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.
The US cities that have comparable amenities to Boston in terms of lifestyle would be San Francisco, New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, Washington DC and Philadelphia, IMO. Those 7 cities differ significantly from the rest of the country. So, out of those, as someone mentioned, if slightly warmer is desired, then Philadelphia, or Los Angeles (different and more car heavy though) and San Francisco. However, you may find being in a warmer climate is so desired, that you're willing to forego a warmer city to have the climate change.
Out of the cities you mentioned, culturally and urban-wise, SFO is the only one that remotely compares to Boston, directly, at least on urbanity/culture. I guess I would have to know how much of Boston, you'd be willing to give up otherwise, and what things matter the very most to you, to determine what you'd like about them. For example, Charleston and Savannah COULD work, but both are vastly different from Boston apart from the fact that both have historic architecture, and both are more removed from mountains than Boston is. Same goes for NOLA, cool and historic, but not really so much like Boston.
I think Charleston, South Carolina and Savannah, Georgia suit you just fine. The only two things that you have to keep in mind with these two is that 1) compared to Boston, they don't have a rapid transit system and really there's no need because 2) these are miniature sized cities (compared to a major city like Boston), so you don't have a vast stretch of land to cover on a day to day basis with these cities.
Both Charleston and Savannah maintain the features that you like most about Boston, which is in the well defined culture, the arts, rivers and coastline, city parks and greenspaces, established neighborhoods, adequate shopping, a well educated and well to do populace, and most of all these cities have a mild winter to pretty comfortable winters compared to anywhere in the Northeastern United States (including when compared to most of the places previous posters have been recommending to you).
You get lots of history, culture, walkability, urbanity, and charm out of Savannah and Charleston. They're also probably well polished cities much in the vein of Boston and they have tremendous settings in the South Atlantic.
If you can adjust to not having a rapid transit system and adjust to a smaller/miniature-sized city then you'll adapt to Charleston or Savannah splendidly.
Savannah and Charleston are great (though I've only familiar with the former), but they are way out of scale when compared to Boston. The only thing they share is a nice historical walkable area (though much smaller in extent), the Atlantic seaboard and the English language. The culture is very different, not just in terms of being southern, but in terms of having a pretty small number of international and domestic transplants or the very large educated, eco-conscious population that the OP was asking for (which while they do exist in these places is nowhere near as prevalent). They're also both a very long distance from any kind of skiing outside of cocaine.
Savannah and Charleston are great (though I've only familiar with the former), but they are way out of scale when compared to Boston.
I don't think this thread is meant to be a comparison though. It appears to be a relocation thread, someone wants the superficial attributes they like about Boston but in a different setting that is more conducive to year round warmth.
Besides, for what it is worth, the initial poster that is in the process of relocating themselves inquired about Charleston, S.C. first as a place they are possibly looking into for relocation. That alone denotes that the size difference between Boston and Charleston doesn't have as much of an influence on the initial poster's line of thinking:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jay-moving
How does Charlotte, Asheville, or Charleston, SC compare?
Also, with the sole exception of the San Francisco Bay Area, every other place the OP mentioned is significantly smaller than Boston and nearly all of them are quite different from Boston, more so than Charleston and Savannah are, the list of things you mentioned that Charleston and Savannah have in common with Boston is actually longer than a list of similarities you could draw between Boston and Austin/Denver/San Diego/Raleigh, some of the other places the OP is looking into relocating.
Also, Charleston is the fastest growing metropolitan area in America outside of Austin, Cape Coral-Naples, or Raleigh-Durham at + 14.53% MSA population growth from the year 2010.
All of its growth is attributed to domestic migration (since its not a big immigrant center nor is big enough to where natural increase plays a pivotal role in its current explosive growth).
Charleston, South Carolina's MSA added + 16,552 people from July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016 and 906 is attributed to immigration; 3,710 is attributed to natural increase (births minus deaths); and finally 11,471 is attributed to domestic migration, a LARGE SEGMENT of which stem from Northeastern and Midwestern United States and has been the case for the last 20 years. Same can be said to Savannah at a slightly smaller extent.
