Chicagoland renters and buyers are itching for walkable suburbs. Enter 'surban.'

[Steely Dan]

this article is chicagoland specific, but it does provide some actual data about the changing preferences among today's home-buyers.

none of this means that mcmansion sprawl-burbia is going to die and wither away, it just means that there is an actual shift in relative desirability currently taking place.

Chicagoland renters and buyers are itching for walkable suburbs. Enter 'surban.'
Danielle Braff
Chicago Tribune

Newbies to Chicago’s suburbs are increasingly stowing cars and slipping into walking shoes.

No longer are McMansions, white picket fences and sprawling square footage topping suburban buyers’ most-wanted list. Instead, proximity to a suburb’s downtown and easy access to restaurants, schools and parks are priorities. For many, walkable suburbs reign supreme.

“Buyer demand has shifted from wanting to be situated in the suburbs, to homes in the urban core,” said Nathan Freeborn, real estate agent with realty website Redfin. “People are trying to get away from using their cars as much as they can.”

That was the goal for the Franken family — Mara, 37; David, 38; Matthew, 5; and Eva, 2 — who moved from Chicago to Glenview about a year ago.

“We wanted to find a home that was close enough to the downtown to enjoy walking like we did in the city,” Mara Franken said. By foot, the Frankens can easily reach a library, train, four parks, a grocery store and a few restaurants.

full article: http://www.chicagotribune.com/classi...515-story.html

[Centropolis]

the desirable inner suburban areas of st. louis are on fire right now. houses on my block that were 100k 5 years ago are on the market for 425k. my brother in law just made a 100k profit on a pre-war suburban house bought just a couple years ago...in the RUSTBELT. it's sort of the story getting lost between the urban core revitalization one, and the MILLENNIALS ARE BUYING SPRAWL ones.

obviously not all cities have urburbs, but this is a thing that is happening in those that do.

[10023]

So why didn’t they move to, like, Andersonville?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by 10023

So why didn’t they move to, like, Andersonville?

my guess is for a SFH and a yard.

andersonville is awesome, but SFH's with a yard are going to be prohibitively expensive there for most families, mainly because they are in such short supply (only ~10% of housing units).

i know this because we just went through it with our recent home search. to stay in one of the cooler, more urban northside hoods we could only comfortably afford multi-family. to get a house with a yard that we could afford, we would have needed to move further west to albany/portage/jeff park or up north to skokie/lincolnwood/west ridge.

but i'm a bit pickier than your typical american on the minimum level of urbanism that i require to not put a bullet through my skull, so we chose location over a house and a yard. many other people aren't quite as persnickety as i am, so buying a house with a yard that's walkably close to a suburban village center with a metra stop works just fine for them.

the article that started this thread isn't so much about city vs. the burbs, but rather the shift taking place in the relative desirability of quasi-urban village center suburbia vs. cul-de-sac-land.

[Buckman821]

Originally Posted by 10023

So why didn’t they move to, like, Andersonville?

Because a single family house with a yard is roughly twice as expensive? Because the house in Glenview comes with phenomenal public schools whereas the house in Andersonville does not?

By the time you add in the cost of private school for two kids in Andersonville your House+School budget could easily be 5x or higher in Andersonville than it is in Glenview.

Additionally you might be surprised to learn that if you're close to downtown Glenview your commute to say...North Wacker Drive or Riverside Plaza is actually noticeably shorter and definitely more pleasant.

Full disclosure I grew up in Glenview. I find it to be kind of a funny choice for this article because its downtown punches way way below its weight class. For a pretty affluent town with a great commute to downtown, it has a loooong way to go.

[dc_denizen]

pics?

[ardecila]

This isn't really news. "Walk-to-train" locations have always been desirable in Chicago suburbs, I remember hearing that catchphrase 20 years ago out of the mouths of realtors. The North Shore is consistently Chicago's most desirable suburban region, in part because of old-money culture but also because of walkability, architectural charm and yes, good transit to downtown Chicago.

For lots of homebuyers, or at least the ones who work downtown and find the train useful, the only reason not to buy in a walk-to-train location is because those homes tended to be smaller and less modernized than new homes in a subdivision somewhere. But never fear, homebuilders figured out they could tear down an old bungalow or four-square (or several) and build a McMansion in its place. Or they could add a grotesquely large addition and eliminate the yard. Best of both worlds.

The real news will happen when Chicago suburbs start creating more of these town centers from scratch, or allowing existing town centers to be redeveloped with medium or high-density options. Our commuter rail system is largely built out with town centers already, but there are many stops that currently sit in industrial/commercial areas and surrounded by large parking lots, these could become the town centers of tomorrow...

