U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago Suburbs
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-18-2008, 10:17 AM
 
11,973 posts, read 28,739,417 times
Reputation: 4596

Advertisements

To me this totally depends on oil prices and public transit infrastructure investment. If gas truly gets to be $8/gallon or more in the next few years as many are projecting, that would trigger a major real estate boom in the inner suburbs. Any inner suburb with good schools will boom tremendously in that environment.

If automobile technology boosts fuel efficiency or if prices don't rise as anticipated, I think the outer suburbs will fair much better.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-18-2008, 11:08 AM
 
Location: Schaumburg, IL
17 posts, read 54,368 times
Reputation: 12
I would say where you have new development in former rural areas. Some of the old, pricey communities mentioned are already 'maxed out' in my opinion.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2008, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Evanston
296 posts, read 1,012,725 times
Reputation: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdc3217 View Post
OK, it is your post, and I shouldn't be aggravated by this, but I am.
Why limit out areas that are not already prime? Your post is to ask where people see growth and appreciation, but don't look where things are undervalued to begin with? Makes no sense to me.
Fair question, and I debated whether to include this qualifier. But I was more interested in sharing ideas on places that families might consider investing in for the long haul, more so than ideas on where speculators might buy cheap property and hope for a turnaround. But, hey, if you have an idea on someplace that's a little downtrodden but you think is poised for a renaissance, that's cool too. We're all just shootin' the sh*t anyway.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2008, 11:22 AM
 
28,461 posts, read 75,481,354 times
Reputation: 18526
While the current media focus on gasoline is certainly not helping development out in the fringes, there are other forces that are probably a bigger deal. No matter how cheap fuel is/was the shear distance that some of these towns are from any sort of intensive employment means thats it is a HUGE time sucker even if highways are deserted and /or you can ride an express train. Life goes from being home/work to home/racing around going crazy to get to work/work/racing around like crazy trying to get home. That is the "double whammy" of any sort of long commute. God forbid that something URGENT happens at one place while you are at the other. I don't care what anybody says about cell phones/Aircards/ teleconferences/ et cetera -- in many sorts of jobs it is a huge negative to have a long commute.

Another big trend is that there are "right sizes" for homes, parks, neighborhoods, churches, governments et cetera. If you are squeezed together too tightly you can't teach your kid how to ride a bicycle, throw a ball or other 'normal' stuff. On the other extreme if you are so spread out that there no other kids to field a little league team or go anywhere on a bicycle kids will just veg out with their XBox never realizing that they can actually DO anything in the real world of skinned knees and clouds of dirt. There are all sorts of things that are effected by the same sort of ranges -- too small a town and there is no serious effort at controlling zoning, enforcing codes, building infrastructure. Too large and things get bogged down in bureaucracy, inefficiency, and corruption. If there are not enough people to get volunteers for things the one or two folks who are available get burnt out, too many volunteers and people lose interest as there is no personal connection.

The basics are simple: What is the #1 question that people ask about on the forums? "Is xxx SAFE????"

The #2 question is generally about affordability. My sense is people don't want to feel like they are paying an arm and leg for something that is run down.

Near the top are questions of "aesthetics". People like towns that LOOK GOOD, but they also want to know that a town has no toxic / obnoxious odors, wastes, industries.

The sense that the commute is REASONABLE is hugely important, beyond the price of fuel there are the questions of time.

Having OPTIONS for dining and entertainment are very often asked, but given the frequency with which most people who are not quite young (or quite old/retired...) really take advantage of these things I suspect they are NOT as important in the end.

Finally, I think the jury is still very much out on 'diversity'. Now don't get me wrong, when it comes to how diversity related to SAFETY for minorities (be it racial, cultural, lifestyle/sexual orientation) a place that is BIGOTED will not be successful, but simply because a place is more homogeneous than the "big picture" averages of the region/state/country/world does NOT seem to be a negative, while having area that foster only one kind of diversity have no advantage in desirability. It is not enough to have people of different appearance, there must be efforts to find people with common goals that bridge any differences of heritage. There are far too few examples of this.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2008, 11:30 AM
 
Location: Portland OR
2,072 posts, read 3,024,613 times
Reputation: 3147
Default ???

Not sure what upsets you about the post. Isn't the OP asking the same thing you are?
I think it is a framing of the question issue.

You want to know where things are "undervalued"
OP wants to know where there is most potential for appreciation.

Not sure of the difference.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2008, 11:35 AM
 
1,156 posts, read 3,416,078 times
Reputation: 487
I'll pitch out Homewood.
I think its undervalued and close enough to the city, and with good enough transit that it could really boom.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2008, 04:08 PM
 
37 posts, read 144,247 times
Reputation: 23
I'll second Homewood.

I would also throw out Flossmoor. Beautiful downtown area along with some very nice homes plus the Metra Electric runs right through the downtown area.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2008, 07:37 AM
 
38 posts, read 107,215 times
Reputation: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humboldt1 View Post
No way in hell sugar grove is within an hour of the city, except maybe at 2AM and driving 80mph or more.
The sad fact is that the outer burbs have seen their fortunes tied to oil prices. The inevitable conclusion to the costs of transportation is urbanization. Look at the past, people always settle next to transportation centers - roads, railroads, airports - and in that order. Human settlement patterns have changed in the past, and they will now change again. Are we so arrogant as to believe that our possessions, houses mostly, are immune from the effects of a sea change in energy prices?

Like the housing bubble, might not the patterns of sprawling development just been an illusion too?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2008, 08:08 AM
 
4,723 posts, read 14,354,961 times
Reputation: 4746
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkForester View Post
I'll second Homewood.

I would also throw out Flossmoor. Beautiful downtown area along with some very nice homes plus the Metra Electric runs right through the downtown area.
Doesnt the proximity of the far less desirable neighboring suburbs like Harvey,Chicago Hts.Country Club hills etc put a damper on these nice areas as far as desirablity and growth?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2008, 08:46 AM
 
Location: Around Chicago
862 posts, read 2,578,293 times
Reputation: 314
No more so than Maywood, Bellwood, and the Austin neighborhood affect Oak Park.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago Suburbs
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top