There's a plaaaaace for us...somewhere a plaaaace for us...
January 12, 2015 8:36 AM   Subscribe

My darling SO has requested that we relocate in ~1-1.5 years. The problem is, we don't know where to go (and personally, I have a hard time imagining a better fit than where we are). We haven't done all that much travel, though, so maybe you MeFites know about a city or two that would fit our somewhat contradictory bill.

We currently live in Chicago, but SO has never lived elsewhere and is starting to feel pretty grumpy about this fact...the bitter cold and tons of snow over the past two weeks aren't really helping, either. I'm not crazy about the idea of leaving, but he rightly points out that I might feel differently if there was in fact a cool new city to be excited about, and not just a vague notion.

He needs:
-Low cost of living (no higher than Chicago's, lower would be better)
-No harsh winters. I think one or two snowfalls a year would be tolerable, but no polar vortex shit.
-Decent live music scene. OK if it's kind of fledgling and indie, just...places to see shows.

I need:
-Walkable and/or good transit; I don't drive or bike
-No hot summers (again, occasional heat is fine but it can't be just relentlessly hot forever.)
-Reliable high-speed internet

Apart from that there are a billion wants, but these are the non-negotiables. Right now we both have most of what we want and need, except that I put up with hotter summers than I'd like, and he puts up with colder winters.

About us:
-Mid 30s, not married. Marriage isn't on our radar and kids are 100% off the table.
-Politically we are basically communists and religiously both atheists
-I have a theoretically portable job though I have never tried to port it before.

Places that have been discussed and crossed off by one or both of us:
-Minneapolis
-New York City
-Los Angeles
-Anywhere in Texas

So Mefi, tell me tales of your magical, cheap, walkable cities with super-moderate climates!
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese to Travel & Transportation (85 answers total) 16 users marked this as a favorite
 
I live in Minneapolis and when we fantasize about escaping the ridiculous winters and hot sticky summers, we think about Denver. It's a pretty cool city and fits a lot of your criteria.
posted by padraigin at 8:40 AM on January 12, 2015 [7 favorites]


-Low cost of living (no higher than Chicago's, lower would be better)

Just FYI, often (not always!!) salaries are higher in cities where the cost of living is higher.
posted by Melismata at 8:41 AM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


Seattle/Portland
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:42 AM on January 12, 2015 [14 favorites]


Depending on your exact definitions of harsh winters and hot summers, those simultaneous requirements probably imply Portland or Seattle.
posted by caek at 8:42 AM on January 12, 2015 [7 favorites]


I was going to say Philadelphia (suuuuuper cheap), but then I got to "no hot summers" and cringed. It's the same reason I want to get out of here.

Based purely on reputation, I'd say somewhere in Colorado, or Portland; based on one cost-of-living index I saw, Portland is only slightly worse than Chicago.
posted by supercres at 8:43 AM on January 12, 2015


Response by poster: Oh--a note: the cost of living is critical because with my portable job comes a Chicago salary. I would not be finding a new job (at least hopefully not for many years), just working remotely.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 8:44 AM on January 12, 2015


One thing to keep in mind is that Chicago is probably the nation's most affordable walkable major city in America with decent transit.

Portland is possibly an option, though somewhat more expensive than Chicago.
posted by bright colored sock puppet at 8:47 AM on January 12, 2015 [15 favorites]


Denver is nice, we get cold but in short order the sun warms us back up (high desert).
Austin is also a musical mecca.

But the coasts are temperate in a way you both want.
posted by nickggully at 8:48 AM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


Frankly I don't think that moving is the answer. The older you get the harder it is to find friend groups and networking connections.

If you were in some backwater somewhere, I might feel differently, but Chicago's pretty great and the walkablility and transit are known quantities to you.

I might suggest Atlanta, there are some darn cute neighborhoods here and our weather is moderate, when we're not hunkered down over an inch of snow on the ground. Our transit is meh and our traffic is epic.

I've lived a lot of places and I often wonder if it wouldn't have been better for me to have stayed in one place.

Travel more, get a feel for the kind of places you like. Don't just move to move.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 8:49 AM on January 12, 2015 [17 favorites]


I am a Seattlite who recently moved to Chicago. At times I dislike Chicago for some of the same reasons you do, and I think Seattle would be a good place to look at.
posted by rossination at 8:54 AM on January 12, 2015 [2 favorites]


Does it have to be just one city? Does it have to be in the US? It sounds like your SO's main motivation is wanderlust, so I can see you two maybe being snowbirds--for example, New Orleans in the winter, Seattle in the summer. Or house-sit in Southern European cities in the winter and Northern European cities in the summer. Some people are just naturally nomads and love to live that way indefinitely, but for me, it only took a period of years before I was ready to settle down in one place, and accept how imperfect it would be.
posted by Bentobox Humperdinck at 8:55 AM on January 12, 2015 [4 favorites]


You're obviously looking at the west coast for milder weather, but places like Arizona and New Mexico are out for the super hot summers. I would say Portland or Seattle. I'm not too familiar with Seattle, so I won't speak to that.

Portland is a "hip" city -- it's full of liberal young people who are kind of weird and just do whatever they want, but there's lots of good local food, coffee and beer, and it's rather walkable with good public transit if you live centrally. Cost of living would be about the same as Chicago. You won't get the snow or oppressively hot summers, but you will get drizzle a lot. In fact, people in Portland don't even pull out umbrellas in drizzle because it's so common. Portland is a cool city, but it's not for everyone.

