New York Times Business Day: Affordable Housing Draws Middle Class to Inland Cities

[Ns1]

When I can find an inland city with low(er) cost of living, 70-90' heat 90% of the time, minimal rain, minimal natural disasters, and some sense of a social life, I'll move.

Vegas is almost there...except for the 110' summers and impending drought conditions.

 

[gbeirn]

I did this, although at the time I didn't realize I was doing it. I moved from coastal NJ (basically one giant suburb of NY/Philly) 7 years when I was 25 to Minneapolis/St. Paul. I did it for the relationship I was in at the time. When that didn't work out, I stayed anyway.

I looked at what my life was like and would be like if I went back to the east coast: extreme high cost of living, commuting, traffic etc. Almost everyone I knew from High School graduated college, got jobs not in their chosen career field and moved back in with their parents. That or they lived with multiple roommates just because you couldn't afford anything. Not that there is anything wrong with that but I didn't want to go back to that.

I bought a house in South Minneapolis in 2012 for 135K, it's a beautiful house in a nice quiet neighborhood. Back in NJ something like this would cost easily 2-3X as much plus many added expenses. I work 5 miles from home and anywhere I could possibly want to go is less than 45min away with most much closer to 20min.

My annual driving mileage has been cut easily in half if not more. Minneapolis has hundreds of miles of bike paths/trails. Dozens of lakes right in the city and hundreds of parks.

If I want to get out of the 'city', I just drive an hour in any direction and and I'm in the middle of nowhere, no light pollution and you can actually see the stars.

I thought for a while, even after I bought my house, that I would want to eventually end up back on the east coast but not anymore. I visit often and that is enough for me.

 

[poofyhairguy]

The article has one guy who's moving out of Austin to Oklahoma City, so it isn't just the coastals.

Austin has the same crappy urban planning as many coastal cities.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I'm as guilty as anyone else in this thread, but the conversation seems to have shifted to rural vs. urban from the subject of the article which was people moving from expensive coastal cities to cheaper inland cities.

I think those of us who live in inland cities are just trying to say that there is nothing wrong with the places we live and this article really isn't eye opening for us. Sure, we may not have mountains or oceans (though Lake Michigan is only a couple of hours away in my case), but our cities are relatively clean, generally have low crime (though Indy is experiencing a crime wave right now), and very cheap to live in. I don't blame coastal people for wanting to move inland to places like Columbus, Indy, Nashville, etc. especially if they have families. As I said earlier, I LOVE the San Francisco Bay area and California central coast and nearly moved there but the cost of living increase just isn't justified IMO.

 

[K1052]

Austin has the same crappy urban planning as many coastal cities.

What constitutes "crappy urban planning" ?

 

[sourceninja]

This is like the new popular contrarian view. Detroit is still losing population, 7,500 per year. http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140521/METRO08/305210136

Artists are not just going to suddenly move to Detroit because it has cheap housing. They need to attract them with restaurants and cafes, parks, lofts, shops, and enigmatically, other artists. Philadelphia's population stabilized 15 years ago, and has recently seen substantial growth in young adults. It still has major problems with crime, infrastructure, schools, etc. It also benefits from proximity to NYC and Washington DC. Detroit has none of that. Any kind of turnaround there is at least 20-25 years away, and I don't see what would spur it.

Detroit is prime for IT companies to move in. Cheap land and easy access to power and cooling with a moderate temp. You could build large datacenters all over the place out there, level whole blocks and turn them into server farms.

 

[vi edit]

What constitutes "crappy urban planning" ?

I'm in Lexington, KY and that definitely fits the description. It's a city of 400k people of which 30k of them commute into the center of it daily. There isn't a single express way into or through the city. Closest is an outer ring that's basically a 4 lane, 55MPH that runs around about 70% of the outer edge of town. Access to the interstate is horrible for 75% of the town. And between 5:00PM and 6:30PM most days it's an absolutely gridlocked mess of traffic trying to get to the outer edges of town using nothing but stoplights and 2-4 lane city streets.

