Your city's "favoured quarter"

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by volguus zildrohar

There is a wedge but pretty much all of West Philadelphia cuts in between economically.

But Fairmount Park is a huge portion of the land between your two sections of wealth. Surely the park is part of why the wealth gravitated in that direction. If so, it's an important factor that stitches your two sections together.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The fact is that the far Northside of Chicago isn't affluent, and doesn't have comparable wealth as the regional core or the North Shore.

I NEVER made any claim that the far northside of chicago is affluent, i merely responded to your initial claim that there aren't any desirable areas north of irving, which isn't true.

Originally Posted by Crawford

You can't make generalizations based on two random home asking prices

i wasn't making generalizations about anything, i was responding to your specific comment, and i quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford

Certainly nothing between North Evanston and Lakeview has prices/demand similar to points north/south.

there are areas between lakeview and north evanston that have prices/demand similar to areas in southeast wilmette, which is north of north evanston.

the reason that income levels are so different is that wilmette is over 75% SFH, whereas edgewater is only ~10% SFH, so while edgewater has some households that can take on a $600G- $1M mortgage, the VAST majority of people who live in edgewater are living in much more affordable condos/apartments, just like most places in the city/evanston. and for what it's worth, LP's median income is only $88K, so it's a FAR cry from the northshore burbs in that regard too.

i get the overall gist of what you're trying to say, but you're unfamiliarity with chicagoland is tripping you up a bit. if you only want to include areas of extreme and exclusive wealth, i think your point is better made by using lincoln park on the south and kenilworth on the north. lakeview, uptown, edgewater, rogers park, evanston, and wilmette all have way more variable levels of desirability/exclusivity, but within that stretch there are loads of desirable areas, they just aren't at peak desirability/exclusivity like LP and south or kennilworth and north.

and the only real reason i'm commenting here is because i know this particular stretch of chicagoland better than most people (and certainly better than you): i grew up in wilmette, i currently live in edgewater, i work in evanston, my parents live in rogers park, and i lived in lakeview for many years during my 20s. this stretch of land along the northside and northshore lakefront that we're discussing has literally been my backyard for the last 4 decades.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by volguus zildrohar

One could argue that but per the OP's question the wedge doesn't come anywhere near the core of the region. I've roughly outlined the well to do areas in and around Center City in blue and then the Main Line and nearby well-off Montgomery County areas and 'desirable' parts of Northwest Philadelphia. There is a wedge but pretty much all of West Philadelphia cuts in between economically.

It comes a bit closer than that. East Falls is basically gentrified these days, though there's still a big gap between that and Fairmount, unless you claim that East Fairmount Park links them.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Re. North York, I was referring to the areas north of the 401. That corridor, with all the modern glassy highrises, doesn't appear to be super affluent. It struck me as more striving immigrant (seemed to be very Asian immigrant, with condo towers and little suburban bungalows).

That's exactly it. Willowdale (aka North York Centre) and - further north - the 905 suburb of Richmond Hill are the epicenter for the aspirational immigrant demographic (largely Chinese and Iranian). Though the 40s/50s bungalows have been largely replaced by monster homes. I'd say that area, and the Orthodox Jewish area around Bathurst and Lawrence have been more impacted by teardowns than anywhere in Toronto.

Housing prices quickly drop off east of the Don Valley Parkway (DVP). The average detached home in Willowdale and Don Mills is about $1.5 million CDN (of course in York Mills it's around $3 million).

[Docere]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

As discussed already, the biggest regional concentration of wealth runs from downtown north, but there's another big one in the west. In the suburbs however, while the wealth continues north, the main corridor is along the western lakeshore

Oakville is Toronto's closest equivalent to Greenwich, Connecticut, and clearly the wealthiest 905 suburb overall.

[volguus zildrohar]

Originally Posted by eschaton

It comes a bit closer than that. East Falls is basically gentrified these days, though there's still a big gap between that and Fairmount, unless you claim that East Fairmount Park links them.

The point I'm making is that the wedge isn't contiguous. I amended the map to include East Falls (green), Overbrook Farms and Overbrook Heights (gray):



Fairmount Park does act as a buffer because no one lives there but in the neighborhoods alongside it on either side of the Schuylkill you'll find average incomes and property values dramatically lower than the areas on either end of the wedge and it isn't a difference of a couple of blocks. East Falls is certainly a well-to-do neighborhood but three or so blocks south of US 1 is Tioga, then Strawberry Mansion then Brewerytown before one reaches Fairmount on the eastern bank. Parkside, Mill Creek and Mantua sit in between the Overbrook area and Powelton Village and the north edge of University City. It would take some very creative gerrymandering to say that the area is a continuous belt of wealth unless one is just counting the land that 76 rests on.

