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.
Kind of skimmed through the list and criteria, but I too question the methodology that helped them come up with this list. For instance, while the economies in places like Seattle and Boston are strong, the COL is very high thereby making it tougher for "non-tech" workers to live, unless they are in some other high-paying occupation. Portland was in the top 10 and while it is a beautiful city is it really affordable? Home prices are soaring while pay remains fairly low.
It was strange to see Asheville on the list because it has a high COL for a city with a limited job market. Myrtle Beach is also surprising because most of the jobs are service and tourism related. I wouldn't expect to see MB and Asheville on a list that had Huntsville at number 7.
Huntsville is one of the top engineering / science cities in the country with NASA and department of defense having installations there. Reasonable cost of living, commute times, and mild winters.
I would rather live there than rainy Seattle.
Huntsville gets more rain. It's warmer and much, much stormier. You could say Seattle gets a lot of cold drizzle.
Seattle summers are probably the best in the country. You can go outside and do things. Only rarely do we get deathly heat, i.e. 90s. That's one reason our commuters walk, bike, walk to transit, etc., in higher percentages than anywhere south of SF/DC.
People do stuff outside in the south during the summer. The summer also doesn't last forever.
I don't think people who like sunny weather are going to want to live in Seattle. That my original point but you shifted it to a discussion of temperature. I was responding to a person in Seattle who could not understand why anybody would want to live in Huntsville.
People generally drive cars in the south because they like driving cars and it is more convenient and saves time. I would think the higher biking / walking thing in Seattle has more to do with the roads being more congested which motivates some people to stop driving as much.
Last edited by ClemVegas; 04-12-2018 at 11:00 PM..
Walking or biking to work is also about lifestyle. There's nothing easier or more liberating than a ten-minute walk to work, except maybe a five-minute walk.
Some of walking is preference, some is avoidance of traffic, and some is choosing a central location (with higher cost) over car ownership. Personally I'd never live in a city where walking to work wasn't easy and common, with all the characteristics that implies.
Seattle summers are probably the best in the country. You can go outside and do things. Only rarely do we get deathly heat, i.e. 90s. That's one reason our commuters walk, bike, walk to transit, etc., in higher percentages than anywhere south of SF/DC.
Chicago and Boston have undesirable winters, yet they have a high % of non-car commuters. LA and San Diego pretty much have the best climate in the country, yet they have a much lower % of non-car commuters. A lot of it has to do with which era a city boomed in and if there are any geographical constraints to sprawl. For southern cities, they can make walking more bearable by reducing the distance between buildings and providing better shade.
I walk and bike for fun. Doing it for work would make me feel claustrophobic or something. But good for you that make it work.
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.