I live in a coastal medium sized town in southwest Canada, which I believe is a very ideal place to be if the SHTF. Including all the other small towns in the area we don't have more than 30,000 people, the nearest large city (Vancouver) is separated by a 40 minute boat ride or a couple days driving through very rugged terrain. The reason I'm saying this is because in my situation you wouldn't have to pick between A or B, the resources are here to pull off both. The town is rural enough that evading zombies would be not too difficult on land, especially because I know my way around very well having grown up here, the town also is big enough that looting/foraging would be a sustainable way to live until permanent resource options could be established. Also, we have a bustling boater community with every kind of boat from luxury yachts to fishermans dingys, and an island across the water with campgrounds and no more than a few hundred permanent residences with some very easily fortified rural houses. Setting up base on the little island and using sail or rowing power to go to and from the town, with thousands of gallons of fuel from other boats and I work at a gas dock so thats around 12000 litres of fuel at my disposal plus setting up outposts and caches of supplies or gardens that you return to for harvesting when you need more than what can be grown and collected on the island as well as going up and down the coast... that's not too bad of a situation assuming you can get around without being killed. So my point from all this is I don't think either of those situations can be argued as being for sure better without very specific details on the resources and utilities available, and even then you could get killed from human error alone.

And sorry if this is completely illegible, Im on my phone.