I think aside from a location near mountains to go hiking or snowboarding, as the OP mentioned they like to do, the two of Charleston and Savannah fit better for the OP than most other places as they offer everything else the OP asked for and work positively towards the OP's seasonal disorder and want for a more affordable rental location.
The OP mentioned that they have SAD (seasonal disorders) that is triggered by cold climate conditions, so that should automatically rule out everywhere in the Northeast, Midwest, parts of the Interior West, and parts of the Southeast in high elevations where snow and grey clouds during winter months is aplenty. The OP in numerous occasions referenced that cost of living is important when they listed high cost of living as a con for some of the cities they are looking into. That alone rules out the San Francisco Bay Area, the most expensive rental market and housing market in America. It rules out the Pacific Northwestern cities as well, in addition to the Southern Californian cities too.
Then, finally, the OP mentioned how they enjoy the superficial qualities that they have in Boston and they specifically went out to list; 1) neighborhoods; 2) parks; 3) arts; 4) culture; 5) transplants/migrants; 6) eco-friendliness; 7) "edu"; and 8) gardening.
Charleston and Savannah have healthy precipitation, so they get enough rainfall to where it helps you in your gardening since you wont have to do nearly as much (nor will your monthly water bills be nearly as high). Both cities are climatically in a sunnier part of the country and clearly sustain year round warmth better than any points north. Both cities have a well educated population, according to the census bureau the Charleston and Savannah MSAs are both over 93% high school completion rate and both are over 34% college educated with at least a bachelors degree which is in line with most of the other "smart" cities and is actually ahead of some of the suggestions others have presented in the thread. Due to their formation during the colonial era, both cities have a defined sense of place and definitive culture that sets them apart from other cities in their broader region and all of America for that matter. This same attribute also is a plus point for both cities with regard to neighborhoods and parks, since their neighborhoods have an early inception during a period when cities were built more on a human scale and the parks were planned to better integrate into a pedestrian zone in the neighborhoods that surround the park. Both cities have adequate art offerings as well, you wont mistake either for an art mecca but they not only have the galleries but also stores and museums to view or purchase the stuff.
Don't know about eco-friendliness, although that wouldn't really matter in this case. Since you mentioned scale initially, scale does work in their favor here. Since they are small and not yet sprawling wildebeasts, their impact on the environment is minimized due to less sprawl and pollution, and these are pretty green cities so the air is constantly filtered out. Don't know beyond that, but I would doubt eco-friendliness is a pressing concern with regard to either city.
I'm not big into Charleston and Savannah for myself, because scale is relevant to me whereas they aren't for the OP of this thread, but I cant help but notice how great of a fit they would be for the OP for almost everything they are looking for with the sole exception being mountains where they can snowboard and hike. For that, while it is suboptimal, they can just make the drive to ski resorts in mountain ranges of North Carolina to get what they want. It's not like it is moving heaven and Earth type of distance.
Hi-- Mid-twenties professional here looking to move to a warmer city.
I am beginning to look for new jobs, and thinking this may be my opportunity to move to a new city. Is there a comparable city to Boston that's a bit warmer / people have liked?
Way more details:
I have lived in Boston for 4 years, and absolutely love the city itself (culture, arts, eco-minded, edu, neighborhoods, parks, etc) -- but the winter is too long/cold for me (seasonal depression). I bundle up and get outside/hike the whites and snowboard, but it's still too cold/long a drive for my preference. Wish New England had June-Sept weather all the time! (Though I'm sure many of you would disagree!)
I love the outdoors (biking, hiking, gardening), and would love to do these activities year round (with less than a couple hour drive (i.e., to the whites)). Most of my friends are in Boston, but I do know some people in cities listed below. Family is in CNY/FL -- not interested in living in these places.
I've been thinking of Denver, Austin, Raleigh, Oakland...any gems I'm missing? (Nashville? NOLA? Seattle? ..Not into DC.)
Anything to add/comment on my pros/cons of the below cities?
1. DENVER Pros: sunny, 2 hrs to amazing mtns, young/transplants/chill vibes, affordable rent. Cons: also 2 hr drive to mtns, cold winters, flat/barren land around city.