You could look in California, but everything will likely be too expensive. San Francisco, LA, San Diego will all be more expensive than Chicago. Sacramento is probably a similar cost to Chicago, but you aren't getting those big city amenities, including the kind of public transportation it sounds like you need. But if you're willing to just stay in one spot, i.e. Midtown, maybe Sacramento could work. It lacks the cool factor of a Portland or Seattle, or a San Diego or San Francisco, that's for sure.
posted by AppleTurnover at 8:56 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


Is living abroad an option? Brussels, Berlin, and Rotterdam have mild climates and reasonable costs of living without requiring a car.
posted by bright colored sock puppet at 8:59 AM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


Response by poster: To answer your questions:

-Yes, must absolutely be in the U.S.
-Yes, must absolutely be one city. I am still cranky because I've had to move 3 times in 8 years, moving more than once a year would basically cause me to murder everyone.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 8:59 AM on January 12, 2015 [2 favorites]


This is not on your list of priorities, but everywhere I've been (Except like SF and NYC and Toronto (never been to LA)) has a significantly worse food scene than Chicago. Just something to keep in mind.
posted by goethean at 9:02 AM on January 12, 2015 [4 favorites]


Are you looking to rent or buy? I moved to Portland 7 years ago because I couldn't afford to buy a house in Seattle. And every time I think about moving back to Seattle I spend a little time perusing real estate listings and end up staying in Portland because Seattle's housing is just not affordable, especially on a Chicago salary. Definitely if you want to buy, but I gather that renting is getting too expensive too; friends of mine in Ballard just had their rent raised $350 and are being forced to move somewhere they don't like as much because they can't afford to stay where they are. So the people who are saying "Seattle or Portland" maybe don't realize how unaffordable Seattle has gotten. Therefore, Portland. Especially if you already have a job (Portland's job market is not great).
posted by rabbitrabbit at 9:03 AM on January 12, 2015 [8 favorites]


Portland might work for you, but I don't think the transit is all that great. I would at least want a bike there, and you don't bike. And it rains. A lot.

Temperate + good transit + cheap is a hard combo. New Orleans is what first came to my mind for you, but again I would say you'd at least need a bike. It can get pretty hot during the summer, but I don't find it oppressive most of the time. Certainly not like Texas.

I think Boston is relatively temperate for the northeast and they have excellent transit. I haven't looked at housing costs there for quite some time but the good transit opens up a lot more potentially affordable areas.
posted by tealcake at 9:06 AM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


People are recommending Seattle, but it's expensive here, much worse than Chicago.
posted by The corpse in the library at 9:08 AM on January 12, 2015 [6 favorites]


I'd recommend Denver but the cost of living here is going up pretty rapidly. However, salaries are pretty good -- I've worked in Chicago and make comparable here to what I'd make there in a similar job. Lots of childfree types here, and tons of transplants, so it's easy to make friends.
posted by jabes at 9:11 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


Northern Arizona isn't too bad in the summer, and although it gets snow, it's not the bitter awful Midwestern cold that you get in Chicago. Maybe check out Flagstaff?
posted by RogueTech at 9:13 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


Seattle is balls expensive.

Portland is cheap, but its catching up if you want to live in the more desirable parts of the city. Lifelong Portlander here, and I just want to point you over to another post I made about the weather in Portland.

Granted, the summers here are mega mild, and we don't get much winter weather of the sub-zero type….but the winters are dark, pretty long, and…really dark. You have to get acustomed to it…I've seen a Portland winter (and spring, keep in mind…spring stays damn dark and cloudy) take a serious toll on folks not accustomed to it. Some people thrive in it, but others…spend a couple visits in march and april before you commit.
posted by furnace.heart at 9:13 AM on January 12, 2015 [6 favorites]


Boston is much more expensive than Chicago, unfortunately. You can live cheaply in the Boston area, especially if you're telecommuting and don't need to be right in the thick of things, but I'm sure you can live much more cheaply in Chicago.

Omaha? Des Moines? The transit won't be nearly as good as Chicago and I don't think the weather is much better either.
posted by mskyle at 9:14 AM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


Yeah I'd say ATL though we obvs have hot summers. I know folks who don't have cars and get around just fine. Cost of living is insanely low; I want to move to Portland but comparatively speaking I don't think we could ever afford the quality of life we're accustomed to.

Here I make around $50k and own an amazing 2k sq. ft. mid-century house that was $90k. There is incredible food, lots of music, and eeeeeverything is air conditioned. Like, in Portland summers I sweat my ass off worse than here because they aren't prepared.

If you wanna chat, memail me! I am always trying to recruit childfree atheists to be my neighbors!
posted by masquesoporfavor at 9:14 AM on January 12, 2015 [5 favorites]


Nashville.
posted by Bentobox Humperdinck at 9:19 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


Sadly, there aren't any American cities as affordable as Chicago with comparable transit and mild weather. If there were one, I'd be living there and not cursing the sleet here in Boston. You're going to have to compromise on one of those, possibly two.

(For the record, Boston is perhaps a tad milder than Chicago and is liveable without a car, but rent is cuckoobananas. I moved here from Chicago and it's great if you're used to Chicago but need to change things up, but it's far from perfect.)
posted by Metroid Baby at 9:22 AM on January 12, 2015 [7 favorites]


Would you consider Washington DC? Mr. Pterodactyl and I went to school in Chicago and moved here and we really like it. The public transportation's decent and it's super walkable. You'd need to manage carefully to keep your cost-of-living down so you'd have to think carefully about where to live but it might be manageable (it has been for us). The internet is reliable. The winters have some chilly days but not like Chicago and the summers are hot and muggy but not unendurably so and most places have at least window-unit air conditioning which is different than my experience in Chicago. There are lots of free museums, plenty of good food, and a ton of great MeFites which could help in terms of settling in. I don't know anything about live music but someone else might. Worth considering!
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 9:36 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


I don't know the Northeast or Northwest enough to make recs there, but I've lived all over the South. Louisville, KY gets my vote for "most enjoyable Southern city." There are tons of travel questions in Ask of MeFites singing its praises.

Memphis can be fun, but the crime/chaos/city government fuckery is very high. Nashville is a bit less interesting than Memphis in some ways, but with a lot of the uglier wrinkles ironed out. There's a fun hippie/lefty vibe in East Nashville though. And lots of good music. Atlanta and the other big cities further down South get miserable hot. You'd be trading one problematic climate for another. Also: Atlanta is full of people from Atlanta. If hot isn't a deal breaker, maybe look into Savannah which is wonderful.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:42 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


I came to say Nashville, too. Their summers are hot, but on average they are not as bad as you would think (compare Nashville averages to Chicago averages).
posted by AgentRocket at 9:43 AM on January 12, 2015 [2 favorites]


FYI rents went crazy in Denver in the wake of the marijuana thing. One Denverite I know is considering leaving the city because they're being priced out of the neigborhoods they want to live in.
posted by pullayup at 9:48 AM on January 12, 2015 [4 favorites]


Surely it's up to your SO, the one who wants to move, to come up with a great place to go and sell you on it.

