Best climbing cities for work, owning a house, and skiing?

Not Not MP Admin wrote:

Now that’s a big city…

Colorado has become one massive city. 

PLEASE stop making these threads

People love these threads.

Dont forget to add a "Good Vibes" column. Give SLC the lowest score for that one

Too bad Mt Lemmon doesn’t get snow like it used to, then your skiing problem would be solved! it was always fun to go up there and ski.    I think it’s the most southerly ski are in the U.S?  I’m not sure how often it opens these days…

Throwaway Civil engineer wrote:

We've entered page 5 of this thread, and no mention of a good town not already on the list. Matthew's Venn diagram is starting to hit home: 

Nobody's spoken much about Spokane or Reno. You guys hiding something up there?

Tim, Ironically I currently live in Tucson. Considering staying here after reading how horrible everybody else's hometowns are in this thread. This is the last true hideout for "middle class civil engineers who climb and bike and have a forcefully-suppressed skiing hobby that never gets fulfilled because it's too hot here in the winter but deal with it anyway because the housing is so cheap and the climbing is so good all the time...oh yeah and there's some jobs I guess"

If I was you, I’d stay in Tucson. The city on your list with cheapest housing is Albuquerque, but even here, a very small house in a decent neighborhood will start in the high $300s. And, although mountain biking around ABQ is world class, climbing in Tucson has much better access. 

I asked chat.openai.com:

falling monkey wrote:

Dont forget to add a "Good Vibes" column. Give SLC the lowest score for that one

Please explain. 

JCM wrote:

In any case, wealthy or not, did you actually work on the Eastside, or did you have your career elsewhere (Bay Area?) then retire on the Eastside.

No one (with any sense at least) would question that the Eastside is an amazing place for climbing and skiing. Of course it is. And many of us would love to live there. But there are big tradeoffs there, and career opportunities are the biggest of those. At least for most fields of employment.

This is a thread about places that have jobs, affordable housing, skiing, and climbing (in that order of priority). Arguing that the Eastside is the spot for these is really leaving out done key info on the jobs and housing challenges there.

I also hope to retire in the Eastside. Maybe fairly early if I play my cards right. But in the meantime I'm living elsewhere to make that money. Many climbers are similar.

in my case it was career in the bay area and a lot of commuting to the eastside, 'living' in both places.  four days bay area:three days eastside (i did that 2-3 times a month for seven years before retirement, much less frequent the decade before that).  yep, it's a shitload of time in a car and it was worth it (to us).

i think many people approach these life choices in a different ways - it's mostly (as in this thread) about 'i/we can't' (insert money, job, housing, inflation, mortgage rates, kids, etc. here) therefore we xyz vs. THIS is where i want to be, so how am i going to make it happen (an approach that worked out well for me).  so, for example, in this thread it's jobs and housing cost (there also seems to be a bias against california, but let's ignore that for now - it's another stupid, endless debate).

my neighbor is an engineer and works remote (there are tons of jobs like that).  he bought his place in the high 200k range (2021) and is fixing it up (yes, he did get an inside sweetheart deal, the house was on the market for 400+K for a short time).  i bought my place in 2013 for 150k (fixed it up and later expanded).  the house across the street sold for 150k (totally trashed), but i didn't have the cash only.  got outbid for a house down the street by $600, it sold for 176k.  i looked for YEARS (while sleeping in a tent or motels), to find a place i could afford, considered buying a lot and going prefab, looked at real estate in the area most days - but i never let go of the vision 'i want to live on the eastside!'  having a vision, a plan, persistence, patience, and making good choices pays off!  

for me, there was never a doubt that i wanted to be on the eastside - not tahoe (like most of my bay area friends), not yosemite west, not sonora, jtree, utah, or colorado.  when you're asking people on MP for recommendations and you could live here or maybe there and this could be good or that could work out, but i can't go here because there are no jobs and i cant' go there because there's no housing, etc., then you're just floating around...

i see kids who come here, soooo psyched to climb and/or ski on the eastside.  they sleep in their vans, scrounge for rooms and apartments, and work in low paying service jobs until they find something better or move on to their next dream destination.  props to these young ladies and gents, they've got their goals and they are making them happen!

