Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, I've brought up many of your points on this board and people refuse to believe there are nicer places -- better weather, less traffic, not as dense and rundown, and not as expensive. I really think people don't travel enough within the U.S. I am OK with this area mostly because I like my job but if I lose the job or decide to do something else, I'll definitely be looking to move.
I don't agree with this. Lots of people agree. But most US cities aren't better than this. I can think of a lot of resort towns I'd rather be living in, with there being something to do. But as far as major metro areas are concerned, most are pretty much the same song outside of Manhattan.
Better cities: Boston, Chicago, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, Seattle. Also, Portland (both Maine and Oregon), Columbus.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, I've brought up many of your points on this board and people refuse to believe there are nicer places -- better weather, less traffic, not as dense and rundown, and not as expensive. I really think people don't travel enough within the U.S. I am OK with this area mostly because I like my job but if I lose the job or decide to do something else, I'll definitely be looking to move.
I don't agree with this. Lots of people agree. But most US cities aren't better than this. I can think of a lot of resort towns I'd rather be living in, with there being something to do. But as far as major metro areas are concerned, most are pretty much the same song outside of Manhattan.
Better cities: Boston, Chicago, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, Seattle. Also, Portland (both Maine and Oregon), Columbus.
Agree with this list, though Boston, Chicago, and Columbus are tough in winter. Would also add San Diego and Denver. I know less about Research Triangle and Austin, but they may be possibilities.
You don’t move West for quaint architecture and old world charm
Denver and Austin? You gotta be kidding. The only redeeming feature of Denver is mountain range view at the distance, the city itself is rather blah and flat. Never been to Austin and had no desire to looking at the photos and hearing about the weather. Isn’t it like 5 months of the weather everyone here freaks out about during 2 months of DC summer?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, I've brought up many of your points on this board and people refuse to believe there are nicer places -- better weather, less traffic, not as dense and rundown, and not as expensive. I really think people don't travel enough within the U.S. I am OK with this area mostly because I like my job but if I lose the job or decide to do something else, I'll definitely be looking to move.
I don't agree with this. Lots of people agree. But most US cities aren't better than this. I can think of a lot of resort towns I'd rather be living in, with there being something to do. But as far as major metro areas are concerned, most are pretty much the same song outside of Manhattan.
ITA. [b] American suburbia outside of major metro areas is pretty much the same with the climate or some aspects of building architecture being the only diff. The same fugly strip malls everywhere and power lines too.[/] There are a few cute town centers (I call them “leisure towns”) in every affluent residential cluster mainly catering to weekend crowd or tourists that are maintained to look quaint to draw people to spend time/money there and get away from the ugliness of everyday errands and job commutes. Unfortunately a lot of these town centers are not for practical everyday living having shortage of businesses people actually need for routine errands. It’s because of car centric lifestyle. PP is on point that the only places you can find practically located businesses on the urban grid is in the major cities dense residential areas. Everything else is built to be accessible by car around vast parking areas and fast roads.
Check out DC proper, it’s very different. And power lines are buried.
Not so in New England, NY, NJ, Chicago.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, I've brought up many of your points on this board and people refuse to believe there are nicer places -- better weather, less traffic, not as dense and rundown, and not as expensive. I really think people don't travel enough within the U.S. I am OK with this area mostly because I like my job but if I lose the job or decide to do something else, I'll definitely be looking to move.
I don't agree with this. Lots of people agree. But most US cities aren't better than this. I can think of a lot of resort towns I'd rather be living in, with there being something to do. But as far as major metro areas are concerned, most are pretty much the same song outside of Manhattan.
Better cities: Boston, Chicago, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, Seattle. Also, Portland (both Maine and Oregon), Columbus.
Anonymous wrote:DC lacks culture. Too many transplants, too professional oriented. No good sports scene, food scene, or true arts scene. For fashion, the city scores a 0/10. People are buttoned up and pretty nerdy.
Food scene has been improving and honestly isn’t terrible anymore compared to any other major city. There is Kennedy Center, there are local theaters, tons of museums and major colleges. IDK what you are talking about. It’s not NYC in terms of fashion for sure, but that’s also because it’s not nearly as dense. Fewer people make for more boring fashions. Anonymous wrote:OP, I've brought up many of your points on this board and people refuse to believe there are nicer places -- better weather, less traffic, not as dense and rundown, and not as expensive. I really think people don't travel enough within the U.S. I am OK with this area mostly because I like my job but if I lose the job or decide to do something else, I'll definitely be looking to move.
Anonymous wrote:I’ve been here 20 years and the utility lines still bother me, but I’ve accepted that this will never change. It is prohibitively expensive to bury power lines.
And another poster was right, the timeline of the housing also did not lend itself well to attractive architecture, with the amount of housing built in the 50s/60s inside the Beltway.
And yet, I’ll take that over tract housing in Phoenix.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, I've brought up many of your points on this board and people refuse to believe there are nicer places -- better weather, less traffic, not as dense and rundown, and not as expensive. I really think people don't travel enough within the U.S. I am OK with this area mostly because I like my job but if I lose the job or decide to do something else, I'll definitely be looking to move.
I don't agree with this. Lots of people agree. But most US cities aren't better than this. I can think of a lot of resort towns I'd rather be living in, with there being something to do. But as far as major metro areas are concerned, most are pretty much the same song outside of Manhattan.
ITA. [b] American suburbia outside of major metro areas is pretty much the same with the climate or some aspects of building architecture being the only diff. The same fugly strip malls everywhere and power lines too.[/] There are a few cute town centers (I call them “leisure towns”) in every affluent residential cluster mainly catering to weekend crowd or tourists that are maintained to look quaint to draw people to spend time/money there and get away from the ugliness of everyday errands and job commutes. Unfortunately a lot of these town centers are not for practical everyday living having shortage of businesses people actually need for routine errands. It’s because of car centric lifestyle. PP is on point that the only places you can find practically located businesses on the urban grid is in the major cities dense residential areas. Everything else is built to be accessible by car around vast parking areas and fast roads.
Check out DC proper, it’s very different. And power lines are buried.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, I've brought up many of your points on this board and people refuse to believe there are nicer places -- better weather, less traffic, not as dense and rundown, and not as expensive. I really think people don't travel enough within the U.S. I am OK with this area mostly because I like my job but if I lose the job or decide to do something else, I'll definitely be looking to move.
I don't agree with this. Lots of people agree. But most US cities aren't better than this. I can think of a lot of resort towns I'd rather be living in, with there being something to do. But as far as major metro areas are concerned, most are pretty much the same song outside of Manhattan.
Anonymous wrote:OP, I've brought up many of your points on this board and people refuse to believe there are nicer places -- better weather, less traffic, not as dense and rundown, and not as expensive. I really think people don't travel enough within the U.S. I am OK with this area mostly because I like my job but if I lose the job or decide to do something else, I'll definitely be looking to move.
Anonymous wrote:There are gorgeous parks and playgrounds all over the place. There are amazing activities and events for families and kids. The museums, events, and shopping are so easy to get to. The shows, concerts, and games are an easy drive and so many venues to choose from. The roads have grassy islands with actual flowers planted in them! There’s so much growth and construction going on. Op, check out the Rust Belt, then come back.