4 ms·

> I'm confident you could find that same situation or better so long as you looked at medium size and smaller cities Are you certain? In my experience, there r

> I'm confident you could find that same situation or better so long as you looked at medium size and smaller cities Are you certain? In my experience, there really isn't an "affordable medium size city" in the US. There are affordable suburbs of medium sized cities. There are affordable suburbs that technically lie within the cities legal boundary lines, and are so-called 'urban' (by legal/taxable status only). But if "city" is being used as a measure of minimum density (and not a line on a map) then there is no such thing as an "affordable for families" large or medium-sized city in the US. Any urban area developed enough to have an average building height of 5 stories or higher is unafforable to the vast majority of US families. This remains true even in the so-called "low cost of living" mid-sized cities.

rsync 8y ago
"Are you certain? In my experience, there really isn't an "affordable medium size city" in the US." Minneapolis. A very, very rich urban environment (there are two cities there, after all) and cultural scene. Is currently, very affordable - even in the most desirable neighborhoods. Denver also fit this bill up until 3-4 years ago.
- phil21 8y ago
  I don't consider Minneapolis much of a city - more like a giant suburb with some nice bike paths. I grew up on the Northside. Same for the few times visiting Denver. You're gonna be driving if you want to have a social life. You simply cannot compare it to a similar sized European city, or to any of the "big city" style US cities on the East coast. For this exact reason I split my time between Minneapolis and Chicago and plan to move to Chicago as soon as possible full time. The lifestyles are not remotely comparable.
- maxsilver 8y ago
  Minneapolis is exactly what I was thinking of when I said, "there are affordable suburbs that technically lie within the cities legal boundary lines" and are therefore called 'city' but are actually suburbs. Lyndale, Cocoran, Harrison, and many other examples, are actually suburban but they are technically within the legal/tax boundaries of Minneapolis and get called 'urban', when they are not. Minneapolis is a cool place, this is not an slight to the city or it's residents in any way. But Minneapolis is almost entirely suburban, and the parts of Minneapolis / St Paul that are actually urban (where "urban" means more than 75% of the buildings are 4+ stories), those parts are not affordable to families.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 8y ago
    I would have argued that you're making a "no true Scotsman" argument until I remembered something. I used to have a house in a great neighborhood in southwest Minneapolis. I had a girlfriend who came to my house frequently for almost a year before she realized I actually lived within the Minneapolis city limits, and not in a suburb. Honestly, I think it's a shame to limit the definition of "city" so stringently. Why can't a quiet neighborhood with tree-lined streets and kids playing outside be considered a part of the city and not a "suburb within a city?" But whatever, I still think of it as the best city I've ever lived in and although I still work here, I miss living in it sometimes.
  - ameister14 8y ago
    Cincinnati is similar in composition but affordable in the city part. Whether you actually WANT to live there, though...

rsync 8y ago

"Are you certain? In my experience, there really isn't an "affordable medium size city" in the US." Minneapolis. A very, very rich urban environment (there are two cities there, after all) and cultural scene. Is currently, very affordable - even in the most desirable neighborhoods. Denver also fit this bill up until 3-4 years ago.

phil21 8y ago
I don't consider Minneapolis much of a city - more like a giant suburb with some nice bike paths. I grew up on the Northside. Same for the few times visiting Denver. You're gonna be driving if you want to have a social life. You simply cannot compare it to a similar sized European city, or to any of the "big city" style US cities on the East coast. For this exact reason I split my time between Minneapolis and Chicago and plan to move to Chicago as soon as possible full time. The lifestyles are not remotely comparable.
maxsilver 8y ago
Minneapolis is exactly what I was thinking of when I said, "there are affordable suburbs that technically lie within the cities legal boundary lines" and are therefore called 'city' but are actually suburbs. Lyndale, Cocoran, Harrison, and many other examples, are actually suburban but they are technically within the legal/tax boundaries of Minneapolis and get called 'urban', when they are not. Minneapolis is a cool place, this is not an slight to the city or it's residents in any way. But Minneapolis is almost entirely suburban, and the parts of Minneapolis / St Paul that are actually urban (where "urban" means more than 75% of the buildings are 4+ stories), those parts are not affordable to families.
- HeyLaughingBoy 8y ago
  I would have argued that you're making a "no true Scotsman" argument until I remembered something. I used to have a house in a great neighborhood in southwest Minneapolis. I had a girlfriend who came to my house frequently for almost a year before she realized I actually lived within the Minneapolis city limits, and not in a suburb. Honestly, I think it's a shame to limit the definition of "city" so stringently. Why can't a quiet neighborhood with tree-lined streets and kids playing outside be considered a part of the city and not a "suburb within a city?" But whatever, I still think of it as the best city I've ever lived in and although I still work here, I miss living in it sometimes.
- ameister14 8y ago
  Cincinnati is similar in composition but affordable in the city part. Whether you actually WANT to live there, though...