[fflint]

For San Francisco proper, the traditional 'favored quarter' might be west-northwest of downtown: Nob Hill, Russian Hill, Pacific Heights, Cow Hollow and the Marina, Billionaire's Row, Presidio Heights, Lake Street, Sea Cliff. Union Square's most upscale commercial blocks are within that wedge, if we're not excluding commercial areas from favored quarters.

Outside San Francisco proper, the typical California rules are in effect: the money follows the countours of the land and sea, in enclaves on the water, around historic campuses and commuter railroads, and especially in the hills. The wealthy hillside community is a California typology, and can be found in the Bay Area ranges to the north, east, and south of SF.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I've heard this is also true for Cincinnati. Seems to be the case

Okay so it's not the only one. I guess it makes sense that these cities would buck the usual western preference though, being that they're both on a westward flowing river.

[10023]

Well Paris and Berlin are on westward flowing rivers.

Cincinnati might be due to the existence of the Kentucky border more than anything else. And then cities on the coast (Miami, Chicago, Oakland) are going to be more influenced by that than wind direction.

[brickell]

I think Miami's SxSW orientation (once you get away from the water front) of it's wedge is likely due to the coastal ridge expanding in that direction away from downtown. This is the highest and driest land in Miami and in theory the most desirable.

[hammersklavier]

Contre Crawford, the New York metro most certainly does have a favored quarter, and one that has perhaps the sharpest dividing lines of all: the Hudson to the west, and the Long Island Sound to the east.

Pittsburgh is the only one that really doesn't have a favored quarter. Thinking about it, this doesn't surprise me -- its "favored quarter" is really its hilltops, promontories of land that historically quite literally rose above the Steel City's smog layer.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

Contre Crawford, the New York metro most certainly does have a favored quarter, and one that has perhaps the sharpest dividing lines of all: the Hudson to the west, and the Long Island Sound to the east.

I don't get it. You're referring to Manhattan alone?

I think regional cores are almost always "favored quarters". NYC isn't different in this regard. The difference is that, regionally, NYC doesn't have an obvious favorable directional.

If I were to interview biglaw partners or investment banking directors re. residence, there would be no common directional. Excluding those living in NYC, you would get significant representation from Long Island, Westchester, Connecticut, North and Central Jersey. Wealth and poverty tends to be somewhat more regionally scattered.

In contrast, if I were to interview equivalents in LA, I would bet that a ton would be on the Westside. If I did the same in Chicago, a ton would be on the North Shore. In DC, they would be to the northwest, in Houston to the west, in Atlanta to the north, in Philly on the Main Line.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Boulder's favored quarter OTOH faces south simply because that's the direction of Denver, and Denver exerts a strong pull.

Do you have any statistics for this? Denver's favored quarter definitely grows to the southeast, but not in Boulder. I grew up in South Boulder, and unless the real estate values south and east are simply WAY higher than the quality of the homes would indicate, this doesn't really jive with my experience. The nicest neighborhoods in Boulder, by a pretty long shot, are the ones along the western edge of town. The upper part of Uni-Hill (Chautauqua area, uphill from the college party scene); and then moreso north of Pearl Street - Mapleton Hill has always been nice, and the Newlands neighborhood by North Boulder Park is currently seeing the highest-end home flips in town. Wonderland Lake all the way through the new-urbanist North Boulder (Holiday drive-in redevelopment area) is very nice as well. Increasingly these days the Whittier neighborhood north of East Pearl St. is becoming a very nice area.

Even in South Boulder, the neighborhoods west of Broadway (especially Devils Thumb adjacent the Open Space) are quite a bit nicer than the neighborhoods to the east. The only stuff southeast of downtown and CU I can think of that would fetch a high land value might be the rural ranchettes out on South Boulder Road, but these aren't really even part of Boulder proper.

[dc_denizen]

I agree, anything on the metro north including Manhattan entirely is part of new Yorks favored quarter.

Compare the scene at penn station (serving nj and Long Island) vs grand central. Certainly a different level of refinement and civility (plus no omnipresent urine smells) at grand central.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

I agree, anything on the metro north including Manhattan entirely is part of new Yorks favored quarter.

Compare the scene at penn station (serving nj and Long Island) vs grand central. Certainly a different level of refinement and civility (plus no omnipresent urine smells) at grand central.

Grand Central is a much more civilized experience than Penn (largely because its a nicer complex and no where near as busy); that doesn't mean that the counties served by Grand Central are wealthier, more desirable or have more corporate activity.

In fact the poorest counties in the NY Metro are on the Metro North, not LIRR or NJ Transit. There's virtually no difference in median/mean income, median/mean home price, and % poverty between the inner suburban commuter counties. Nassau, Westchester, Fairfield, Bergen, Somerset, Morris, are all about the same.

