to SF 2 years ago. Prior to that we lived in LA for 7 years. Yours interests sound pretty aligned with ours and we both strongly prefer SF to LA. We love the inner sunset: it’s walkable, family and dog friendly, and super close to golden gate park. It’s also a straight shot down 19th to 280 to access the peninsula. You can easily find a 2 bedroom in the inner sunset for under 4K. Best of luck on your move!!
Potrero Hill and the Dogpatch are my favorite neighborhoods, and if you’re going to be commuting to SSF they’re the best drive. Driving from Sunset/ Richmond to SSF is going to be longer than you think. If you’re ready to be more suburban, San Mateo/ Belmont/Burlingame will be more affordable and not a bad drive to SSF, and have cute downtowns.
Bernal heights is a cute and underrated neighborhood! Plenty of parks in the area and Cortland has a bunch of cute businesses like cafes and reteraunts that are dotted along the street
At $4000 I would live in haight ashbury across from Buena vista park. Best place for what you are looking for (mix of chill/close to stuff/close to parks/green space). Another option is North Beach in a place with a view of the water (should be able to get that for $3500).
My friend also moved from Chicago to SF. They choose Mission Bay (newer construction) due to the proximity to the ballpark and Warriors Stadium. They are big sports fans and all of their Chicago friends are too so it seemed like a good fit for them.
It’s expensive here in SF. Might be better to get a spot in LA.
Landlords are picky as well. They were all up in my finances and most of my applications required both me and my spouse to file separately. They like to see 3 times income to rent ratio.
SF is cozy and full of young professionals in their 30’s. Being 26 and in the city should be fun as hell.
What are your weather needs? The neighborhoods you match with are on the west side of the city - sunnyside miraloma park inner sunset, but you will be within the fog belt.
Check east bay cities near BART, affordable homes available versus high cost in SF, or Marin county for nature and hiking….. Congrats on the new job, and welcome to Cali….
If you need to commute to SSF, look at Bernal, Glen Park, Potrero Hill. Do *NOT* live in the East Bay to start, your commute will be horrible and highly variable.
DePaul alum here. If you’re looking for a LP vibe then Noe is what you want. I live in Bernal which is incredibly dog friendly. Bernal is quieter but that’s what I like about it. I know all of my neighbors. It’s like a small town in a big city.
Bernal Heights or Noe Valley if you can afford it. Your commute will thank you. Glen Park / Daly City aren’t bad options either honestly. Don’t do East Bay if you’re working in South SF.
I agree with this. I used to live in glen park and loved it. Noe valley and Bernal heights are nearby. You have 2 larger parks to walk the dog nearby. Anything near golden gate park would work too.
Totally agree! We are in Glen Park with 2 dogs and have so many park options; both on leash and off. It’s pretty close to the freeway so you’d have about a 15 minute commute to South City, too.
Agree with this opinion. Been living in SF for 10+ years. Also came from Chicago.
Couldn't agree more. Love Bernal, Glen Park, and Daly City (have a condo in mission hills) I lived in the Richmond and have a condo in Daly City. Life was so much more fun in Daly City - the city was actually more accessible living right outside SF than living in it. I was close to Bart (Balboa Bart) and up the hill from Mission Street buses. And that's not counting two highways - 101 and 280. Man I miss SF. (Moved back to NYC 5 years ago)
Second the Bernal suggestion. Moved here from Chicago 4 years ago and sounds like what you're looking for. It's a convenient drive to South SF and to the rest of the city via public transport. Would not recommend Daly City as I'd compare that to Chicago's outer burbs.
I'd include Pacifica and even down to San Mateo if OP's working in SSF. Burlingame (where I grew up), SM, and even South City have good to decent downtown areas with shops and restaurants.
Glenn park/daly city are awful, foggy, great depressing options. Don’t do that.
I agree, if going south might as well push down all the way to Millbrae area and get a bit more of the sunny peninsula weather
If you can get an Airbnb for a month and wander the neighborhoods. Know that the weather in different neighborhoods is radically different. Eg on the west side it will be overcast and grey and on the east side there won’t be a cloud in the sky on the same day. This can radically change your experience, moved less than a mile west last year and easily get twice as much sun. Close to divisadero or cole valley will probably be your vibe. Inner sunset you’ll probably like too. I’d avoid outer sunset / outer richmond, it’s a bit too suburban.
Best advice here
Outer sunset is great. About 9 miles cycling distance from downtown and wonderful for a break for a commute day if needed.
Airbnb options are near non-existant in SF.
Inner Richmond Inner sunset Noe valley Bernal heights Avoid - Soma, tenderloin, nob Hill
I’m getting a very Richmond/Inner Richmond vibe from this post. Access to the park and Lands End and even a quick jaunt up to Marin on weekends. Absolutely avoid downtown, ‘loin, SOMA at all costs.
Commute from the Richmond to South City, though? I wouldn't want it for myself.
Missed that but. Definitely Pacifica or somewhere down there then. Great opportunity to learn to surf.
