IN OTHER NEWS – A new poll by DatingAdvice.com reveals the Georgia cities people would and wouldn’t move to for romance.

Release:

• Ranking of the most and least appealing cities if moving for love.
• Savannah rated as the most attractive city in Georgia to move to for a new relationship. Augusta-Richmond the least appealing.
• Infographic included.

You’re head-over-heels in love, and the thrill of a long-distance romance has been both sweet and exhilarating. But as time goes by, the prospect of uniting with your beloved in the same zip code becomes not just a dream, but a necessity. However, does the allure of your significant other’s city sway your decision to make the leap? What if love calls from the sun-kissed beaches of Miami or the bustling streets of New York City? Would the affection be as strong to draw you to McDowell County, West Virginia, a place fighting valiantly against economic setbacks, or to Gary, Indiana, a city trying to rise again from its industrial past?

Through a comprehensive survey of 3,000 people in long distance relationships, DatingAdvice.com sought to find out whether the city in which their partner resides is a factor when deciding whether to move.

They therefore created a ranking of cities considered the most and least appealing if moving for love, with some very interesting results…

The top five cities people would move to for love are:

#1 San Francisco, California.
San Francisco was voted as the most appealing city, with its tech-forward streets and cultural mix pulling at the heartstrings of lovers nationwide. It’s where innovation meets inclusivity, offering new transplants the promise of progressive values and a community that’s as varied as it is vibrant. The Golden Gate City promises a treasure trove of parks, coastal views, and artistic pursuits, perfect for those in pursuit of a life painted with shared experiences.

#2 New York City, New York.
In second place came the magnetic allure of New York City — every district beating with its own rhythm, offering a variety of experiences that range from gastronomic quests in Queens to the artistic soul of Brooklyn. It’s a city where the world connects, and diversity is the cornerstone of every block, making it a haven for lovebirds looking to build a nest in the world’s capital.

#3 Buffalo, New York.
Buffalo’s warmth and welcoming community spirit make it an inviting destination for those relocating for love. For someone new to Buffalo, the sense of belonging and ease of making connections stand out, making it easier to transition into a new life. The city’s affordability and proximity to natural wonders like Niagara Falls also mean that couples can enjoy a high quality of life and shared adventures without breaking the bank.

#4 Fresno, California.
Fresno is a gem for those seeking a blend of urban culture and outdoor living. Newcomers are drawn to its laid-back atmosphere, diverse community, and the beauty of its surrounding landscapes. Fresno also serves as a gateway to some of the nation’s most treasured national parks, offering couples an escape into nature at a moment’s notice. For partners looking to lay down roots and explore California’s natural and cultural offerings, Fresno is an attractive and affordable choice.

#5 Jackson, Mississippi.
For those moving to Jackson, the city offers a deep dive into the heart and soul of the South. Its rich musical heritage and culinary scene provide a sensory feast for newcomers, with blues clubs, galleries, and restaurants waiting to be explored together. Jackson’s community-focused vibe means that newcomers quickly feel at home, supported by a network of friendly locals and fellow transplants. 

On the flip side, for every city that stirs the heart, there are those that, despite their charm, don’t quite capture the imagination of lovers. These cities, though brimming with their own unique allure, seem to lack the romantic luster that compels a leap of love. The 5 least appealing to move for love are:

#246 Lancaster, California
Lancaster might present a challenging proposition for those contemplating a move for love. Known for its desert climate and sparse landscape, it’s a city that often appeals to those with a taste for solitude and the stark beauty of the Mojave Desert. The stark, wide-open spaces might make for an introspective solo journey, but as a backdrop for romance? Lancaster’s narrative is more about soul-searching solitude than the intertwining of hearts.

#247 Oxnard, California
Oxnard’s coastal location might suggest a seaside paradise, but its industrial character often overshadows its beachy appeal. With a working harbor and stretches of agricultural fields, it may not offer the quintessential Californian beach town vibe that lovebirds might crave. For those daydreaming of California love, Oxnard’s pragmatic pulse might just miss a beat.

#248 Palmdale, California
Situated in the Antelope Valley, Palmdale is a city with a small-town feel and a slow pace of life, which might not resonate with those used to the energy of a metropolis. It’s a slice of Americana that offers clear skies and clearer minds, albeit a tad too tranquil for the amorous adventurer. For lovers seeking a life punctuated by art galleries, late-night eateries, and spontaneous socializing, Palmdale’s peaceful pace might not quite sync up with the rhythm of romance.

#249 Roseville, California
Roseville’s charm is undeniable, with tree-lined streets that tell tales of quiet lives and neighborly bonds. But through the lens of love? It’s a place where passion might pivot more toward picket fences than pulsating nightclubs. The suburbia’s siren song beckons those ready to settle rather than those looking to be swept off their feet by urban excitement and the lure of a 24/7 lifestyle.

#250 St. Paul, Minnesota
There’s a stoic grace to St. Paul, with its storied buildings and the gentle flow of the Mississippi. Yet, while it’s a haven for history buffs and those who find love in hushed, snowy evenings, St. Paul’s chilly embrace and leisurely tempo aren’t for everyone. If your love story craves chapters filled with energy and warmth, you might just find St. Paul’s cool demeanor a bit too literal.

When it came to Georgia cities specifically, 3 were identified as appealing for those willing to relocate to live with their partner. The top pick was Savannah, in #50 nationally:

#50 Savannah

Savannah charms with its historic architecture, beautiful public squares, and a warm, welcoming community. Its coastal location offers a mild climate and the pace of life is slower, which can be a welcome change for those from more bustling urban centers, while the city’s cultural and culinary scenes are still thriving. An appealing choice for young lovers looking to forge their future together.

Other top ranked Georgia cities were:

#52 Macon-Bibb #56 Columbus.

However, 3 Georgia cities were cited as locations that people would not be prepared to move to for love. The least appealing was Augusta-Richmond, in #179 place nationally: 

#179 Augusta-Richmond

Augusta-Richmond boasts a rich history, outdoor recreational opportunities, and a lower cost of living compared to other cities in Georgia. However, residents should be prepared for the hot and humid summers, which can be uncomfortable for some. The city has a limited public transportation system, making owning a car necessary for most residents. Additionally, while Augusta-Richmond has a charming downtown area and scenic riverfront, some may find the lack of cultural amenities and entertainment options a drawback.

Other Georgia cities considered to be unappealing were:

#177 Athens-Clarke #178 Atlanta.

Infographic showing which cities people are most willing to relocate to for love.

The survey queried respondents who had moved to be with their partners, probing into the significant concessions they made. A striking 57% identified parting with family as the most substantial sacrifice, while 18% pointed to a shift in lifestyle as a primary concern, which encompasses forging new friendships, seeking out new gyms to join, and discovering new favorite drinking hangouts. An additional 15% felt that leaving behind friends was the hardest part, with 10% citing the job hunt as a formidable challenge.

About 23% of couples who closed the gap from long-distance to cohabitation conceded that there were heated arguments over who should relocate. Nonetheless, most couples reported that the move fortified their bond, though 16% admitted it introduced new hurdles. Eleven percent observed that their relationships terminated post-relocation.

Finally, in recognizing that long-distance relationships cannot be sustained indefinitely and must eventually transition to being close-distance to survive, respondents were quizzed about the duration they believe a long-distance relationship can endure before the couple must choose to cohabitate or conclude the relationship. The collective average from the responses indicated that the maximum sustainable period for a long-distance relationship is 1 year and 11 months.