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.
Depends on what COL is. Eugene, OR might be a good fit
I'd agree with a Eugene (though it's as progressive as Portland). Also, I'd add Bellingham, WA to the list. It's like a smaller, prettier Eugene on the water. If the OP is visiting the region, he should definitely pay it a visit.
Asheville, NC. Warm climate with mild 4 seasons and enough snow without it being overwhelming. Liberal but I don't think its like San Francisco or Portland or anything. There's some beautiful scenery there. Mountains, forests, rivers and creeks. Lots of wildlife like deer and bears.
Leave the built parts of any city/metro, and you are in a pristine natural setting. Whether it is ideal or not will only depend on the types of natural settings you prefer.
Leave the built parts of any city/metro, and you are in a pristine natural setting. Whether it is ideal or not will only depend on the types of natural settings you prefer.
They mentioned they like trees. I don't think the Oklahoma panhandle, no doubt beautiful in its great plains/western aesthetic, will be ideal to a nature lover that likes trees.
They mentioned they like trees. I don't think the Oklahoma panhandle, no doubt beautiful in its great plains/western aesthetic, will be ideal to a nature lover that likes trees.
True. However, the natural areas of cities in the Eastern US will pretty much fulfill the tree requirements the OP wants, from the East Coast west to the eastern areas of states like Oklahoma.
I say in terms of variety in nature than Los Angeles is the king. You have the ocean with great waves, Big Bear for skiing, the nearby desert, etc. not too mention near perfect weather. Los Angeles is also a pretty urban environment. There's a reason LA is so expensive, and it's not JUST because of the ocean or Hollywood. The Bay Area I can imagine doing well here too but there isn't as much variety in nature in Northern California.
I say in terms of variety in nature than Los Angeles is the king. You have the ocean with great waves, Big Bear for skiing, the nearby desert, etc. not too mention near perfect weather. Los Angeles is also a pretty urban environment. There's a reason LA is so expensive, and it's not JUST because of the ocean or Hollywood. The Bay Area I can imagine doing well here too but there isn't as much variety in nature in Northern California.
Los Angeles gets my vote, too. In many neighborhoods you can walk to a wilderness area. Not a park, not a recreation area, but wilderness.
Los Angeles gets my vote, too. In many neighborhoods you can walk to a wilderness area. Not a park, not a recreation area, but wilderness.
Honestly, the same applies for all cities.
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.
