Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In Chicago a wealthy younger family probably just wouldn't live in the city; they'd live on the North Shore or in (southern) DuPage County. But if they did, yeah, I guess an apartment would be more likely than a house in a wealthy but old-money neighborhood that's far from everything. There are good magnet schools near downtown.
I’m not “wealthy”, but I could afford to live in any part of Chicagoland, and when we were considering a move back, we were only considering the city. There are Chicago neighborhoods with good schools, and condo/townhouse (and the occasional sfh) within reach of the upper-middle class.
I actually went to Lane Tech, and back in high school we used to go to parties from people in our school and other Chicago schools in high rises where they lived. I just don't think it's anywhere or near as prevalent as it is in NYC, but I would say after NYC Chicago probably has the most.
That's really interesting. I've always assumed that most people in Chicago tend to leave high rises once their kids reach elementary or middle school.
In Chicago a wealthy younger family probably just wouldn't live in the city; they'd live on the North Shore or in (southern) DuPage County. But if they did, yeah, I guess an apartment would be more likely than a house in a wealthy but old-money neighborhood that's far from everything. There are good magnet schools near downtown.
That was true 15-25 years ago, but these days there are very many very wealthy families with children living in the city, many of them choosing the downtown/near north and Lincoln Park areas. If you can afford the higher costs of having kids in the city, it's extremely desirable for many to do so.
My husband and I aren't "wealthy", but we make ~$320,000 per year and would never live anywhere else in the area with our children but directly in the city of Chicago. We have a single family home though not an apartment.
Yeah my inclination is that this would only be very common in NYC. It all depends on what your threshold is for commonplace...I'm sure there are examples of wealthy families opting for this in every city, and some (like Chicago, DC, SF, Miami etc) where it wouldn't raise too many eyebrows. But only NYC where it is super commonplace.
In NYC, the people that can choose to live anywhere readily choose to live in apartments/condos/co-ops in the city. That's mostly for Manhattan and Brooklyn. However, the not-wealthy but still comfortable who are getting priced out of Brooklyn are now looking into Jersey City, Hoboken, and select other parts of Hudson County for either condo/apartment/rowhome living. Mult-family buildings here often have a few parking spots for purchase/rent. Many of the rowhomes have parking spots out front or the newest buildings sometimes have garages.
In LA, the COL is so high that while the wealthy didn't often choose to live in apartments/condos, there was absolutely nothing strange about having a friend who lived in an apartment their entire childhood. Many of my friends did, especially those whose parents moved to the area later. Especially those who moved to the suburban districts for the better schools just outside the city limits of LA. But there are some wealthy people who live in the condos/apartments on Wilshire Blvd in the Westwood area and in Century City by choice.
Definitely SF also, but now a lot of them are in the single-family attached homes of the outer districts.
Idk enough to comment, but I'm sure it's common in Boston, DC, and Chicago as well. I could see it becoming more popular in Philly too, now that it's finally picking up on the re-urbanization trend and attracting lots of young couples and young families into the city limits. It's still a majority rowhome city, but I wouldn't be surprised if people start choosing to live in the new high rises or other condos/apartments going up throughout CC.
Idk enough to comment, but I'm sure it's common in Boston, DC, and Chicago as well. I could see it becoming more popular in Philly too, now that it's finally picking up on the re-urbanization trend and attracting lots of young couples and young families into the city limits. It's still a majority rowhome city, but I wouldn't be surprised if people start choosing to live in the new high rises or other condos/apartments going up throughout CC.
Yeah, I honestly think most families in Philly who want an urban neighborhood would choose a rowhome. It would generally provide more room, privacy, and amenities that a family needs compared to an apartment. Because rowhomes are the common urban experience in Philly anyway, the family would not be missing out on any of the typical urban experience here.
In NYC, the people that can choose to live anywhere readily choose to live in apartments/condos/co-ops in the city. That's mostly for Manhattan and Brooklyn. However, the not-wealthy but still comfortable who are getting priced out of Brooklyn are now looking into Jersey City, Hoboken, and select other parts of Hudson County for either condo/apartment/rowhome living. Mult-family buildings here often have a few parking spots for purchase/rent. Many of the rowhomes have parking spots out front or the newest buildings sometimes have garages.
In LA, the COL is so high that while the wealthy didn't often choose to live in apartments/condos, there was absolutely nothing strange about having a friend who lived in an apartment their entire childhood. Many of my friends did, especially those whose parents moved to the area later. Especially those who moved to the suburban districts for the better schools just outside the city limits of LA. But there are some wealthy people who live in the condos/apartments on Wilshire Blvd in the Westwood area and in Century City by choice.
Definitely SF also, but now a lot of them are in the single-family attached homes of the outer districts.
Idk enough to comment, but I'm sure it's common in Boston, DC, and Chicago as well. I could see it becoming more popular in Philly too, now that it's finally picking up on the re-urbanization trend and attracting lots of young couples and young families into the city limits. It's still a majority rowhome city, but I wouldn't be surprised if people start choosing to live in the new high rises or other condos/apartments going up throughout CC.
It's actually the 50s to 90s buildings that are most likely to have garages. Developers have been moving away from the suburban style buildings since then, at least in areas with good public transit. Most of the new buildings I see in North Brooklyn do not have any off street parking.
I also think that rowhome living is completely different than apartment living (assuming you own the whole thing), since it's functionally the same as a detached single family house.
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/22...m_content=link
But, sticking to apartments, most Chicago buildings are one-two units per floor. Apartment living is different when you aren’t sharing walls with your neighbors.
Last edited by gladhands; 06-06-2019 at 05:03 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
