Interesting. I have looked at Chicago real estate sections (from actual hard-copy Sunday Tribunes--whenever I visit Chicago). I have also looked at the Washingtown Post real estate sections.
Here's what I've noticed:
Chicago DOMINATES THE SHIT out of the market. Sure, suburban houses are being built like hotcakes and are a major part of the region's boom, but clearly the VAST, VAST majority of housing up for sale and new construction I see advertised in the Tribune is in Chicago proper (keep in mind, I always got the Sunday Tribune from O'Hare airport). Chicago completely dominates space in the real estate section of the Tribune, and it's really quite amazing, especially seeing all of the projects under way throughout the city. This alludes a bit to the comments made by Edsg in his "Overwhelmed" thread.
Washington doesn't dominate as much. Although many city developments are emphasized, easily 60% of what is advertised is located in either Maryland or Virginia.
However, whatever is built in the DC region is more likely to be advertised in its relation to the DC Metro, making it seem that proximity to transit is more important and attractive to people out here than it is to Chicagoans. This is true even in DC's suburbs. Often it is one of the first things mentioned: "right off the Clarendon Metro!"
In Chicago, many developments also advertise being near the 'L and Metra, but it seems to be a tad bit less important, and often developments also talk about proximity to the expressway--something I never saw in any advertisements for DC-area developments.
What does this all mean? Chicago obviously dominates its region much more than DC does. Also, the DC region is a bit more transit-minded than Chicago is. Either way, both cities' condos had parking--so in the end their real estate boom is largely similar.
But DC considers 12 stories high-rise living... That's a whole different discussion> |
0 comments:
Post a Comment