Memphis has awful public transit and is hideously, soul-crushingly hot in summer. I (a transplant from NY) like it here, but it doesn't seem to fit your most important standards.

I recommend you visit anyplace you seriously consider.
posted by tomboko at 9:50 AM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


Is your SO's local hireability a factor? You could technically get what you want in just about any small town that's big enough to have a cable provider. The technicality is that you can get walkability and/or afford to live near the primary commercial center, but there will be little to no public transportation. If it was home to a decent-sized university you might get a little public transport.

I'm thinking of places like Bloomington or Lafayette IN, or Chattanooga TN. Or Nashville, as some have said, or maybe the Little Rock area. I know people in each of those places who live happy funky not-quite-hipster type lives without kids - and they can afford great houses, even by themselves or with only one full-time-working person. They've certainly had no problem finding community. I don't think any of them are carless, though.
posted by Lyn Never at 9:51 AM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


Just wanted to chime in and say that even though Austin was suggested upthread, it sounds like it would be well out of both your price and temperature range.

Also, don't forget, "Wherever you go, there you are."
posted by WalkerWestridge at 9:54 AM on January 12, 2015 [2 favorites]


Best answer: Here in Philadelphia, the transit, cost of living, and music/cultural scene is relatively comparable to Chicago. I like visiting Chicago a lot, and feel that it's just different enough from Philadelphia to be an interesting change, while having a comfortable amount of similarity w/r/t expectations.

Each summer here, there's a week or two of grossly hot, humid weather and everyone screams bloody murder and forgets that the entire rest of the summer was pretty moderate. But anywhere on the east coast, the real question about summer weather is your tolerance for humidity more than heat.

Each winter, there's a week here and a week there of bitterly cold weather, and/or a significant snowfall or two, and everyone screams bloody murder and forgets that the rest of the winter was pretty moderate. However, sidewalk/road conditions are often poorly handled/budgeted compared to cities that get more consistent amounts of snowfall each year -- though public transit runs pretty much fine.
posted by desuetude at 9:56 AM on January 12, 2015 [6 favorites]


Temperate + good transit + cheap is a hard combo.

I agree, and I think this is going to be a stumbling block when it comes to relocating. You can probably have two out of the three of "temperate, good transit, cheap." All three together will be hard to find. How much are you (and/or your SO) willing to compromise, and on what? Is your SO going to have to find a local job, or will he be able to work remotely? Because temperate, cheap, great transit AND a thriving local job market is like a pink unicorn, at least in my experience - because that sort of city is on everyone's wish list, so the "cheap" factor rapidly disappears.

Portland might be do-able if your SO can work remotely. The local job market in Portland is terrible - it's been described as a place where the young go to retire - so I'd advise it only if you can both work remotely.
posted by Rosie M. Banks at 9:58 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


Pittsburgh. It's super cheap yet very urban feeling. Decent transit, emerging food and music scene, and a ton of jobs. It really is the perfect big-ish city.
posted by tryniti at 10:03 AM on January 12, 2015 [11 favorites]


While I live in DC and love it here, it has one of the highest costs of living in the nation, so I'm not sure I would recommend it based on your needs specifically. Average rent is around 2x what it is in Chicago. You might like nearby Takoma Park, MD--it's very communist- and atheist-friendly--but our summers are just terrible so be aware of that.

So my recommendations, in addition to the aforementioned Denver, would be Pittsburgh, PA, Louisville, KY, or Asheville, NC. These are college towns and/or cities that are currently undergoing the earlier stages of gentrification, so you'll have your live music and your good internet with the low cost of living that comes from living somewhere that doesn't have the same cachet as your Austins and Portlands. You'll still have cold winters and hot summers, but not like Chicago. Maybe also Blacksburg, VA - definitely a college town and a little more isolated but all of the former VA Tech students I know have very fond memories.
posted by capricorn at 10:05 AM on January 12, 2015


Eugene, Oregon.
posted by bobdow at 10:05 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


Response by poster: Rosie M. Banks [on edit, also Lyn Never]: If we can find a cheap enough location, we can get by on my wages alone. We could theoretically already do this in Chicago, but it would be tight. A cheaper city would let us do so with breathing room, which would be great obvs.

SO's experience is retail sales/management, though, so I would imagine that most locations would eventually yield some work for him--even if it were, say, seasonal, or part-time. He also has plans to start a (super-specialized) thing from home.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 10:06 AM on January 12, 2015


Best answer: I also think Philly could be a good option. It can get hot (not to mention humid) during the summer, though I think not quite as hot as Chicago. Winters would be a lot warmer too, and while we like to rag on SEPTA here, I've found it to be largely reliable and effective in getting me around places. COL is comparable to Chicago's, certainly less than the Pacific NW.

Pittsburgh would also be worth looking at.
posted by black_lizard at 10:12 AM on January 12, 2015


Uprooting your whole life is more painful than most people imagine. Building new networks of friends and connections is hard work too.

If your partner merely wants to experience life somewhere else, and you can work anywhere, why not become snowbirds? Move out of the cold for a few months a year, sublet your Chicago place, try renting somewhere you think you might like. If you really love your winter home, maybe move there for good.
posted by emjaybee at 10:17 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


I love Pittsburgh dearly but did not chime in to suggest it because I suspect that it is not temperate enough for you. And that the transit or walkability may not be good enough - but that is a very specific issue of what neighborhood you live in, so if you decide Pittsburgh whether is tolerable, come back and post another AskMe about what Pittsburgh neighborhoods have decent public transit! But we are cheap, have lots of music and a good arts scene, and if you pick your neighborhood right walkability and transit can be just fine.
posted by Stacey at 10:38 AM on January 12, 2015 [4 favorites]


I'm not sure I'd recommend Sacramento for someone who doesn't drive, but I'll give you some background, just so you have the information.