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by ardecila

This isn't really news. "Walk-to-train" locations have always been desirable in Chicago suburbs, I remember hearing that catchphrase 20 years ago out of the mouths of realtors. The North Shore is consistently Chicago's most desirable suburban region, in part because of old-money culture but also because of walkability, architectural charm and yes, good transit to downtown Chicago.

For lots of homebuyers, or at least the ones who work downtown and find the train useful, the only reason not to buy in a walk-to-train location is because those homes tended to be smaller and less modernized than new homes in a subdivision somewhere. But never fear, homebuilders figured out they could tear down an old bungalow or four-square (or several) and build a McMansion in its place. Or they could add a grotesquely large addition and eliminate the yard. Best of both worlds.

The real news will happen when Chicago suburbs start creating more of these town centers from scratch, or allowing existing town centers to be redeveloped with medium or high-density options. Our commuter rail system is largely built out with town centers already, but there are many stops that currently sit in industrial/commercial areas and surrounded by large parking lots, these could become the town centers of tomorrow...

What you are proposing has happened and already is happening in countless Chicagoland suburbs, as far as I’ve seen. Could we go denser? Of course. But development of condos, apt buildings, townhomes, and homes is a continuous process, in addition to “town centre” style retail development.

[nomarandlee]

Originally Posted by Buckman821

Full disclosure I grew up in Glenview. I find it to be kind of a funny choice for this article because its downtown punches way way below its weight class. For a pretty affluent town with a great commute to downtown, it has a loooong way to go.

And yet Glenview does a good deal better than its neighbor (Northbrook) where I grew up. It has always been a bit mystifying how towns with so much money floating around don't demand better aesthetics and amenity-driven downtowns.

The only positives is that Northbrook has huge swaths of strip mall land near its two train stations which it could redevelop nice high TOD downtowns if it chose. It first has to come to grips that the glory days of Northbrook Court cash cow will likely never have a resurgence.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by ardecila

This isn't really news. "Walk-to-train" locations have always been desirable in Chicago suburbs, I remember hearing that catchphrase 20 years ago out of the mouths of realtors. The North Shore is consistently Chicago's most desirable suburban region, in part because of old-money culture but also because of walkability, architectural charm and yes, good transit to downtown Chicago.

of course railroad burb town centers have always been a popular option in chicagoland.

the "news" here is that there is a shift in the priorities of people seeking suburban housing options that is making these quasi-walkable town centers even more popular relative to cul-de-sac land.

Originally Posted by from the article

A 2017 study by the National Association of Realtors found that walkers span the generations. Sixty-two percent of millennials and 55 percent of those born before 1944 prefer walkable communities and brief commutes, even if it means living in an apartment or town home. And 53 percent of Americans would give up a home with a large yard in exchange for a home with a smaller yard that’s within walking distance of the community’s amenities, according to the study. That figure is up from 48 percent in 2015. It’s part of a shift toward valuing time and experiences more than possessions, said John Burns, CEO of John Burns Real Estate consulting.

it doesn't mean that all housing in suburban town centers will become $1M+ and that mcmansion sprawl-topia will collapse into ruins and revert back to nature, it just means that perceptions about the relative desirability of these two distinct arrangements of suburban housing are starting to tilt more in favor of traditional burbs. this is a positive trend in my opinion.

[Buckman821]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

And yet Glenview does a good deal better than its neighbor (Northbrook) where I grew up. It has always been a bit mystifying how towns with so much money floating around don't demand better aesthetics and amenity-driven downtowns.

The only positives is that Northbrook has huge swaths of strip mall land near its two train stations which it could redevelop nice high TOD downtowns if it chose. It first has to come to grips that the glory days of Northbrook Court cash cow will likely never have a resurgence.

The Milwaukee District North line in general seems to be near the bottom of its peer set. Morton Grove, Glenview, Northbrook, Deerfield - all of these downtowns are pretty underwhelming and didn't have much of a historic core to work with in the first place.

The UP-Northwest (it's neighboring line) on the other hand has pretty impressive downtowns. Park Ridge, Des Plaines, Arlington Heights and to a lesser extent Mt. Prospect are all much better imo despite the fact that these towns are generally (shades of gray of course) slightly more middle income.

It's funny because when you grow up on the North Suburban Side of Chicago you are sort of conditioned to think that all the western suburbs just aren't quite up to par. Then I grew up and actually saw these places and couldn't believe how much nicer lots of their downtowns are. Elmhurst, LaGrange, Hinsdale, Naperville, Glen Ellyn, Downers Grove and several others too...all much much nicer than Glenview and Northbrook.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Buckman821

The Milwaukee District North line in general seems to be near the bottom of its peer set. Morton Grove, Glenview, Northbrook, Deerfield - all of these downtowns are pretty underwhelming and didn't have much of a historic core to work with in the first place.

