Is S.F. Really Worth The Cost? C'mon -- Really? (San Diego: transplants, renting)

[NewToCA]

Silverbox, the prices for homes in San Francisco's Excelsior, Portola, Sunset and Richmond areas are not tremendously higher than Sacramento (using midtown as a comp area), and these are the areas I was thinking about in my posting. A search of PacUnion Real Estate Site for the city of San Francisco (not the surrounding areas) disclosed 121 single family homes with at least 3 bedrooms and 2 baths below $800K, and 47 condos with at least 2 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms below $600K. In addition, a quick scan of Craigslist disclosed over 100 apartments with 2 bedrooms for rent below $1800. Obviously, these are subsets of what is for sale overall, excluding FSBO sales and apartment houses.

Is San Francisco expensive? Sure it is. But relatively speaking it isn't four times the cost of Sacramento, not even close.

And concerning traffic, Washington DC and Philadelphia weren't walks through the park. But I consider San Francisco worth the cost difference.

I agree it is based on your perspective, and mine is that of one who loves living in the city.

[gizmo980]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

Silverbox, the prices for homes in San Francisco's Excelsior, Portola, Sunset and Richmond areas are not tremendously higher than Sacramento (using midtown as a comp area), and these are the areas I was thinking about in my posting.

One of those is my neighborhood, and as I mentioned before, my house is a pretty good deal... so if you'd like more specific info on where I live, feel free to PM me any time.

[gizmo980]

Originally Posted by sliverbox

By the way, I don't live in San Francisco but go there often.

There is a BIG difference between living here and visiting here. Then again, you can find out for yourself, do the morning commute and work the 9-5 shift then decide if paying 4 times the amount to live here is REALLY worth it.

Not all of us work 9-5 (I'm usually 10-7), and my commute is only 0.5 miles on surface roads... so life isn't as horrible as you make it out to be!

[dmetro]

Originally Posted by mr2007

Thanks for all of the passionate responses to my original post.

Here's my take: The term "worth" is relative.

For me -- based upon the time I have spent in S.F. and what I observed -- the cost of living in San Francisco is not worth it.

I know it may feel like the "Meditteranean" in North America so to speak, but I think it would be less expensive and more practical to live in Atlanta or Austin or Charlotte and just fly to the actual meditteranean several times per year! Personally, I enjoyed S.F. and appreciate the culture, but I didn't enjoy it to the tune $paying $850K for a home that would be $250K in Atlanta.

I live in the Metro Detroit area. And before everyone goes into the "Anywhere is better than Detroit", "Murder Capital", "Rust Belt Economy", "Armpit of America" rant, let me tell you that I live in Oakland County, Michigan -- the "real" O.C. because our incomes and wealth actually exceed that of Orange County, California -- the more popular O.C. If you are familiar with the communities of Birmingham, Bingham Farms, West Bloomfield, Orchard Lake, Rochester Hills, and Farmington Hills, you know that some of these communities-- though near Detroit -- are among the top 10 wealthiest communities in the entire U.S.A. I am not even including the perhaps even wealthier Grosse Pointe communities, which are in Wayne County, Michigan. I just wanted to clear up that I am not stepping over bullet casings in my driveway just to get in my care and go to work. Michigan's core city of Detroit certainly has its issues, though.

There is a small, semi-rural community between Detroit and Ann Arbor called Ypsilanti Township, Michigan. It is a burgeoning area for young families in SE Michigan because you are close to Ann Arbor (University of Michigan) and Detroit (for sports events, concerts, clubs, museums). Google just opened up a new office in Ann Arbor, Michigan and a lot of the Google employees with families are buying homes in Ypsilanti Township. BTW -- SE Michigan is in the process of trying to transform itself from an Automotive/Industrial driven region to an IT Sector and Entertainment Destination focused region. Yes -- Entertainment. We have 3 casinos (not those cheesy casino boats but permanent Casino Hotels -- one of which is an MGM Grand property -- and many other performance/theater venues).

I just want to show you what a $270K home in rapidly growing Ypsilanti Township, Michigan looks like: (see attached photo)

4 Bedrooms, 2.5 Baths, 2861 Square Feet, .25 Acres of Property, monthly mortgage payment of approx. $1380 per month

What would this house cost in S.F.?