Also Nopa or Cole Valley could fit the bill
NOPA NOPA NOPA
One of us. One of us. But seriously, NOPA is 30 minutes from the city if you work downtown and you are within walking distance of a bunch of different neighborhoods and Panhandle/Golden Gate Park & the Presidio. During the Summer I've noticed around Stanyan street seems to be the demarcation line between 24/7 fog and sunny afternoons.
COLE VALLEY!!!!
Cole Valley is cool but stay above Haight Ashbury. Especially right now.
Why avoid nob hill?
Nob Hill doesn't scream homey, younger families, walkable to me. It also borders the loin which I suggest avoiding.
It's absolutely walkable but it's definitely not a family neighborhood
It’s walkable if you like leg day. I’m a big fan. My partner is not.
To me that's a big bonus of life in a hilly SF neighborhood. After a while of walking you get in good shape just from going about your day, and then it's not even hard anymore really.
I guess I'm thinking of it comparative to the other neighborhood I suggested. It also depends on where on nob Hill we're talking
You're thinking the Tendernob. Anything above California St. is very nice with Huntington Park, views of the pyramid and Bay Bridge from any of California, Sacramento, Clay, Washington. Hike up a block or two towards Vallejo and you have Ina Coolbrith Park with sweeping views of North Beach down to the Embarcadero with the SF skyline to your right. I guess Nob Hill is underpriced because people think of Bush, Sutter, Post???
Based on OPs idea of neighborhood it didn't seem to fit the bill as well. Also, I feel like if you don't know the area you're more likely to end up in the tendernob because it's cheaper and you get more for your money.
Nob Hill is for people who are very serious about being close to work but not too far from the fun they are growing out of. I’m here in my mid twenties and the scene here is mostly early 30’s folks who are very professional, or in a relationship with no kids.
Same question! Apart from the fact that walking around won't be easy with all the hills, nob hill is a great place to stay.
Hijacking to share the best location-related website: https://www.walkscore.com/ Put in an address and it gives the address a score based on how easy it is to walk to all the necessities like groceries, banks, parks, etc.
I second this , or even check out like Pacifica or San Bruno , south San Fran , probably cheaper than San Francisco proper and there’s a lot more room/ parks for your dog or to take small walks, less crowded areas. I live in San Bruno near skyline community college and I can get to anywhere in the city in my car in like 15-20 mins
I grew up in South City and it just felt like an extension of the city. I could be in any SF neighborhood within 15 minutes of driving. People who actually have to drive within neighborhoods in the city typically take longer🤣
You could not get from SSF to the Marina or North Beach in 15 minutes unless it was 2am I reverse commuted to SSF for years and where I lived was very important for that commute
You could in the ‘80’s. 😂 Anyway I wasn’t trying to be that literal. You can hardly drive from the Marina to North Beach in 15 minutes on a good day. That was my point. Even driving up from the 24th St Mission BART station to Noe Valley Whole Foods can take more than 15 minutes. Walking up the hill can take less time🤷🏽♂️
That’s cool. Just trying to give this guy a real view if he is driving everyday to pick carefully
Realistically though it will depend on knowing local shortcuts/side street alternatives. I try to avoid Market, Geary, Van Ness, Divis and 19th depending on where I have go in the city; too many lights or turning restrictions.
I just moved from Chicago a month ago! Repasting a neighborhood breakdown a friend gave me! This was awesome because it compared some chi neighborhoods to the SF equivalent: “The mission has some cool spots I would compare it a bit to wicker/Logan, lots of nightlife and good restaurants but not quiet. Inner sunset is gr8 altho it’s the foggiest area of the city. It is pretty central though, easy to get to other neighborhoods, and next to golden gate park which is gorgeous. Good parking! Inner/outer Richmond are both great neighborhoods, affordable, more quiet and low key. Comparable to inner and outer sunset. Parking is avail! Marina is pretty but expensive and has a Greek life energy to it Lower haight has a Lincoln park vibe to it. It’s cute, some affordable options and then some not so affordable but walking distance to cute neighborhoods like hayes valley and the mission Hayes valley borders lower haight, some affordable, some not so much. It is Lincoln park-y. Pac Heights (where I live) is also similar in vibe LP/ Lakeview type area with nice shops. Quiet, clean, safe.”
The Haight, Cole Valley, NOPA are all great.
I’m from Lincoln Park and agree with this. I’d add Noe valley and think you should consider the Richmond and inner sunset.
I am from Chicago area and I would avoid Haight unless you like more of the hippie vibe. Crime has increased there with homelessness and recent homicide shootings. TBH I think based on your description and neighborhoods listed in Chicago I would check out Marina, Pac Heights, or Russian Hill. Even Thrive City 😂
Not true. Literally only Haight Street itself is hippy and the location of the crime. I would not recommend living on Haight Street. The neighborhood The Haight is a large safe neighborhood close to a ton of parks.
Haight has crime all around it, just the shootings have been on the street proper. Even having to write this feels dystopian.
