New Lenox or Tinley Park???? (Chicago, Naperville: real estate, apartments, rentals)

[At1WithNature]

Who chooses to be in a negative atmosphere? I hear the concerns of some people when it comes to the philosophy of running away from your problems. However, choosing to raise your family and concern yourself with the welfair of your significant other as well as your children is another matter entirely by itself.

[NYrules]

Originally Posted by 355express

Sorry NYrules but the tracks of land in Tinley you mention will not have another 20,000 people moving in. Tinley's population is now at about 60,000 so how will a track of land thats going to be a Wal-Mart and a downtown redevelopment with condos going to increase the population by 20,000? Yes I'm sure you can name some other tracks of land in Tinley that are yet to be developed but another 20,000? no way! Like I said Tinley Park is about built out.

Read it and weap my friend. Village of Tinley Park (http://www.tinleypark.org/ed/demographics/population_facts.htm - broken link) And that is just in the next 12 years. Believe me there is plenty of room to jam another 20,000 people into Tinley Park. Hell look at towns like Skokie which are only about a mile by a mile or two in land area yet has over 60,000 people in it. Oh and the Super Wal Mart is just what is planned at the SW corner of 191st and Harlem, tons of new high rise condos are expected to be built in the downtown, as well as all the way down 191st Street of which some have already went up near 80th Ave.

[BRU67]

Originally Posted by At1WithNature

Who chooses to be in a negative atmosphere? I hear the concerns of some people when it comes to the philosophy of running away from your problems. However, choosing to raise your family and concern yourself with the welfair of your significant other as well as your children is another matter entirely by itself.

I absolutely agree, but there's also the issue of recognizing and adjusting to reality. If you want to keep you and yours in the safest situation possible, more power to you. But unfortunately, you do not live in a bubble, and the longer folks decide that they simply want to isolate themselves from problems, the worse those problems are going to get. Eventually, those issues will be in your face in one form or other.

Personally, I think trying to escape "urban influences" by moving further out is less reprehensible than it is risky. You just don't know what direction that safety blanket is going to go in. Some think that (white) people will keep moving further and further west until they're eventually in Iowa. I don't think that will be the case. My prediction is things will go down more like in Sukwoo's "The Next Slum" article, and affluent people will move back in towards the City. So, where is the stop and spin point going to be? You sure don't want to be outside of it!

You can make your community strong and family centric all day long but some people have a very low "fear" factor, so it only may take a few persons from a certain demographic group to move in before it starts a chain reaction, particularly in communities where residents feel they are "surrounded" by declining communities. This stuff can happen fast. Austin went from 95% white to 95% African-American in, what, 10 years? Not saying that would ever happen again but it illustrates that unless you're in an extremely wealthy and exclusive town, there's no way you can really be sure that there will be no demographic changes.

As such, I personally think it's better just to deal with it head on but that's just me.

[chet everett]

Originally Posted by BRU67

...
Personally, I think trying to escape "urban influences" by moving further out is less reprehensible than it is risky. You just don't know what direction that safety blanket is going to go in. ...where is the stop and spin point going to be? You sure don't want to be outside of it!

... Not saying that would ever happen again but it illustrates that unless you're in an extremely wealthy and exclusive town, there's no way you can really be sure that there will be no demographic changes.

...

The value of so many homes out is really high. Most have the features that will be in demand for a long time. I'm not saying that anything is a "sure thing" but you aren't going to see people with hundreds of thousands in equity just saying "I'm outa here" -- it was a lot easier for Austin to flip with its higher percentage of rentals than places like Hillside that have much more higher ownership.

Not say it is BAD to be a renter or own rental property, just that such areas don't have the "ballast" to resist sudden surges...

[BRU67]

Originally Posted by chet everett

The value of so many homes out is really high. Most have the features that will be in demand for a long time. I'm not saying that anything is a "sure thing" but you aren't going to see people with hundreds of thousands in equity just saying "I'm outa here" -- it was a lot easier for Austin to flip with its higher percentage of rentals than places like Hillside that have much more higher ownership.

Not say it is BAD to be a renter or own rental property, just that such areas don't have the "ballast" to resist sudden surges...