anyway, having lived and traveled all over the world, i can only say that the eastside is a great place - heck, the only other places i'd really consider are parts of austria, france, or spain, but that's another chapter...

anyway, ymmv ;-)

Frank Stein wrote:

Except that there is no housing for $400k and under in Denver or anywhere in the Front Range for that matter, it being OP’s key criteria. 

looking at zillow, it looks like there is actually quite a bit of housing sub-400k in the SLC area. people need to have somewhat realistic expectations though...

https://www.abc4.com/news/wasatch-front/salt-lake-city-ranked-in-top-100-cities-worldwide-for-2023/amp/

old5ten wrote:

in my case it was career in the bay area and a lot of commuting to the eastside, 'living' in both places.  four days bay area:three days eastside (i did that 2-3 times a month for seven years before retirement, much less frequent the decade before that).  yep, it's a shitload of time in a car and it was worth it (to us).

i think many people approach these life choices in a different ways - it's mostly (as in this thread) about 'i/we can't' (insert money, job, housing, inflation, mortgage rates, kids, etc. here) therefore we xyz vs. THIS is where i want to be, so how am i going to make it happen (an approach that worked out well for me).  so, for example, in this thread it's jobs and housing cost (there also seems to be a bias against california, but let's ignore that for now - it's another stupid, endless debate).

my neighbor is an engineer and works remote (there are tons of jobs like that).  he bought his place in the high 200k range (2021) and is fixing it up (yes, he did get an inside sweetheart deal, the house was on the market for 400+K for a short time).  i bought my place in 2013 for 150k (fixed it up and later expanded).  the house across the street sold for 150k (totally trashed), but i didn't have the cash only.  got outbid for a house down the street by $600, it sold for 176k.  i looked for YEARS (while sleeping in a tent or motels), to find a place i could afford, considered buying a lot and going prefab, looked at real estate in the area most days - but i never let go of the vision 'i want to live on the eastside!'  having a vision, a plan, persistence, patience, and making good choices pays off!  

for me, there was never a doubt that i wanted to be on the eastside - not tahoe (like most of my bay area friends), not yosemite west, not sonora, jtree, utah, or colorado.  when you're asking people on MP for recommendations and you could live here or maybe there and this could be good or that could work out, but i can't go here because there are no jobs and i cant' go there because there's no housing, etc., then you're just floating around...

i see kids who come here, soooo psyched to climb and/or ski on the eastside.  they sleep in their vans, scrounge for rooms and apartments, and work in low paying service jobs until they find something better or move on to their next dream destination.  props to these young ladies and gents, they've got their goals and they are making them happen!

anyway, having lived and traveled all over the world, i can only say that the eastside is a great place - heck, the only other places i'd really consider are parts of austria, france, or spain, but that's another chapter...

anyway, ymmv ;-)

I’m honestly happy that it worked out for you. However, please note that you bought at the tail end of the housing crisis. It is a vastly different market these days. 

Frank Stein wrote:

I’m honestly happy that it worked out for you. However, please note that you bought at the tail end of the housing crisis. It is a vastly different market these days. 

meh, you can still find places in bishop at the $400k level.

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/136-Edward-St-Bishop-CA-93514/2064282260_zpid/

slim wrote:

slim just did more work than 25 real estate agents combined! 

lol op you call it "quantitative" but each 1-5 score is a qualitative, subjective grade. is a 4 twice as good as 2? quantitative would be something like # routes within 2 hours drive of (lat,long). it's just mush fed into a mush machine leading to the same mushy rankings that were in every other thread before this: https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/120995670/top-10-best-us-large-cities-for-climbing

sage

How *you* rank the factors matters a lot. You may have 2 factors ranked high and the other not high, but just enough  

Case in point Ogden. Houses well under $400k. If skiing means lift served deep powder and the terrain needed to take advantage of it (what I would want) you’ve got 2 great under the radar resorts. I have a friend who bought a place up the hill in Huntsville for the skiing. But if skiing means blue square groomers it exponentially opens up the ski choices.  

