CHICAGO | Economic & Business Development

[rgolch]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I saw the negative spin and rolled my eyes too, but not because he is a “conservative curmudgeon”. To the contrary, I think he is probably a tad liberal.

I think these journalists have to write pieces that have a bit of tension in them just to draw interest. Journalism is a business. That’s why it’s not entirely to be trusted.

Chicago’s strong showing in the $200k (higher rate as a percentage than NY and LA but lower than some smaller big cities) or above category already shows that Greg is wrong in suggesting that people will bail on Chicago in droves once their income is higher

What’s more is, people over the age of 45 usually don’t uproot their lives just for the heck of it. That’s the time of your life when kids are usually in high school, and you’ve already developed your social networks. I’d think the under 30 crowd would be at more risk of leaving. So this assumption that as this group gets older and more successful, they are at risk for leaving, is just complete nonsense.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by rgolch

What’s more is, people over the age of 45 usually don’t uproot their lives just for the heck of it. That’s the time of your life when kids are usually in high school, and you’ve already developed your social networks. I’d think the under 30 crowd would be at more risk of leaving. So this assumption that as this group gets older and more successful, they are at risk for leaving, is just complete nonsense.

I wonder how many people who are in these income groups right now who either have young children or will have them soon will either (a) stay in the city, (b) move to the suburbs, or (c) move out of the metro area. I'm curious to see if there could be a changing trend or not in the future with people like this. Also how many people won't have kids and just stay in the city.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Next time, I'll be sure to ask you for YouTube videos instead of providing your own insight.

That's difficult for him to provide since he hasn't got any insight to provide. It was pretty funny watching his negative BS immediately get bitchslapped by wildly positive unemployment numbers. Such a wild swing that it is, as you mention, suspect. CSI is a decent indicator, but it's not something that is going to give you much, if any, insight on the relative health of city economies, it's simply not designed for that. Interesting that Chicago's at the bottom of that list, but Chicago is not known for wild real estate price increases. There's a reason for that: ample developable land. Prices rise and new supply is built here. That can't be said for SF or NYC. I don't see them building Smarthomes TM all over NYC or SF.

Originally Posted by marothisu

I wonder how many people who are in these income groups right now who either have young children or will have them soon will either (a) stay in the city, (b) move to the suburbs, or (c) move out of the metro area. I'm curious to see if there could be a changing trend or not in the future with people like this. Also how many people won't have kids and just stay in the city.

I get married in a month and we will also become an official household at or near the top of the income categories discussed. We have zero intention of leaving the city. Maybe we'd move to Evanston or Oak Park if I found a deal on a FLW or something like that, lol. There's a higher odds of me finding that in Hyde Park though.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I wonder how many people who are in these income groups right now who either have young children or will have them soon will either (a) stay in the city, (b) move to the suburbs, or (c) move out of the metro area. I'm curious to see if there could be a changing trend or not in the future with people like this. Also how many people won't have kids and just stay in the city.

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

I'm in the highest income group discussed, plan to have kids in 1-2 years and will 100% stay in the city.

I just accepted a job that will put me in that highest income group, but requires I commute to and likely move to Miami. Ideally I'd do it long enough that I could prove out that I can do the work and then take a job back in Chicago at even higher income. On the off chance Amazon lands in Chicago that would become easier. I'm 44, though, recently divorced, and gay, so I don't really fall into the "starting a family" category despite the fact that I would have loved to have kids - I know gay couples can adopt or do surrogacy, but it's so much harder that for straight couples that can just accidentally start a family. It's really the only thing I'm still conflicted about when it comes to being gay.

Even if I do actually move to Miami, I will almost certainly keep my condo here in Chicago, maybe renting it out, maybe not, because I have enough ties here still that I'd like to keep a base even if I don't live here 100% of the time. I wonder how many other people are like me.

[Halsted & Villagio]

Originally Posted by emathias

I just accepted a job that will put me in that highest income group, but requires I commute to and likely move to Miami. Ideally I'd do it long enough that I could prove out that I can do the work and then take a job back in Chicago at even higher income. On the off chance Amazon lands in Chicago that would become easier. I'm 44, though, recently divorced, and gay, so I don't really fall into the "starting a family" category despite the fact that I would have loved to have kids - I know gay couples can adopt or do surrogacy, but it's so much harder that for straight couples that can just accidentally start a family. It's really the only thing I'm still conflicted about when it comes to being gay.

Even if I do actually move to Miami, I will almost certainly keep my condo here in Chicago, maybe renting it out, maybe not, because I have enough ties here still that I'd like to keep a base even if I don't live here 100% of the time. I wonder how many other people are like me.

As someone who lived in Miami for close to 2 years after law school, I don't envy you at all. Miami is VASTLY overrated. A country/party city in many respects but more than that... a city that caters to sleeze... clubs, strip clubs and little run down hole in the walls are king. And somewhat surprisingly the downtown is virtually lifeless. The beaches are where the action is at but even those get old as they are often overcrowded and flooded with teens and twenty somethings on drinking binges. It is easy to see why Miami is glamorized on TV and movies though - the party atmosphere and beaches - but it offered very little outside of that. The whole Miami scene was a rude awakening for me - I could not wait to get out of there.

