Always a small town. I like to have a big house and a semblance of nature available. Although I could do with less right wing neighbours.
Philadelphia has Fairmount park, the largest inner city park (not counting Central Park, which was manufactured). You can live in a house right up against it. I imagine other cities have plenty of nature too. And even not next to giant parks, many larger cities have home with large yards and tons of trees
City, no doubt in my mind.
Being able to walk, bike and take transit instead of having to own a car is important for me. I’m not interested in the additional maintenance involved with owning a house, an apartment suits me a lot better. I also like having good access to plenty of things to do in the form of a great selection of restaurants and being close to international transportation options. Good access to nature without having to drive a car is also important to me.
Sounds like a city that’s not in North America. But OP didn’t specify.
Small town. Cities are high energy. I like visiting but get worn down by the hustle and bustle.
I already live in a huge city and I like it that way.
There is always something happening, and always a way to get there.
I’ve done both, neither, just kill me now. Unless the small town is near a big city, so I can have cheaper housing but also access to more than a dollar general without driving for an hour.
City.
I want to be able to surround myself with a variety of people and cultures, while also being able to surround myself with the community that makes me feel welcome.
Growing up gay in a rural town that was relatively progressive was still a nightmare, and the town’s best feature for me was the commuter train that took me to the closest big city.
I love having access to basically everything relatively easily and I love having a multitude of options for all the things I have access to. Small towns can’t provide that.
I also hate yards, though gardens are nice.
So yeah, for me while I have found some small towns I could make work, I would always be giving up things that I value to do so. Big cities are the best, and smaller cities can be good, too, but I’m a city boy through and through.
Mid-sized stand-alone city. Think 50-200K people.
If I explicitly have to choose between big city or small town, then it comes down to employment options. If that is a non-factor (e.g. remote work) then small town.
For those saying culture or whatever, I’m ok with commuting to a big city once a month or whatever for that stuff. I don’t need cultural attractions for my day-to-day life.
Agreed. You go to a small town and everyone knows your business. Big cities end of up terrible commuting experiences as everything needs a vehicle. Yeah, you get often public transportion, but spend most of the day trying to get anything done as everything gets spread out.
Mid size usually has everything reasonably nearby, public transport and cycling is generally safer/practical.
Size doesn’t really matter to me. Density and accessibility matter to me most.
I would rather live in a community of ~10k that is walkable than a community of 1m+ where I have to drive everywhere. If I can access groceries, dining, and public transportation without ever needing to own a car, I am happy.
I could live in North Bend, Washington, but not Gary, Indiana.
I could live in NYC, but not L.A.
It’s all about girth!
I live 15 minutes outside a small town, 1 hour away from the city.
Love it.
Countryside.
Small town. Less traffic, crime, pollution, expense. More sense of community.
Less walkable / car dependent, further away from medical attention or emergency services, the community is awful
Small towns are typically going to have hospitals within the same distance. The only difference is they will helicopter you to a large city if its a severe medical problem.
Agreed. Emergency services stations are all within minutes from my place in the outskirts of a small town, so is the hospital. The community is awesome.
I’m two minutes away from the best doctors in my country. A rural person is found 30 minutes too late by his neighbor who calls his brother in law before 911
Maybe in some places, but I think most small towns of 10k and larger have normal hospitals and EMS services. All the places I have lived have been within 10 minutes of the hospital.
I dont really see much of a benefit to big cities, its a quick helicopter ride if someone is going to need extreme medical care. As long as there is a Costco, Home Depot, and walmart, I am all set.
This entire question is completely distorted by the poor-qualtiy postwar urbanism that is rampant everywhere.
The reality is, there shouldn’t be much difference. Lowrise cities – 2-4 story buildings/townhomes, small apartments, walkable neighborhoods/mass transit, corner groceries, all that stuff that people think can ONLY exist in big cities should be the norm for nearly all towns.
I don’t think many people would describe a place like, say, Bordeaux as a “big city”. 250kish people in 50 square kilometers is hardly Paris. It’s a small city, or maybe a big town. And it has everything you can want from a city and more. Shows, museums, beautiful multimodal neighborhoods, a robust tram system, restaurants and cafes and bars. All this kind of stuff.
The problem is we’ve all been mentally taught you can either live in island, R1A zoned suburbs which require driving to do ANYTHING or else you need to live in a huge metropolis like NYC. Or else we’ve been trained to think of a “city” like the bullshit they have in Texas, where it combines all the worst features of those island suburbs/car dependence with all the worst parts of city (crazy prices, noise, exposure to nearby-feeling crime, etc).
While a lot of the US big cities are trying to sort out the knots they’ve tied themselves in, your best bet to find beautiful, livable urban-ism is in those much smaller <500k cities that don’t even show up on the typical lists of cities. Especially if they are historic, since the more historic a place is the less likely it got bulldozed in the 60s to make room for more highways (destroying local neighborhoods in the process) Some kind of a big university also tends to be a plus, though it’s a mixed bag. Check for places that do not have an interstate carving through the middle of the city.