If you look at Sacramento, you're really looking at the central city - primarily Midtown. You can also live in East Sacramento or Land Park near midtown/downtown and be able to walk to the things you'll need. Be aware that it's a relatively small area. Walkscores in Sacramento's Central City are in the high-90s. Take a look at the walkscore map, and it gives you a good idea how big the central city is. The green area is definitely walkable.

Sacramento's suburbs are all strip malls and wide streets. They have almost completely non-functional public transit and are NOT walkable.

I'll cover your want list one-by-one.

-Low cost of living - Yes. Renting is cheap, but buying in the central city isn't. You can easily rent a nice 1 bedroom apartment in a Victorian, older building or duplex for $1,000 per month. A 2 bedroom house in or near the central city can be rented for $1,500 per month. If you want a new 1 bedroom apartment in a new building, it's more like $1,500-$1,600 per month. Buying central city housing is anywhere from $375 to $500 per square foot, which is decidedly NOT cheap.
-No harsh winters - Yes. There aren't many places in the country with milder winters. It's sunny more often than it rains, and occasionally gets into the 30's F as a low. Highs have been in the 60s all week this week.
-Decent live music scene - No. There are places to see shows for sure, and music somewhere almost every night, but most national touring bands skip Sacramento and go to the Bay Area instead. I've been to a ton of shows here with like 20 other people. San Francisco is an hour and 45 minutes each way on a weeknight. Oakland is about 90 minutes. There is train service, but you'll have to drive if you're coming back late at night.

I need:
-Walkable and/or good transit - Good in the central city. Very bad in the suburbs.
-No hot summers - Sacramento has a reputation for being hot, but it's not really deserved. Average high in July and August is low to mid 90s, but there's almost no humidity, and the central city is covered in large, mature trees. It's almost never above the 70s at night, which means even on the worst days, it's only hot between about 11 AM and 7PM. Average low for the hottest months is 59. You can eat outdoors at night eight months per year.
-Reliable high-speed internet - Yes.

You also mentioned food, and Sacramento has an excellent restaurant scene and an outstanding, year round farmer's market, since a significant portion of the country's food is grown in the central valley.

Davis is nearby and is smaller and has better transit, but is significantly more expensive.

I'd also look at Portland, Denver and maybe Salt Lake City, which is more liberal than you would think. You might also look at more rural college towns in the Western US. Berkeley and parts of Oakland bordering it meet your criteria except for cost.
posted by cnc at 10:46 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


Your "no harsh winters" and "no hot summers" is cutting out large populated regions of the country, so it's a bit difficult. You're basically looking at the Pacific Northwest, parts of California, some Western states, and maybe southern New England.

If a lower cost of living is important to you, I would seriously think long and hard before moving to Seattle--from friends that live there, I know that it's currently exploding with money and getting more and more expensive. The cost of living in Chicago is already ridiculously low for a major city.

I like the Denver suggestions--it's a walkable city with good weather and entertainment options, and they're expanding their transit. It can get hot there in the summer, but it's not humid.

Out-of-left-field suggestion: how about Salt Lake City? It's surprisingly hip, has good transit, the weather is fairly moderate, and it's not majority Mormon so you won't feel out of place.
posted by Automocar at 10:47 AM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


Best answer: I would say Carrboro, NC fits the bill except for the hot summer thing. But it's only like two or three weeks where it gets really hot. Buses that go to all the main spots. Bike paths, walkable town, good music scene, lots of 30-something childless lefty people that are out and about. There's even free wi-fi downtown so you can sit at a bar/in the co-op lawn and work.
posted by greta simone at 10:50 AM on January 12, 2015 [4 favorites]


The Pacific Northwest. More specifically, check out Tacoma, which is between Seattle and Portland on the I-5 corridor.

While the cost of living in Seattle is quite high and the job market in Portland is lousy, Tacoma seems to be the new up-and-coming city in the region (now that the Aroma is gone). I've visited friends there a few time over the past year and have been impressed every time. And the climate is pretty mild, if you don't mind drizzle.

If I were to move back to the Pacific Northwest and proximity to specific family members (who all live farther north) were not an issue, I would seriously consider Tacoma.
posted by Jacqueline at 10:54 AM on January 12, 2015 [2 favorites]


Weirdly, I'm going to suggest Salt Lake City. They get some winter but it's not unbearable, transit is reasonable (but not outstanding), summers are gorgeous and it's a little leftist oasis in the middle of a red state. My gay family members actually kind of loved it there as long as they ignored statewide politics and focused on city stuff.
posted by charmedimsure at 11:04 AM on January 12, 2015


Lots of good city suggestions above, but my suggestion pertains more to the process of all this. It sounds like you're able to telecommute and your partner doesn't have a solid job that he's tied to (and is planning to start working from home anyway). So, I would propose that next fall you guys SUBLET your current apartment and get something furnished in whatever city you choose for 6 months or so, and then reassess. Just take whatever you can pack in a few suitcases and put everything else in storage. I recently made a huge crosscountry move for work, and while there are great things about my new location, it is HARD leaving everything behind, even if there were some things about our old location that weren't 100% perfect. If I had the chance to test the waters in a fairly risk-free way, I would do it in a heartbeat. You guys might find that a solid 6 months of living in another location is AMAZING and you love it, and then you move there permanently. Or you might find that the 6-month move satisfies your partner's travel bug, lets him see another part of the world, and you're ready to return to Chicago. To me, a solid friends network is so much more important than weather. Your case might be totally different! But either way it seems like it makes sense not to put all your eggs in once basket since you don't absolutely have to.
posted by rainbowbrite at 11:06 AM on January 12, 2015 [5 favorites]


nthing others who've come in to say that you should reconsider suggestions of Seattle. I moved to Seattle (from Denver) nearly 5 years ago and am now having to relocate because it's simply too expensive. The biggest reason is rent. You used to be able to find a nice 1 bedroom apartment under $900 -- now you generally can't find a 1 bedroom apartment for less than $1300-$1500. Even tiny (micro) studios, which offered some of the cheapest rent (especially for singles), have gone from $500 to $700-900. That's for a 150 sq ft studio with shared kitchens (ie: dorm style living). Rent has simply skyrocketed here and is increasingly beyond the means of those not in the tech/computer industry. Some slashes to public transit have also made certain parts of the city inaccessible (though I've heard they're bringing some service/routes back after voters approved funding).