On the plus side, if you have big money... and I do mean, BIG money (millions in disposable income) you could have an entirely different experience down there. You know, the whole yacht/club VIP room treatment thing. It is sort of a "haves" versus "have not's" place with a giant gulf dividing the two worlds. There is no real middle ground unless you are into strip clubs and partying all the time. For you, as a gay man, I honestly can't say what that experience would be like in Miami. I will say that although Miami is a party city there is a streak of red-neck culture down there of intolerance that you will want to keep an eye on.

Good luck to you no matter what you decide.

[Kenmore]

brutal, lol^

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

CSI is a decent indicator, but it's not something that is going to give you much, if any, insight on the relative health of city economies, it's simply not designed for that. Interesting that Chicago's at the bottom of that list, but Chicago is not known for wild real estate price increases. There's a reason for that: ample developable land. Prices rise and new supply is built here. That can't be said for SF or NYC. I don't see them building Smarthomes TM all over NYC or SF.
.

CSI only measures single family home prices. It does not measure condos or coops

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by rgolch

What’s more is, people over the age of 45 usually don’t uproot their lives just for the heck of it. That’s the time of your life when kids are usually in high school, and you’ve already developed your social networks.

speaking as a late-stage genX-er (i'm 42) city-dweller, it seems like most of my peers delayed procreation until their 30s. it's now not all that uncommon to be 45 with kids in elementary school.

some of my friends jumped into family-hood earlier and now have a teenager on their hands, but they're the exception, not the rule in my social circle. maybe out in the burbs people generally start families younger?

Originally Posted by marothisu

I wonder how many people who are in these income groups right now who either have young children or will have them soon will either (a) stay in the city, (b) move to the suburbs, or (c) move out of the metro area. I'm curious to see if there could be a changing trend or not in the future with people like this. Also how many people won't have kids and just stay in the city.

we're generic white people in our early 40s, we're comfortably well into the 100K+ group, we have 2 young kids, and we're currently planting some long-term roots in lincoln square.

a generation ago, people like us almost unilaterally moved to the burbs.

now, lots of people in our age/income/racial demographic still do move out to the burbs once olivia and oliver reach school age, but i do get the sense that a real shift is taking place.

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

I'm in the highest income group discussed, plan to have kids in 1-2 years and will 100% stay in the city.

My wife and I are also in this group (33/34 years old). We are 8.5 months pregnant and planning to stay in the city. Most of my friends are planning the same and looking at neighborhoods like Logan Square and Avondale. A lot depends on how much the neighborhood CPS schools improve in these neighborhoods.

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ Avondale is great for kids, the schools aren't perfect yet, but that's got more to do with the flood of yuppie parents just now starting to put their kids into school.

I've said it a million times, CPS doesn't have a teacher problem, it doesn't have a funding problem (at least in terms of what it spends per student), it doesn't have an administrator problem, and it doesn't have a facilities problem. None of these things cause the issues we see. The problem CPS has is a parent problem.

It's not that these parents could even do any better given their own life circumstances, but when you put a bunch of kids who have parents who are either unwilling or unable to give their kids the resources they need to succeed, no amount of teaching or school funding is going to fix it. Parents who either don't have the resources or work three jobs or weren't well educated themselves or are in jail are simply not going to provide the education stats that a bunch of rich white collar people with free time and multiple degrees do. As the demographics of any given CPS school start to change, the quality of the school inevitably goes up.

And that's a good feature of gentrification. Whichever low income kids are still going to the neighborhood school when it's flooded with yuppie spawn are going to benefit immensely as the load on school resources is lightened and teachers can spend more time catering to those who really need the attention. Mom Physicians Assistant and Dad computer programmer have plenty of their own resources to dote on Junior with.

Schurz High School in Avondale is an excellent example of this, as Old Irving, Portage Park, and Avondale have been flooded with upper middle class families, Schurz has gone from a semi dangerous, mediocre at best, High School to top ranked across the city with an IB program and all sorts of other bells and whistles. That's another example of how the "gentrifiers" go about improving schools. Schurz had no IB program until a bunch of parents got together and started agitating for one. That's not going to happen in a neighborhood of entrenched poverty where the parents don't have time to organize and may have never even heard of International Baccalaureate.

Originally Posted by marothisu

CSI only measures single family home prices. It does not measure condos or coops

Yup, which is why I'm referencing Smart Homes. You can't compare cities where the cores are basically devoid of SFH to a city where full block townhome developments regularly go up on the fringes of downtown (River North and South Loop come to mind) using an indicator that only tracks SFH. SFH is probably almost the predominant form of new housing supply in Chicago after downtown luxury apartment highrises. They're everywhere and that puts a lid on SFH prices here because the formula is simple, prices can never exceed the price of a vacant lot plus the price of construction plus a basic level of profit for the developer. When you have vacant lots galore even in the hottest areas like Logan Square, that's going to put an upper bound on how quickly SFH prices appreciate.