We can only get the amenities of modern urbanism in the biggest metropolises these days because of how badly the “suburban experiment” has distorted and destroyed our community life. And there can only be so many metropolises, so they’ve naturally turned absurdly expensive. People can’t afford to live in them because of how much people want to live in them. So they settle for suburbia, since financial poverty feels way worse than poverty of community.
For me the important difference between the two isn’t just a zoning problem, it’s a people problem.
Small towns, like the one I grew up in, even ones that are comparatively progressive, are still a nightmare for anyone who doesn’t fit in with the community norm.
Big cities let people find their community because therefore a lot of different ones to try.
This doesn’t go away with different planning or by fucking cars or whatever the kids are into these days.
The problem is we’ve all been mentally taught you can either live in island, R1A zoned suburbs which require driving to do ANYTHING or else you need to live in a huge metropolis like NYC
I prefer areas zoned for agriculture over either of those. My favorite place I’ve lived so far is one where you look out at night and see nothing but inky black outside my windows. I’ll walk 5 miles to the nearest town for that.
I’ll never argue with someone who wants that true, rural/countryside/homestead life. The appeal is there for me too, even if my own calculus says the cons wildly outweigh the pros.
I’m pretty skeptical you’re going to find it 5 miles from a healthy town, though.
I would walk 500 miles for a clear, dark night sky.
The older I get the more remote I want to live. I just want a good grocery store, a hardware store, doctor and vet in approx 10 min drive distance and I need something to charge my car nearby. That’s all the „city“ I need. Otherwise I want peace and nature around me.
75% of the water pumped out of America’s rock needs treatment for particulate. You’re going to need food municipal water for a while if you’re in America, and that is gonna limit your range from city hall.
Also. Low-density is the worst configuration for housing on a cost/benefits and land-use perspective. We left the 1950s a long time ago, so, no matter where you live we can’t go back to sprawl and low density.
Bad for your water (and other infrastructure) and bad for the planet. Otherwise, enjoy!
If low density is the worst for housing cost-effectiveness, why is living in large cities so much more expensive?
The thing I’ve heard is, think of how when you’re a mile away from each neighbor, it’s your tax dollars paying for the road, sewer, sidewalks, water, electric, gas lines, for a half mile in each direction. Initially and for maintenance and replacements. That’s why a lot of rural areas just don’t have sidewalks or fiber internet or sometimes they’re using well water.
In a city duplex, you’re paying half the utilities for like 20 feet in front of your house.
It just is more efficient to live closer together, the reason cost of living goes up is because everyone wants to live in the city and employers want that supply of workers so they try to get in or close to the city too and it’s a virtuous cycle of concentration. But housing supply being what it is, and all the jobs being nearby, means housing prices go up. Still worth it to most people hence why there’s still demand, but higher than living in a place with fewer jobs and amenities.
Subsidies. Both in form of roads and home ownership incentives being focused on single family homes. The fact that renting is the primary way to live in the city seems detrimental to it being cost effective too.
I find your point about renting compelling, is there anything that could be done to improve the situation?
Housing cooperatives seem good. There have been some successful uses of community land trusts to keep prices in check too.
Better laws surrounding collective loans feels necessary for medium density too high density housing to be bought up by groups tenets. This just an issue at large for community and worker owned coops in my experience. There are some creative crowd funding type bonds out there but its not very responsive and better suited for long term plannings then seizing on need or opportunity.
Lastly there are tenet unions to at least mitigate the rise of rent and unmet obligations by land lords.
City.
Fewer bigots, fewer people in your business, there’s community spaces other than the church, the food is better, and most of all, there’s work to be had.
It is a matter of personal preference, but there is a reason most people are migrating into cities right now.
Edit: I was wrong. While most people were migrating to cities for work, that isn’t necessarily true anymore nationwide. In my state, it is still happening, but we have a large influx of people from other states.
Isn’t that reason return to office policies though, and the majority of people would happily leave the city life behind if they were not forced to go back?
Appreciate you are answering a question and each one of us has their own preference but not sure you can say most people agree with yours.
So I looked it up, and this isn’t true anymore most places.
It used to be, young people flocked to cities both for work and for things to do. It looks to me based on where this is/isn’t happening now that the main factor is cost of living.
I’m confused now, are you saying that the current trend is to move out of cities or to the cities?
Most places, the current trend right now is moving out of cities. In my local area, people are still moving into cities for some reason.
More people are moving from City to Rural now actually.
It’s not a huge trend but it’s surprising nonetheless. Significantly to Extreme COL changes is probably a big reason.
I’ve lived in both, and prefer big cities as long as I’m living in a walkable neighborhood.