Tacoma, as mentioned by Jacqueline, would be a more viable option, though it's definitely catching on as the cheap, artsy place to be if you've been priced out of Seattle. It does seem to have everything you're looking for and is pretty comparable to Chicago prices (based on my brief exploration of CL). IMHO there is an aroma occasionally (from the paper mills in the area), but it has improved a lot over the past few years and therefore may not be a concern for you.
posted by stubbehtail at 11:09 AM on January 12, 2015 [2 favorites]


I'd suggest Nashville, but your transit needs knock that out of the running. Public transit in Nashville is abysmal.

Other "lite south" options could work, but you'd really want to visit first. Check out Research Triangle NC, Charleston SC, Austin TX (note: this is pretty much not Texas), or Washington DC collar counties. Everyone's idea of a "brutally hot summer" is different, and a lot of people think those places have bad summers, but they're not relentlessly hot like New Orleans. If you can handle some hearty cold, Burlington VT might be a good match for you ideologically and far enough away from the Great Lakes to not get the lake effect snow.

One thing to keep in mind is that when it snows or is cold in a "lite south" city, things just shut down. It's not like in Chicago where kids have to go to school as long as it is above zero, and you're expected to get to work no matter what. In DC, everything shuts down with a threat of snow/ice. It's a different lifestyle that makes winters a little more bearable because you're not missing anything.
posted by juniperesque at 11:18 AM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


Pittsburgh. It's super cheap yet very urban feeling. Decent transit, emerging food and music scene, and a ton of jobs. It really is the perfect big-ish city.

No. I lived in Pittsburgh for 10 years and moved to NYC two years ago but maintain close ties to the city. So I have an idea of what life in a real big city is like but also know what Pittsburgh is currently like. I love the city, including the fact that people are so enthusiastic about it that they suggest it for every moving question, but Pittsburgh simply does not fit your criteria:

- The weather is about the same as everywhere else in the Northeast. The winters are cold, the summers are hot. Yes, we get that polar vortex shit.
- Public transit is just atrocious. You must have a car or bike to realistically have a social life in Pittsburgh or get anything done. It does not run 24/7 (or anywhere close), neighborhoods that are only a few miles apart on a map require two buses and several hours, some lines only run once an hour, the system is perpetually underfunded with corresponding service cuts and price increases. Having lived in a big city like Chicago with good public transit, it would be especially hard for you to adjust.
- I can't speak on the music scene expertly. I know of a handful of places to see live music but don't know what you'd consider decent. I just want to note that Pittsburgh is not what I would consider a big-ish city. It is 300,000 people. So even if we have what someone would consider a decent live music scene, you would still need to scale that down to what is considered decent for a city that size.
- I know this was not in your list, but since someone mentioned it: Pittsburgh does not have a ton of jobs. Most people in their late twenties/early thirties I know who left, including myself, left because they could not find a decent job. It's very field dependent, of course, and if you're in health care, you'd be fine.

Things that are true/on your list: It is super cheap, including real estate. We do have have fast Internet here. (I had FIOS, even in a not super trendy neighborhood.) The food scene really is pretty good.
posted by unannihilated at 11:23 AM on January 12, 2015


Best answer: I think you'd be really happy in Asheville, NC. It's a bit hot and muggy in the summers, but extremely affordable, good music scene, good food, walkable.

I don't think you'd be happy in DC at all. It is extremely expensive, for one thing. And the summers are awful--I found it just as uncomfortable as summers in Gainesville, FL (which would be high on my list for you if not for the heat). And it snows occasionally, but the infrastructure sucks for snow so everything shuts down.

I like the suggestion for Burlington, too.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 11:24 AM on January 12, 2015 [2 favorites]


St. Louis, MO would be worth looking into. It checks off almost everything on your list. The winters are rarely bad (and never near as bad as Chicago,) the summers are hot but never like Texas hot (though they are very humid.) Though obviously not as good as Chicago, there's a good music scene with local bands and lots of touring acts. The food scene has been growing the last decade and is now pretty great. If you're into craft beer, it's one of the best cities in the country. The cost-of-living is very low.

The only caveat would be the 'Walkable and/or good transit' thing. It depends on what you consider walkable or good transit - it certainly can't compare to a major city like Chicago, NYC or SF. But I lived there for years without a car (I did bike, though.) The bus system isn't great but there's a few lines that are reliable and it's improving. There's a metro though the system is pretty small. But if you live in the right neighborhood (South City, Maplewood, others) you'll have everything you need in walking distance. I lived in Tower Grove South and I was 5 minutes walking away from dozens of bars and restaurants, a regular grocery store and a badass international grocery, a huge park, a post office, and a major realiable bus line that will take you to the metro where you can go downtown/the airport/what have you.

Plus it's only 5 hours in car to Chicago if you want to head back for a weekend here and there.
posted by saul wright at 11:26 AM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


Something to note (because it's an assumption I made at first) is that since OP does not need to work-commute and has a partner with a car (especially one who may be home part/all of the day as well), actual robust public transportation is not as essential if there are walkable neighborhoods with decent services. So if the city you are suggesting has a part of town with affordable available housing and a shopping center with a grocery store, maybe a coffee shop and a couple of restaurants, OP could probably be very happy and comfortable. Suggestions of those specific kinds of neighborhoods might be especially helpful in the decision-making process.

I work from home and drive my car once a week maybe.
posted by Lyn Never at 11:29 AM on January 12, 2015


You should seriously look at Louisville.

Winters are mostly mild, with fluctuations in both directions of the typical 45ish degrees. The cost of housing is dirt cheap compared to other places. Food and music scenes are excellent. No idea about the reliability of public transit, though I've heard from the few people I know who use it that it has been getting better. And honestly, nothing will compare favorably to Chicago. The neighborhood I live in is exceptionally walkable.