 

[Ronstang]

What constitutes "crappy urban planning" ?

Austin does for sure. I've lived there twice and it got worse the nine years I was absent and now I don't even like to go. Road planning is utter crap. Toll roads everywhere. There is absolutely no zoning....one of the things that made sure I left. When I lived there I had a nice little house all to myself on a really nice street and one street over it looked like a war zone of poverty. Since I moved my old neighborhood is not even inhabitable by my standards. Austin was nice until all the loser liberals from around the country moved their after they fucked up where they live.....being too stupid to realize they have and are fucking up a great place with their crap.

 

[Blackjack200]

The article has one guy who's moving out of Austin to Oklahoma City, so it isn't just the coastals. A lot of the better inland cities aren't "cheap" except in comparison to SF/LA/NYC/Seattle etc. The costals are still growing but limited housing supply, speculation, wealth sheltering, and difficulties building more are pushing middle class people out of the cores or the metro entirely.

They used the Austin guy to illustrate the frustration when an inland city becomes enough of a destination that it develops some of the problems of the coastal cities.

I think those of us who live in inland cities are just trying to say that there is nothing wrong with the places we live and this article really isn't eye opening for us. Sure, we may not have mountains or oceans (though Lake Michigan is only a couple of hours away in my case), but our cities are relatively clean, generally have low crime (though Indy is experiencing a crime wave right now), and very cheap to live in. I don't blame coastal people for wanting to move inland to places like Columbus, Indy, Nashville, etc. especially if they have families. As I said earlier, I LOVE the San Francisco Bay area and California central coast and nearly moved there but the cost of living increase just isn't justified IMO.

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I think there are a lot of upsides. The old view of the country as a couple of coasts with flyover country in between is evolving and the growth of those cities is evidence of it.

Detroit is prime for IT companies to move in. Cheap land and easy access to power and cooling with a moderate temp. You could build large datacenters all over the place out there, level whole blocks and turn them into server farms.

And where are you going to get your tech workers from?

 

[Wreckem]

Austin does for sure. I've lived there twice and it got worse the nine years I was absent and now I don't even like to go. Road planning is utter crap. Toll roads everywhere. There is absolutely no zoning....one of the things that made sure I left. When I lived there I had a nice little house all to myself on a really nice street and one street over it looked like a war zone of poverty. Since I moved my old neighborhood is not even inhabitable by my standards. Austin was nice until all the loser liberals from around the country moved their after they fucked up where they live.....being too stupid to realize they have and are fucking up a great place with their crap.

The tolls roads are result of the state of Texas being cheap.

Zoning? Fuck this is Texas. Texas doesn't do much zoning. Look at that mess they call Houston.

 

[Blackjack200]

I'm in Lexington, KY and that definitely fits the description. It's a city of 400k people of which 30k of them commute into the center of it daily. There isn't a single express way into or through the city. Closest is an outer ring that's basically a 4 lane, 55MPH that runs around about 70% of the outer edge of town. Access to the interstate is horrible for 75% of the town. And between 5:00PM and 6:30PM most days it's an absolutely gridlocked mess of traffic trying to get to the outer edges of town using nothing but stoplights and 2-4 lane city streets.

That's one thing worth pointing out. Philly, DC, and NYC all have interstate highways running through them and extensive mass transit infrastructure. While it's true that most of those transportation systems are overloaded, they're substantially more capable than what Oklahoma City has. It will be interesting to see what happens as these inland cities grow.

 

[sourceninja]

.....

And where are you going to get your tech workers from?

Pay people enough and they will go anywhere. I'd happily go to Detroit for another 10-15k

 

[purbeast0]

not a chance i could live in a rural area. but i also would not want to live in the middle of a big city. i love the location that i live now.

