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 would just move to a large city like chicago or philly with great public transportation and live near a train station that way traffic would not affect you much if at all.
Milwaukee actually might be the best fit for this category. It is shockingly under the radar on here for the size and vibrancy of it’s core. It lists as a metro of 1.6 million but is the most compact metro in its echelon. It’s 2million person CSA covers less land area that almost every MSA. It does have some congestion, but every city on mentioned has some form of it.
Places like Grand Rapids, Omaha, and Des Moines are all less sexy. They are all strong midsized cities with growing/diversified economies. They have all be going through building booms in their core and offer surprising levels of activities for their size. The urban mobility institute rates Grand Rapids as the most congested of the three, but when compared to places like Chicago and Philly it’s a commuters paradise.
(It's not under the radar in Chicago...obviously)
Wisconsin's two major cities are a gift from topography. Among US cities, Chicago and Milwaukee alone face out to the open waters of the Great Lakes in an environment that has encouraged that relationship. The dynamics of the two Lake Michigan cities differed greatly from the pair, Cleveland and Buffalo, on Lake Erie...neither of which were able to create the type of lakefronts that Chicago and Milwaukee did.
Thus, I would contend, Chicago and Milwaukee are really the only cities in the US that from their cores look out to totally open waters with only the horizon in the distance in an inviting setting. That setting always has given Chicago its vibrancy, but people miss the fact that Milwaukee has the same kind of asset and uses it well. It would as difficult to imagine and inland Milwaukee as it would an inland Chicago.
The other city, obviously Madison, sits on a narrow isthmus between two good sized lakes (with two others nearby). There is nothing like Milwaukee and its isthmus that actually finds its downtown area on both lakes. In comparison, Seattle does not feel like a city on an isthmus because of its far greater width.
Philadelphia and especially Chicago have living costs much higher than the national average. Philly is in the top 10 for worst traffic and Chicago top 5 if not top 3. Chicago is one of the most visited American cities and gets horrific crowds and long lines. I don't know what the employment situation is like in either City, but they both seem to have a reputation for being business unfriendly.
That is very true and can speak to Philly specifically where I believe something in the neighborhood of 50% of the city residents reverse commute because businesses are alienated from locating within the city limits due to heavy taxation and regulatory issues.
Milwaukee actually might be the best fit for this category. It is shockingly under the radar on here for the size and vibrancy of it’s core. It lists as a metro of 1.6 million but is the most compact metro in its echelon. It’s 2million person CSA covers less land area that almost every MSA. It does have some congestion, but every city on mentioned has some form of it.
Places like Grand Rapids, Omaha, and Des Moines are all less sexy. They are all strong midsized cities with growing/diversified economies. They have all be going through building booms in their core and offer surprising levels of activities for their size. The urban mobility institute rates Grand Rapids as the most congested of the three, but when compared to places like Chicago and Philly it’s a commuters paradise.
How much does COL and harsh weather play into QOL? For me its an issue. I couldn't have a good QOL In a cold climate because Im miserable when its cold or under 32°F . For the people that drive to work everyday during the winter getting stuck in ice/snow , the wind beating your face red, no thanks.
How much does COL and harsh weather play into QOL? For me its an issue. I couldn't have a good QOL In a cold climate because Im miserable when its cold or under 32°F . For the people that drive to work everyday during the winter getting stuck in ice/snow , the wind beating your face red, no thanks.
I can understand this, and in truth I'm getting worn out on the length of the cool/cold season where I live myself. Though I will say the impression you give above, that is also echoed by others to varying degree's is overstated. People (especially in the south) have this image of pretty much every thing north of the Mason/Dixon turning into ice planet Hoth from November to April, where it's a permanent blizzard with 40mph sustained winds and snow so high you can barely see roof tops.
The reality is a bit more muted with freeze/thaw cycles, and often not windy at all. Walking to your car in 28 degree weather with no breeze isn't particularly unbearable, and your face won't get beat red. People who live in these parts know how to plan, and bundle when needed. There are few areas that are really unbearably harsh, you can usually identify them by sparse populations. Also driving in snow isn't particularly difficult. Typically the worst case is that it causes prolonged congestion because everyone slows down for it. The bigger part of that is snow prone areas have armies of well organized snow removal teams that keep roads pretty clear when needed. I understand not liking cold, and clouds, but the truth is the impact on QOL is not nearly as dramatic as it's made out to be. Perhaps even less so than areas with oppressive heat for more than half the year.
Yes. SEPTA is the entire public transit authority, not just subway or trains btw. Most everyone in Philly “lives near septa,” because our coverage is quite comprehensive. I live near commuter rail (and bus), fwiw.
Kansas City comes to mind off the bat for me. Good food as well. I don't recall Charlotte having too bad of traffic but it has been a few years since I've been. Richmond was pretty nice as well. It has less amenities and is one of my least favorite cities in the US but I hear that OKC and Tulsa are both up and coming... But i've only heard it through the grapevine so take that as you will
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.