The not-hot summer is the only thing that wouldn't work, but I personally can deal with a hot (90s) July-August in exchange for beautiful autumn weather that usually doesn't get chilly until November.
posted by chaoticgood at 11:31 AM on January 12, 2015


I'm amused by how people discard some of your criteria in answers. I'm living in Burlington. I love it in Burlington. If you don't want cold - don't come to Burlington. I think it isn't as bad as Chicago, but it isn't a lot better. Also, it's orders of magnitude smaller and has lousy transit. I'll suggest it to a lot of folks - but not you.

I do think Pittsburgh is a great "maybe" suggestion. The real question is whether it is temperate enough. I honestly left in part because the winters didn't get cold enough to have what I considered "real snow that sticks around". De gustibus non est disputandum, right?

There are great places for walking and transit, and non-great places. When I lived there I enjoyed taking "weekend drives" because I never had to touch the car otherwise...
posted by meinvt at 11:31 AM on January 12, 2015


Response by poster: Something to note (because it's an assumption I made at first) is that since OP does not need to work-commute and has a partner with a car (especially one who may be home part/all of the day as well), actual robust public transportation is not as essential

No, your assumption was correct, there is no car at all. We both currently get by with walking, buses, and trains. My SO would be willing to consider a place where a car is needed but I am absolutely not.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 11:36 AM on January 12, 2015


I'd recommend Denver on music / culture and walkability grounds. Definitely becoming more expensive to live here, though.

A note of caution: we do catch the edge of the polar vortex. Lots of spring snow. (I recall shoveling 4' of snow from the roof in March of '03 to keep the house from collapsing. Lost some beautiful old trees that year.) Fortunately, what's fallen rarely sticks around long. So it ain't no Minneapolis, but might still be a dealbreaker.
posted by Lycaon_pictus at 11:37 AM on January 12, 2015


Just to be absolutely clear, if you are not willing to have a car, then both Asheville and anywhere in the RTP area in North Carolina are going to be extremely difficult unless you are willing to accept a lot of limitations on the availability of amenities. Otherwise, I'd say the Triangle is the place (depending on your definitely of hot summers). It really sounds like you need a big city, and that's where you bump up against the cost of living issue. This quest sounds a little bit impossible.
posted by hought20 at 11:47 AM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


Oakland meets all your criteria (very mild year-round, easy to live without a car, lots of cultural activities) but rents are rising as people are fleeing San Francisco.

You may also want to compare this list with this list.

However, I'd still echo those who say don't move just for moving's sake. You trade off a lot.
posted by psoas at 12:01 PM on January 12, 2015 [2 favorites]


Sacramento is really hot. Pittsburgh is really cold (and gray).

This might be crazy, but I'd look into the cheaper and more random neighborhoods of Oakland and Portland. Yes, rents can be crazy, but there are very few places one can live without a car. Even if OP lives in a walkable neighborhood, half of their friends will be somewhere completely auto dependent. I can think of a half dozen places where you could get by with minimal car use, but it takes a special place to be happily car-free. Add to that a preference against hot summers and against cold winters. You might consider whether you could get creative and afford the Bay Area.
posted by salvia at 12:13 PM on January 12, 2015


Philly and Baltimore are milder than Chicago for sure - the summers can get sticky though. Decent public transportation and tons of quirky stuff.
posted by chainsofreedom at 12:17 PM on January 12, 2015 [2 favorites]


It is very hard to live in this country without a car. It just really cuts down your options. I don't really drive either, and I've been trying, but outside of NYC, Chicago, maybe Boston or San Fran... my impression hasn't been good. In American cities that claim to have "good public transport" you end up at a lot of bus stops trying to catch busses that only go once an hour, sorta thing. It's not impossible to get around, but once you know someone with a car (and most people will have one), you'll always be asking for a ride instead of taking the long inconvenient bus trip to get there... To me the worst part is I basically feel like I'm on a different plane of the city than most people. Things aren't happening at the "pedestrian" level, for the most part.
posted by mdn at 12:52 PM on January 12, 2015 [10 favorites]


Just think about how stratospheric living costs would be in Chicago if we had our arts, culture, food, music, and public transportation, yet no brutal winters.

This is why you're not going to find a city that fulfills your requirements for the same amount of money.
posted by Juliet Banana at 1:00 PM on January 12, 2015 [14 favorites]


I want to 2nd the idea to remove Pittsburgh from your list. When I was there, I remember every single band that I wanted to go see would skip Pittsburgh because they were also playing in Philly and then going on to Chicago or maybe Cleveland.
posted by jabes at 1:03 PM on January 12, 2015


Another thought: it sounds like your partner BOTH wants you to move away from your entire support structure AND expects you to support him financially for the short term and possibly the long term?? This sounds like a pretty big imbalance to me. I think if he wants to make this work, step 1 is probably figuring out how he can contribute to the financial pot in the new city in a real way. For example, you guys might be able to afford the Bay Area (parts of Oakland, Berkeley, or Albany, perhaps?) if you had two full incomes. That area would certainly fulfill all of your other requirements (and bonus, is an awesome place to live with lots of Midwest transplants like yourself).
posted by rainbowbrite at 1:07 PM on January 12, 2015 [3 favorites]


I worked remotely from midtown Sacramento and loved it, I would happily move back. I had neither a car or bike, though like you my partner drove. I have detailed my love for midtown in previous asks, on my phone but happy to expound if you memail me. I also love Chicago and have lived thereabouts. The thing about the heat in Sacto is that it is DRY heat, which I find infinitely more tolerable than humid (Chicago). Plus, everything is air conditioned.