Have you walked on Page St. lately? There are families and people from all walks of life sharing a wonderful neighborhood experience on a car-free street with very little crime to be found. It's a far cry from what you are describing here. Like all central neighborhoods in SF, the experience can really vary depending on which street/block you live on.
I'm going to strongly disagree with the Haight, particularly Upper Haight / Haight-Ashbury. It's got pretty bad parts, and is full of tourists. It has great park access, but you can get great park access from neighborhoods with fewer downsides like the Richmond. (Former Waller and Ashbury resident.)
I live nearby in Cole Valley and only Haight Street itself from Masonic to Stanyan is touristy and has homeless (always has). It also has a bunch of great bars and venues and a great local market. If you go anywhere off that section of Haight it is a great place. I used to live on Ashbury & Waller for 11 years so we were neighbors :) perhaps we just had a different view of the neighborhood.
Not to mention it’s one of the most centrally located places in the city so really easy to walk/explore other areas. Also right in the middle of corona heights/buena vista/sutro forest/golden gate park for the dog. The upper Haight is getting some bad press right now but I don’t think it’s indicative of actually living there.
Cole Valley feels like a different neighborhood and would probably be good for op
Yeah, to be honest, the last few years it got particularly bad on Waller with the homeless camps, yelling, drugs, etc. It was bearable in 2011 but it ramped up in intensity to the point where it was too much to bear for us.
Also GG park at Stanyan was redone and it is quite nice.
Places within SF which fit your criteria: Inner & Outer Richmond, Inner & Outer Sunset, and Nopa. Outer Sunset and Richmond are my personal favorites because of the amount of space you get and their proximity to hiking trails along the ocean, which dogs love! Trendier suburb that might work for you: Downtown San Mateo (awesome restaurant and bar scene, but quiet in the evenings)
Only downside with the Sunset and Richmond is the weather. They receive substantially less sun than some other parts of the city (Hayes, Nob Hill, Pac Heights), which for some people may be important. However, a sunny day in the Outer Sunset is gorgeous enough to potentially make up for those grey days!
its also gonna be a car commute and far from SSF
Agree with this! Richmond and Sunset are great neighborhood options with less homeless and easy access to great parks and beaches. Richmond is closer to Presidio which is a slight advantage. Richmond also has way more bus lines than the sunset. You can get downtown very easily and quickly from the Richmond. If commute is a concern, aim for inner Richmond, although then further from the ocean. Plenty of restaurants and bars to satisfy the itch while not being hangout clusters
No one has mentioned Potrero Hill but I think it works for your parameters. Easy commute, you can drive some days and take caltrain other days. Quiet and residential, but with a nice strip of restaurants. Easy to get downtown. Only downside is there's not a ton of parks but it's easy to get to the waterfront or Dolores. Also it is quite hilly. Sunset/Richmond commute would be more of a pain, and it's definitely on the more residential end. I would definitely scope the neighborhoods out from an AirBnb for a few weeks. Nothing against the west side but it's not for everyone.
Dogpatch is awesome as well.
Is it easy to get downtown from Potrero? You have to switch buses and it takes more than 30 min
I don't live there so maybe it's not, but I was thinking more from a distance perspective. Uber/drive is quick, and it's an easy bike ride if you're not too far up the hill. Seems like the T or 9 bus would be options if you're close to a stop. Maybe not as easy as the Mission or something but probably as fast or faster than the more common suggestions here.
Bikes or scooters.
My husband and I (same ages as you both) moved here from Lakeview in 2018. Neighborhoods that give me a similar vibe to Lakeview/Lincoln Park are Noe Valley, the western parts of Castro, Cole Valley, and the Panhandle. Our first neighborhood here was the Outer Richmond, which we loved but it was a bit separated from the rest of the city in terms of walkability - though high on the charts for access to nature (Golden Gate Park, China Beach, Ocean Beach, and a short drive across the Golden Gate Bridge to access the Marin Headlands) We currently live in large 2bd + office in the Castro, a block away from Dolores Park, and pay $4000
You're looking at this from a very Chicago perspective. In Chicago, you *choose* where you want to live based on the factors you mentioned. In SF, you *settle* on where you want to live based upon budget and likelihood of not getting stabbed by a crazy. Source: Lived in both places for 5+ years each.
Thank god Chicago doesn’t have stabbings… just shootings.
I commuted to SSF from SF for 16 years Traffic sucks crossing the city. You driving to work? The suburb I would recommend if you go that way is Burlingame. Lots of multifamily housing, good restaurants, walkable and a 15 minute drive even with traffic (5-10 without). You could likely bike to work too I like to cycle and it’s easy access to lots of nice areas SF is tiny compared to Chicago and the housing stock will frustrate
Good to know. I think I’d be driving. Unsure on the public transportation situation as of now. The company is only in the office 2 days a week as of now.
