Anyone familiar with South Shore? (Chicago, Cicero: crime rate, house, buying)

[nextjen]

Originally Posted by ItsMeBitches

Most of the hoods on the Eastside are dense. Woodlawn, Bronzeville, Southshore are all dense. Its just white people up north are mad ignant bout the way black people live in Chicago. We aint all bungalow.

We ain't all Bungalow? Is that like bougie bougie? FYI Bungalows were built for the working class in the early 1900's. And we aren't all mad ignant. We all want the same things - just not the knuckleheads our former 'alderman' Beavers allowed into our working (KEY WORD - WORKING) class 'hood. Happy friggin' new year...

[PokerPlayer1]

Bump to this thread.
At these price levels, I'm strongly, strongly considering buying here.
Manias work in both directions, up and down. $4.20 gas is just as maniacal as $1.60 gas a few months later.

The prices I'm seeing for some lakefront down in SS is starting to look very appealing from a speculative standpoint. I wouldn't ever live there myself and I won't section-8 it out, but at these levels (look carefully- a lot of inventory is still priced way too high), I feel a lot of bank owned stuff in South Shore is severely under priced.

[Stumpy77]

Originally Posted by PokerPlayer1

Bump to this thread.
At these price levels, I'm strongly, strongly considering buying here.
Manias work in both directions, up and down. $4.20 gas is just as maniacal as $1.60 gas a few months later.

The prices I'm seeing for some lakefront down in SS is starting to look very appealing from a speculative standpoint. I wouldn't ever live there myself and I won't section-8 it out, but at these levels (look carefully- a lot of inventory is still priced way too high), I feel a lot of bank owned stuff in South Shore is severely under priced.

prices might be nice, but the crime rate's still the crime rate

[arriell]

i live like 5 blocks from there and its not the best . and i do think race has a factor . unfortunately. im a black female and have been living on the southside all my life - kenwood, chatham, jackson park areas, and over here is the worst. and i believe u might be a target because of ure race unfortunately. these young punks like to mess with ppl that they think are weak and some feel like if ure a white boy in their hood u wont win. apartments are cheap because of it . some apts are really nice . if u need any more info or q's u can personal msg me .

[PokerPlayer1]

Originally Posted by Stumpy77

prices might be nice, but the crime rate's still the crime rate

"Urban Pioneer" real estate sales have always been and will always be a game of finding the next biggest idiot and selling to him for more than you paid.

We've already seen how delusional the naive, idealistic white masses can be when it comes to buying into places like this. All this most recent (drastic) price decrease does is lower the barriers to entry so similarly delusional idealists who happen to reside in a lower economic strata can participate. To the wealthier ones who've already shown a willingness to pay positively moronic prices for "up and coming" (LOL!) areas like South Shore, this screams "bargain".

No matter how bad the crime rate is in South Shore (and it is pretty bad), the fact is, South Shore offers something very tangiable in the way of views and square footage that, if it existed 10 miles up the lake in a white neighborhood, would cost 10X as much. This is very, very appealing to the bargain minded, young urban whites, especially those who are willing to live in a black neighborhood believing that "hope" and "change" will carry them through.

In my opinion, there are enough of these people to support prices that are higher than what's currently par in South Shore. Speculative real estate always gets hit first and hardest in r/e downturns- and invariably, it usually gets beaten down too far before it finds a realistic balance. I'm starting to see oppurtunities (particularly bank owned ones) that definitely scream "this is just too cheap, even for South Shore". Once credit gets going again, I belive the upward correction may be drastic.

[ajolotl]

So, has the sustained rapid appreciation of e.g. Kenwood from the late 70s (when it was pretty rough) until now just a 30-year long series of idiots buying from each other, or is there sometimes such a thing as true gentrification.

I have a colleague who bought there in 1986 for 150K or so. Everyone told him no to. His house is worth over 2M now. Big idiot.

Originally Posted by PokerPlayer1

"Urban Pioneer" real estate sales have always been and will always be a game of finding the next biggest idiot and selling to him for more than you paid.

[surlycue]

Originally Posted by ajolotl

I have a colleague who bought there in 1986 for 150K or so. Everyone told him no to. His house is worth over 2M now. Big idiot.

The only problem is he had to live there for the last 23 years.

[ajolotl]

Originally Posted by surlycue

The only problem is he had to live there for the last 23 years.

I don't know -- an acre lot, 10K square feet, 10 minutes to the loop, 1 mile from the lake, walking distance to work, Court Theater, Mandel Hall, Doc Films, Rockefeller Chapel, etc etc. Maybe not for you but I don't think it qualifies him as an idiot. The price is ignoring the riff raff, but their numbers have dwindled rapidly over the years.

[PokerPlayer1]

Originally Posted by ajolotl

So, has the sustained rapid appreciation of e.g. Kenwood from the late 70s (when it was pretty rough) until now just a 30-year long series of idiots buying from each other, or is there sometimes such a thing as true gentrification.

I have a colleague who bought there in 1986 for 150K or so. Everyone told him no to. His house is worth over 2M now. Big idiot.

There is definitely sometimes such a thing as "true gentrification", however, as another poster alluded to, there's a massive price to be paid in terms of a diminished (often times, grotesque) quality of life if you're buying as a primary residence and want to get in while it's still 'cheap'. Simply dismissing the trajectory of gentrification as "ignoring the riff raff" is a woefully inadequate description of what the first salvo of urban-pioneers have to endure during that critical 'first decade' when the "up and coming area with all that potential" is still a 3rd world jungle of crime and squalor, pretty much totally unfit for habitation by respectable people (including those unfortunate folks who are trapped in such places as a result of life circumstances beyond their own control).

I believe the biggest mistake most people make on this issue is assuming that since gentrification exists as a concept, it will invariably come to any neighborhood that is in the city limits, by the lake and largely black. It doesn't even require the benefit of hindsight to figure out why the areas that gentrified in the last, say, 20 years did so. Plenty of people saw it with 20/20 foresight and put their money where their mouths were. A lot of the dynamics that were in play for those places aren't anywhere to be found in South Shore.

That said, I do believe I'll live to see the day when South Shore is "the next big thing". Whether it turns out to be or not depends on a lot of things that no one can predict. I'm just not going to live there myself during the changeover, but I might dip my toe in to a property to hold as a long term gentrification play, or, a "sell on the rebound" type of deal.

[Manigault]

Originally Posted by surlycue

The only problem is he had to live there for the last 23 years.

I've lived around there (but not in Kenwood) for more than 25 years. It ain't been so bad.

The question of buying a home is if you are speculating or if you are investing in a consumable, ie you want to 'consume' the neighborhood, the local trans, shopping, etc. If you want a quick flip, then you can be very critical of any perceived downsides of a particular area.

However, if you are using a residence for the long run of about 5 years or so, you may learn to overcome or even to work to defeat any drawbacks in the area.