U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-05-2016, 06:30 PM
 
14 posts, read 18,732 times
Reputation: 39

Advertisements

I have searched and searched and have not found an exact answer so firstly, I apologize if I missed the answer somewhere in the forums! Secondly, thank you for any help you can offer!

My husband and I currently live in Colorado. We are looking for the right town to settle in and buy a house. We have been hunting (visiting) various towns for the past two years and have yet to find a good match.

Here is what we are looking for:
-If you are familiar with Boulder, CO that city has the vibe we love! It is bikeable, there are so many restaurants, it is clean, it has fabulous access to the outdoors... BUT it is WAY out of our price range. We would need over $750,000 to get a decent house there (i.e. one with a two car garage and maybe granite counters in the kitchen).
-A place where we can get a decent house (two car garage and *fingers crossed* granite counters in the kitchen for under $600K.
-We are extremely active outdoors so we need a town that is close to hiking, camping, and fly fishing spots.
-It would be ideal if the town had 4 seasons! We don't need as much snow as CO provides, but we do not want to go back to 100+ degree days constantly in the summer (we lived in Austin,TX).
-We love to travel so a town that is within 2 hours to an airport would be great.
-I am a teacher so I can work anywhere and my husband works remotely as a computer engineer so the job market is not an issue.
-We want a town that has unique, locally owned restaurants. If chain restaurants are the main source of dining, then we are most likely not interested in the area. We really do not want to live in Suburbia.
-A neutral religious/political scene. We are not active in either of those areas and would rather everyone go about doing their own thing without pressure from one end or the other.
-A walkable downtwon is an added bonus!

We have visited the following towns and they were not right for us for one reason or another: Asheville,NC / Austin, TX / Bend, OR / Ashland, OR / Eugene, OR / Corvallis, OR / Portland, OR / Seattle, WA / Logan, UT / Flagstaff, AZ / Missoula, MT / Bozeman, MT / San Francisco, CA / San Diego, CA / Pretty much every town in Colorado

Again, thank you for any help you can give me in our hunt!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-05-2016, 06:46 PM
 
56,609 posts, read 80,890,793 times
Reputation: 12505
I'd maybe add Burlington VT and Ithaca NY as well. Saratoga Springs/Ballston Spa in NY be sleepers due to fitting a lot of what you want, with close proximity to the Adirondacks and Albany. Saratoga County has been one of the fastest growing counties in NY State too. Fly Fish the Adirondacks > Home

Amherst and Northampton in MA may also work for you.

Last edited by ckhthankgod; 09-05-2016 at 07:13 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2016, 09:35 PM
 
443 posts, read 1,050,455 times
Reputation: 189
Durnham...Nashville..Knoxville...Alabama..Missouri
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2016, 12:18 AM
Status: "could've~would've~should've used 'have', not 'of'" (set 19 days ago)
 
Location: A Yankee in northeast TN
10,483 posts, read 14,316,428 times
Reputation: 23286
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillingTime1102 View Post
We have visited the following towns and they were not right for us for one reason or another: Asheville,NC / Austin, TX / Bend, OR / Ashland, OR / Eugene, OR / Corvallis, OR / Portland, OR / Seattle, WA / Logan, UT / Flagstaff, AZ / Missoula, MT / Bozeman, MT / San Francisco, CA / San Diego, CA / Pretty much every town in Colorado

Again, thank you for any help you can give me in our hunt!!
Since many of those seem like they would fit your needs maybe it would be helpful if you were to state the reasons you felt they weren't right for you after all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2016, 06:48 AM
 
21,188 posts, read 30,366,193 times
Reputation: 19627
Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro NC is a good option that would seemingly fulfill your criteria quite well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2016, 01:10 PM
 
Location: Bellingham, WA
1,090 posts, read 1,070,955 times
Reputation: 1941
Quote:
Originally Posted by DubbleT View Post
Since many of those seem like they would fit your needs maybe it would be helpful if you were to state the reasons you felt they weren't right for you after all.
My thoughts exactly. The locations listed would be the places that I'd suggest, so OP- I'm curious what you didn't like about them.

FWIW I lived outside Asheville and have lived all over CO. I work by remote and my wife and I had a similar criteria for where we wanted to move next. We ended up choosing Bellingham, WA and love it here. It absolutely should be on this list of cities, but somehow manages to fly under the radar- for now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2016, 06:15 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma
6,858 posts, read 6,189,606 times
Reputation: 6140
Boy, that's a nice batch of places to live.