If your partner has a car and it gets too hot... Bail for SF or North bay for the weekend. :)
Oakland/Berekeley is pretty awesome too, but pricey.
posted by jrobin276 at 1:22 PM on January 12, 2015


You could live like a KING in St. Petersberg Florida or Biloxi MS. A KING I TELL YOU (I have visited those cities and found cool local scenes there outside of the tourist trap nonsense).
posted by Potomac Avenue at 2:10 PM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


Your NO CAR criteria is really a deal breaker for most small cities though. Check out this ranking by walkscore of top transportation systems in the US. Most are in cold cold places. Miami is #5 though!
posted by Potomac Avenue at 2:14 PM on January 12, 2015


Actually some more interesting data on public transport here on 538. Looks like Athens GA and Honolulu could be options as well!
posted by Potomac Avenue at 2:19 PM on January 12, 2015


Another vote for Nashville; you would be miserable in Memphis. Improving transit is a super high priority for the evolving NashvilleNext plan.
posted by mmiddle at 2:31 PM on January 12, 2015


Best answer: Another vote for Philadelphia. Yes, it was hit by the polar vortex, but in the Mid-Atlantic everyone freaked out precisely because it was so abnormal. There are usually only 1-2 snowfalls a year. I've never lived in the city proper, but I know plenty of people who are happily car-free. I'd rate public transit on par with SF, which is to say, you can't get everywhere underground (buses are a necessary evil for certain neighborhoods) but overall it's perfectly workable.
posted by serelliya at 2:44 PM on January 12, 2015


Response by poster: Welp. This was somewhat more discouraging than I had hoped, but it's good to have reality checks. Looks like there might be some hope for Philly, and maybe NC...

My apologies for possibly sounding stubborn and inflexible on the thread; I know we're asking for essentially the moon. But frankly I would be giving up a lot for this move, as many people have noted above, so my non-negotiables are just really, really non-negotiable. (As are his! If he were able to live happily with bad winters, we wouldn't even be asking this question--we'd just be living in, like, Detroit or Madison or Minneapolis already.)
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 2:57 PM on January 12, 2015


A lot of people are crapping on seattle for this, but why not move to a less desirable part of seattle that's still connected in to the transit network, and still has grocery stores and such you can walk to? There's definitely cheaper parts like say, lake city, that are still in town and meet those requirements but just "aren't cool" and still remain comparatively cheap. More in the "before" rent bracket people were mentioning for the Good Old Days than after.

A lot of the core areas, or cute family neighborhoods are getting horribly overpriced(and some are just becoming a flat out ripoff for what you get), but it's not smothering the entire town.

Beacon hill, for example, is still really affordable and also has lots of nice places. And it's a quick bus or walk from the international district if you're on the north end. And you get the bonus of it being one bus away from downtown, and one bus away from capitol hill(which is where everyone pays out the ass to live, and where a lot of the live music and other interesting things are)

I wouldn't write off seattle if it checks most of your other boxes. The rent isn't ALL terrible, it's just terrible if there's a specific area you want/need to live in of it.(many of us are roped in to specific zones by wanting reasonable commutes for both spouses, etc) If you aren't already established here and can take your pick, it can still be totally reasonable. You just have to pick one of the neighborhoods that people don't freak out over.

Also, people crap on the transit here, but it's freaking fine I've ridden the bus everywhere since i was 5. Definitely map out what routes you'd typically need to take to get to/from where you're going, but i really think people overstate how bad it is. Almost every route runs every half hour or 15 unless it's really late or a sunday or something, and you can get essentially anywhere. My only warning would be to avoid places where you need to take more than one bus to get downtown.

As a bonus for my beacon hill or lake city suggestions, if you're teleworking and he wants in on retail management, there's LOTS of retail downtown or on capitol hill, or right in lake city(or downtown, which is one express bus away from there too!) to check in on and apply at.
posted by emptythought at 5:27 PM on January 12, 2015


Regarding the heat index, remember the saying "It's not the heat, it's the humidity." You might find a warmer-but-drier climate preferable to a slightly cooler-but-humid one. I'm from SoCal and I think the (barely) humid days are waay worse than the (very) hot days.

City-Data.com
is a good resource for stats but you should also check out the forums; I've found them to have friendly locals and helpful, current advice.
posted by Room 641-A at 5:57 PM on January 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


With your specific needs (public transportation, culture, food, COLA), you are in the best US city for you. I think you should plan to take regular vacations during the worst of the weather. If you can do even part of your job while out of the office, you might be able to extend your time away by putting in a few work hours every morning wherever you are. Plus, if you can spend weeks at a stretch in different locales, it might scratch his itch to experience living in other places.
posted by Iris Gambol at 7:52 PM on January 12, 2015 [2 favorites]


Having recently moved to Chicago from Philly, I have to disagree with some of the folks up thread. Philadelphia summers were absolutely God-awful miserable, and the winters, though not as cold as Chicago's, are (or were, for the 3 years I lived there) comparably snowy. We paid more than 2x per kilowatt hour of electricity as we do in Chicago, and it was harder to find an apartment in Philly that included any utilities at all. Booze is hard to come by and expensive.

Look at Cincinnati, OH. Mild winters, hot summers (but nowhere as bad as Philly.) Rents are super cheap, there's a good art/music scene, a burgeoning downtown nightlife, and it has a couple walkable neighborhoods. There does exist a bus system -- it is not great but not terrible.
posted by coppermoss at 8:52 PM on January 12, 2015


There's some hope for Philly, but knowing both cities, the public transport situation is going to feel much, much worse to you. I strongly suggest you spend a long weekend or a week there trying to get around before you decide you can live there without a car. Everything from grocery shopping to furnishing your place is going to be intensely difficult there without a car. Perhaps Zipcar and/or occasional rentals will help you out, but you will find the public transportation does much less, much less conveniently and much less frequently than what you're used to.

I agree that the weather is fine, actually really unremarkably moderate expect for those 1-2 weeks in winter and in summer. You would like the weather fine, the music scene fine, the food scene, the people (including childfree mature couples), the walkability. You just won't be able to breeze around as easily.
posted by Miko at 9:22 PM on January 12, 2015


I've lived in Chicago (Hyde Park), DC (Adams Morgan), west suburban Boston as a child and now in Philly (Fairmount). I really do love all of those cities in different ways, and they do all have a different feel and different +/- in each of your categories.

DC's Metro is the best while you are on it, but it may not go to where you need to live to afford to live there. DC also started to feel small to me after 6-7 years.