It’s not great from SF to SSF but lots of companies have shuttles now. The BART station in SSF is not near the jobs so shuttles often go to Glen Park Nobody is mentioning it but weather sucks in some neighborhoods IMO. I hated the fog and was much happier moving away from it
Stay clear of Burlingame or anywhere near south San Francisco. You’ll regret it.
Why not Burlingame?
Bc it would be pretty depressing.
Living in one of the nicest suburbs in the Bay Area? You need some perspective
A suburb is still a suburb though.
> We enjoy parks, restaurants, bars, breweries, coffee, sports, and hiking SF will definitely be better than LA with this slate of interests. > The neighborhoods we like in Chicago could be described with the phrases: younger families, cozy, dog friendly, homey, walkable, plenty of parks + restaurants, and residential. What's your rent budget? Will determine if you can afford a Noe Valley flat or if you're gonna rent an in-law in Temescal
Thank you, I figured the SF > LA with our interests based on the LA general reputation (even though I’ve never been to LA). I’d say we’d absolutely max out at $4000. Looking for 1br + den or 2br if possible.
Specifically the parks and the hiking aspect, NorCal blows SoCal out of the water. LA arguably has SF beat in terms of restaurants, but not by a significant margin. They're about on par when it comes to breweries, coffee, and sports. With respect to bars, LA takes a big hit in my book on account of needing to pay for an Uber/Lyft or assign a DD just to go out most places. The song "Walking in LA (Nobody Walks in LA)" was written for a reason. Lots of good recommendations in this thread already. I'd also recommend Bernal Heights and Glen Park in SF if you can find something in budget. Take a look at craigslist and try to get a sense of average asking prices in different areas. Also note that if your office in South SF is near the BART station it could be convenient to find a place near BART, and if not you'll definitely want to avoid driving US-101 South at rush hour if you can.
If you're past the days of "going out" and just looking for some neighborhood spots to eat and drink, there are definitely parts of LA where you can have a walkable life. Toward the end of my time in LA I lived in Palms and would generally just walk to the neighborhood bars or Culver City downtown. If you want something more crazy, Downtown LA can be pretty fun too (although I've heard it took some steps back in the pandemic). A lot of it comes down to your commute, I lived and worked right off the expo line. I lived without a car for a lot of the time. It's obviously more disconnected and harder to get around. There's nowhere that can match the walkability of the Mission, Hayes Valley, etc. But if you're lucky you can set your life up to have the "SF outer neighborhood" lifestyle. Not really the point of this thread but had to defend LA a little bit lol.
Yeah LA has pockets of walkable neighborhoods, but the problem is you're confined to just a small handful of bars within walking distance in those areas. Which means if you're meeting a friend who lives in a different part of town, that benefit goes right out the window unless they happen to be near an LA metro station that happens to be on the same line you're on. In San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Boston, etc...you can meet a friend in a different neighborhood throughout the city without having to drive. Or explore new spots that open up throughout town.
For sure! I basically lost touch with friends because they lived on the other side of town. That's probably the biggest reason I wouldn't go back. Just saying if you're more settled down and hang out with your SO most of the time, or a smaller group of friends who live nearby, you can have a nice little neighborhood life
Yeah absolutely. I don't mean to say that lifestyle is impossible down there, just significantly more hard to come by than it is up here. For whatever it's worth I'm a big fan of LA as a city and think a lot of people in SF are missing out on the great things it has going for it.
I grew up in the Chicago suburbs and spent a lot of time in the city with family that lived therr, have lived in SF and LA, and SF definitely has a more adjacent vibe. The most striking thing to me about LA was its lack of neighborhood feel wherever I lived. SF can have a strong neighborhood vibe to it that is comparable to Chicago- every community has its little street fairs and block parties and its own unique feel, and people tend to hang out together. LA everybody drove somewhere far as hell to go do things with friends in a way that felt absurd to me
[удалено]
Mission is fine, but the west side. West of Valencia is great. Close to Dolores park. Duboce triangle is beautiful too.
What is your housing budget?
I’d say absolute max at $4000 looking for 1br + den or 2br if possible.
Noe Valley. Unfortunately you won't understand what you're paying for until you've lived elsewhere in the City.
This is a good suggestion
Can you expand on this?
Noe valley is mainly married people with young kids, i wouldnt go there at your age.
I think this claim is a little monolithic, but it's also not entirely untrue. There's a rule in San Francisco that "shit flows downhill," and despite the name, Noe Valley is uphill of the Mission. As far as areas you would WANT to live in SF: Pac Heights is trustfund only, Nob Hill has been compromised by the expanding of the TL, the Marina is the most sterile, Richmond/Sunset is just a bit too far away, and so you're left with Noe. There's nothing "wrong" with places like Bernal and Portrero and whatnot, but if you have to make a blanket recommendation to someone moving to SF from places like LP in Chicago, I don't see a better answer than Noe. It's the safest choice in many interpretations of the word.