I haven’t climbed there but I’ve heard it’s good. Maybe not world class multi pitch but also under the radar (less crowds). It’s about 90k population, is that big enough for these types of jobs? Is it close enough to SLC to commute? So if the job market and world class climbing is more important maybe it wouldn’t work for you  

Another thing to do is think outside the box. Maybe a condo (or just rent which can be a better value) in the city and a cabin in the mountains. That’s my strategy now. Except I have a house I bought in 2010 that I couldn’t afford nowadays and a cabin 1.5 hours away with tons of skiing and climbing nearby.

It’s funny that people get upset by these threads yes there’s a lot of them, but all you have to do is scroll by. But some people would rather click on them, read them, and reply. I’ve seen most of these town suggestions many times but there’s usually a few new ones too. It’s helpful to have input from many people who’ve lived all over. And as I said different factors are weighted differently someone may see a new idea they hadn’t considered that works for their priorities. 

Glowering wrote: 

Case in point Ogden. Houses well under $400k. If skiing means lift served deep powder and the terrain needed to take advantage of it (what I would want) you’ve got 2 great under the radar resorts. I have a friend who bought a place up the hill in Huntsville for the skiing. But if skiing means blue square groomers it exponentially opens up the ski choices.  

I haven’t climbed there but I’ve heard it’s good. Maybe not world class multi pitch but also under the radar (less crowds). It’s about 90k population, is that big enough for these types of jobs? Is it close enough to SLC to commute? So if the job market and world class climbing is more important maybe it wouldn’t work for you  

O-town.  Folks do that commute to SLC.  I spent a short time driving I-15 and its pretty stressful.  Not to mention risk.  Early to avoid the rush hour and finish early if the job allows would make a huge difference.

From Spanish Fork north to Brigham City is really just one big city along the Wasatch Front.  Really hard to discern visually where city starts and another ends.

That said, tons of climbing and skiing near Ogden.  Would be an option.  Mindful of the I-15 commute to be sure.

If $400k is your housing limit, you’re not going to check many of your boxes, and the ones you do check will come with caveats.
I live in Boise now, and may be an OK fit for some with your list of factors, but forget about $400k housing.
We just bought a house in North Carolina, and are making the move this coming summer. We ticked the $400k box no problem, the climbing is as good as any other place so far discussed on this forum, but skiing is off the list. For us, or for my wife at least, being within a 3hr drive of great beaches was prerequisite. So NC became the winner…
I spent my 20’s and 30’s living in Crested Butte, CO, and in Jackson Hole. Best quality of life you can imagine. Not even comparable to the places that are in your list. The only factor that doesn’t give with your criteria is housing price, which is going to be 2x-3x your limit…

So here’s an idea: raise your housing budget limit, find a creative way to afford it, and live in the absolute BEST place you can imagine. Live in Cataluña, live in Vail, live in Jackson Hole. I’ve known hundreds of people that work pretty normal jobs and have found ways to buy homes in 5-star destination towns, and have the best climbing and skiing in their backyard. Just saying , being a middle-class king in Jackson Hole is WAY more fun that being a middle-class king in Albuquerque or Sacramento…

Throwaway Civil engineer wrote:

Howdy folks. Wife and I are making a decision matrix for where to move next. As an engineer, I've got a good handle on making cold-hearted, quantitative decisions. Currently live in Tucson, AZ. Love the climbing and COL (including the cost of the house we bought), but the job market, summers, and lack of skiing here aren't great. Below is the decision matrix so far:

From you folks, I'm looking for more cities to add to the matrix that have great weather, climbing, and skiing, and lots of decent paying civil engineering jobs and cheap houses. 

Thanks everybody

Definitely move to SLC. The Sierra is full. 

JCM wrote:

Lol. Basically "Have you considered being richer?"

It’s not that ridiculous of an idea. I’ve been all over the socio-economic spectrum at different times of my life. I spent many years dirtbagging, and I mean the old-school style, not the #vanlife style. Spent decades renting apartments and houses, either alone or with roommates. Then the last couple decades as a homeowner, and most recently a multiple property owner; primary and vacation homes plus 2 rental homes.

I haven’t really “become richer”, I’ve just figured out how to afford things, and learned how to use debt as a tool.

I suggest you go read “Rich Dad, Poor Dad”. Everyone should give it a read in their 20’s, you might get turned on to some idea that lead you down a different path. I learned late.

Fan Y wrote:

Definitely move to SLC. The Sierra is full. 

Lol....Reno is last on the list, pal.