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.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,558,075 times
Reputation: 5785
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmitrybax
We live in Charlotte for 2.5 years (moved from Europe).
Looking for something new:
- not so hot in summer (winters are ok, I'm from Siberia).
- a city with activities (walkable, museums, etc). Charlotte is like a huuuuge suburban where literally nothing to do.
- better kitchen (I'm not a fan of fried chicken, I prefer seafood).
- must be a tech hub.
- East cost only.
We don't need a 700 sq. feet, 10 bd, 25 bathrooms house. Absolutely ok with small townhouses or studio/1 bd for the first time.
I'm a car enthusiast, I can use public transport but I definitely want to have at least one car, just for fun.
I don't want to pay more than $2000 for rent (small studio is ok).
- I work remotely (IT, that's why I need a tech hub).
- Spouse, dog, cat, no kids.
- Income $100k/year.
NY - too expensive rent.
DC - ???
Atlanta - I don't like it, it's like a huge Charlotte.
Philadelphia - not a tech hub at all.
Boston - likely.
Chicago - nice, but what about the crime rate?
Charlotte to Chicago seems like a pretty awkward move, or shall I say unconventional. I just don't see the juxtaposition there between swapping one for the other place.
DC and Boston are similar, but more bang for your buck goes to Washington DC or the immediate suburbs surrounding it. Both DC and Boston are tech hubs, so I guess the question should be more specific of what exact types of tech jobs you're looking for. IMO the 100 sq mi radius of DC gives you no shortage of activities to do compared to the others. Seafood is top notch throughout the DC-Baltimore region, and is just as good in Boston too.
Last edited by the resident09; 11-23-2021 at 08:16 AM..
It's the reverse. Boston has more activities (better sailing, much better shopping, hikingand skiing 10 minutes south of Boston, and multiple beaches IN the city, more neighborhood oriented events on the regualr). DC has better food, mueseums and nightlife. Lived in both.
You could in theory get 2 BR for 2000 in both DC and Boston. In Boston though it'll be in worse areas of the city.
Yes, I'm from Boston but I lived in DC for a summer working on their Hotlanes (HOV) project. When I got out of work on a few of those hot summer afternoons, I tried to find a lake to go for a swim, which I can do here in Boston. There were literally no lakes or ponds in the whole metro DC area to do so.
Charlotte to Chicago seems like a pretty awkward move, or shall I say unconventional. I just don't see the juxtaposition there between swapping one for the other place.
DC and Boston are similar, but more bang for your buck goes to Washington DC or the immediate suburbs surrounding it. Both DC and Boston are tech hubs, so I guess the question should be more specific of what exact types of tech jobs you're looking for. IMO the 100 sq mi radius of DC gives you no shortage of activities to do compared to the others. Seafood is top notch throughout the DC-Baltimore region and is just as good in Boston too.
I guess you haven't read his wants. He wants a real city, Chicago and Boston fit the narrative, Chicago has a lot more going for it than a transient place whose biggest employer is the federal government. Why is it unconventional going from a sleepy suburban like city to a large city and large metro area? Your rental back and forth about "bang for your buck" is irrelevant if they choose a close in suburb to the large city that has it alot going on and proximity to the city.
I have had two opportunities offered to me to relocate to Washington as a lateral from Chicago. Both times I said no. The transient nature of the office and the city makes it a no. Even in the federal government interns start wanting to be close to the core, and tire of it and want to go out to the field if possible. There is a distinct culture divide between the two cities that Chicago wins.
I don’t know that I would say there are tons of high end apartments that are cheaper than what you’d find in Boston/DC. At least pre-pandemic the truly high end/ultra modern apartments in the downtown core (Loop, River North, Streeterville,etc) are pretty darn pricey. Maybe slightly less than DC/Boston, but the average person won’t be saving a lot by moving to Chicago vs DC/Boston for those types of apartments.
Where Chicago shines to comparable cities like Boston/DC is that when you get outside of the core, you can have plenty of affordable options in really cool neighborhoods that are very accessible to downtime. The housing stock is older (although many times nicely renovated inside). But if someone thinks they will find Sunbelt prices for really high end apartments in Chicago, you’d be mistaken. You won’t be saving much for those types of apartments in Chicago vs DC/Boston. Atlanta, Dallas, etc would be better options.
I mean maybe not in River North.. But most any other neighborhood, including south loop, have luxury apartments for a great price vs. a city like Boston or DC. Such a surplus of luxury mid and high rises in Chicago.
Boston's luxury apartments are predominantly found in Seaport, Back Bay, West End, or over the Charles in Cambridge. They're ridiculously expensive.
Boston's luxury apartments are predominantly found in Seaport, Back Bay, West End, or over the Charles in Cambridge. They're ridiculously expensive.
Also Fenway and South End. Worth noting, too, that a lot have also been going up round northern Allston/Brighton, Assembly, Wellington, and Alewife. I think near Revere Beach and parts of Chelsea as well.
I actually took a brief tour of one of them near Wellington. Was about $2500-2600 for a 1 bedroom I think or $2300-2400 for a studio? Too expensive for me, but I make less than the OP.
I mean maybe not in River North.. But most any other neighborhood, including south loop, have luxury apartments for a great price vs. a city like Boston or DC. Such a surplus of luxury mid and high rises in Chicago.
Boston's luxury apartments are predominantly found in Seaport, Back Bay, West End, or over the Charles in Cambridge. They're ridiculously expensive.
Chicago has very good luxury apts for decent rates.
Boston is another beast. Some of the newer builds can be $7-12k for a 2 or 3 bed. Its insane.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,558,075 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justabystander
I guess you haven't read his wants. He wants a real city, Chicago and Boston fit the narrative, Chicago has a lot more going for it than a transient place whose biggest employer is the federal government. Why is it unconventional going from a sleepy suburban like city to a large city and large metro area? Your rental back and forth about "bang for your buck" is irrelevant if they choose a close in suburb to the large city that has it alot going on and proximity to the city.
I have had two opportunities offered to me to relocate to Washington as a lateral from Chicago. Both times I said no. The transient nature of the office and the city makes it a no. Even in the federal government interns start wanting to be close to the core, and tire of it and want to go out to the field if possible. There is a distinct culture divide between the two cities that Chicago wins.
OP mentioned tech jobs not government. DC area has more tech jobs than Chicago. They all offer something different, I just haven't heard of many people moving from a Sunbelt city such as Charlotte moving to a Chicago at least ahead of other cities on the East Coast. I hear of people from DC, Boston, NYC, Philly moving to Chicago for work, but not from the Sunbelt. Tech salaries in Chicago also don't match the other two.
OP mentioned tech jobs not government. DC area has more tech jobs than Chicago. They all offer something different, I just haven't heard of many people moving from a Sunbelt city such as Charlotte moving to a Chicago at least ahead of other cities on the East Coast. I hear of people from DC, Boston, NYC, Philly moving to Chicago for work, but not from the Sunbelt. Tech salaries in Chicago also don't match the other two.
I am an Orange County, CA native. I live in a Chicago suburb full of transfers from the sunbelt. My neighbor is from Dallas. I wouldn't stereotype a metro of almost 10 million full of Fortune 500 companies, top law firms and medical centers.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,558,075 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justabystander
I am an Orange County, CA native. I live in a Chicago suburb full of transfers from the sunbelt. My neighbor is from Dallas. I wouldn't stereotype a metro of almost 10 million full of Fortune 500 companies, top law firms and medical centers.
That's exactly what you did with DC there talking about government. There are more tech jobs in the DC area, and the average pays higher than Chicago. Those are facts, but I digress. The OP will figure this out on his/her own.
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.