Chicago was too cold/windy for too long for me (and the summer of '96 is indelibly marked as one of the hottest stretches of time in my life - but we didn't have AC), but I dearly loved it and it was the cheapest.

Boston is worst in most ways (expensive, cold, hot, and something about the personaliyy makes it not my favorite).

Philly is on the cheaper side, SEPTA is doable, see desuetude's spot-on comment about the few weeks in summer/winter that makes us feel sorry for ourselves (especially those that have not lived in Chicago, DC or Boston) and it would stack up pretty well in liberal cred among other cities you might be considering.
posted by Pax at 5:39 AM on January 13, 2015


Something to consider on the car side is whether you are willing to use options like Zipcar and Uber. Our current location would be pretty miserable without those two, mostly because of weather (we're a reasonable walk to transit in good weather but a miserable walk in bad weather or late at night). Cost-wise, we spend way less than it would cost to own a car, but the fact that there are many Zipcars within a 10 minute walk of us + Uber/Lyft with generally a 5-10 minute wait makes it feel much easier to get around and not feel trapped by the lack of car (plus, it has been really important for some medical stuff where we really didn't want to be on public transit + it was not feasible to walk to the hospital). I don't know the stats for different cities in terms of how available different car share/ride share services are, but this might be something to check out and possibly extend your options.
posted by rainbowbrite at 7:06 AM on January 13, 2015 [2 favorites]


As an Atlantan: Hot, humid summers are our main drawback. Temperatures usually hover in the 90-100 range and occasionally bump over into the teens.

Atlanta might fit your bill otherwise. Housing is relatively cheap. Various music venues ranging from arenas to dive bars. High-speed internet is widely available and Google Fiber may be an option in the future. Transit/walkability is decent-to-meh, depending on where you live, but improving. We have a reputation as a car town, though I know people who get along fine without a car and I'm perfectly able to get around with just rail and walking.
posted by fifthpocket at 8:05 AM on January 13, 2015 [1 favorite]


Response by poster: With your specific needs (public transportation, culture, food, COLA), you are in the best US city for you.

Yeah, we definitely know (or at least I definitely know) that Chicago is theoretically the best city for us, and it breaks my heart to think of leaving. But since staying is off the table, well...we were hoping there was a "second-best."
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 8:49 AM on January 13, 2015


Asheville would fit great, weather wise. We have all four seasons, but none of them are extreme. You'd have to be careful about choosing housing, though, because the public transportation is not great. There is a semi-decent bus system, and it just started running on Sundays, but buses run once an hour, and not all that reliably. If you can get close to downtown, there's groceries and amenities in walking distance, or close to Haywood Rd in West Asheville.
posted by rikschell at 8:51 AM on January 13, 2015


I'll resist arguing with other commenters and just note that you can readily look up climate comparisons and public transport maps/schedules for Chicago and Philadelphia.

Beyond technical criteria, it's really an ineffable sort of thing to choose a new city that feels like it could be home, though. Nthing to take a long weekend in a few different cities and give 'em a spin for how they feel to you. When I was looking to relocate, some of the options that made the most sense on paper, that I thought I would love, just didn't sing to me at all when I visited with an eye toward being a resident. (Philadelphia was honestly not particularly on my radar, but when I visited with a friend who was planning to relocate, I wandered around a few neighborhoods ranging from rich to shabby. Before I knew it I had a running list of things I liked about this place a whole lot more than anywhere else, and welp, that was it.)
posted by desuetude at 11:11 AM on January 13, 2015


I'm wondering if cities that have a big university presence might work for you, kind of as an alternative to larger cities, even if they're not perfect in terms of transit. I'm a non-driver who grew up in Chicago and lives in NYC, so take this with a grain of salt, but I spent a summer in Charlottesville, VA and think that could make sense, along with the NC towns mentioned above. Charlottesville can get kind of hot in the summer, but not nearly as bad as further south. Good music, OK bus system, pretty. Not sure if that's the right answer, but more generally I think you might look at places that house somewhat sizable universities, as in my limited experience, they sometimes have more walkability and/or back-up transit that you might be able to make use of even not affiliated with a university (and maybe your SO could find a job there if that was of interest). Like, I haven't been to many of the places on this list, but I've heard nice things about Flagstaff and Athens and Eugene, for instance.
posted by milkweed at 1:49 PM on January 14, 2015


Best answer: I keep revisiting this thread and thinking about this, and it's possible that the previously suggested Carrboro, NC would work. The two biggest draws for you would probably be the music scene (go look at Cat's Cradle and Local 506 to get an idea--both are easy walking distance from Carrboro), and the huge cost of living savings considering you're keeping your Chicago salary.

Transit is good for a small town--the busses are free, and run more often than they do in a lot of smaller places (at least every 30 minutes, and probably more often during some periods).

When I think "walkable," I think "can you get groceries within walking distance?" I don't know if that's the correct criteria--I am not a big city person, though I've tried it twice (LA and Baltimore, and LA isn't exactly the kind of city we're talking). In Carrboro, you can easily live within walking distance of a food co-op and a regular grocery store, along with several restaurants and coffee shops. Just look for a place within walking distance of Weaver Street Market. There's also a good farmer's market within this radius, and various shopping.

With the buses, you can easily get to almost anywhere in Chapel Hill--there's a Trader Joe's within easy busing distance, for instance, and I am pretty sure there are two different libraries easily reached by bus*. It's really just when we talk about going elsewhere in the Triangle area that you'd probably want a car, because taking a bus will be either a huge pain (via Triangle Transit buses) or impossible. If you'd need more than this and you're open to Zip Car, I'd say Carrboro (or Chapel Hill towards Carrboro) is perfect.

I have a friend who's lived in Carrboro and in Chicago. Drop me a message if you want me to ask her anything. I know the Carrboro end, but not so much Chicago.

As for your politics, people around here call it the People's Republic of Carrboro.

*Here I reveal much about what I consider important. :)
posted by hought20 at 7:23 AM on January 15, 2015 [4 favorites]


« Older Networking together multiple computers   |   Heated mattress pad with a timer Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.