Out of all those places, I think Missoula is the closest to Boulder with the exception that it is not suburban and it is a lot colder in the winter. It's certainly not as upscale but has that same vibe as Boulder without the pretentiousness. I actually think the setting in Missoula is actually prettier than Boulder because it is completely surrounded by mountains. From what I understand Burlington has many of those attributes plus a big lake but I've never been there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2016, 06:20 PM
 
Location: Tempe, AZ
4,552 posts, read 3,640,935 times
Reputation: 3625
Dude if Denver snows too much then you don't even want to THINK about Flagstaff. ~100" of snowfall there every year.

Santa Fe has the same climate and elevation but less snow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2016, 10:19 PM
 
14 posts, read 18,732 times
Reputation: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by DubbleT View Post
Since many of those seem like they would fit your needs maybe it would be helpful if you were to state the reasons you felt they weren't right for you after all.
In the spirit of transparency I will share why those places are not a good fit for us. This will probably make some people angry, but I apologize ahead of time. These are just my opinions based on the visits I made to these locations...

Asheville,NC: Too humid. City felt too big with layout of highways/interstates everywhere that were necessary for travel inside the city.
Austin, TX: Missing the four seasons. Too large of a population.
Bend, OR: There was nothing that stood out about Bend to us in a good way. 3 hours to a major airport felt too remote.
Ashland, OR: Felt way too remote from major airports. We also felt like the general population was a lot older and we wouldn't have a lot in common with the population.
Eugene, OR: Not enough amenities. Not fans of the weather.
Corvallis, OR: Not enough amenities. Not fans of the weather.
Portland, OR: Too large of a population. We are not fans of rain. Didn't match our personalities.
Seattle, WA: Too large of a population. We are not fans of rain.
Logan, UT: Local religion impacts state legislation, which would impact our future kids' education.
Flagstaff, AZ: High home prices. Sand/dirt landscape did not feel like home even though there were pine trees everywhere.
Missoula, MT: We felt like big box stores and chains were at the center of the lifestyle here vs. local like we prefer and that really changes the ambiance/vibe.
Bozeman, MT: Too expensive for the remote location.
San Francisco, CA: Too large of a population. Too expensive.
San Diego, CA: Too large of a population. Missing the 4 seasons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2016, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Tempe, AZ
4,552 posts, read 3,640,935 times
Reputation: 3625
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillingTime1102 View Post
In the spirit of transparency I will share why those places are not a good fit for us. This will probably make some people angry, but I apologize ahead of time. These are just my opinions based on the visits I made to these locations...

Asheville,NC: Too humid. City felt too big with layout of highways/interstates everywhere that were necessary for travel inside the city.
Austin, TX: Missing the four seasons. Too large of a population.
Bend, OR: There was nothing that stood out about Bend to us in a good way. 3 hours to a major airport felt too remote.
Ashland, OR: Felt way too remote from major airports. We also felt like the general population was a lot older and we wouldn't have a lot in common with the population.
Eugene, OR: Not enough amenities. Not fans of the weather.
Corvallis, OR: Not enough amenities. Not fans of the weather.
Portland, OR: Too large of a population. We are not fans of rain. Didn't match our personalities.
Seattle, WA: Too large of a population. We are not fans of rain.
Logan, UT: Local religion impacts state legislation, which would impact our future kids' education.
Flagstaff, AZ: High home prices. Sand/dirt landscape did not feel like home even though there were pine trees everywhere.
Missoula, MT: We felt like big box stores and chains were at the center of the lifestyle here vs. local like we prefer and that really changes the ambiance/vibe.
Bozeman, MT: Too expensive for the remote location.
San Francisco, CA: Too large of a population. Too expensive.
San Diego, CA: Too large of a population. Missing the 4 seasons.
I can only see Boise fitting what you are looking for. You sound like you want another, cheaper Denver (I personally count Boulder as part of Denver overall because they are close enough together) and that really just does not exist. If there were other Denvers it wouldn't be so expensive to live there in the first place. And Boise is getting expensive now but it's not Denver's level. The West is expensive for a reason. Few cities with lots of public land and face it our Western weather is desirable too many because of a lack of humidity. The West is not cheap anymore minus the Desert Southwest which is quickly changing to become expensive and as you have learned now the places in the Southwest with more desirable weather (Flagstaff, Sedona, Santa Fe, ABQ) are actually average or even more expensive COL than the rest of the nation. So there is no other part of the West that needs "discovering" and is still cheap. We are no longer the Frontier that we once were a little over a century ago.

If not Boise then maybe Spokane.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top