![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
to dream the impossible dream....
Dec. 15th, 2009 08:19 amMy father (63) is mostly retired at this point. He and his wife are in the process of updating their house, decluttering, and thinking about moving to their retirement location. (She's only 50, but works as a crossing guard, so her career is not a factor; their kids are out of the house.) Family is mostly in New England or Ohio.
This is the list of things my father wants in a retirement location:
-temperate weather - not too hot in summers, not too cold in winters. I gather some snow is acceptable, but not Maine/upper New England levels of snow.
-small city, a college town would be ideal.
-not below the Mason-Dixon line.
-in a politically liberal location.
-preferably a place that is neither growing (exurban McMansion developments are a bad thing) or declining (i.e. not South Dakota).
-less expensive than where they live now, which is a wealthy area of Cincinnati. (My father is well off, but very cheap.)
He recently checked out Asheville and decided it was too expensive, he didn't like the way the highways went through the city, and he hated the exurban development. (It was already a fail on the Mason-Dixon line factor, and also possibly the snow issue.)
I just can't imagine a place that would actually meet his requirements. Anyplace with great weather, a thriving cultural scene, and progressive, is going to be overrun with OTHER people who want to live there, meaning it's expensive and has development issues. I mean, look at Portland, OR. In the age of the internet and "great places to retire" magazine features, there are no hidden gems.
This is the list of things my father wants in a retirement location:
-temperate weather - not too hot in summers, not too cold in winters. I gather some snow is acceptable, but not Maine/upper New England levels of snow.
-small city, a college town would be ideal.
-not below the Mason-Dixon line.
-in a politically liberal location.
-preferably a place that is neither growing (exurban McMansion developments are a bad thing) or declining (i.e. not South Dakota).
-less expensive than where they live now, which is a wealthy area of Cincinnati. (My father is well off, but very cheap.)
He recently checked out Asheville and decided it was too expensive, he didn't like the way the highways went through the city, and he hated the exurban development. (It was already a fail on the Mason-Dixon line factor, and also possibly the snow issue.)
I just can't imagine a place that would actually meet his requirements. Anyplace with great weather, a thriving cultural scene, and progressive, is going to be overrun with OTHER people who want to live there, meaning it's expensive and has development issues. I mean, look at Portland, OR. In the age of the internet and "great places to retire" magazine features, there are no hidden gems.
