Best value place for someone who wants "city living" (apartments, condos)

[Taggerung]

We all know nothing can beat NYC for "city living," but as the place becomes increasingly unnafordable, what city represents the best "value?" Where can you get the most "city living" for your money? Metros of 2 million + only

[SonnyDaze]

Philly

[Maintainschaos]

If you want legitimate city living, Chicago or Philadelphia.

[aquest1]

Out of all of these and in terms of overall "best value," I would have to say Pittsburgh on the lower end of the scale, and Chicago on the upper end of the size scale. Totally livable, affordable, and wonderful amenities.

[BrianGC]

Philly would get my vote. It's amazing how affordable 1-bedroom apartments and condos are there, and it's very walkable with plenty going for it.

I wouldn't pick any of the sunbelt cities - lots of catch-up in transit needed and too much emphasis on copy-paste suburban sprawl.

[CCrest182]

Chicago and Philly pretty easily. Most other coastal cities are too expensive, and most other non-coastal cities aren't really "big city".

[Mr. Boring]

Why not determine which one of those places is the cheapest? If they're all cities, then the cheapest city offers the most value.

[gladhands]

Pittsburgh is the cheapest city that offers what I consider real city living. Chicago is the best value, as it offers ELITE city living with middle-of-the pack COL.

[march2]

Philadelphia and Chicago, hands down.

[march2]

Originally Posted by Mr. Boring

Why not determine which one of those places is the cheapest? If they're all cities, then the cheapest city offers the most value.

There's a difference between "cheapest" and "best value". Value takes cost into consideration AND all other aspects/qualities the area offers, sort of averages them out. Cost without the qualities can't constitute value.