The UP-Northwest (it's neighboring line) on the other hand has pretty impressive downtowns. Park Ridge, Des Plaines, Arlington Heights and to a lesser extent Mt. Prospect are all much better imo despite the fact that these towns are generally (shades of gray of course) slightly more middle income.

It's funny because when you grow up on the North Suburban Side of Chicago you are sort of conditioned to think that all the western suburbs just aren't quite up to par. Then I grew up and actually saw these places and couldn't believe how much nicer lots of their downtowns are. Elmhurst, LaGrange, Hinsdale, Naperville, Glen Ellyn, Downers Grove and several others too...all much much nicer than Glenview and Northbrook.

But the North Side suburbs are "nicer" by most conventional metrics. They generally have higher incomes and higher apples-to-apples home prices.

Yes, there are some nice West Side suburbs, especially Hinsdale. And Glenview/Northbrook are "lesser" North Shore fancy suburbs. So, yeah, if you compare the best of the west with the middling of the north, you might get slightly higher desirability, but that isn't a reasonable comparison. Hinsdale is much cheaper than a Winnetka or Glencoe.

And those west side suburbs you mention have, by far, the busiest commuter rail line in Chicagoland (and perhaps the busiest commuter rail line in America outside of NYC metro). It makes sense that they have thriving downtowns adjacent to the stops. Your North side rail line has lesser ridership/frequency, and has always played second fiddle to the older, more expensive lakeshore communities along the UP North.

[Steely Dan]

^ yep.

for reference, here are chicago's 12 commuter rail lines by 2017 total ridership:

BNSF - 16,227,453
UP-NW - 10,910,483
UP-N - 9,028,965
UP-W - 8,332,483
ME - 8,149,693 -
RI - 7,923,588
MD-N - 6,818,808
MD-W - 6,349,815
SS - ~3,400,000 (technically not part of metra)
SWS - 2,457,418
NCS - 1,684,357
HC - 727,202


in the north half of chicagoland, the three UP lines into ogilvie serve more people than the 2 MD lines + NCS that feed into union station. and the suburban town centers around the UP lines are generally more built-up and developed than those around the MD stations, for whatever reason.

of course everything takes a back seat to the mighty BNSF through the southern tier of the western burbs.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ yep.

for reference, here are chicago's 12 commuter rail lines by 2017 total ridership:

BNSF - 16,227,453
UP-NW - 10,910,483
UP-N - 9,028,965
UP-W - 8,332,483
ME - 8,149,693 -
RI - 7,923,588
MD-N - 6,818,808
MD-W - 6,349,815
SS - ~3,400,000 (technically not part of metra)
SWS - 2,457,418
NCS - 1,684,357
HC - 727,202


in the north half of chicagoland, the three UP line into ogilvie serve more people than the 2 MD lines + NCS that feed into union station. and the suburban town centers around the UP lines are generally more built-up and developed than those around the MD stations, for whatever reasons.

of course everything takes a back seat to the mighty BNSF through the southern tier of the western burbs.

I spent a half day or so in downers grove, once, either going or coming on BNSF and enjoyed strolling around. i'm not sure how downers grove stacks in the regional chicagoland suburban downtown order, but i've used those BNSF and RI lines over the years to go downtown if i'm in chicagoland and dont feel like sitting in traffic on a friday afternoon.

[Tom In Chicago]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

I spent a half day or so in downers grove, once, either going or coming on BNSF and enjoyed strolling around. i'm not sure how downers grove stacks in the regional chicagoland suburban downtown order, but i've used those BNSF and RI lines over the years to go downtown if i'm in chicagoland and dont feel like sitting in traffic on a friday afternoon.

I think Downers Grove is pretty typical for a village center located at the Metra station. . .

. . .

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago

I think Downers Grove is pretty typical for a village center located at the Metra station. . .

. . .

i'd agree. it's pretty standard.

it's certainly nice enough, for sure, but not a standout.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7905.../data=!3m1!1e3

[the urban politician]

If you add up the walkable built environment (prewar and more recent) in Chicagoland suburban downtowns alone, many of which are served by a Metra station, you probably have a moderate-sized city right there.

[Centropolis]

so what is the crown jewel rail suburb that has "everything" downtown...and i presume that evanstan/oak park/etc isn't what we are talking about.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

so what is the crown jewel rail suburb that has "everything" downtown...and i presume that evanstan/oak park/etc isn't what we are talking about.

evanston and oak park ARE the two crown jewels of chicagoland town centers.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

If you add up the walkable built environment (prewar and more recent) in Chicagoland suburban downtowns alone, many of which are served by a Metra station, you probably have a moderate-sized city right there.

definitely. i did the same for st. louis county with it's second highrise downtown in clayton and other pre-war areas outside of st. louis city once and easily ended up with more urbanism and people in pre-war areas than charlotte, nc.