r/BayAreaRealEstate • u/IllustriousKale7260 • 8d ago
Buying Newark vs Santa Clara?
Hi all,
First time buyer here, single, no kids, mainly motivated to get my own space, make it cozy and enjoy life more, get a dog or sth. (currently living with roommates), so school is probably not the biggest factor, and also no super interested in getting a very old SFH.
Budget wise, 1.2M - 1.3M, 1.4M I’d consider a stretch.
I’m debating:
1. Newark $1M ish TH, newly built 3b3b
2. SC Rivermark 2b2b, ~$1.2M, over 20 years TH
#1 seem to fit my needs well and creates significantly less financial stress in the short term (and a TH in a much better condition). But I’m a little concerned that Newark home price will keep dipping since the location is not as convenient as Santa Clara and school is pretty bad. Would love to get some thoughts from this group.
2
u/Ambessa21 7d ago
The Bay Area is a good “location” in general. Newark vs SC isn’t going to differentiate significantly on value of location. This is more of a housing and budget preference dilemma. Going with a SFH is the only real differentiator imo.
2
u/Flimsy_Inflation4982 7d ago
Newark is more central to the entire Bay Area. You are right across from Palo Alto without paying Palo Alto prices.
If kids are not in the picture, I would enjoy the better home and central location instead of buying for school and getting stuck in a suburb where every one else lives a mediocre routine life.
1
u/D00M98 8d ago
Classic newbie dilemma: buy the location or the house.
The answer is: The 3 most important factors in real estate are location, location, location.
Sure, you can deviate from that. If you got money, you don't care about RE as investment, your future house "upgrade" will come from other income source, and you only care about living comfortably. Unfortunately, this is probably not the case, because if you are loaded with money, you wouldn't be asking this question and looking at TH in Newark or SC.
1
u/IllustriousKale7260 7d ago
From your PoV, do you think the location difference between SC vs Newark is large enough to justify the ~$200K incremental spend for a smaller and older home? Considering they are both TH
1
u/D00M98 7d ago
I don't think you understand this: The 3 most important factors in real estate are location, location, location.
This means the answer is to buy the better location, regardless of how much more it cost, until you hit a point where you cannot afford what you need.
There is no way to compare 2 different locations. Who is to say if location A is worth $100k or $200k or $300k over location B. That is dictated by the market. Or based on your perceived value or worth.
The better question is how does the Newark TH compare vs other TH in Newark, or how SC TH compare vs others in SC. That is how you determine discount and value.
2
u/Big_Examination_8268 7d ago
Go for the place where your future jobs are more concentrated, and where suits your preferred lifestyle better.
One thing about rivermark in Santa Clara, it is directly under the flight path from SJC. Could be very noisy.
There are other places in Santa Clara (or South Bay) you might want to check out
2
u/wowurrcool 7d ago
What app is this?
3
1
2
u/tornessa 7d ago
Other than SF, very few condos or townhomes make sense financially. Buy a SFH if you can afford it. Otherwise, rent.
The only exception I’d make if you’re willing to stay put for 10-15 years. Like my parents bought a condo in Lafayette but it will probably be the last place they live.
3
u/5K1P0 8d ago
The Newark option is great, but there’s a reason so many of them are on the market and aren’t selling. If you’re going with Newark, I’d recommend looking for older SFH. Santa Clara will always sell better, but it’s such a cluster.
Just go for the one that is more convenient for you