NYC family of 6: Move to or Chicago or SF? Anyone lived in both? (Washington: apartment, home)

[chet everett]

The headline grabbing stories are not about those involved in gang activity. They are the heartbreaking cases of people that were literally minding their own business when some idiot that was involved in illegal activity mistakenly targeted them or worse the hoodlum's reckless aim randomly struck down a true innocent, often tragically inside an adjacent home.

The degree to which this can be avoided within Chicago is not often covered in the "national stories" and does end up making all of the city sound like a non-stop bullet dodging nightmare to those that don't understand the sharp divides of income and race that often are the only separations between neighborhoods a short transit stop apart...

My "baseline recommendation" for families with school age children considering Chicago is that private schools (at about $15k per child) need to be part of your calculation due to the dysfunction of CPS. Even if your kids are bright enough to be admitted to one of the better performing the Daedalean
policies regarding relocation all but guarantee things won't work out ...

The many desirable suburbs that are linked to Chicago via excellent express rail service means that a nice home with a "family sized" lot and all the other ammenties that are attractive to those with children can be also be under 30 minutes from your office. And gun violence is a complete non-issue in just about every desirable suburb.

Originally Posted by plates

Unless you plan on being involved in gang activity, you don't have to worry in your case.

Chicago seems to be your city since you seem to want it more other than the above which has been dispelled.

South Haven is only about two hours away as well.

[jonnynonos]

Tony Hu's restaurants are great and there are some other great ones.

You know what is funny even when you go to a "less authentic" restaurant in Chinatown it is often filled with Chinese people. Try ordering off menu next time, maybe.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by jonnynonos

Tony Hu's restaurants are great and there are some other great ones.

You know what is funny even when you go to a "less authentic" restaurant in Chinatown it is often filled with Chinese people. Try ordering off menu next time, maybe.

Yeah. Hu's places are good and of course Lao Sze Chuan is Michelin rated. Haven't been here yet, but my gf's friends say Go 4 Food is even better and it is also Michelin rated. A few friends from China said it might be the best in town, although I don't think they've tried some of the good places in Albany Park. Sun Wah has really good duck and my Chinese friend said they could do well in China. VIP Restaurant and Great Seas in Albany Park (Korean run chinese) are really good too (they do other things pretty well). Cai has some decent Dim Sum and actually their Peking Duck might be better than Sun Wah's (at least what I had at Chinese New Year). There are some more good places in Chinatown and also Bridgeport (i.e. Han 202). Others in Albany Park, Garfield Ridge, a few in Lakeview, etc.

If all someone did was eat the chinese food in the Loop or River North/Streeterville then yeah, I pity you. Those places (except 1 or 2) do suck for sure and don't count. Sadly, I think most people try what's only in these neighborhoods and base the rest of Chicago...the other 75 community areas of chicago, based off that which is being rather miser-ly.

[sfcambridge]

I've lived in both cities for many years, and am close to your age. But I don't have kids.....

I think they both are great.

The major issue to consider is expense, and family issues, as both cities are excellent and will be great for you and your kids. If money is no object, sure go to SF. The quality of life is better (but only if you have a lot of money!!), the weather is better, the natural beauty/adventure is better, the food is better, the integrated/multiculturalism/international component is better, and the schools are often better too. I loved having a better integration of hispanic/Asian cultures (it is not just Chinese..... it is incredibly diverse). I loved the progressive feel. However, the Bay Area (because of the incredible concentration of wealth there) also has many very conservative folks who are also fairly educated and people can be more tolerant.

Chicago has great value for what it has to offer. Rough weather, but seasons can be good. Amazing diversity and a size that makes SF sometimes seem small.... but huge areas of segregation, corrupt politics. Chicago is much less progressive, and does lack some of the sophistication of a NYC or SF, but does have a large number of Universities c/w SF that does add to some academic component. The lake is beautiful and does make it seem like you are on the ocean. The architecture, the museums and the numerous affordable neighborhoods makes it a great place for exploring. Both Chicago and SF have excellent culture/arts, but the number of free summer music festivals, cultural festivals, and incredible (reasonably priced) theater options in Chicago are pretty unsurpassed. They nearly have NYC beat on that one, for half the price and half the crowds.

So why did I leave the Bay Area.......? Family. My parents needed help, time moves quickly.... and as you have kids.... you should think long and hard about how important family is to you and will be to your kids in the future. If you isolate them, they will grow up to think that is how families should be and family is less important. If you need help, think how wonderful to have your families there. There are pros/cons to both that are strongly dependent upon the families (and their sanity...).

So why will I probably not return to the Bay Area? Because of the expense. I can live much better and afford a much better home with better entertainment in Chicago. Remember, to get a house in SF with a yard and big enough for a family of 6 in a ok area will easily be in the 1-2 million range and that may not be a nice looking house! There are some beautiful homes in the Bay Area, but tons of poor construction/ugly/tacky ones that cost so much it is literally heart stopping. But you are coming from NYC... the only place in the country that can compete with SF for cost, so I assume you prepared for that.

But I will always miss the natural beauty, weather, culture, and ease of life of SF.

[Vlajos]

I believe SF has a much worse public school system than Chicago. My sister in law who lives there told me that every child is assigned a school by lottery. Most of the schools are bad. In Chicago, there are plenty of good to great neighborhood schools that all you have to do is live in the boundary. If you are accustomed to NYC housing prices, Chicago is a cake walk for a good neighborhood school. No need to bother with magnet lotteries.

[Lucky Clover]

Originally Posted by sfcambridge

I've lived in both cities for many years, and am close to your age. But I don't have kids.....

I think they both are great.

The major issue to consider is expense, and family issues, as both cities are excellent and will be great for you and your kids. If money is no object, sure go to SF. The quality of life is better (but only if you have a lot of money!!), the weather is better, the natural beauty/adventure is better, the food is better, the integrated/multiculturalism/international component is better, and the schools are often better too. I loved having a better integration of hispanic/Asian cultures (it is not just Chinese..... it is incredibly diverse). I loved the progressive feel. However, the Bay Area (because of the incredible concentration of wealth there) also has many very conservative folks who are also fairly educated and people can be more tolerant.

That's debatable.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by tawfiqmp

That's debatable.

Yep. Most food authorities will even place NYC and Chicago almost neck and neck and a bunch place Chicago above it actually.

[eureka1]

You will pay twice the money for half the house in the Bay Area. Stay in Chicago and vacation in California.

[BigLake]

Originally Posted by tawfiqmp

That's debatable.

I'd agree. It's kind of a conventional wisdom thing, but this conventional wisdom might be a bit dated. I think NYC, Chicago and San Francisco are America's great gastronomic/dining cities (with New Orleans maybe), and probably in that exact order. They're all very good.

[jonnynonos]

I wouldn't say Chicago is lacking in sophistication. I'm not quite sure what that word means these days. I actually have spent more time in London than New York, and I would say Chicago does not have that vibrancy, which is probably similar to NY. It's simply not as big as a city, and is not as international of a city.

But in terms of sophistication... I'm sure you can go hang out at the Artist's Cafe and talk Kafka until your little head falls off. Someone could visit the Modern Wing, CSO, Grant Park Orchestra, Summer Dance, Chicago Humanities Festival, Lollapalooza, the MCA until they were completely and totally insufferable.

In fact:

We got our own big paper, the Chicago Tri-bune, and some of us folks is known to read it daily! And we also got the Internet, so if you want, you can even read a paper from London England or Tai-wan!

Hell, I even know a few people who get the New York Times delivered all the way out here, if you can believe it!