[Vlajos]

We have 2 teenage kids and a younger one. We are both mid 40s. No plan to leave the city. In the $200K+ income bracket. Nearly every SFH owner in our area is similar. A very big shift has occurred over the last 5-10 years. Most of these families would have gone to the suburbs before. Now they are staying. This is why Chicago's home prices are the strongest in the region now.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by marothisu

CSI only measures single family home prices. It does not measure condos or coops

Right, and as an example the City of Chicago had 963 SFH sales in April. The entire metro had 6,544 SFH sales.

The City had 1666 condo sales in April while the entire metro had 3991 condo sales.

The suburbs are really dragging down the region.

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Schurz High School in Avondale is an excellent example of this, as Old Irving, Portage Park, and Avondale have been flooded with upper middle class families, Schurz has gone from a semi dangerous, mediocre at best, High School to top ranked across the city with an IB program and all sorts of other bells and whistles. That's another example of how the "gentrifiers" go about improving schools. Schurz had no IB program until a bunch of parents got together and started agitating for one. That's not going to happen in a neighborhood of entrenched poverty where the parents don't have time to organize and may have never even heard of International Baccalaureate.

As an expecting parent wanting to plant roots in the city, this raises an issue I am seeing. When you search for school rankings/results, the most common response is GreatSchools.org. They have a lot of information and make it easy to compare schools in one city to another (or city to suburbs).

The problem is that some of their data is from as far back as 2014. When we are talking about these rapid neighborhood transformations, it is hard to find a reliable source for what is truly happening on the ground. We have the city data, but aside from the straight demographic information, I think people view it with skepticism based on past scandals and the natural incentive to inflate (that could just be me). As an example, GreatSchools has Schurz as a 1/10. This would immediately turn-off many families looking to make a move into the neighborhood.

Does anyone have thoughts on how to cut through the information and find the truth? Can we extrapolate marothisu's data to estimate which areas will see school improvements in the next 3-5 years?

[Steely Dan]

^ i think LVDW is being awfully liberal with the truth here.

Schurz might be improving, but it's still ranked as a level 2 school by CPS's own measurements (a FAR cry from "top ranked across the city"), and its student body is still 92% low income as of this school year, so all of those upper middle class families flooding into avondale/old irving/portage park aren't sending their kids to Schurz in very significant numbers yet.

but it's an utterly spectacular piece of architecture, probably dwight perkins' best work, or at least my personal favorite.


source: http://www.connectingthewindycity.co...t-one.html?m=0

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

As an expecting parent wanting to plant roots in the city, this raises an issue I am seeing. When you search for school rankings/results, the most common response is GreatSchools.org. They have a lot of information and make it easy to compare schools in one city to another (or city to suburbs).

The problem is that some of their data is from as far back as 2014. When we are talking about these rapid neighborhood transformations, it is hard to find a reliable source for what is truly happening on the ground. We have the city data, but aside from the straight demographic information, I think people view it with skepticism based on past scandals and the natural incentive to inflate (that could just be me). As an example, GreatSchools has Schurz as a 1/10. This would immediately turn-off many families looking to make a move into the neighborhood.

Does anyone have thoughts on how to cut through the information and find the truth? Can we extrapolate marothisu's data to estimate which areas will see school improvements in the next 3-5 years?

Do not use Greatschools, it's terrible. Use the https://illinoisreportcard.com/

[Baronvonellis]

The IB program is excellent though in general. Glad more schools are getting it! I did it in high school. Dang you guys are making big money!!! I need to find a job like that, I'm in my mid 30's and I interview for more advanced jobs, but I get passed over all the time. I'd like to find a company that will give me a chance with something more difficult, my job is so easy.

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

The IB program is excellent though in general. Glad more schools are getting it! I did it in high school. Dang you guys are making big money!!! I need to find a job like that, I'm in my mid 30's and I interview for more advanced jobs, but I get passed over all the time. I'd like to find a company that will give me a chance with something more difficult, my job is so easy.

To be fair, I was citing household income as wife and I both work. What do you do?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

To be fair, I was citing household income as wife and I both work.

ditto.

there are few things one can do in this world to better boost one's financial stability than getting married and staying married.

but you gotta choose wisely, because if you don't follow through on step 2, divorce can be financially crippling.

[nergie]

My wife and I are in the same demographic both in age (39/41)and income and we just had our first child, 8 weeks old. We upgraded to a 2bdrm, 2.5 bdrm place in the Legacy downtown and kept our 1bdrm place in LSE. Our immediate need will be a nanny in Sept/Oct after my mother in law leaves. We are wait listed at the Gardner pre-school with our daughter slated to start in Apr, 2019. We are both hard core city people and don't want to end up in the burbs. Appreciate any suggestions re nannies, preschools and/or where the good public neighborhood schools. Thanks.

[Vlajos]

Lincoln, Burley, Coonley, Ravenswood, Waters, Blaine, Nettlehorst, Skinner, South Loop, Hamilton, Audubon, Sauganash, Wildwood, Bell, Mayer, Alcott are some that pop into my head and are all attendance area elementary schools.