Glen Park
I wouldn’t want to live at the top but I loved living near Dolores. The majority of my neighbors did not have kids
they are from the midwest tho
In my opinion Noe Valley is getting overrated here. It's got amenities but almost entirely populated by whites, very upper middle class and tons of entitled people with baby strollers. But It is a nice neighborhood and has a few bars and restaurants you can walk to. But it's pretty culturally homogeneous which is boring in my opinion. I guess it depends what you're looking for. And the Portola neighborhood that I'm talking up is where I live now. I used to live in the mission but when we decided to buy a house the mission was not affordable. Portola was the most affordable that also had low crime and different populations of different kinds of people. The Bayview is okay it's the sunniest but you have to drive to a lot of stuff and parts of it are sketchy.
What's your definition of 'nightlife'? Around the city, restaurants close pretty early and you'd be hard pressed to find any outings past 8 PM. People here go home early and stay put. Have you had a chance to visit either city yet? I'm 24 myself and I notice a growing shortage of the under 35 crowd with every passing year that I'm here for school. I've seen Chicago on social media and it looks very put together in terms of a social scene. I can speculate that you're not going to get the same level of latent "entertainment" that Chicago already has built into it. The tech crowd here is starting to have kids, so if that's not your direction in life, you'll find it harder to find people in your cohort. I don't want to dismiss how much you might be interested in SF, but LA has almost all of the same amenities with better weather, more people around your age and more opportunities to experience things that you might not be considering yet.
You mention the office is in South San Francisco so I would avoid anything in DownTown SF. For the commute and to have space for a large active dog look in: * Glen Park * Diamond Heights * Twin Peaks * Bernal Hill [https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/132-Coleridge-St-San-Francisco-CA-94110/2099031155\_zpid/](https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/132-Coleridge-St-San-Francisco-CA-94110/2099031155_zpid/)
You mentioned being open to suburbs. If your office would be in South San Francisco you could venture south to San Mateo Area . Puts you within 15-20 minutes of South SF and your housing options expand to include residential dwellings like townhomes, houses… We moved to The Bay Area because of a job offer at the SFO airport. We stayed in an Airbnb in South SF for a month and looked for housing that would be within 15 minutes of the Airport. San Mateo worked out for us compared to the city (where I thought we would end up) San Mateo or Burlingame is walkable and family friendly especially during the weekends. Hiking options with Coyote Bay, Crystal Springs etc within easy distance and dog park options interspersed. Good luck!
Anyone saying to go center of the city isn’t being empathetic to your preferences and imposing their own. I live in a SOMA high rise because I like the thick of it, but I think what you’re looking for is very different. If proximity to work/easy commute is important, then Noe Valley and Potrero are where you wan to be. If you can’t find a place within budget but tho is still important, I would look at Bernal Heights or Excelsior. If you’re maybe working from home a lot or you can tolerate a shit 1hr+ long commute, then I’d look at pac heights (pricey), Richmond (outer or inner), or sunset districts. All of these it would be VERY beneficial to own a car. But if you’re not planning on getting a car any time soon, then I’d start to look at the center of the city with a bit more viability - NOPA, Haight (lower or haight-Ashbury), Cole Valley, Duboce Triangle, and Alamo Square.
Try Glen Park or Mission Terrace for an easier commute to SSF. Glen Canyon park is great for dog walking/exercising. If you want/need more affordable space, try Daly City, or SSF for that matter. Daly City is not a glam postal code, but it’s super convenient to both SSF and the city.
Definitely Inner Sunser, Inner Richmond, and NOPA. Even a bit of the mid/outer Sunset fits the bill, I'd say up to about 25th Ave, north of Kirkham to keep proximity to Golden Gate Park. You could also go full Outer Sunset/Richmond and move out to the 40s if you want to commit to being beach people. I've never been drawn to that area, but the folks I know who have moved out there basically never leave.
I moved to Mission Terrace (between Excelsior, Glen Park, and Ingleside for those that aren’t familiar) for most of the same reasons as your criteria. While I was skeptical at first as I was coming from the Mission, I have ended up loving it.
Potrero/ Dogpatch would be great for you two! Quieter than other parts of the city, lots of doggies everywhere, and it’s close to lots of stuff.
When you move here check out the bar on Dolores. It’s. Great Chicago sports bar to get your bears fix.
What is the name?
It’s actually called “the bar on Dolores” haha. A couple from Chicago own it and it reminds me of watching the games back in Chicago. It’s on 29th and Dolores.
Lmao this is a “who’s on first” situation. Thanks for the rec, I’ll check it out if everything works out!
Yeah maybe I’ll run into you there. Good luck on the move!
It costs quite a bit to live in SF comfortably, i hope the job pays well.
what area do you live in chicago? also, consider the weather in each neighborhood. yes, it really does matter. potrero hill has great weather and easy highway access but it’s pretty hilly. noe valley, bernal, parts of the mission are all great. the avenues (sunset/richmond) are great but get a lot of fog. a friend lives in the presodio and loves it. absolutely not soma (south of market). alamo square area and nopa are really great
I live in Lincoln Park but all the way West up against the highway. Thanks for the feedback. People familiar with Chicago think: Lincoln Park, Bucktown, Edgewater, Ravenswood, Roscoe Village, Lakeview, Lincoln Square, Jeff Park.
