I think people have covered the requirement of a lack of population to truly appreciate the scenery but that raises the question of why they are underpopulated. Most of the time it is because they aren’t near a port or good farmland, and it never took a lot of people to extract mineral wealth, and why not build factories where the people already are? These days the same thing goes for farmland which is why the flatter grain-growing areas have low or negative population growth.
And the lack of farmland goes hand in hand with rugged terrain, so rugged terrain, which is associated with being a nicer looking place, is correlated with lack of farmland which is correlated with underpopulation.
This is a major reason my wife and I are targeting Coeur D’alene for our retirement home. It’s close to Spokane so you get all the medical facilities and travel options while being far enough away to get the beauty of a small town.
The fact that an area is scenic may be due to the lower population. But I’m not sure that has stopped developers in the past from exploiting desirable areas, as seen on both coasts.
The fact jobs, medical facilities, city culture and big stores are less available is certainly a factor, but hardly an insurmountable one. That depends on the person, of course. I mean, if they can build Las Vegas…
The lack of demand for an extensive project may be a problem too. It probably would take some time to get used to living far from a city.
Or maybe a culture where, say, hiking or the outdoors are better as a lifestyle (one can talk about at cafes) rather than a pastime one actually enjoys and does frequently.
But some of these beautiful areas must be an hour or two away from middling size cities. Not New York, obviously. But in many ways probably the best of two worlds?
Why not New York? There are some very nice, scenic places in Connecticut, Westchester County and other places upstate that are only an hour or two away from the city.
The problems with any place that is “the best of both worlds” are:
Being so desirable, the cost of real estate will be pushed up. The farther away from the city, the less so. But 1 and 2 hours are still “commutable” to the city, so they will increase in demand.
They won’t last being “the best” for getting away from the crowds for very long. Any place that “nice” and “commutable” that can be developed, will grow. The strip malls will expand and get bigger, and the next thing you know a big box store/complex appears.
Spin back the clock maybe 50 - 60 years around the SF Bay Area, Los Angeles, Washington DC (beltway), and you would see these “remote”, maybe smaller, older towns or nothing at all, that fit the “best of both worlds” description. Then look at them now: if they weren’t able to grow (easily), the prices have shot through the roof. If they were able to grow - they have been “absorbed” into the expansion from whatever city/industrial area where the work exists.
This is an extensive list of dealbreakers for me, and I suspect I am not alone. You are surely among a very small minority of people who either actually prefer living in these conditions, or are willing to put up with it in order to have some pretty mountains to look at.
Your post is the best answer to the OP’s question so far.
It’s a good answer. Having to essentially own a plow or tractor and drive a truck or big vehicle would dissuade many. As a Canadian, I have been told (in jest?) never to go to any part of an American city where you can’t get a pizza delivered by a major chain. They didn’t comment about rural areas. I’m sure even Internet access or speed are issues in some places.
But given Internet access, if another Covid struck in two years I’m guessing a beautiful rural area would start to look appealing. The description about areas becoming expensive and ugly (much to the consternation of some longer term residents) is true and has played out many times.
They called it Paradise, one in Rhode Island
New York is not an area I know very well but I’m sure has a lot of surrounding areas which are popular/expensive/desirable like most big cities. I’m sure they are very nice. The book contains Litchfield Hills and loops around the Hudson and Delaware rivers. Most of the drives are far more rural.
I live in eastern Connecticut (and work in central Connecticut). I don’t know much about Westchester County (which is in New York, of course), but I do know something about the part of Connecticut that is within an hour or so from NYC: Fairfield County in the southwestern part of the state.
Fairfield County has some of the most expensive real estate in the country because of its proximity to NYC. Also, the traffic is completely gridlocked. I did a project once in Greenwich, Connecticut, and it took me 5 hours to drive the 90 miles there from my house. Every day the two major highways (I-91 and the Merritt Parkway) get backed up for hours. This is why most commuters who work in NYC take the train.
Anyway, I do my best to stay out of that part of the state if I can possibly avoid it. I would not want to live there.
I wasn’t trying to make any point about the traffic, nor the real estate prices but just to say that it’s a scenic part of the country. (The Merritt Parkway is particularly scenic and I think the other highway you might take to Greenwich is I-95, not I-91, which goes north from New Haven to Hartford and into Massachusetts.)
