Relocating from Chicago to San Fran - family friendly neighborhood suggestions (Richmond: neighborhoods, good schools)

[rbehs]

I've lived in both the East Bay and the South Side of Chicago, and they are not at all similar.

I'd say that closest match to Evanston would be Berkeley, but I don't kow of a city that is really quite like Oak Park. To me, San Mateo and Burlingame feel more like the Western Springs/Hinsdale area.

[skyao]

I have lived in Both Chicago and the East Bay, so let me clarify.

I was trying to make an analogy that the East Bay and Southern Suburbs of Chicago are viewed in the same way.

For example, for better or for worse, many people in the Bay Area look at the East Bay as a step child to SF or the peninsula. While there are many nice areas of the East Bay, there is alot of snobbery towards that area by people in SF et al.

Also, that feeling is returned by many people in the East Bay who think people in SF and the Peninsula are snobs. This is similar to how people from the South Side of Chicago think of people from the North Shore. Think A's versus SF Giants and White Sox versus Cubs.

Also, Evanston is more like Palo Alto than Berkeley. Both expensive, exclusive private universities areas with lots of yuppies. However, commuting from Berkeley to Sunnyvale will be a long commute, so i would cross that off the list.

[humboldtrat]

Originally Posted by skyao

If you are commuting to SF and to Sunnyvale, you do not really want to live in the East Bay, especially for the commute to Sunnyvale.

I agree. If work is in SF and Sunnyvale, stay on that side of the bay. With the traffic the way it is, crossing a bridge everday can be time consuming and will get old in a hurry.

[rbehs]

I may have stretched to say Berkeley is more like Evanston than Palo Alto. I was thinking in the sense of the urban environment, with both Evanston and Berkeley having built-up downtowns closely integrated with a major university's campus -- and both being adjacent to a larger, more urban city. Palo Alto, even with Stanford, feels more suburban to me. But it does make a lot of sense in terms of the commute, and it is a well-kept, beautiful area.

[City Boy]

Originally Posted by bigdave01

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Because they earned that money. Many homeless people want to be homeless, it is a lifestyle choice. I still can't understand why people say we have no middle class. It seems that our country is richer than it has ever been, and even the poor live like the extremely wealthy in many countries.

What if Obama instead of spending 800 billion on random things, helped the homeless.

[bigdave01]

Don't give me that look.

[hsw]

Chic is arguably US' most centralized urban region...most of high-income jobs are in Loop...wealthiest/smartest financiers tend to live in GoldCoast, LP, LF and Winnetka

SF region is about as decentralized as LA; most of economy, aside from a few hedge funds and PE shops in SF, is in the ~30mis stretch from PaloAlto to SJ

Woodside, Atherton and PaloAlto are Chic's LF/GC/LP wound into one suburban area w/far more wealth (and IQ and youth)...and most residents (lots of wealthy engineers; some financiers) commute to offices in SiliconValley, not SF

SF's PacHts/PresidioHts are much like Chic's GC, except residents tend to be financiers who either commute to SF's FinDt or to MenloPk's SandHillRd (the Midtown/Loop of SV)

If single, would live in PacHts (better restaurants in SF than Peninsula, but SF itself is a fairly lame, dirty, sleepy suburb); if have kids, would choose PA area...far more IQ in PA area than in City of SF

[suzynuprin]

Just wanted to thank everyone for their comments and giving me some perspective on locations. I've had to rely upon the kindness of strangers to assure me that there are communities that make the stress of uprooting my family an easier transition, so for that, I thank you.

For the comments in regards to the price point of both a purchase and a rental, it appeared that on most of these boards, it was eventually asked what 'the budget' was in order to redirect or suggest probable locations, so I just took the liberty to answer that question before it was asked. And yes, my husband and I are both working parents and have worked hard to provide for our family We do help the homeless in Chicago in far more tangible and beneficial ways than simply free handouts - we were named volunteers of the year for our recent efforts with The Lakeview Pantry (our local food shelter) and for the past 10 years have organized a holiday toy drive helping 1,000 families annually. We recognize that while we have worked hard for what we have, we also cannot put on our blinders to those that are less fortunate around us. Enough of my soapbox - trust me, your real estate prices are significantly higher than what we can get for our house in Chicago.