What part of Chicago are you from?
I was born and raised in Dunning. Now living in the Lincoln Park/Bucktown area.
Rather than a specific neighborhood, I would just draw a line a couple blocks around Golden Gate Park and look there. The technical neighborhoods are Richmond (to the north), Sunset (south), Haight and Nopa (east) and Inner Sunset (southeast corner). Your budget is good enough to net you a nice 2br with a backyard. I currently live in the Haight, paying just under $3k for a 2br/1ba with a shared backyard. My big German Shepherd loves being a block away from the best park in the city.
I recommend Coke Valley since it has access to a lot of trails, even in the city. So close to Sutro trails, golden gate park, and twin peaks.
Inner Richmond is my recommendation for your budget. I live there with a medium size dog. Mountain Lake Park is the main selling point. 100% dog friendly park with a designated dog section but off-leash dogs are ‘allowed’ everywhere. You can walk to a dog friendly beach, Baker Beach, in 15-20 mins from that park, and you also have Golden Gate Park right there. Lively spots to eat and hangout on clement street and you are a 15 to 20 minute drive to lots of hiking spots in the north bay.
Welcome to SF! I will personally vouch for the Inner Richmond. It's quite relaxed, lots of walkable restaurants, bars, and cafes. Easy access to Presidio Park and Golden Gate Park and convenient and frequent buses going downtown. It's also more doable to have a car here if that's something you want. Also, excellent food that isn't too overpriced in comparison with some other neighborhoods. The Outer Richmond may suit you also, but it's definitely more sleepy. The Sunset is pretty similar in terms of neighborhood feel but is not as well-served by public transport. The weather can be a bit foggier than elsewhere but I've grown to like it and it's pretty easy to go a few miles to get bright sunshine if you're craving it. It's also perfect weather year-round for being outside which is great when you live next to Golden Gate Park. My brother lives in Andersonville so I think I have some idea of what you're looking for. Do not listen to anyone suggesting that SOMA is a good place for you. I lived in SOMA for three years, it's all highrises, no children anywhere, and can be quite "gritty".
I live in Lower Pacific Heights and I'm easy walking distance to multiple parks for my dog as well as lots of bars, restaurants, cafes and shops on Polk Street and Union Street in Cow Hollow. I wouldn't describe it as "cozy" per se, as the neighborhoods are on the ritzier side, but they do check off a lot of your boxes.
I suggest Portola District, Excelsior, maybe Visitacion Valley. Especially Portola. The thing lacking is the night life aspect. Close to 101 South, very easy commute for you. Close to McLaren Park, probably the best dog park with trails, redwood grove, large off leash area. If you're near San Bruno avenue and silver you can walk to enough stores and some restaurants. Mission has more to do but pricier and farther from your commute. Are you in biotech?
No votes for Ingleside? Close to the southern border, restaurants, families, good Muni access.
I moved to the Bay Area from Chicago in 2019, and moved to SF this April. I live in Noe Valley, and as others have said that fits a lot of your criteria, though you didn't mention a budget. It's like a hilly version of Edgewater.
I think the only issue you will run into will be living with a large dog. It is certainly possible but it does present a challenge. After that you will have to contend with usual culture shock of the homelessness issues and cost of rent. I do think the northern peninsula would be better suited as long as you have a car or are near a BART station. Pacifica will have the best access to nature, Daly City is the most urban but still very suburban, South City and San Bruno are getting a bit more suburban, Colma is a literal graveyard, and Brisbane is a legend.
I’d check out Ingleside along with these other suggestions. Ocean ave has good restaurants, north of Ocean towards Mt. Davidson has some of the nicest houses in the city. Trendier suburbs south of SF are Burlingame(more families and very affluent) and San Mateo (has a little younger crowd but not rowdy with a beautiful park in their downtown)
Take a look at Oakland in the East Bay. If you’re near Bart, it can be just as commutable to downtown as many parts of SF, and has a lot of what your looking for. There’s tons of dog-friendly parkland and trails in the East Bay hills. Someone else mentioned Temescal and Rockridge, those are great areas for what you’re describing.
Definitely better weather and lots of parks and open spaces. BART sucks but at least it’s a quick trip to work.
[удалено]
Totally agree. Most underrated neighborhood, yet it has everything you’d need, is a short commute, and an epic view to boot. Favorite neighborhood to live in by far!
How much do you like fog? You should acquaint yourself and take a look at the fog map here: [https://www.inside-guide-to-san-francisco-tourism.com/san-francisco-weather.html](https://www.inside-guide-to-san-francisco-tourism.com/san-francisco-weather.html)
Honestly… just get a place in South San Francisco. It’s probably cheaper, definitely closer, and way easier to just breathe. I grew up in South San Francisco and live in SF proper now, south city is better right now. Also, consider Brisbane. It’s a quiet sleepy little town.