In my opinion, I would rather live in an area like this, maximize my money, and use the money I've saves to travel to San Francisco (or anywhere else) as many times as I want. We live in the United States, so we can find enough stimulating activities in almost any area that we live. That's the great thing about this country.

With that being the case, why not maximize your income?

I agree totally. Michigan and most of the country have reasonable costs of living, as long as you stay away from the east and west coasts. In Michigan, you can get a 3,000 sq. ft. 4 bedroom, 3.5 Bath home on .4 acres in a beautiful Metro Detroit suburb with award winning schools for somewhere in the neighborhood of 300-400 k. Like you said, imagine what a home like this would cost in San Francisco.

[pwright1]

To Mr2007

If I lived in a town where I'd have to catch a flight to do any of those things you mentioned there is absolutely no way I would ever live in that kind of place.

Those communities in the Detroit area, Farmington Hills, Sherwood Forest, Palmer Woods and Grosse Point are all beautiful and more house for the money than SF but you are in the Detroit area. You simply can't compare Detroit to San Francisco.

[sliverbox]

To Mr2007

If I lived in a town where I'd have to catch a flight to do any of those things you mentioned there is absolutely no way I would ever live in that kind of place.

Those communities in the Detroit area, Farmington Hills, Sherwood Forest, Palmer Woods and Grosse Point are all beautiful and more house for the money than SF but you are in the Detroit area. You simply can't compare Detroit to San Francisco.


People have very different attitudes towards what they deem beautiful, interesting, attractive, and fun. Believe it or not, there are those that hate SF as much as some probably hate Detroit. Some people actually prefer snow. Some people like 100 degree weather. Some even like rain. If you are a die-hard SF person, then naturally that is to your liking. But don't assume that you're any better off than someone else who didn't choose SF as the place for them to live. Believe it or not, there are people in other places who aren't jealous of those in CA and think their home is an absolute piece of heaven. That's why this is such a great country- we have the ability to choose to our liking.

Mr2007 was making a point that if he really wanted to actually see some of the things he mentioned- like having BBQ in memphis and seeing the ocean, then he could easily take a flight and do so on a weekend and still be out on top due to the extreme cost differences between where he lives now and if he lived in SF where he might not have the funds to have as much traveling freedom.

[City Boy]

I dont know anybody who would willingly move from SF or any west or east coast city to Detroit/Detroit Burbs. There cant be too many people who enjoy salting and shouveling 2 feet of snow every winter. That gets old FAST. Especially when you get older. You get confined to your house in those sub freezing temps. I would rather live in a 1200 sq foot 650k house in SF than a 4000 sq foot 300k house in detroit. lol is that even a comparison??

[sliverbox]

I think the answer we've all been searching for on this post is non-existent. Everyone is going to have a totally different answer. As said, the idea of paradise is going to be very different. For someone in Michigan to declare that their piece of dirt is better than a piece of dirt in SF is no better than someone in SF saying the same thing. Neither person is right to make a generalized claim. I grew up in a warmer climate. But I lived in the east coast for a few years. long enough to know that I dislike frigid weather- hence my move here. But that isn't to say that EVERYONE feels that way. Some DO prefer snow. I've met them. Many of them in fact.

We're all pretty unique individuals and there are many things that get thrown into the bag: weather, expense, religious and political leanings, and so on. Some of these are more important to different people for different reasons. Some reasons will override others. Perhaps a person likes the idea of living somewhere more affordable so they can enjoy a level of living that their finances would not allow in SF. Perhaps someone in SF loves the weather and politics there enough to find the expense and possibility of renting for a lifetime worthwhile. These opinions change with age, living situations, maturity, education, and so on as well. So we ourselves will even go through transformation in attitude. Trust me- I was one of those who also thought SF and CA in general were the BEST places on earth. It was only when I studied the cold hard facts regarding the enormous amount of finance required to attain life basics here that I began to question my personal notions.

So bottom line- we're not going to be able to answer this question. If SF is worth the added expense is a person-by-person basis.

[pwright1]

This is a forum and each individual is different. There is no right answer. Just different answers from different individuals. 'Is S.F. Really Worth The Cost? C'mon--Really?' I gave my opinion and Mr2007 gave his. No big deal.

[BearBranch]

I lived in SF in my twenties (mission district). After three years it was time to move. It worth the cost as an experience, not as a place to settle.