What do you think is the minimum size a typical city needs to be to have everything you need? (neighborhood, schools)

[LittleDolphin]

lol. My town's under 5,000 and has everything I need. I could even live here w/o a car if I wanted. Could walk or ride my bike to everything (groceries, library, hardware store, garden center, doctor, dentist, vet, several discount stores, thrift shops, ABC store, etc.)

The next town, about five miles away, has all the big box stores if I need them.

And whatever else I need is easily found under my fingers on the computer keyboard.

I used to live in a large metro area but find my small town much easier to access my needs.

[Prickly Pear]

Smallest place I ever lived in Tucson, and that was too small. Economy was too poor.



I have only ever lived in multi-million plus metros and that's the only way I will do it.

[Guineas]

Probably about 4-5 million metro area with city propers under 1 million.

Cities like Seattle and Boston are my sweet spot while still being manageable. High quality local restaurants and businesses, nice walkable neighborhoods, good medical care (with level 1 trauma, pediatric specialists, and cancer care readily available), major universities in the city for activities and exposure for kids, concerts and pro sports venues, museums and large urban parks for the family, and less than 30 minutes to an international airport with lots of nonstop domestic flights. That last point is really important. These cities are also big enough that if you lose your job or want to climb the corporate ladder, you don't have to relocate to find another job. They are also small enough that not everything is spread apart like in LA or DFW and you can still get around easily on surface roads.

People on here who think they just need a Walmart, a few diners and a family doc/dentist haven't really thought this through.

[nadnerb]

I would need a good quality farmer’s market, local grocers, concert venues, at least one independent movie theater, good city parks, and an international airport no more than an hour away. I work remotely so I don’t care about job market, and I don’t have kids so child-related amenities don’t matter to me. My current town (Olympia, WA) has all of this. There are many other towns of this size (50k) that do too, but obviously there are many more that don’t.

Access to good restaurants is more of a want than a need, and it varies widely from place to place. Portland’s food scene was outstanding and I knew that anywhere else in the PNW would be a downgrade in this regard (except maybe Vancouver BC). I’m alright with an okay food scene because it forces me to cook more.

[Joakim3]

If we are talking about basic essentials & commodities? 50-100k is a good threshold

Having lived on literally both ends of the size spectrum (Tokyo vs. Meridian, MS), once you start getting over the ~2 million MSA mark certain "big city" amenities start becoming standard (professional sports teams, major airports, zoo's, concert/entertainment venues, etc..) and it becomes a matter of how much quantity one wants rather than quality.

[Aelius]

Originally Posted by Guineas

Probably about 4-5 million metro area with city propers under 1 million.

Cities like Seattle and Boston are my sweet spot while still being manageable. High quality local restaurants and businesses, nice walkable neighborhoods, good medical care (with level 1 trauma, pediatric specialists, and cancer care readily available), major universities in the city for activities and exposure for kids, concerts and pro sports venues, museums and large urban parks for the family, and less than 30 minutes to an international airport with lots of nonstop domestic flights. That last point is really important. These cities are also big enough that if you lose your job or want to climb the corporate ladder, you don't have to relocate to find another job. They are also small enough that not everything is spread apart like in LA or DFW and you can still get around easily on surface roads.

People on here who think they just need a Walmart, a few diners and a family doc/dentist haven't really thought this through.

Is it not possible that they have thought it through and simply want fewer things in their community than you do?

To use some of your examples, I personally don't care about restaurants, walkable neighborhoods, major universities, concerts, pro sports venues, museums, large urban parks, or nearby major airports. Indeed, some of those things I dislike having nearby.

[Mutiny77]

For me, I'd say a metro of roughly 750K.

[Losfrisco]

Living in a small city outside of a metro area, IMO, was a nightmare.

-inadequate medical/health services

-"good old boy" politics

-people who would be invisible in a big city acting like celebrities

-bars/restaurants that wouldn't last a week in business in a major city heralded as "the best"

-"where else are you gonna go to get this" general attitude in services

-on a special diet? Good luck finding what you need.

Even living in a 3 million metro has its limitations. What if you decide on a career change one day? Hope your city supports it, or else you have to move.

Bigger is always better, the benefits far outweigh the perceived stressors of big city life.

[mjlo]

Originally Posted by Prickly Pear

Smallest place I ever lived in Tucson, and that was too small. Economy was too poor.



I have only ever lived in multi-million plus metros and that's the only way I will do it.

In fairness Tucson's economy lags even its similarly sized peers. I'm not sure Tucson's economy is indicative of it's size, so much as it is of Tucson itself.

[elchevere]

Multi million—hub airport, all 4 pro sports leagues, good and diverse restaurants, good nightlife, good cultural events (arts, music, etc and not passed over), good shopping, walkable living areas, etc.