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.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say the Boston suburbs are more expensive than the NYC
I looked on Zillow. You can find apartments for under <$1400 a month in decent areas within 45 mins driving distance of Boston. They may be small and not very luxurious, but at least you can find them.
In NJ, you'd be lucky to get an apartment next to a crackhouse in the 4th ward Paterson NJ for $1500 a month.
I looked on Zillow. You can find apartments for under <$1400 a month in decent areas within 45 mins driving distance of Boston. They may be small and not very luxurious, but at least you can find them.
In NJ, you'd be lucky to get an apartment next to a crackhouse in the 4th ward Paterson NJ for $1500 a month.
Yeah, I don't buy that there exists any real difference. It's apples and oranges. Although 45 min driving distance to Boston, likely means 90 minutes during work hours. And the commuter is far less extensive.
While most data suggests Greater Boston is more expensive than the NYC Metro, the data generally looks at median values and list price(s).
But effective tax rates in MA are quite a bit less than NY/NJ. So, at least as it relates to housing, I'd think this at least offsets any difference in purchase/rental prices.
While similar SFH styles, Burlington MA is far more manicured.
That really isn't true. Have you been to Burlington?
Burlington is pretty ho hum, in my book. Very standard post-WWII suburbia, especially compared to the many more historic towns in Eastern MA, with plenty of strip/commercial/office development. It's affluent, but not notably so.
COL/income ratio is very similar in both KoP and Burlington.
There are most definitely suburbs in the further reaches of Philly (and NYC and Boston) that will have new developments, and that have largely been developed starting in the 90s. But not with the same type of infil/commercial development to match. That is what you'll struggle to find.
You know what area you'd love? Some of the outer ring suburbs of Chicago.. Somewhere like Naperville would be right in your wheelhouse. Too bad it's not remotely close to the Northeast!
Yea. I visited Chicago and loved it! You’re right it checks every box except it’s not in the northeast. That’s the only thing missing. Well the taxes are outrageous.
If there weren’t geographic constraints, Portland would be my spot haha
I pointed out the very clear differences in residential feel, based on te OPs preference of shiny and new. You said it was bordering on misinformation. Once again, specifically Ashburn vs. KoP, one exclusively grew in the 2000s to the tune of 40k people. The other was largely built prior to 1990.
I can do other streetviews? Here are a few, simply dropped the pin.
I also said OP would struggle to find the same type of modern suburbia and edge cities in NYC, and Boston. I don't think that's anything other than true.
If I were projecting my preference, I would tell OP to live in Bethesda, or Ardmore, or Wayne, or Scarsdale, or Tarrytown, or Wellesley, or Lexington. That's what I would do. Because I have no interest in living in places like Ashburn. But I'm not the OP.
Actually i would consider Rockville and north Bethesda for sure. Bethesda is probably beyond what I want to spend but I love that town
Of the 3 city/suburbs mentioned, Philly wins... Philadelphia burbs are affordable, diverse, spacious and well-connected with the large SEPTA Regional Rail network on the PA side. Philly area housing is much cheaper than NYC's; the main driver in so many Manhattan workers moving to metro-Philly and training into NYC for work. I believe Philly is also cheaper, generally than Boston.
I would also add the English country village feel of suburban Philly, with 2 lane roads, cottages, historic, old-style Inns, pottery villages, and miles and miles of farms and unspoiled woodlands is an added bonus.
I would also add the English country village feel of suburban Philly, with 2 lane roads, cottages, historic, old-style Inns, pottery villages, and miles and miles of farms and unspoiled woodlands is an added bonus.
Agreed.
To be fair, metro NYC and the Boston area have a coastal charm vibe that isn't replicated in the Philly area. But the bucolic countryside vibe of the Western and Northern Philly 'burbs is very distinctive (not just speaking of pleasant leafy roads, which are common in Northeast suburbia, but a combination of Piedmont topography, with horse farms and more actual working farms that give you many more open vistas of the landscape).
That really isn't true. Have you been to Burlington?
Burlington is pretty ho hum, in my book. Very standard post-WWII suburbia, especially compared to the many more historic towns in Eastern MA, with plenty of strip/commercial/office development. It's affluent, but not notably so.
Agreed.
It's very standard, northeast post WWII development. You could very easily be in any Metro, from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia to NYC to Boston. I always much preferred neighboring towns like Reading, or Wakefield, with their more active towns centers and more consistent growth patterns over many centuries/decades.
When I was growing up, not so far from Burlington, it was considered a blue collar, hard working, not dissimilar to neighboring Billerica. Of course, it had its share of 1970s tech development, and the mall. But that was just about it, from the outsiders perspective. It was until the 2000s that it saw an influx of middle-upper class families looking for reasonable access to city or 95 for work.
To be fair, metro NYC and the Boston area have a coastal charm vibe that isn't replicated in the Philly area. But the bucolic countryside vibe of the Western and Northern Philly 'burbs is very distinctive (not just speaking of pleasant leafy roads, which are common in Northeast suburbia, but a combination of Piedmont topography, with horse farms and more actual working farms that give you many more open vistas of the landscape).
I'm bias as I grew up there, but I always used to bring outsiders to Concord, Carlisle, Lincoln for this very reason. The rolling hills, farms, large estates, waterways. In my opinion, if we're talking Metro Boston (non ocean), it is the nicest stretch of Massachusetts to explore with the exception of maybe the Boxford-Topsfield area (which to me, is a step down). I suppose the Harvard-Stowe-Groton area fits the bill, too, though it's far more forested and hilly. I do love the orchards that way, though.
I gather Philadelphia has this in more/larger pockets, with more use of stone and brick. I've only ever spent time along the main line, but would love to explore deeper and wider.
Actually i would consider Rockville and north Bethesda for sure. Bethesda is probably beyond what I want to spend but I love that town
Well if you like Bethesda, Philadelphia has somethin' for ya!
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.
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.
