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.
Central California can be pretty butt ugly. I don't think places like Bakersfield, Modesto, Fresno, and Merced are beating out many places in scenery and natural environment.
Ironically some coastal Californians (I lived in the area, long ago) perceive the Central Valley as resembling the Midwest. They would never imagine a place like Madison, where the city wraps around large lakes with abundant green space, one of the largest farmer's markets in the country, virtually zero unemployment and a top research university and lively cultural scene. Not exactly like Bakersfield ...
For sure. Austin approaching DC and Boston levels? You can’t help but laugh at that.
You have to do apple vs apples for housing. The Boston number is mostly little condos in old buildings and an awful lot of those are in lousy neighborhoods. Cost per square foot on condos would be a better metric. A ton of Austin is single family homes and zoned to always be single family homes.
You can take any of the most hated, butt of jokes CA cities and still have-
-Year round warm weather
-Scenery that is beating most of the rest of the country
-Beach and mountain access less than two hours
-Rail connection with frequent departures to major coast cities
Yea seriously. California is California there’s a ton of selling points. Even in some of the worst areas you’re probably getting a SFH with a yard and for a lot of people that’s only a dream.
Oakland LA and Long Beach are stupid. How and why???
Well this is a matter of location, Oakland is way cheaper than it's surroundings.
Here is Oakland vs all of it's immediate neighbors:
Piedmont, CA $2,874,933
Berkeley, CA $1,626,505
San Francisco, CA $1,545,059
Alameda, CA $1,339,047
Oakland, CA $961,248
San Leandro, CA $904,988
And Oakland has a ton of established neighborhoods that lift the overall city average.
Really points to how Chicago and Philadelphia are the best city deals in the US.
I am really surprised that Minneapolis is so low. Unless you're really into a large, dense urban core Minneapolis is clearly a safer, classier, more prosperous place than either Chicago or Philly, so it does make sense that a real estate price point this low would fuel the growth the Twin Cities is experiencing relative to Chicago/Philly.
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.