You mixed up the lyric. The first line of the song (“The Last Resort” by the Eagles) goes like this:
She came from Providence, the one in Rhode Island…
In the song, she packs up her things and moves out west to a place they call paradise. (This is one of my favorite songs, BTW.)
Anyway, I used to live in Rhode Island, and Providence is certainly no paradise. There are some nice parts of Rhode Island (especially on the ocean), but there’s a reason I left Rhode Island and moved to Connecticut.
Right, I meant to say I-95. (In my defense, I take I-91 to get to I-95 or the Merritt.)
The Merritt is pretty, except it was built before modern highway standards, with no proper entrance or exit ramps, and no merge lanes for accelerating and decelerating. In fact, the entrance ramps have stop signs to keep people from entering the highway in front of a vehicle going 60 mph with no merge lane. About the only saying grace is that trucks are banned, which is why I usually go that way. Because of the lack of merge lanes, most people stay in the left lane.
I’ve heard the area there is scenic, but I wouldn’t really know, because even though it is less than 50 miles from where I am sitting, it is so hard to get there that I only go that way about once a year, and even then I’m usually just passing through to get to NYC. (I’ve been to Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Florida and Texas more frequently than I’ve been to Fairfield County, Connecticut—and I live in Connecticut!) I can’t emphasize enough how bad the traffic is there. For my project in Greenwich, I ended up getting a hotel during the week because it was so hard to drive in every morning.
Something to consider is the areas of low population are, at least today, overwhelmingly areas of low education, low family income, low ethnic diversity, and RW or Trumpist sentiments. Other countries may not have Trump, but rural political & social conservatism coupled to low educational attainment and a tiny horizon of experience with the larger society is a worldwide phenomenon.
If you don’t mind hobnobbing only with those folks and listening only to that rhetoric every time you see another human being then moving to a rural small town is a fine idea.
For those smallish towns that become “hot” with the high-earning expat set, a sort of left-leaning political “gentrification” can & does happen. Which mightily pisses off the locals. Sort of like the town & gown dichotomy in college towns, but involving grown-ups and real politics over city services, growth, zoning, etc.
Plus of course all those city slickers with their city paychecks bid the prices up & wreck that too for the large fraction of the local populace who rent or don’t own a lot scenic enough to sell.
IME there’s a good deal more variation than that; and there are likely to be quite a few people worth hobnobbing with.
However people who move in who have the attitude that the locals are all beneath them are indeed likely to be poorly received.
Much of that actually has little to do with left or right, though it sometimes gets phrased that way. It’s more likely to have to do with arguments between people who object to the smell of cowshit and want to have sidewalks and street lighting versus people who want to raise livestock and don’t want to pay for sidewalks and street lighting which they consider unnecessary, or in some cases detrimental.
That part can be a genuine problem; and also for those who don’t want to sell the lot they live on, even if it does happen to be scenic.
Homes are not equivalent only to cash value for a lot of people.
Beautiful area. But I’m uneasy about its very recent white supremacist past. Not all of the folks attracted by that Aryan Nations ideology have moved away.
And if the remnants of the Neo-Nazi nutjobs weren’t enough, you also have the hardcore Catholic schismatics. A few of whom at least are serious looney bins (I should know - I had some distant family by marriage mixed up in that mess).
I wish you luck, but there are just way too many whackadoos in Northern Idaho for my own comfort.
Good points all. Including your implied criticism of my overdrawn urban lefty elitism.
I lived on the edge of suburban St. Louis MO for years and often went out into the rural counties & small towns on day-trip adventures. I met many wonderful kind-hearted folks out there. And a few raging yahoos.
Ehh. We’re lilly white and after careers in mining and the oil field can ignore the arrian wing of conservatism fairly well. Sure they don’t make ideal neighbors but at least they won’t bitch about me shooting trap off my back porch.
There are some nice parts of Rhode Island (especially on the ocean), but there’s a reason I left Rhode Island and moved to Connecticut.
to keep people from entering the highway in front of a vehicle going 60 mph with no merge lane. About the only saying grace is that trucks are banned, which is why I usually go that way. Because of the lack of merge lanes, most people stay in the left lane.