city or rural? (Joliet, New Lenox, Lincoln: live, price, suburban)

[hlcc]

Originally Posted by Chanmarie

Please forgive me if my questions have already been answered. I have been searching forums for weeks now and haven't quite found what Im looking for.
My husband has been given a pretty good offer in the Chicago area. Hodgkins to be exact. We both grew up on small farms in Utah so the city seems a little intimidating. While we are open to new things (city life) we also have 3 small children (4 and under) that are very used to having wide open spaces to run and play. I love being able to send them in our huge backyard with no real concern about there safety. They also enjoy being able to run with their animals and get dirty. Is it possible for us to find this kind of life style within a reasonable commuting distance to Hodgkins? We are hoping to find a commute that is an hour or less. Any more than an hour just doesn't seem worth the time it would take away from our family.
We have looked at homes in the NW Indiana area. There seems to be a lot more there as far as space and nicer homes that are in our price range (around $200,000) Is it realistic to think he could commute from that area in an hour or less? There is one home on the outskirts of Hobart that we are particularly interested in. What would that commute be like?
Any suggestions or advice is greatly appreciated. Should we change things up and try city life? Are there other areas you would suggest besides NW Indiana?

$200K will not go very far in Chicago in terms of housing size. Just as a point of reference, $500K will probably get you a large 2 bedroom or 3 bed room high rise in the core of Chicago.

Personally between a larger house & longer commute or smaller house & shorter commute, I always prefer a closer commute. With a 2 hour commute each day (1 hour each way), you are basically wasting 10% of the day that you are awake.

[Chanmarie]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Hah, we don't consider SLC big. Sizable, but not very big. SLC's population is about 7% of Chicago's overall population. I'll put it this way - take the "greater downtown area" of Chicago (areas of Near North Side, Loop, Near South Side, and Near West Side) and it has about the same population as all of SLC in about 11.8 sq miles (SLC is 109 sq miles).

As someone else has pointed out, there are pure rural areas closer to Hodgkins in the area than having to go to Indiana. Naperville actually has over 140,000 people in it, but it's pretty damn suburban. Downer's Grove is maybe 50,000 people, Bolingbrook is 75,000, etc.


A few examples in the area:
* 7412 Kenicott Ln, Plainfield, IL 60586 - Home For Sale and Real Estate Listing - realtor.com®
* 407 Deering Ln, Bolingbrook, IL 60440 - Home For Sale and Real Estate Listing - realtor.com®
* 109 Cedarbrook Rd, Naperville, IL 60565 - Home For Sale and Real Estate Listing - realtor.com®

I would stay in Illinois, but that's just me. The first result up there, Plainfield, is actually pretty rural right outside of the city (See: http://goo.gl/maps/EG7Hs). The closest area of Indiana is still further away than these areas I'm quoting above. Bolingbrook and Downers Grove are probably half the distance as to the nearest distance in Indiana.

Also, a lot of the Chicago area is pretty flat. There are a few small, small exceptions and there's a number of small lakes and rivers in areas, but you aren't going to find quite the same nature as you have out west, especially with mountains. They just don't really exist in this area, unfortunately.

Again though, I'd ask the suburban forum. I'm just a city boy

So you think I could get more rural in a shorter commute if I stay in Illinois?
Funny you should say that about the mountains. One of the only things that is making me hesitant about moving is leaving the mountains behind. We spent a lot of our free time in the mountains. Ill be sad to leave them.

[jdiddy]

Look in the SW suburbs. NW Indiana will be too long of a commute and for no good reason, you can already find homes in your price range in some of the sw burbs.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Chanmarie

So you think I could get more rural in a shorter commute if I stay in Illinois?
Funny you should say that about the mountains. One of the only things that is making me hesitant about moving is leaving the mountains behind. We spent a lot of our free time in the mountains. Ill be sad to leave them.

As I mentioned, the Plainfield, IL one right outside of it is rural. It's about 20-25 miles from Hodgkins and it's on an interstate (I-55). Or you could go south a little past Frankfort which is about the same distance and rural.

If you want more suburban - you won't have acres upon acres of land probably at your price, but you could probably get 1/4 acre with a sizable yard and parks around - then really I'd look into closer places like Downers Grove, Orland Park, Bolingbrook, etc.

Yeah the mountain thing I'm sure will take a little bit to get used to. There is at least an ample amount of water in the metro area in some parts. Not to mention that huge lake called Lake Michigan that looks like it could be an ocean at first glance. Little known too but there's over 30 beaches on Lake Michigan in the city of Chicago itself, including a few right downtown. Really, no match nature wise for the western states you're used to, but at least it's not exactly central/eastern Nebraska either. There are also some ski and snowboard areas in the Chicago area, and also Wisconsin, but they pale in comparison, again, to what you're used to. They hills/mountains are usually only say 100-800 feet in height I think. Door County, WI is a popular vacation spot for people from Chicago. A little bit of a drive, but nice. In Minnesota there is the Boundary Waters which is a lot further, but a very beautiful area. Closer to Chicago are areas like Starved Rock State Park. Really though, you won't find a match for the mountains you have in Utah at all. Maybe if you took the mountains away, an area like the Boundary Waters in Minnesota or some areas along Lake Michigan in the state of Michigan you'd find nice.

