|

06-13-2007, 04:14 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: virginia beach, va
56 posts, read 60,466 times
Reputation: 30
|
|
Gurnee v. Schaumburg v. Naperville
I am considering relocating somewhere in Chicagoland and I have come down to three places: Schaumburg, Gurnee, or Naperville. Gurnee is booming and more diverse and cheaper than Schaumburg. However, Gurnee's crime rate is higher and is so far away from the city and O' Hare. Schaumburg's crime rate is lower and is closer to the city and both O' Hare and Midway, but it's losing people and jobs and it has a higher unemployment rate than Gurnee. Naperville is also booming and close to the city and airport but I heard it's losing people and jobs too and that it's overhyped. Which one should I choose?
|
|

06-13-2007, 04:23 PM
|
|
Rangers FC supporter
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Western Chicagoland
17,197 posts, read 18,786,903 times
Reputation: 4851
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rw2006
I am considering relocating somewhere in Chicagoland and I have come down to three places: Schaumburg, Gurnee, or Naperville. Gurnee is booming and more diverse and cheaper than Schaumburg. However, Gurnee's crime rate is higher and is so far away from the city and O' Hare. Schaumburg's crime rate is lower and is closer to the city and both O' Hare and Midway, but it's losing people and jobs and it has a higher unemployment rate than Gurnee. Naperville is also booming and close to the city and airport but I heard it's losing people and jobs too and that it's overhyped. Which one should I choose?
|
Naperville is not losing people and jobs, I question that information greatly. The city has been booming since the 80s and is still growing, including jobs. For a city its size, its crime is super low and its poverty level is the lowest in the nation for its size. Not only that but CNN/Money magazine rates it one of the 10 best cities in the nation. 
|
|

06-13-2007, 05:06 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
3,484 posts, read 3,398,164 times
Reputation: 1432
|
|
|
Of those three,Naperville,no contest
|
|

06-14-2007, 01:19 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
80 posts, read 116,859 times
Reputation: 30
|
|
|
I'm not sure where you're hearing that Schaumburg or Naperville are losing people and jobs, but I doubt its true in any systematic way.
Schaumburg is one of the largest suburban office districts in the country, and there's a massive retail presence that's not going away any time soon. It may have an older housing stock than Naperville or Gurnee, but I don't think there are houses sitting vacant in Schaumburg neighborhoods. It's almost literally in the middle of the Chicago landscape, so its location could be a big advantage depending on where you work.
Naperville is almost completely built out, mostly with newer residential developments. If anything, its problems revolve around the huge demand for services that come from so many family homes. Over-hyped is subjective. Its got one of the nicer suburban downtowns and solid schools, so it shows up on lots of people's lists.
Gurnee, in my mind at least, lacks any community identity when compared to the other two. It provides an affordable housing option for people whose lives revolve around the North burbs, but not much else. It may not be that much farther from Chicago than Naperville in straight miles, but seems much more separated from the rest of Chicagoland.
I'd consider where you're going to be working, your priorities in housing and location, and check out some neighborhoods. I wouldn't spend too much time worrying about crime, job losses, or dropping populations in most Chicago burbs.
|
|

06-14-2007, 01:48 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
124 posts, read 197,055 times
Reputation: 63
|
|
|
I live in a small community next to Gurnee. Our area is safe, pleasant and affordable. But.....if I could choose, I would pick Schaumburg. We shop at a couple of specialty stores there a couple of times a month and the area appears more vibrant than where we live, not to mention being closer to Chicago and O'Hare. If you have a family, you might like Gurnee. The schools are good, the library is wonderful, Great America is right down the road, and it is affordable.
|
|

06-17-2007, 10:03 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
530 posts, read 283,547 times
Reputation: 104
|
|
|
If you want your family to be safe pick Naperville
See city data's crime index (lower being safer)
Schaumburg 235.6
Gurnee 239
Naperville 116
|
|

06-17-2007, 03:43 PM
|
|
Master of school statistics
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hollywood/Brookfield, IL
660 posts, read 1,177,308 times
Reputation: 213
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe107
If you want your family to be safe pick Naperville
See city data's crime index (lower being safer)
Schaumburg 235.6
Gurnee 239
Naperville 116
|
Not necessarily. Schaumburg and Gurnee both have very large shopping malls, which contributes to the seemingly high crime rate. All three towns are perfectly safe for families.
|
|

06-18-2007, 08:22 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
80 posts, read 116,859 times
Reputation: 30
|
|
|
If you look at the breakdown of those crime numbers, most of Schaumburg's higher number are due to burglaries (think retail) and auto theft (parking lots and car dealers). Residential areas of Gurnee are also very safe, although I'd be a little more careful there if you're looking for cheaper housing or on the East side that borders North Chicago and Waukegan.
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|