- i can drive to 2 different subway stations 5 minutes away and take a train if i want to get into DC.
- i have smaller "bar towns" like 15 minutes away (bethesda, md)
- restaurants galore around here.
- i live 5 minutes away from a lake i fish in regularly.
- i live 20-30 minutes from other lakes/rivers that i like to fish in.
- i'm an hour away from the chesapeake bay if i want to do salt water fishing.
- i'm about 180 miles from a beach so i can drive to the beach.
- i get all 4 seasons around here.
- there are 3 major airports within 40 minutes drive from me and i can get a lot of direct flights to the carribean/tropics to go on vacation.
- tons and tons of high paying jobs around here.
- mountains an hour or so away if i want to go skiing (been over a decade since i've done that)
- all of my wife's and my family are around here, so once we have a kid, we'll be able to have a baby sitter and go on our vacations still

i really don't think i would want to live anywhere else at this point in my life.

 

[Blackjack200]

Pay people enough and they will go anywhere. I'd happily go to Detroit for another 10-15k

That's interesting. I sure as shit wouldn't.

 

[Ns1]

Pay people enough and they will go anywhere. I'd happily go to Detroit for another 10-15k

That'll be enough to cover the emotional trauma from the first carjacking

I'm with blackjack, I wouldn't.

 

[CLite]

I grew up rural and now I live in the top 4 densest population city/town in the country. One day we will go back to rural, maybe when the 2nd is born, but it's perfect now for a young family.

Living like a king is very subjective, some view that as having a mansion with an abundance of ft^2, others have entirely different viewpoints.

 

[sourceninja]

That'll be enough to cover the emotional trauma from the first carjacking

I'm with blackjack, I wouldn't.

I've been to Detroit for work a few times. I've been to Gary, IN for work a few times. While not a great area, and not a place I'd go for a midnight walk, it's not all that bad. Never been attacked in either. I was mugged in Chicago and San Fran though....

Salaries can be very high for cost of living in the area and still stay lower than working on the coasts. As more high paying tech jobs move in, the area would change, prices would rise, the poor will be driven out and the area would improve.

 

[K1052]

Austin does for sure. I've lived there twice and it got worse the nine years I was absent and now I don't even like to go. Road planning is utter crap. Toll roads everywhere. There is absolutely no zoning....one of the things that made sure I left. When I lived there I had a nice little house all to myself on a really nice street and one street over it looked like a war zone of poverty. Since I moved my old neighborhood is not even inhabitable by my standards. Austin was nice until all the loser liberals from around the country moved their after they fucked up where they live.....being too stupid to realize they have and are fucking up a great place with their crap.

Liberals fucked up the city by using what is generally the Texas paradigm for zoning and road projects?

 

[K1052]

I'm in Lexington, KY and that definitely fits the description. It's a city of 400k people of which 30k of them commute into the center of it daily. There isn't a single express way into or through the city. Closest is an outer ring that's basically a 4 lane, 55MPH that runs around about 70% of the outer edge of town. Access to the interstate is horrible for 75% of the town. And between 5:00PM and 6:30PM most days it's an absolutely gridlocked mess of traffic trying to get to the outer edges of town using nothing but stoplights and 2-4 lane city streets.

Urban planning is not limited to ease of commute issues, also I think you'd find very little appetite for ripping a new interstate though the middle of town to make it easier.

 

[Wreckem]

Urban planning is not limited to ease of commute issues, also I think you'd find very little appetite for ripping a new interstate though the middle of town to make it easier.

Many people in Dallas, including high ranking county and city official want to rip out I345 from the heart of down town(it links 45 to 75). The 1.something mile stretch of elevated roadway is at the end of its useful life without hundreds of millions of dollars in repairs. The state says it will cost $2.something billion to tear down and replace with surface streets.

The issue is, the highway is a blight, and it takes up prime real estate in downtown Dallas. The city and county are going to continue to fight for its removal because they would get a shit ton in property taxes once its redeveloped.

 

[Blackjack200]

Many people in Dallas, including high ranking county and city official want to rip out I345 from the heart of down town(it links 45 to 75). The 1.something mile stretch of elevated roadway is at the end of its useful life without hundreds of millions of dollars in repairs. The state says it will cost $2.something billion to tear down and replace with surface streets.

