Inner Ring Suburbs - thoughts? (Chicago, Skokie: real estate, rent, houses)

[sthornt1]

Originally Posted by oakparkdude

I don't know what you consider too high for property taxes, but there are definitely properties within your price range in Oak Park. They will tend to be on the east end of OP, but if you're used to Edgewater, that's probably okay with you from a safety perspective.

Very crudely put - and I know this is not the actual formula - I consider the 1.4% I pay in Chicago to be suh-wheat, 2% reasonable, and 3% high. So on a $300,000 house @ 3%, the $9k to $10k in property taxes is roughly an additional $1000 monthly payment on top of the mortgage. That's what I'd like to avoid.

[Mister Mappy]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Further if one does not know where towns are in relation to one another OR how cookie cutter the housing stock is I would STRONGLY suggest that they refrain from posting.

The are NO tract developments in the towns I have listed and folks that do not know the difference between towns like Orland / Blooming / Barrring / Harwood "some thing or other" and the towns I cited really detract from the useful of the forum.

I will assume this was meant for me, and what I said about Clarendon Hills.

Well, Chet so you know, a couple who are friends of mine rented a house in Clarendon Hills for a few years back around 2003-04. One worked in Lisle, the other at Hines, so it was convenient for both at the time. The house was near Clarendon Hills Rd & 55th St, and it was a blah split level ranch house probably built in the 60's. The whole block & the surrounding blocks were basically all the same kind of ranch houses, set back from the street, and some hidden by trees. Maybe cookie-cutter wasn't the best way to put it, but they really weren't all that dissimilar from one another. There were nicer homes on the other side of 55th St, but where they were at was just "meh". I never did say anything about "tract" homes.

With the OP's budget, that is probably the part of Clarendon Hills he would end up in.

Yes, Chet I do have a decent grasp of Chicagoland geography, and do know the difference between Orland/Blooming/Barring/Harwood etc.

As far as the school district goes, I did screw up. Harwood Heights north of Lawrence & west of Harlem is in the Maine South districts, but not all of Norridge in that area is. I thought all of that part of Norridge was, but the line running thru Norridge there is weird. Sorry about that one. Nobody's perfect.

[chet everett]

In Clarendon Hills, and many other desirable areas, being on the wrong side of a dividing line makes all the difference. Not only is there no part of Clarendon Hills south of 55th St that inside the desirable D181 elementary shared with Hinsdsle, but tremendous numbers of homes inside the desirable area have been torn down. The tear downs are of course not the only homes north of 55th, but many of the remaining homes do have a considerable amount of charm, as well being ideal for a family that wants to take advantage of top tier schools, excellent park district programs, a pleasant and walkable little downtown and all the other features that have push Clarendon Hills into the ranksmof the most desirable towns of the region.

Due to recent over supply of multimillion dollar housing, perfectly livable homes that would have otherwise been torn down are available for purchase. By buying such a home ones investment is all but completely isolated from market downturns. http://www.redfin.com/IL/Clarendon-H.../home/18024170



Funny that someone would feel the miles and miles of completely identical bungalows wedged into the land around O'Hare are somehow more desirable / less "cookie cutter" / "meh" than homes that due to the large subdivsble lots are remain in demand. http://www.redfin.com/IL/Clarendon-H.../home/18018033

[Mister Mappy]

Here's a few houses in the Maine South part of Harwood Heights. The 2nd one says Chicago, but it's the other side of the street that's Chicago. It does say it'ss part of Maine South's district. Also, some of the houses are short sales, and one is a FannieMae Homepath house. Not sure how that would affect you. Maybe Chet can advise you more about that.

7437 W Winona St, Harwood Heights, IL 60706 - Zillow

4933 N Oriole Ave, Chicago, IL 60706 MLS# 07202759 - Zillow

7513 W Winona St, Harwood Heights, IL 60706 MLS# 07690808 - Zillow

4901 N Octavia Ave, Harwood Heights, IL 60706 MLS# 3 - Zillow

7413 W Argyle St, Harwood Heights, IL 60706 MLS# 07495761 - Zillow

Oh, and as a concession to Chet, here's a cute house in Clarendon Hills. It has an unfinished basement, and only 1 bathroom, though!

2 Arthur Ave, Clarendon Hills, IL 60514 MLS# 07736025 - Zillow

[Mister Mappy]

Originally Posted by chet everett

In Clarendon Hills, and many other desirable areas, being on the wrong side of a dividing line makes all the difference. Not only is there no part of Clarendon Hills south of 55th St that inside the desirable D181 elementary shared with Hinsdsle, but tremendous numbers of homes inside the desirable area have been torn down. The tear downs are of course not the only homes north of 55th, but many of the remaining homes do have a considerable amount of charm, as well being ideal for a family that wants to take advantage of top tier schools, excellent park district programs, a pleasant and walkable little downtown and all the other features that have push Clarendon Hills into the ranksmof the most desirable towns of the region.