How do boulder, ft collins, co springs, etc compare -- is it hard to be young/not know ppl in these cities? (never visited these places)
2. AUSTIN Pros: culture/art/music, young/transplants, warm, river, affordable. Cons: too far from mtns/hiking? know the least # people here. (never visited)
How does San Antonio compare? (Family in SA, that's why I would only consider Austin or SA.. Not DFW, Houston.)
3. R/D, NC Pros: warmer, cool scene/arts. Cons: driving between the research triangle. too southern vibes? too small?
How does Charlotte, Asheville, or Charleston, SC compare?
4. OAKLAND / SF BAY Pros: sunny, love all sf bay (culture/arts/young/many transplants/eco), oakland's warmer/sf temperate, greens/parks/hikes nearby. Cons: so expensive to live/rent, even oakland/berkeley. temperate/not hot. awesome mtns still a hike to get to.
OP, your list is good and I'm assuming you're not moving on a college student/ starving artist budget (which many of these "help me move" threads are all about), so I think it's fair to include "expensive" cities like the Bay Area. You didn't specify a budget nor did you specify a career field (which could change things drastically if one area is better for your field). So I'm going just on "young professional:"
I'd lean towards SF/OAK if you can swing the cost of living. That's the toughest trade off there. There's really nowhere within reasonable proximity to SF that you can live affordably. While Boston is expensive, there are at least pockets where it's reasonable and still decent (i.e. Worcester, Lowell, Haverhill, Quincy- though that's shot up in price, and even pockets of Lynn and Salem). One of the toughest things for anyone on a budget is maintaining any sort of standard of living when moving to the Bay Area. It's either a fortune and you pay it, or it's a complete dump (and still really expensive). But if you can swing it, it's much more comfortable year round (if clouds and rain dampen your style, skip the Outer Richmond and the Sunset as they have the most fog/overcast weather). As you said, Oakland may be better. But it checks off all of the buckets otherwise. Worth noting that while the Sierra's are a decent distance, they're infinitely better than the Whites, and the hills closer to the city (i.e. Mt. Tam, Muir Woods, Marin Headlands, etc.) offer far better hiking that what you'd find near Boston (like Blue Hills). So I'd still give it the edge on that front.
I'd also consider Philadelphia or Baltimore if "a little warmer" is enough for you (seriously, spring starts about a month earlier- none of this late March or April blizzard stuff). Philadelphia is a bigger, more gentrified city than Baltimore, but Baltimore offers great value. I don't think the Poconos match the Whites (DEFINITELY not for skiing), but they'll do.
Denver wins for access to the Mountains (definitely less than 2 hours to much more rugged terrain). It's also more comfortable in the winter. I think people assume it's just as cold as Boston, but it isn't. Wild weather out there though (snow one day, 65-70 degrees the next).
I'd also look at Seattle and PDX. Definitely warmer than Boston, and not quite as bad with the overcast as people make them out to be. Much more of an outdoorsy culture. Go big and look at Vancouver (BC) too if you're feeling a little international.
I'd pass on Austin. Cool town, great food, nightlife, etc. However, while the hills are pretty, you're about 7+ hours from any real mountains. I like visiting Austin. I would never live there. I agree with others about the summers being unbearable.
I'd also pass on Raleigh/Durham. None of the cities in the research triangle are going to come even close to making up for a fraction of what's great about urban Boston (the architecture, walkability, transit/pedestrian friendly neighborhoods, etc.). And while much of NC is beautiful, you're still more than 4 hours from the real mountains of North Carolina which still aren't nearly as rugged the Whites or anything you'll find out west (though they are beautiful). R/D is great for a lot of people (my family down there loves it), but for someone who loves everything about Boston "except the winter," I don't think R/D is a good alternative. MAYBE Asheville, but I still wouldn't do that (too small/isolated).
Lot of my family moved from Boston and NY to Atlanta and love it but I do not know if it what you are looking for. Atlanta is a great corporate city you can get high paying jobs like Boston and NY but the cost of living is much lower.
We moved from the South End to Richmond Va and don't miss Boston at all. Richmond is a great substitute. Basically like Austin was in the 90s.
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.