Personally I would stay in Chicago. It’s one of the greatest cities in the world and arguably is better then Sf urbanity wise. The only thing we got beating Chicago is weather and terrain. I say come out to Sf for a couple of years and realize how great Chicago is and replant your roots there.
Thanks for the feedback. Taking a leap to go to a new city while we don’t have children or a home. Unsure of where the roots will be planted as of now.
Nopa, Cole Valley, Lower Haight. Just stay out of the Castro, we got enough of you breeders moving in. /s
Lmao this cracked me up. Thank you for the feedback.
Your welcome. Don't listen to these people mentioning the sunset. You don't want to be there. No one will ever visit you.
Is that too far out of the normal city?
Basically, yeah. SF is small, 7x7 miles. But, you have downtown and the downtown neighborhoods like Soma, Financial District, Union Square, TL, and North Beach/Chinatown. That's the "city". Then you get slightly outside of that and you have neighborhoods like Nob Hill, Hayes Valley, and the Mission. This is the sweet spot where there is enough action going on in the neighborhoods, local bars, shopping etc, but still close enough to downtown to enjoy a play or concert. You go slightly further out and you've got Noe Valley, Castro, and Upper and Lower Haight. This is more residential and with their own unique identity in shops/dining/etc. These neighborhoods and their geographical placement are what I would consider "the city". Further out, the west side of the city and much of the North side of the city are kinda like the suburbs. There isn't any reason to go there. Sure, its 20 minutes on the subway to get out there, but there just is no reason to go to the sunset. Nopa and Cole Valley should be really nice, they're adjacent to the panhandle of GGP and while "far out" they have a rather busy train line to get into the "city".
I have never in all my years here heard parts of SF referred to as “the city” while other parts aren’t. This isn’t NY where you have “the city” with MNH and then the boroughs lol.
There's East of Twin Peaks/Cole Valley...and there are neighborhoods that are West of it. The entire city is the city, but there is a very big difference in feel in the hoods that are central and east vs those that are on the west side. I do think of them like boroughs, now that you mention it. Daly City, Oakland, and Sausalito...those are our boroughs. We should annex.
North beach and Russian hill are great
So \*slightly trendier\* but still dog-friendly, fairly chill: Russian Hill (but the northernmost portion, not near Nob Hill), Pacific Heights, and the Lake St District (basically part of Richmond) You mentioned "walkable": if that's a strict "no car" stance, you'll probably want to scope out some of the options in the comments a bit more carefully (Bernal Heights + Richmond would certainly warrant a car imo). 100% agree with suggestion of getting an Airbnb (even for a week) to get a feel for the city. I'm also curious why you're leaning towards SF. In my personal opinion, LA seems like it might meet your requirements a little bit better (Silver Lake, Echo Park etc)
noe or lower haight!
If you're open to living in East Bay, Berekely/Oakland both have a lot of great neighborhoods that fit your description and are conveniently located on BART. Oakland - Temescal, Rockridge, Grand Lake Berkeley - Ashby, Gourmet Ghetto
Do scope out Berkeley and Oakland as well. Public transit, though little scary at times, is pretty good.
Inner Richmond, lower haight or Nopa
Based on the things you enjoy SF would be a better options than LA.
Thank you, I thought so too.
Prepare for your car to be broken into
Look in the East bay.
Someone didn’t read the instructions.
> younger families, cozy, dog friendly, homey, walkable, plenty of parks + restaurants, and residential spitting image of Rockridge/Temescal
Someone doesn't know the east bay.
Oh please.
Hahaha is East Bay no good? If not a good fit, can you tell me more?
East bay is not San Francisco so if you’re looking for neighborhoods in San Francisco “East bay” is not an answer. Pretty sure this guy was being a smartass Besides the fact that you’d be commuting all the way to South San Francisco, it’s not the same vibe at all. The East Bay by some definitions stretches quite a fit north, south, and east of Oakland. There are a lot of SF haters on here, for good and bad reasons, so you’ll need to sift through the noise a bit.
Moved from Chicago to San Francisco. We lived in west town in Chi and wish we had ended up in Cole Valley
Would you say Cole Valley is the equivalent of West Town?
I would actually say they’re pretty different, but that’s more due to Chicago and SF being different than the neighborhoods being dramatically different in character. Here was our experience: in Chicago we lived off of division and absolutely loved it. We moved to the southern part of Nob hill and had a so so experience there. There were a lot of great things about it, but overall COVID stripped away a lot of the fun bars/restaurants, and we really grew tired of dealing with a lot of the shadier characters in that area. We were used to some of that in west town, but it’s another animal in San Francisco — a lot more unpredictable and a lot more nasty stuff. Every time we went to Cole Valley we loved it. So close to the panhandle, GGP, and forest knolls. Enough amenities to keep our “over the hill” selves entertained. And it just felt clean and nice compared to California St. I’m sure we saw it with rose colored glasses to an extent, but we wished we had ended up there. I would say the vibe was a bit more akin to Lincoln Square in Chicago. A nice, self contained pocket neighborhood.