[nearnorth]

Originally Posted by Chanmarie

Thanks so much for replies. In regards to suburbs I don't even know what to expect. I've honestly never been to a big city unless you consider Salt Lake City "big" which I doubt. From a locals perspective would you all suggest staying within Illinois? We are headed there in a few days. Any areas we should check out? I plan to check out the la grange area as well as downers grove and Naperville. Any other suggestions? Again, thank you!

If you want rural, I would suggest staying in Illinois, just because (as someone else mentioned) there are going to be rural areas closer to the work location in Illinois than in Indiana, and I don't think the price difference between rural areas in the two states is much, if anything at all. If you're looking for suburban, I would lean toward Indiana, however, where you're likely to get more for your money. (I don't think you'll find much in your stated price range in Naperville or Downer's Grove.)

[nearnorth]

Originally Posted by oddstray

I moved away from Chicago 30 years ago, so I'll be no help for recommending neighborhoods.

But Hodgkins, IL is not close to NW Indiana. If I'm looking at the same place you're naming, it's near the Stevenson Expressway and La Grange Road.

Can you be more specific about where "Hodgkins" is, where your husband will be working?

Google can.

https://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-...&ved=0CIIBELYD

It's only about 25 miles from the edge of NWI, which is commutable. People often overestimate distances between IL and IN locations, for some reason. Must be a psychological barrier at the state line.

[nearnorth]

Originally Posted by Chanmarie

So you think I could get more rural in a shorter commute if I stay in Illinois?

From Hodgkins? Yes. No doubt about it. Check out Google Maps.

It sounds like you've decided in your mind that Illinois is urban and Indiana is rural. In reality both are largely rural states full of farm land. Chicago is located in the far NE corner of Illinois, with ~10% (roughly 1 million out of 10 million) of its metro area population bleeding into NW Indiana. (By comparison, Utah has fewer than 3 million in the whole state, despite having nearly as much land area as Illinois and Indiana combined.) Since Hodgkins is W/SW of the city, there are closer rural areas in Illinois, further to the W and SW. NW Indiana is SE of the city, so you're going to have to travel through more of suburbia to get to rural areas in that direction.

[nearnorth]

Originally Posted by marothisu

As I mentioned, the Plainfield, IL

Though Plainfield is at the edge of the metro area, and rural by the standards of city-dwellers, I'm not sure that someone from rural Utah would view it as such. I agree that they should look in that direction, if commuting to Hodgkins. I just think they may have to go a tad past Plainfield for truly rural.

[Chanmarie]

Originally Posted by marothisu

As I mentioned, the Plainfield, IL one right outside of it is rural. It's about 20-25 miles from Hodgkins and it's on an interstate (I-55). Or you could go south a little past Frankfort which is about the same distance and rural.

If you want more suburban - you won't have acres upon acres of land probably at your price, but you could probably get 1/4 acre with a sizable yard and parks around - then really I'd look into closer places like Downers Grove, Orland Park, Bolingbrook, etc.

Yeah the mountain thing I'm sure will take a little bit to get used to. There is at least an ample amount of water in the metro area in some parts. Not to mention that huge lake called Lake Michigan that looks like it could be an ocean at first glance. Little known too but there's over 30 beaches on Lake Michigan in the city of Chicago itself, including a few right downtown. Really, no match nature wise for the western states you're used to, but at least it's not exactly central/eastern Nebraska either. There are also some ski and snowboard areas in the Chicago area, and also Wisconsin, but they pale in comparison, again, to what you're used to. They hills/mountains are usually only say 100-800 feet in height I think. Door County, WI is a popular vacation spot for people from Chicago. A little bit of a drive, but nice. In Minnesota there is the Boundary Waters which is a lot further, but a very beautiful area. Closer to Chicago are areas like Starved Rock State Park. Really though, you won't find a match for the mountains you have in Utah at all. Maybe if you took the mountains away, an area like the Boundary Waters in Minnesota or some areas along Lake Michigan in the state of Michigan you'd find nice.

We are open to new things so we are pretty excited for the new landscape. We have heard that the beaches on Lake Michigan are awesome. Better than most beaches in California. We are big fishers so the lakes are appealing to us.
800 feet is like a nice hill here. Haha. Big change but it'll be a fun adventure!
So is the general opinion of everyone here that we should go more rural? Or should we stay more suburban? Given what I have told you (which isn't much to go on I realize) where do you think we would most happy? Time was, how long would you say the commute to Plainfield is?

[Chanmarie]

Originally Posted by nearnorth

Though Plainfield is at the edge of the metro area, and rural by the standards of city-dwellers, I'm not sure that someone from rural Utah would view it as such. I agree that they should look in that direction, if commuting to Hodgkins. I just think they may have to go a tad past Plainfield for truly rural.

Although rural like we have here would be ideal we don't have to have the acreage we have here. Honestly just something with a pretty good sized yard in a slower paced area would be great.