San Francisco to Chicago . are we nuts? (Schaumburg, Evanston: 2014, apartments)

[Lookout Kid]

The suburbs of San Francisco are a lot more expensive than the suburbs of Chicago. I've looked at housing in the suburbs near Silicon Valley, and it's very very expensive all the way past San Jose to the south, and the only "affordable" areas I have seen have been troubled areas like Oakland and East Palo Alto.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

The suburbs of San Francisco are a lot more expensive than the suburbs of Chicago. I've looked at housing in the suburbs near Silicon Valley, and it's very very expensive all the way past San Jose to the south, and the only "affordable" areas I have seen have been troubled areas like Oakland and East Palo Alto.

Yeah it's crazy. One of my parents' best friends moved to the SJ area in the mid 90s and settled in a small city near Gilroy. They have a nice house at probably around 3000 sq ft with a back yard that's maybe 40x15 feet. It's worth over $1 million today. Not even close to San Jose and the city they're in has no more than 30,000 or 40,000 people in it.

[Vlajos]

My house in a nice neighborhood of Chicago has 4 bedrooms and 3 baths, is about 3,000+SF and on a double lot with a nice sized city yard and a two car garage off the alley. It's 100 years old but extremely well maintained. My sister in law lives in a nice area of SF, has a 1,000 SF fixer upper with 2 bd and 1 bath and a bizarre 1 car garage thing with virtually no yard. The homes are the same price.

[chet everett]

Totally agree SF and greater Silicon Valley housing costs are generally to be about 50% more, but in SF utility costs are about 10% less and transportation costs are also lower. The various tech saavy towns often run the local Internet /VOIP service so that is cheaper. Buying a home that is a "one time" type expense but transportation and utilities are "forever"...

I would also argue that given the relatively high quality of public amenities in SF and pleasant weather one can get by with a whole lot less out of pocket expenses for entertainment and child related costs -- even fairly well off folks feel pinched outfitting kids with four seasons of clothing in Chicago, my California friends have a much less varied range of apparel. The various shifts in Chicago toward high priced events in what are allegedly public parks means big money for promoters and expensive outlays for fans.

[oakparkdude]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Totally agree SF and greater Silicon Valley housing costs are generally to be about 50% more, but in SF utility costs are about 10% less and transportation costs are also lower. The various tech saavy towns often run the local Internet /VOIP service so that is cheaper. Buying a home that is a "one time" type expense but transportation and utilities are "forever"...

I would also argue that given the relatively high quality of public amenities in SF and pleasant weather one can get by with a whole lot less out of pocket expenses for entertainment and child related costs -- even fairly well off folks feel pinched outfitting kids with four seasons of clothing in Chicago, my California friends have a much less varied range of apparel. The various shifts in Chicago toward high priced events in what are allegedly public parks means big money for promoters and expensive outlays for fans.

How are transportation costs lower in CA when its one of the few places with higher gasoline prices than Chicagoland? CA is also one of the few places with a sales tax rate that is fairly comparable to IL. Also, while the IL state income tax rate is in flux, it definitely won't go as high at 8.0% which the marginal rate in CA for families with incomes between 78-99k. Granted our property tax rates is quite a bit higher than in CA, but the absolute amount may not be all that different given the higher values of CA real estate.

Moving to Chicagoland usually is not a cost-saving measure compared to most parts of the country with a few exceptions, but the Bay Area is one of those exceptions.

[sfcambridge]

Do you live in SF now?

I moved from SF to Chicago. I have also lived in the South Bay and have family that live all throughout the SF Bay Area.

The cost of living in SF/Bay Area (with housing as the main variable) is shocking. I left SF for family reasons, but have no regrets now and realize I would never be able to live in the areas I wanted and afford a decent home. You are being very reasonable to consider Chicago. The weather change will be challenging, and depression will appear every winter. Get a happy light, plan a vacation every winter to a warmer place for your sanity, and pick up some indoor hobbies for your family. There are also many inexpensive things to do in the Chicago area for families if you are motivated, but if you are classical outdoor California types, the transition will be hard. Public transportation is also better here, overall. Utilities will not kill you (in Chicago you need more heat, summer you need more AC). But SF housing costs will.

But Schaumburg?

But I'm not a fan of that suburban lifestyle. Only you and your family know what you are looking for in a living situation. If you like Schaumburg, then why not?

Let's put it this way... my brother lives in a home in a desirable suburb on the South Bay that is worth > 1.5 million and it is a simple, plain, one story (no basement) 3 bedroom home that is in decent condition but is cheap looking in construction. You could buy the same house in better condition with a basement in Schaumburg for $250k-$350k - and that's on the high end.

[chet everett]

Tollways are far more common in our region than SF, that contributes to the higher transportstion costs. Similarly the way statistics are collected the folks spending big money on monthly Metra or CTA passes are skewing the results vs folks that get employed provided shuttle service from SF to campuses in Silicon Valley ; one is out of pocket, the other a "benefit".

I won't speculate on the likelihood of the OP being in California's 8% income tax bracket, though I do know the relative simplicity of Illinios income tax means there are far less opportunities for deducations from our single "bracket".

http://www.tax-rates.org/california/...tax-calculator

Finally I would caution that "advice" about housing costs in Schuamburg from someone that has almost certainly never ventured into that town let alone given any serious consideration to buying a home there should be taken with a MOUNTAIN of salt. Few homes in the desirable portions of Schaumburg would be available for $250k with many priced at more than DOUBLE that. Towns with a more traditonally developed core and better schools like Arlington Height or Mt. Prospect have homes that are priced much more like those in desirable suburbs of SF and when one looks to even more desirable areas of eastern DuPage Co / western Cook Co along the BNSF or the North Shore the price "gap" may be even narrower if not outright flip flopped. That said the employment options for folks with the skills of the OP may make Schaumburg a realistic target...

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Tollways are far more common in our region than SF, that contributes to the higher transportstion costs. Similarly the way statistics are collected the folks spending big money on monthly Metra or CTA passes are skewing the results vs folks that get employed provided shuttle service from SF to campuses in Silicon Valley ; one is out of pocket, the other a "benefit".

I won't speculate on the likelihood of the OP being in California's 8% income tax bracket, though I do know the relative simplicity of Illinios income tax means there are far less opportunities for deducations from our single "bracket".

Lol, tolls will break the bank (what is the toll to cross those SF bridges now?). That and buying a winter coat. VS income tax 50% higher and housing prices at least 50% higher.

[chicagobear]

Personally, if I was in your situation, I'd look at Boise, Idaho. I see it growing a lot over the years.

[jdiddy]

Originally Posted by chet everett

The various shifts in Chicago toward high priced events in what are allegedly public parks means big money for promoters and expensive outlays for fans.

This one goes in the chet Hall of Fame. Chicago is more expensive than the Bay Area because Lollapalooza.