Suburbs by young, middle, old (Chicago, Aurora: apartment complexes, new house, buying)

[Suburban2332]

Was curiuos what all think of this question. When you think of the suburbs of Chicago, what comes to mind with age? What I mean by this, where do the young live(18-32), the middle(32-50), and older(50+). In my opinion the young live on the outer burbs West, Northwest, and Far North due to New Construction and affordabilitiy. Places like Aurora,Elburn, Lake in the Hills, Antioch, Wacaunda. The middle live in places like Naperville, Downers Grove, Elmhurst, Schaumburg, Arlington Heights. The older live in the North shore, Fox Valley, Barrington. Does this sound accurate?

[aragx6]

Not really. Often it's the 18-32 crowd that has the most money to spend on housing. Many of them don't have kids to worry about and they want to be closer the action. I know very few young people who would willingly move to Aurora. Apartments can be had for cheap just about anywhere.

[Steve-o]

There are many young folks on Aurora's eastern edges, in the newer apartment complexes.

[oakparkdude]

You really can't stratify suburbs by age. Its not like once you turn 50 you magically have enough money to move to Kenilworth. The more accurate classification scheme probably involves income and race.

[middle-aged mom]

I think a substantial portion of those in the 18-25 range continue to live at home because they are either in school or can't afford to leave the nest.

The greater Barrington area is almost 100 square miles, encompassing many villages and generalizations are impossible. I think the median age is under 40.

[DonkeyTeeth]

I guess there are some areas dominated by old money where you wouldn't find many young first-time home buyers, and some areas that try to attract only young families with lots of starter homes.

But in general, you can't really assume people just think and act linearly - as age goes up, income goes up, so they live in more expensive areas. Lots of things influence and change where people live. Some people live where they live just because of proximity to family, friends, or work. Income doesn't always go straight up with age - some people may make compromises so a parent can stay home or they may settle for smaller homes where they know schools are good.

[Steve-o]

Originally Posted by sukwoo

Its not like once you turn 50 you magically have enough money to move to Kenilworth

You gotta admit though, that would be pretty sweet. Almost like a reward for getting that far in life.

[oakparkdude]

Originally Posted by Steve-o

You gotta admit though, that would be pretty sweet. Almost like a reward for getting that far in life.

I realize you're joking, but don't get me started on how older people get a disproportionate share of government assistance. SS, Medicare, and, now, free transit rides. Why not help kids out so they can become productive, tax-paying adults? This country's priorities are so messed up.

[NYrules]

No mention of the south side? I see north, west, and far north west... I guess we (the south side) are forgotten about once again on here.

And NO, you cannot generalize by saying an area is all old people or all young. Yes, more young families tend to be the ones buying the newer homes, but why is this? Is it because they prefer new or just simply cannot afford areas like Skokie, Mt. Prospect, Niles, Palos Heights, etc and don't have the time to be buying some old house that will need months worth of remodeling to bring the home out of the 60's? Also lets not forget to mention that as a couple gets older, their kids move out leaving them "empty nesters" what do they need to move for, to some big huge new house where everything is all new to them? First off, who is going to clean that thing? 70 year old mom? Is she going to have to be lugging the ol' Kenmore from the west wing of the house to the east on a day to day basis? Not to mention that sentimental attachment is a big thing for people as they grow older. Memories of their kids waking up at 6AM and running downstairs on Christmas morning to open their presents under the tree, maybe memories of having their own parents over who are no longer with them and just remembering "dad" sitting by the fireplace really hits home for some (esp in women who typically are close to daddy hence creating the slogan "daddy's little girl"), memories for dad of having his son catch his first pitch from himself in the front yard... In any case sentiment/memories are a big part of why older folks tend to stay put once their kids move on. Since the far out places are all new, they don't have any memories for most leaving older folks to want to stay put in the older areas. Afterall, its their home. Its their life. Its all they know.

[rgb123]

A lot of people think of the suburbs still as if people are still coming to Chicago from Europe on the boat and then radiating out to the burbs as they can afford it. The reality is that a lof of us, like myself are the grandchildren of that migration. A lot of us have actual ties to certain suburbs and consider them our hometowns. A lot of us in our 20's and 30's may be living and working in the suburbs, and living close to or in the suburb we grew up in, not because of money but because it is our town. I do live in the outer ring, and I am 30. I work closer in and could live anywhere from Chicago to points north and west, anywhere from Kenosha to Harvard, to Naperville. I chose to live close to where I grew up because I have ties there and I like it. I know a lot of people who went to my high school that have NEVER left town....I believe this probably plays out in a lot of the suburbs. I don't think you see things stratified by ecomonmics unless the area is very depressed or very wealthy.