Homewood vs. Flossmoor (updated information) (Chicago, Chicago Heights: section 8, rental, crime rate)

[chicago_60611]

My wife and I are looking to buy a home in the area, and had some very specific questions: Which village is better? Which has the better schools, what’s the best preschool, Montessori or other? (Looking for a well defined ethnic mix) Which village offers the most diversity, what are the ethnic makeups? What are the different neighborhoods for these villages, what’s the difference in them (distinctive characteristics), in addition are there any we should avoid (sections/boundaries/cross streets), which ones should we be looking at? Which areas in each of these villages are more prone to flooding? What types of activities are offered (dance, gymnastics, or other), and how diverse are they? Which village has the overall better reputation and value for the money? Have there been any major/minor crimes within the last 6 months, and if so what were they? (I'm sure overall crime is less than Chicago), but all places have crime, what type of crimes happen in these two villages? Lastly, does anyone have any negatives or bad experinces--again I'm looking for recent incidents like last 6 months to a year. Thanks.

[At1WithNature]

How about Neither? Flossmoor is the better of the two but both towns are surrounded by crap. Seriously, take a ride in Harvey, Chicago Heights, Markham, East Hazel Crest, etc. Cocaine sales, gang activity, broken familiy structures, and poor property upkeep run rampant in both Homewood and Flossmoor's neighboring towns. And you are incorrect, Homewood's neighbors (such as Harvey and Chicago Heights) have much worse crime than the City of Chicago. Ever since they knocked the projects down, the south suburbs have been cemented as a cess pool (for the most part). And cess pool equates to all the things that I mentioned previously when regarding Homewood's neighboring towns. You'd be better off in Olympia Fields.

The schools are going down the crapper. This is proved by both lowered test scores and a greater amount of absentee teenagers.

The good thing that both towns have going for them is their both capable and stern police forces. Oh, and avoid 183rd and Halsted at all costs.

[ajolotl]

Flossmoor is an extremely beautiful suburb in my opinion. Much nicer homes and better planned than now more popular suburbs west of the interstate (Tinley, Orland, etc.). I agree though that it does have multiple pressures pushing it in the wrong direction. For it to not sink into mediocrity (or worse, though I don't see it becoming a cesspool) it will have to reinvent itself. I don't see it ever retaining the relative prominence and desirability it once had, but it has enough going for it that it can conceivably emerge as a pretty decent town.

One of the key issues is H-F high school. Property taxes are so high there. If the school is as good as it once was, then it makes sense to pay. At1 is correct though that things have really gone downhill with the school. I know this from multiple colleagues whose kids went through the system. It is just a much rougher place every year.

Originally Posted by At1WithNature

How about Neither? Flossmoor is the better of the two but both towns are surrounded by crap. Seriously, take a ride in Harvey, Chicago Heights, Markham, East Hazel Crest, etc. Cocaine sales, gang activity, broken familiy structures, and poor property upkeep run rampant in both Homewood and Flossmoor's neighboring towns. And you are incorrect, Homewood's neighbors (such as Harvey and Chicago Heights) have much worse crime than the City of Chicago. Ever since they knocked the projects down, the south suburbs have been cemented as a cess pool (for the most part). And cess pool equates to all the things that I mentioned previously when regarding Homewood's neighboring towns. You'd be better off in Olympia Fields.

The schools are going down the crapper. This is proved by both lowered test scores and a greater amount of absentee teenagers.

The good thing that both towns have going for them is their both capable and stern police forces. Oh, and avoid 183rd and Halsted at all costs.

[skyeINIL]

My first piece of advice would be to ignore At1WithNature. I would have but ajolotl quoted his post so I had no choice this time.

Secondly, choose Flossmoor. Crime rate is very low as compared to Homewood. Better housing choices, IMO. The surrounding suburbs have very little effect on the crime of either town.

Lastly, 183rd and Halsted is not an intersection to be avoided. That is, unless you have an irrational fear of Wendy's, White Castle, Culver's or Walgreens.

[At1WithNature]

Originally Posted by skyeINIL

My first piece of advice would be to ignore At1WithNature. I would have but ajolotl quoted his post so I had no choice this time.

Secondly, choose Flossmoor. Crime rate is very low as compared to Homewood. Better housing choices, IMO. The surrounding suburbs have very little effect on the crime of either town.

Lastly, 183rd and Halsted is not an intersection to be avoided. That is, unless you have an irrational fear of Wendy's, White Castle, Culver's or Walgreens.

Sadly, SkyeINIL is blinded by her subjective viewpoints. If you want an unbiased opinion, don't listen to her. Some people just don't like to hear the places they hold so very dearly get bashed. but outsiders can tell you the truth. or people who once lived in homewood (like i did) and then moved away. The H-F area is NOTHING like it was 20 years ago. And nothing changed for the better.

[Lookout Kid]

I think the labeling of entire areas as "to be avoided" is basically the new redlining, and is a major reason for the segregation we see today. That said, I don't think I'll ever be moving to the South Suburbs. It's a delicate situation. But maybe high gas prices and increased congestion will ulitmately save the inner ring of suburbs.

Once the outer ring of suburbs faces aging housing stock and infrastructure costs that are impossible to budget for year after year, we will see another major shift in demographics in the Chicago area. I think ultimately we will find an equilibrium point where there are better housing and school choices close to the city, but that is decades off.

[ajolotl]

That and the fact that there are only so many horrible people to go around.

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

I think the labeling of entire areas as "to be avoided" is basically the new redlining, and is a major reason for the segregation we see today. That said, I don't think I'll ever be moving to the South Suburbs. It's a delicate situation. But maybe high gas prices and increased congestion will ulitmately save the inner ring of suburbs.

[Humboldt1]

Skye,

Nothing good ever happened in and around a White Castle. In the northwest suburbs sometimes the only black people you will ever see outside of a few buppies is in a white castle. Glendale Heights is the perfect example of this.

The White Castle is located at swift and army trail and services the mostly black section 8 housing between lake and army trail west of 355.

Most of my yuppie friends who grew up in Flossmor complain of how bad it is getting and how their parents are looking to leave.

How is Lansing doing?

As I remember, skye believes Lansing is a great place to raise a family, something that most posters on here vehementally disagree with.

Lansing still sucks and gets worse with each passing year.

[skyeINIL]

Ah, it's cut-and-paste Humboldt! It's been awhile. And as usual, pulling stuff out of your behind:

Most of my yuppie friends who grew up in Flossmor complain of how bad it is getting and how their parents are looking to leave.

Yes, Flossmoor with its whopping crime rate of 116 and its horribly low median income of $107,850 is getting bad. It seems that whatever town is being talked about you have "someone that you know" who lives/lived there that can tell you about it. You must be a popular guy.

I haven't lived in Lansing since mid-November, but from what I know it's still an ok place to live.

[Lookout Kid]

Instead of ALL suburbs with growing black or hispanic populations "going down the tubes", I think we're likely to see many suburbs that have mixed populations in the future. It just inevitable. There will be a "bad side of town" in many suburbs, and it will be where all of the cheap rental housing is concentrated. It's only when the poverty element gets too strong a foothold that the entire town faces a fate like Harvey or Maywood.

The only suburbs that will escape this are the most expensive ones. This is why River Forest continues to be a wealthy town even thoug many of its neighbors have declined. Places like Hinsdale and Oak Brook are unlikely to see major changes in the near future. The North Shore will remain the most expensive suburban region for decades to come becaus of it's geographic advantages (the lakefront and relative isolation from the worst parts of Chicago).