Want to move to CA (lived there before), but see people leaving (Chico: real estate, foreclosure)

[Steve97415]

Originally Posted by Need_affordable_home

It is true alot of Californians are moving to north California. The prices there are so much cheaper!

I would have to dispute this assertion. Depending on exactly what ones means by "north California", housing costs are often higher, not lower than in locations south of Pt. Conception.

[Need_affordable_home]

San Francisco is considered central California. My friend's parents moved to north California(I forgot the city) but its pop is 90k and they got a really nice big house(but tiny lot)for only half million! I would be somewhat hard pressed to find this much house here in south Florida for half million!

[Sassberto]

Originally Posted by Need_affordable_home

San Francisco is considered central California.

Everything from San Fran north is considered Northern California. It's geographically central, but Central CA is the area north from Ventura to about Big Sur

[Need_affordable_home]

Thanks for the correction! Ok in this case, people are talking about geographically north California being cheap. Well north of S.F of course.

[greatbasinguide]

Cheap is not a good word. Iowa has cheap homes. North Ca. is many different geographies, some which are popular are far from cheap, those with no economy are possibly less expensive. In my North California town, a 30 year old 960 sq ft 2 bed one bath on a standard lot with a one car garage will go for 3-400,000

[Need_affordable_home]

Originally Posted by greatbasinguide

Cheap is not a good word. Iowa has cheap homes. North Ca. is many different geographies, some which are popular are far from cheap, those with no economy are possibly less expensive. In my North California town, a 30 year old 960 sq ft 2 bed one bath on a standard lot with a one car garage will go for 3-400,000

Cheap is relatively speaking. The median house price in n. Cali is significently less than s. Cali. There are exceptions. Its the same in Florida. Youd be hard pressed to find anything "cheap" in south Florida but much of north Florida is a fair bit cheaper and you can get land in towns or outside city limits in north Florida for a fraction the cost.

$300k for nearly 1000 square feet 2/1/1 newer house(30 years isnt considered old) is a pretty good price in California. Youd be looking at closer to half million for the same thing in other parts, especially south California.

Iowa is cheap, so is West Virginia, much of Texas, north New York and some cities in many other states like Georgia, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, etc. Its all about the location, location, location! Choose a less "desirable" location anywhere and of course prices will be lower. Even in California, there are "cheaper" locations. Maybe cheap isnt a good word, how bout "less expensive"

[greatbasinguide]

Did a bit of research,, the cheapest home in Truckee is one of those 960 sq footers at $375,000

I like North East CA. it is God's country,, check out Alturas, Burney Falls... But it is not for everyone, long two lane mtn roads to get anywhere

[hairmetal4ever]

Originally Posted by Need_affordable_home

San Francisco is considered central California. My friend's parents moved to north California(I forgot the city) but its pop is 90k and they got a really nice big house(but tiny lot)for only half million! I would be somewhat hard pressed to find this much house here in south Florida for half million!

LOL...here's what you get in Ohio for $464,900:

removed

Why is this board so hard to hotlink on?

[speedoflight]

Northern CA is not north of SF. SF Bay Area is in Northern CA. You come here to SF Bay Area and all day long the news will say "Northern CA News" and by no means are the prices here cheaper than Southern CA or in Florida. The areas you're thinking of are the very northern parts of the state, i.e. north of Sacramento, i.e. places like Eureka, Ukiah, Chico and many of these tiny towns. Be very sure you make the correct delineation regarding North / Central / South because it sounds so weird and wrong geographically when you talk about Northern CA and then not include the SF Bay Area. There's not that much going on in these tiny very Northern CA towns except the basic industry. It's probably not hard to find any job there but very hard to find good paying jobs in such places. That's why everyone flocks to the SF Bay Area and the LA area.

Originally Posted by Need_affordable_home

Cheap is relatively speaking. The median house price in n. Cali is significently less than s. Cali. There are exceptions. Its the same in Florida. Youd be hard pressed to find anything "cheap" in south Florida but much of north Florida is a fair bit cheaper and you can get land in towns or outside city limits in north Florida for a fraction the cost.

$300k for nearly 1000 square feet 2/1/1 newer house(30 years isnt considered old) is a pretty good price in California. Youd be looking at closer to half million for the same thing in other parts, especially south California.

Iowa is cheap, so is West Virginia, much of Texas, north New York and some cities in many other states like Georgia, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, etc. Its all about the location, location, location! Choose a less "desirable" location anywhere and of course prices will be lower. Even in California, there are "cheaper" locations. Maybe cheap isnt a good word, how bout "less expensive"

[Need_affordable_home]

Thanks for the correction! San F. is geographically central but considered north Cali. When I say north Cali, I mean geographically north, like the northern third of Cali. SF is in the central third geographically speaking. Is 90k considered a small town? Its a pretty big city but not a huge metro. I will have to ask my friend what the name of that city was in very north Cali but houses there are "cheap" half mil gets you alotta house!