Thanks again - keep the comments coming, it is significantly helping me with my research.

[kander63]

suzynuprin,

I was born and bred in the Chicago area (grew up in La Grange) and lived in Rogers Park, Wrigleyville, and Oak Park at various points as an adult. I lived in San Francisco for 7 years, before leaving in 2004 to check out Portland, OR (which I love, but I may be moving back to the Bay Area in the near future for a whole set of complicated reasons). Since I know both areas pretty well, just wanted to add my $0.02.

There is nothing in the Bay Area that is like Oak Park in any tangible way. In terms of values, and type of people that live there, I would say the inner East Bay (Berkeley, Piedmont, Rockridge, Montclair etc.) probably come the closest. I would also say that Berkeley is more like Evanston than Palo Alto is.

Since your husband would be working in the city, I would strongly suggest trying to stay in the city, given that you can afford $2million. The school situation complicates things a bit - I don't have children so I can't really help you out there. But, if you can deal with that, you should be able to find something decent for 2 million although it will be a lot less space than what you could get for that in Chicago!

I would definitely check out Noe Valley, and the parts of Glen Park (an adjacent neighborhood) that border it. Many of the houses are attached, but they often have small back yards or gardens, and it is fairly popular with families with kids who can afford it. You might not be able to find a place with a separate bedroom for each of your kids there though, if that is something you want. For that, you'd have to a little farther out in the city, to places like Forest Hill, West Portal, Monterey Heights. Thoses areas have very charming houses, and are a little more family oriented, but are also a little more suburban in feel, for better or worse.

I actually like Berkeley and Oakland better than SF - only probably is the commutes are not as easy to downtown SF unless you live near Bart. Rockridge is the only really nice part of Oakland that is near a Bart station, and for what you can spend, you could buy any house in the neighborhood and probably have enough left over to send your kids to private school (in Oakland, public schools are probably not an option). It has kind of an Evanston/Oak Park vibe - definitely the same kinds of people live there at least. If we move back, that is where my partner and I are going to try to live as he would be working in Hayward and I would probably be working in downtown SF.

Piedmont, which borders Oakland has great schools and is quite charming as well. Definitely check that out. It's very expensive, but I think for $2M you could find something OK. It wouldn't be the nicest house on the block though

Although Alameda does have some great housing, it is a little too isolated for what I think you want, given that you've been living in Wrigleyville.

By the way, don't feel you have to apologize for being able to afford what you can afford (unless you lied, cheated or stole to get the money, which I doubt). While I am deeply concerned about the stratification of wealth in this country, hardworking people who can manage to afford 2 million for home in the most expensive city in the country are not the problem.

If you have any more specific questions, let me know - happy to help out a fellow ex-Chicagoan.

By the way you can actually get some decent deep dish pizza in the east bay at Zachary's. I happen to like Chicago-style thin crust pizza better than deep dish, but that does not exist outside cook county, IL. When will the rest of the world realize that thin-crust pizza is supposed to be cut into squares and not wedges?

[beat_the_govt?]

Originally Posted by kander63

I would also say that Berkeley is more like Evanston than Palo Alto is.

Agreed. I went to school in Evanston, and recently moved to the Berkeley/Kensington area. The transition was effortless. A lot of people forget that Evanston has some run-down areas close by its tonier areas, as does the inner East Bay. Evanston also has a lot of crunchy lifestyle people like Berkeley. Berkeley is more Evanston than Evanston, though, if you understand that. Palo Alto reminds me more of something like Arlington Heights but classier.

Walnut Creek is the spitting image of Naperville, or maybe that should be the other way around. Scary similar, right down to the ginormous Barnes & Noble downtown.

I also lived in Lakeview for a year. Not at all like SF - Lakeview is much more livable, unless of course you prefer "ultra lounges" to neighborhood pubs. SF is less of a city than it is an idea of a city. Silicon Valley def. has more energy and is more humane.

Given your price range, I'd pick somewhere in the Peninsula close to I-280 for commuting to the city. It's just nicer down there.