[dc_denizen]

really? there is a huge hedge fund community is in CT and Westchester (both working and living there), not in Nassau or Bergen (except the north shore closest to NYC, admittedly). Most financial people, when they've 'made it', move to CT and westchester and not NJ or LI, if anything, for the easier commute. I would argue that the north shore and the nice parts of bergen county are kind of in CT's orbit also. central LI is not anything special.

Places like Short hills and summit/berklee heights etc are "where mom and dad live", older money crowd with mostly retirement income, that worked in the suburban pharma and insurance office parks their whole careers. lot of middle-class ethno-burbs, or legacy Jewish areas. not where wealthier people want to move these days.

LI is expensive and value for money is terrible (ugly tract housing).

[pdxtex]

portland is hip in all directions these days but id say most of the local action is on the east side of the river within a 3 mile radius of downtown. NW is still the true urban hub of portland but it doesn't really change much. the pearl district is nearly built out and all of the old portland money is up in the west hills. that hasn't changed in 100 years.

[Docere]

Share of workforce and average income (in thousands) by occupation for selected counties:

Legal occupations:

Manhattan 4.7% $175.4
Westchester 3% $152.0
Nassau 2.7% $107.7
Morris 2.2% $131.3
Fairfield 1.9% $135.4
Bergen 1.8% $123.8
Somerset 1.7 $146.1

Management occupations:

Manhattan 14.9% $107.9
Somerset 14.8% $110.7
Morris 14.6% $108.6
Bergen 12.8% $99.2
Fairfield 12.6% $116.2
Westchester 12.4% $107.8
Nassau 10.6% $96.1

Business occupations:

Manhattan 10.4% $96.3
Morris 7.9% $91.2
Fairfield 7.7% $101.8
Somerset 7.4% $87.9
Bergen 7.1% $77.0
Westchester 6.5% $95.0
Nassau 6.3% $81.5

http://statisticalatlas.com/

Certainly within the elite, there's a preference for Westchester/Fairfield. LI and Bergen look like they have more middle management, non-white shoe lawyers etc. On the other hand, it's not like there's a dramatic "wealth direction" like in a lot of other cities. Among Manhattan law partners or investment bankers I suspect of those who don't live in Manhattan, more come in from Westchester than LI or NJ. But coming in from LI or NJ isn't by any means unusual.

[10023]

I'd lean towards saying that NY's favored quarter extends north of the city as well.

There are of course nice areas and lots of money in north Jersey and Long Island (i.e., the North Shore) as well, but there's also Hempstead and a whole lot of former white working class postwar suburbia (which might now be overpriced real estate, but isn't like the WASP strongholds north). The Hamptons are of course a different story but not really part of metro NY.

To use Chicago as an example, if you're going to draw a distinction between the North Shore and the still very nice (and expensive) western suburbs like Hinsdale and its neighbors, then you can make the same one for NYC. In fact those western suburbs might be Chicago's version of north Jersey (with the mall in Oak Brook standing in for Short Hills).

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Docere

Certainly within the elite, there's a preference for Westchester/Fairfield.

There might be a slight preference, but barely noticeable apples to apples. It also depends among whom.

Generally speaking, nonwhite professionals and immigrants prefer NJ and LI. Religious Jews prefer NJ and LI. WASPs and expats prefer Westchester and CT. Of course there are exceptions. "Boat communities" on North Shore of LI are popular with WASPs/Catholic whites. "Rivertowns" in Westchester are popular with liberal Jews.

The main difference is that NJ and LI have more "regular" Levitttown-style middle class areas, and Westchester/Connecticut don't, because of topography and NIMBYism. There's almost no "normal sprawl" directly north of the city (there's only one suburban-style Walmart and one suburban-style Target in Westchester).

But if you're looking for a typical suburban colonial in a more professional area, say Darien, CT, Westfield, NJ or Roslyn, LI, the price will be more or less the same. Any variance is usually explained by schools, taxes and ease of commute. So Bronxville is painfully expensive but it's less because it's Westchester and more because it's the closest wealthy suburb to Midtown by train.

Originally Posted by Docere

Among Manhattan law partners or investment bankers I suspect of those who don't live in Manhattan, more come in from Westchester than LI or NJ. But coming in from LI or NJ isn't by any means unusual.

In terms of raw numbers, there are more Manhattan-bound commuters from NJ and LI. In terms of executive residence I've never noticed any strong geographic tilt. When I worked in investment banking, a suburban-residing managing director was as likely to live in Princeton or Mill Neck as in Westport or Bronxville.

There may be a small proportional tilt, but there are just a ton more people on LI and NJ than in Westchester/CT. The majority of suburban NYC actually resides in NJ, and LI has nearly 3 million people. Westchester and Fairfield both have just under 1 million each.