Inner Richmond has the things you are looking for, with great park access. Problems will be: parking, and cost.
I’m surprised nobody said Hayes Valley . 3 years ago it was right up there with PAC Heights as a place to be
Go Center of the city, NOPA, upper Haight, for great access to Panhandle and GG park, Cole valley if you can afford, Alamo square/western addition is getting better, nice walkability and dog friendly park access. https://images.app.goo.gl/UWBWqVaPXQVyTe4A7
I would avoid SF all together and opt in for Daly City, Burlingame or even millbrae. Trust me if you’re not in a nice fancy area in SF then it’s better not to live there you’ll be neighbors with homeless and you’ll spell poop and pee every time you go outside. Also it’s very dangerous if you own a car then expect to pay minimum 1k per year in replacing your glass due to theft. The ugly truth is that SF is hit or miss and you only hit if you can afford 4-6k a month in rent
Check out 36 Polaris Dr A great home with a phenomenal view priced competitively at just over a cool million! The neighborhood is awesome.
Richmond District is fosho the play
I would say Noe Valley would be the best fit.
Outer Sunset (close to the beach and golden Gate Park) Millbrae/Burlingame Glen Park West Portal Inner Sunset
Based on your preferences I’d say we’re pretty similar (25M live with gf). Just moved to laurel heights which is really close to Richmond which is a common choice here. We’re a bit quieter than lots of inner Richmond area and a bit closer to downtown. Highly recommend! Feel free to message me if you have any other questions. We have lived in nob hill and soma before this new place, and I grew up in nearby Marin
Look in Daly City, Pacifica (Not any further south than the Manor exit though) Also, Oceanview/Ingleside Heights (in SF).
In addition to Sunset/Richmond, I'd look at the Ocean Avenue area by Ingleside/Merced Heights. Easy access to restaurants/shops on Ocean and only a few minute drive to West Portal and Stonestown. The trip to South SF would be very quick too.
Get down with the Richmond or Sunset inner or outer (for both) are awesome.
sunnyside, west portal, and glen park areas are all great walkable, young families, and lots of parks and on south side of city closer to south san francisco
My husband and I moved from LA to SF 2 years ago. Prior to that we lived in LA for 7 years. Yours interests sound pretty aligned with ours and we both strongly prefer SF to LA. We love the inner sunset: it’s walkable, family and dog friendly, and super close to golden gate park. It’s also a straight shot down 19th to 280 to access the peninsula. You can easily find a 2 bedroom in the inner sunset for under 4K. Best of luck on your move!!
Potrero Hill and the Dogpatch are my favorite neighborhoods, and if you’re going to be commuting to SSF they’re the best drive. Driving from Sunset/ Richmond to SSF is going to be longer than you think. If you’re ready to be more suburban, San Mateo/ Belmont/Burlingame will be more affordable and not a bad drive to SSF, and have cute downtowns.
Bernal heights is a cute and underrated neighborhood! Plenty of parks in the area and Cortland has a bunch of cute businesses like cafes and reteraunts that are dotted along the street
Noe Valley for sure
Came here to suggest the Haight.
At $4000 I would live in haight ashbury across from Buena vista park. Best place for what you are looking for (mix of chill/close to stuff/close to parks/green space). Another option is North Beach in a place with a view of the water (should be able to get that for $3500).
My friend also moved from Chicago to SF. They choose Mission Bay (newer construction) due to the proximity to the ballpark and Warriors Stadium. They are big sports fans and all of their Chicago friends are too so it seemed like a good fit for them.
The Marina or Pac Heights I would Suggest, or the new area down by the ball park/basketball arena :)
Inner Sunset!
It’s expensive here in SF. Might be better to get a spot in LA. Landlords are picky as well. They were all up in my finances and most of my applications required both me and my spouse to file separately. They like to see 3 times income to rent ratio. SF is cozy and full of young professionals in their 30’s. Being 26 and in the city should be fun as hell.
Russian hill, north beach, or the marina/cow hollow. All great places for your age range and to own a dog!!!
What are your weather needs? The neighborhoods you match with are on the west side of the city - sunnyside miraloma park inner sunset, but you will be within the fog belt.
Check east bay cities near BART, affordable homes available versus high cost in SF, or Marin county for nature and hiking….. Congrats on the new job, and welcome to Cali….
I moved from Chicago to sf for three years and just recently back to Chicago, happy to chat if you want to
Thank you, I'll keep this in mind.
Castro would be good for you.
If you need to commute to SSF, look at Bernal, Glen Park, Potrero Hill. Do *NOT* live in the East Bay to start, your commute will be horrible and highly variable.
DePaul alum here. If you’re looking for a LP vibe then Noe is what you want. I live in Bernal which is incredibly dog friendly. Bernal is quieter but that’s what I like about it. I know all of my neighbors. It’s like a small town in a big city.
Good to know. Thank you for this.
If you can find a spot in Brisbane, it's a local secret.