Due to recent over supply of multimillion dollar housing, perfectly livable homes that would have otherwise been torn down are available for purchase. By buying such a home ones investment is all but completely isolated from market downturns. 130 OXFORD Ave, CLARENDON HILLS, IL 60514 | MLS# 07701041



Funny that someone would feel the miles and miles of completely identical bungalows wedged into the land around O'Hare are somehow more desirable / less "cookie cutter" / "meh" than homes that due to the large subdivsble lots are remain in demand. 5713 Western Ave, CLARENDON HILLS, IL 60514 | MLS# 07705472

I really don't get why you're getting so worked up over this. Just because YOU love DuPage county, doesn't mean everybody will. If the OP's in Edgewater, DuPage county is going to be a big change.

As far as the houses go, the 2nd one is quite lovely, and $100,000 over the OP's budget. The 1st one looks ok on the inside, but IMO, the outside, completely wrapped in white siding is hideous, and makes it look like a trailer. "The miles, and miles of completely identical bunglows near O'Hare" have way more character than that house.

To the OP, let me apologize for getting a little snitty here. It certainly wasn't my intention, but when someone gets your goat for no reason....

Anyway, the best advice is to drive around any area you may be interested in to get a feel for it, and see if you can imagine yourself living there. I've known 6 couples from the city who moved out to DuPage county. Only 2 ended up staying. (One in Itasca, and the other in Naperville.) Three are back in the city, and the one in Clarendon Hills ended up in Oak Park. As I said, if you're used to city living, DuPage county is going to be a big change. You may love it, but then again you may not. Good luck.

[chet everett]

I am not tying to sell anyone on any particular county or town, quite the opposite, I have offered up a range of solutions.

The OP wants their wife to have the "better" commute and toward that end I posted a whole bunch of options in Western Springs, inside Cook Co., that would best (in my opinion) meet their needs. I also suggested Elmhurst, Park Ridge, and the NW side.

When I see inaccurate info I make efforts to correct it, and if those corrections come off as "personal" I can only suggest that opinions are pretty much by definition personal whether they are "this is a great place" or "meh".

Finally I know literally HUNDREDS of families that have l moved from Chicago to suburban areas in Cook and DuPage co and NOT A SINGLE ONE has "moved back" to Chicago. I do know a handful that have bought condos downtown for "second homes" as the kids get older, but that is more a "treat" to have place to stay for downtown weekends / late night than any sort of DISATISFACTION with the excellent quality of life that make the towns I recommend desirable to families with school age children...

[Lookout Kid]

The Skokie commute complicates things. Park Ridge fits all of your criteria but price. It's more expensive than Oak Park these days, even with taxes figured in to the equation. Some other Northwest suburbs that fit your price range with good schools include Mt. Prospect, Arlington Heights, or even parts of Palatine... But then you're probably getting further out than you want. As you round the city limits to the west and south, there are just a bunch of working class affordable suburbs with sort of underperforming schools, like Harwood Heights, Norridge, Elk Grove Village, Franklin Park, Elmwood Park, River Grove, etc.

If I were in your shoes, I'd probably settle on a smaller house in the Maine South district (Park Ridge). But education is very important to me. Your wife could use the Kennedy and Ike to get to work, though it wouldn't be pretty during rush hour.

[Larry Siegel]

>I'll compromise on that before moving farther out

*This is just my experience*, but do not - not - not buy a house that you already perceive, at your young age, as too small. All you'll think about is moving or adding on.

My wife and I raised 2 kids in a "tight" 3 bdr in a very upscale neighborhood. We never had a houseguest and we wound up spending a lot of money putting people up in hotels. We thought about moving, well, every night and when we finally could afford a two-room addition, we started to enjoy living there.

We should have bought a 4 bdr in a cheaper neighborhood.

[chet everett]

While I can understand how someone might feel that having a fourth bedroom would be more convenient I have my doubts that the only thing one would think about is moving or adding on.

In my experience many / most people that buy a three bedroom home and then add-on a guest room find it goes largely unused. The situation is different if the family needs a fourth bedroom for a large number of kids OR if the home has inadequate space in the kitchen / "family room". In these cases I would agree that an addition can make a huge difference. In fact I have done that sort of thing and I think that when done at the right time / right price point it can truly "jump up" both enjoy and value of your home in ways that are rightly called "life changing". On the flip side, given how far out one would have to go before they encounter any area where four bedroom homes at the OP's desired price point are common I would hesitate to recommend that route. In all honesty for someone working at Roosevelt & Western and spouse working in Skokie I cannot think of any town filled with cheap four bedroom home that would make sense. Now if they worked in Orland Park or Schaumburg or Naperville there optionsnwould grow immensely, but that does not sound like something in the cards.

Originally Posted by Larry Siegel

>I'll compromise on that before moving farther out

*This is just my experience*, but do not - not - not buy a house that you already perceive, at your young age, as too small. All you'll think about is moving or adding on.

My wife and I raised 2 kids in a "tight" 3 bdr in a very upscale neighborhood. We never had a houseguest and we wound up spending a lot of money putting people up in hotels. We thought about moving, well, every night and when we finally could afford a two-room addition, we started to enjoy living there.

We should have bought a 4 bdr in a cheaper neighborhood.

[Lookout Kid]

I currently have a family of four in a two-bedroom condo, and dream of the day I have that third bedroom! But our children are the same gender, and will continue to share a room when we do get a larger place. We long for that office/guest room that we used to have before we had kids. It won't go unused.