This is not without logical sense. My major personal issue with the "Next Slum" article was precisely what you cite -- the rental ratio. Most exburbs do not (yet) have high rental percentages, unlike Austin and other neighborhoods which changed quickly in decades past. The author explains that away by saying those homes will be turned into rentals as developers are unable to sell the glut of inventory and as they deteriorate much faster over time than the better built early 20th century stock in the cities and inner-suburbs. I suppose that could happen but it's pretty speculative.

That said, while these exburb homes may have amenities galore, they're also not very well built (as NYRules pointed out) and are very far out -- and get further out every year. Will they retain their intrinsic value over time? I think that will be an issue. I also think people will grow tired of long commutes and continue to be intrigued by the character that older, well-built homes in the City (and inner-ring suburbs) offer, not to mention proximity to the State's main business district (the Loop).

I guess time will tell but I simply can't see the 'burbs extending much further out than they are now. I also think current outer 'burbs (like Tinley/Orland, New Lenox, Frankfort, etc.) will have a hard time managing the rapid growth and creating communities with the kinds of parks, business districts and walkability that you have in the City and inner-ring. You're already seeing miserable traffic conditions in those areas. I don't know if this will improve over time and as they get bigger.

[chet everett]

BRU67 hits it like I see it too. Landlords like to own rental houses where people HAVE jobs and/or good access to an area with concentrated employment. Have you EVER seen rental ads say "in the middle of nowhere and miles from shopping". Landlords are NOT going to help out developers! Now if it is a condo or even dense townhouse would a BIG rental king type company sink money into it at a big enough discount? Probably - that would be scary. All those stories about a certain Pilsen centric firm owning a few hundred townhomes for rental would shake up some plans, huh?

These towns can plan all they want but if the developers can't get financing things basically freeze the way they are. Not a bad thing as most those towns have "high code" construction standards similar to the Union friendly City of Chicago regs (the stuff in Wisconsin is a whole other beast...) but not something that I'd stay awake worrying about.

[BRU67]

Originally Posted by chet everett

BRU67 hits it like I see it too. Landlords like to own rental houses where people HAVE jobs and/or good access to an area with concentrated employment. Have you EVER seen rental ads say "in the middle of nowhere and miles from shopping". Landlords are NOT going to help out developers! Now if it is a condo or even dense townhouse would a BIG rental king type company sink money into it at a big enough discount? Probably - that would be scary. All those stories about a certain Pilsen centric firm owning a few hundred townhomes for rental would shake up some plans, huh?

Unless, of course, demand for housing increases in the City and inner-burbs to the point where property values get driven up to a level where lower income people can no longer afford to live there. They'll still need somewhere to live. The exburbs may not offer good access to the City job base, but they still offer access. But, yes, that's probably a few years down the line. I wouldn't look for that in the next 5-10 years. I think the continuation of the "back to the city" movement will be based on market forces, not so much a reverse "white flight" situation.

[soxfan2005]

.
vester 72 wrote:
Oh, and Oak Forest was never that nice to begin with - it is about the same as it always has been, just older.

Been here for 36 years and have had nothing but a good time. OF is not a great place for shopping and restaurants, but it has a great school system, a top notch park district and plenty of great families. OF is not just 159th and cicero its everything else that makes a safe and affordable place to live!

[vester72]

The one missing piece in the equation of people moving to the city are kids. You get very little space in the city for a lot of money and the public school system, on the whole, is abysmal. Yes, there is Whitney Young, Payton and some other very, very good schools, but kids have to test into them and there are then racial quotas so even if you test well, you may not get in. The alternative schools are sometimes (most of the time) horrible.

Yes, there are private schools, but they are very pricey. Chicago Lab School is what - $17k a year? The Montessori in Streeterville is like $20k and the Montessori in the South Loop is $12k for part-time.

Kids and the city do not always go together - now if you do not have kids, I consider the city a no-brainer.

That being said, I left due to kids. - for $600-$700k all I could afford was a four-story townhouse with a 250sq ft yard which is not kid friendly at all.

Anyway, gas prices will throw all of this out of whack so who knows. . .

Oh, and I did not mean to sound like Oak Forest sucked - just meant it was never a Hinsdale or Elmhurst - still a very good place to live, eat, hang out, etc.

[drlandgrebe]

Tinley Park is a great community with so much to do and near majoe expressways as well. There is development to restore downtown Tinley in the next few years-should be great! I work and live in Tinely, so i favor it over New Lennox (although New L. is great too) but Tinley would be my choice