Like Swampscott, but somewhere else? (Boston, Worcester: houses, neighborhoods, buy)

[Bostonanza]

Hello all,

We’re a young family of four relocating to Boston this coming spring and looking for a town to plant our roots. We’ve driven around a lot, and of all the places we’ve looked, I love the homes in Swampscott the most. Lots of gorgeous historic homes, square footage over 2000 sq ft on small plots of land, things to do nearby (though I much prefer a quaint downtown over Lynn Shore Dr.), and homes in our budget of 450-550k. Above all I was impressed with how beautifully maintained each property in the Olmstead historic district is... it just seems like a beautiful place to live, and I like the idea of proximity to neighbors, being a stay at home mom myself.

Thing is- Swampscott is a haul from my family in Connecticut, while those communities south and west of Boston are up to an hour shorter drive. I imagine I’ll be headed there three times a month with two kids in the back seat so an hour, or even 30 minutes, makes a big difference.

If anyone knows of any affordable towns elsewhere with population density (small plots) and historic homes like Swampscott, that are well maintained, pleasant, and safe, that we can check out, we’d much appreciate it! One area I liked was Quincy near the water, but schools are not what I’m hoping for.

[ECPCVC]

Live in Swampscott. You can’t really replicate an oceanside town with historic homes in Metrowest. 3 times a month isn’t something to base the town you live on. From your description, it seems your kids are little. Soon they will be watching movies in the backseat and it won’t be a big deal at all. You also won’t be going 3/4 weekends a month because your kids will want to play sports and go to birthday parties and friends houses. Think about the long term. I say this as a person who’s family lives in NY. We used to go there all the time, but my kids are 5 and 7 and between soccer, gymnastics, skating and birthday parties we’re lucky if we get there once every 3/4 months. And I’m very close with my parents and family.

[jayrandom]

I agree. If someone told me I could live somewhere I loved and in exchange I’d have to drive at most six extra hours a month, I’d do it without question.

[missionhill]

Massachusetts Ave historic district in Worcester meets the description. Short haul to CT. Longish ride on the train into Boston, probably comparable to Norwalk or Fairfield into Grand Central.

[gf2020]

Why would you be heading back to Connecticut 3X per month? As your kids get older, your weekends will be consumed with their activities not traveling to see family. Your relatives can come to MA and visit you.

You might want to give Marblehead a good look as well. The property taxes and utilities are lower in Marblehead than Swampscott so you can actually buy a more expensive home but have the same overall monthly costs. Because of Marblehead's larger size, there are more homes to choose from as well.

It's a great area, I have been living on the North Shore for almost 30 years.

[Peabody99]

I agree with the previous posters who are suggesting you live where you love! You have your own family now, live where is best for you and your family. I used to drive to NY a lot, before I was married and had a child. I refuse to go back now (we are busy with our house/family/friends here) to see my mom, she visits us!
Worcester cannot be compared to the NorthShore!

[missionhill]

Originally Posted by Peabody99

Worcester cannot be compared to the NorthShore!

Well no, but the OP is taken with a particular type of development that's very characteristic of late-19th/early 20th century upper middle class suburbs. Olmsted himself evidently planned the subdivision in Swampscott. He is famous for others-- especially Riverside near Chicago, and he laid out a similar subdivision for Worlds End in Hingham which, fortunately for walkers everywhere, never developed beyond building the carriage roads. Most similar neighborhoods west of Boston like Wellesley Hills are far more expensive than what the OP has to spend. Worcester is no suburb but it does have extensive areas on the west side of big, older homes on smaller lots quite like the Olmsted district in Swampscott (but without the Olmsted pedigree--or the ocean!)

[Peabody99]

Originally Posted by missionhill

Well no, but the OP is taken with a particular type of development that's very characteristic of late-19th/early 20th century upper middle class suburbs. Olmsted himself evidently planned the subdivision in Swampscott. He is famous for others-- especially Riverside near Chicago, and he laid out a similar subdivision for Worlds End in Hingham which, fortunately for walkers everywhere, never developed beyond building the carriage roads. Most similar neighborhoods west of Boston like Wellesley Hills are far more expensive than what the OP has to spend. Worcester is no suburb but it does have extensive areas on the west side of big, older homes on smaller lots quite like the Olmsted district in Swampscott (but without the Olmsted pedigree--or the ocean!)

I was thinking the ocean difference, school differences, culture and education level differences, etc. Not just the look of the houses.

[SalamanderSmile]

Swampscott always struck me as Melrose-by-the-sea so I would say Melrose.

Most close-in MA towns can feel similar to Swampscott as there will be an historic cute center and then edges of bi-level 1960s suburbia until it fades into the next town's historic cuteness. So similarly affordable I would say Wakefield, Reading, Stoneham and Beverly, West Medford.

More urban/bigger but with pockets of what you are looking for would be Watertown, Waltham and Canton.

[New Englander]

Originally Posted by SalamanderSmile

Swampscott always struck me as Melrose-by-the-sea so I would say Melrose.

Most close-in MA towns can feel similar to Swampscott as there will be an historic cute center and then edges of bi-level 1960s suburbia until it fades into the next town's historic cuteness. So similarly affordable I would say Wakefield, Reading, Stoneham and Beverly, West Medford.

More urban/bigger but with pockets of what you are looking for would be Watertown, Waltham and Canton.

You have some good advice here, however I have never heard Swampscott compared to Melrose. Melrose is a great town, however the coastal charm is definitely not present there. Melrose has it's own charming downtown -- one that differs from the Swampscott.