The issue is, the highway is a blight, and it takes up prime real estate in downtown Dallas. The city and county are going to continue to fight for its removal because they would get a shit ton in property taxes once its redeveloped.

Philly has the same problem with I95.

Here's the solution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_big_dig

 

[K1052]

Many people in Dallas, including high ranking county and city official want to rip out I345 from the heart of down town(it links 45 to 75). The 1.something mile stretch of elevated roadway is at the end of its useful life without hundreds of millions of dollars in repairs. The state says it will cost $2.something billion to tear down and replace with surface streets.

The issue is, the highway is a blight, and it takes up prime real estate in downtown Dallas. The city and county are going to continue to fight for its removal because they would get a shit ton in property taxes once its redeveloped.

A lot of cities are considering (or have done) similar things. It's hard to argue with the results in SF after the Embarcadero Freeway came down. Alaskan Way in Seattle is going away. Dallas did that capping project over the Woodall Rodgers. As these pieces of very expensive infrastructure come to the end of their useful lives there is a lot more debate about keeping or demolishing them in the context of improving the city.

 

[Thump553]

Austin does for sure. I've lived there twice and it got worse the nine years I was absent and now I don't even like to go. Road planning is utter crap. Toll roads everywhere. There is absolutely no zoning....one of the things that made sure I left. When I lived there I had a nice little house all to myself on a really nice street and one street over it looked like a war zone of poverty. Since I moved my old neighborhood is not even inhabitable by my standards. Austin was nice until all the loser liberals from around the country moved their after they fucked up where they live.....being too stupid to realize they have and are fucking up a great place with their crap.

What you are complaining about is not the effect of "loser liberals" but rather the implementation of Texas style libertarianism, where zoning is an evil infringement upon your property rights, taxes are evil and things like roads should be private enterprises.

Oh and gbeirn, don't go talking up Minn/St. Paul, that great city will get flooded with immigrants. What you should be saying is that it is colder than the Arctic Circle there.

 

[Muse]

We moved out of IL this spring. Property taxes were horrible, state colleges were insanely expensive (UofI was like $25k a year for in state tuition), and living downstate there really isn't dickall to do. It's 2-3 hours to even get to a city that had more than 200k people. And that doesn't even go into the insanity that was our corrupt ass government.

It doesn't matter who you elect in IL. Democrat, republican, whatever. Crooks through and through.

Lenny Bruce, many decades ago said "Chicago is so corrupt it's thrilling!"

 

[Muse]

I'm as guilty as anyone else in this thread, but the conversation seems to have shifted to rural vs. urban from the subject of the article which was people moving from expensive coastal cities to cheaper inland cities.

I'll say that I have thought it would be really nice to move to a cheaper coastal city. Like Charleston, or NOLA or something. The only thing really keeping me from doing it is my job and the fact that I don't want to move that far from my family. I don't like the idea of living inland though.

Yeah, living inland always turns on a little light in my brain. The most liberal nations (and likely communities) are on the ocean, an idea I encountered many years ago. Staying near the ocean seems a good idea.

In my mind weather is a big factor in where I want to live. I just installed a windows AC in my bedroom, have never lived with AC in my life. I did this a month ago and have used it a total of less than 3 hours. I installed a couple of 200mm computer case fans next to the AC. They use little more than 1% the electricity (6 watts) that the AC uses. Those I use every night to draw in the cool night air. The weather here is really good, is fantastic compared to most everywhere else I could live. Almost never freezes, very rare challenging heat waves, the humidity is nothing like the challenges of the east coast or southern states. No hurricanes, tornadoes, but there is the threat of a disruptive or even devastating earthquake. They are rare, but do happen, and it's best to be prepared for one.

When I can find an inland city with low(er) cost of living, 70-90' heat 90% of the time, minimal rain, minimal natural disasters, and some sense of a social life, I'll move.

Vegas is almost there...except for the 110' summers and impending drought conditions.

Those summers aren't going away, nor the drought problems.