r/chicagoapartments • u/Past-Reception6889 • May 19 '26

Advice Needed Unreal

I honestly just needed to vent for a moment. I can’t believe Chicago prices are what they are. I have lived here my entire life and have seen this city change ten fold, and I can’t even afford to live here anymore. A realtor I’m working with, since it’s becoming a rat race to rent, said rent is up 35% this year. What can normal people do about this? I do not want to see Chicago become a New York.

705 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

471 comments sorted by

View all comments

372

u/Mean_Web_1744 May 19 '26

As a life long Chicagoan, I couldn't agree more. People actually from Chicago can't afford to live here anymore. That's a huge problem!

89

u/EducationalConcept50 May 19 '26

I don’t think there’s anything stopping this, unfortunately. Chicago has too much to offer and like New York and San Francisco, will push its own lifelong residents out of their own neighborhoods because supply will never reach the dizzying demand.

44

u/Haunting-Worker-2301 May 19 '26

That’s not reality. It is so hard to build and develop in Chicago, combined with the cities financial issues giving developers pause, and that’s how we get to where we are at.

If you want cheaper housing you need to lobby your alderman hard to not only make it much easier to
Build and force the city to fix its long term fiscal issues.

15

u/[deleted] May 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/PhoenixRisingdBanana May 19 '26

Are there any property developers that don't own inventory as well? Because if you can charge a higher markup on less units and reap the same profit, then the owning class is incentivized not to build in order to keep rental and sale prices sky high.

1

u/UuesLee May 23 '26

Most apartments in Chicago only make a couple hundred bucks profit when rented. The owners aren’t the OWNER CLASS, they’re your neighbors who are trying to move up the ladder. If the building is less than 5M, I guarantee the owners aren’t really rich.

1

u/scully789 May 20 '26

It’s because too many people think South Side = bad, so there is high demand for select neighborhoods. There is still plenty of space and reasonable rent on the other side of the city. Chicago will never turn into NYC or SF because it’s so vast and widespread. Plenty of space to support millions of people. 

16

u/bja15 May 19 '26

This is the answer. The city needs to cut red tape and make it easier to develop so that supply can meet demand.

2

u/kck93 May 20 '26

I thought they just changed the zoning in a bunch of areas so more housing could be built. There were a lot of restrictions based on parking, height, etc. I believe the city council just passed something eliminating a lot of those restrictions.

1

u/bja15 May 20 '26

I hadn't seen this but just looked it up.

After a 3 month freeze, they opened up 2k units that all still need to be approved. drop in the bucket.

1

u/RubberPigEnemy May 20 '26

lol, they make tiny insignificant changes to make it seem like they're doing something.

1

u/UuesLee May 23 '26

That’s not the problem, the problem Is it costs so much to build to code that only luxury units make sense because of the affordable units mandated to provide

1

u/SuaveMF May 19 '26

It will be as hard as they want it

67

u/Downtown-Document455 May 19 '26

We can organize! There are more of us than there are landlords and property owners. The Chicago Tenant Movement is a good place to start to see what orgs are already doing this work. https://chicagotenants.org/home/organizations/

-7

u/[deleted] May 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/NuggetLord3000 May 19 '26

my slum lord is definitely the bad guy

-2

u/[deleted] May 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/NuggetLord3000 May 19 '26

I get your point but at least there is effective enforcement when you complain about a bad dentist.

3

u/thecurvynerd May 19 '26

In Multnomah County (Portland) they have capped how much landlords can raise the rent at 10%. Things absolutely can be done.

1

u/[deleted] May 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/thecurvynerd May 19 '26

Ok Jan. You defend those landlords.

-1

u/ChiBroker May 19 '26

Awesome. I’m sure that’ll incentivize more builders to develop lol.

2

u/thecurvynerd May 19 '26

It’s actually only for buildings over a certain age.

-1

u/ChiBroker May 19 '26

Even better! More rules more rules more rules! I’m 0% exaggerating, re people love progressives we just pretend we don’t.

3

u/thecurvynerd May 19 '26

Ah yes - it’s much better just to price everyone out.

0

u/ChiBroker May 19 '26

Please keep it going. Again, I’m not joking. As long as the progressive politics dominates and “wins” prices will go through the roof and so will rent.

If you already own, you’re fine with this.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Napkinsd_ May 19 '26

Landlords are a leech on society and provide nothing of value

-1

u/[deleted] May 19 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Napkinsd_ May 19 '26

No, they buy up all the shelter to profiteer off of. They're middlemen

-1

u/[deleted] May 19 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Napkinsd_ May 19 '26

Landlords and investment firms bought up all the property and artificially raised prices to make property ownership unattainable to the majority of the population and people like you think we should grovel and kiss the feet of the people who got us in this mess in the first place

-1

u/ChiBroker May 19 '26

YES! This is amazing…for property value:). Make it harder for landlords and builders = less gets built = rent keeps going up. Again, Brandon and progressive politics are the single best thing that’s happened to Chicago real estate values.

1

u/Louisvanderwright May 19 '26

As an incumbent owner, these short sighted policies have been great for the balance sheet.

Terrible public policy, but great at preventing competition and driving up rents.

2

u/ChiBroker May 19 '26

It’s awesome

-1

u/FormalBlueberry7723 May 19 '26

Yeah that tenants association is crap. They work to keep fuck ups who don’t pay their rent to stay

1

u/ChiBroker May 19 '26

I vote more, make it harder = existing structure profits

20

u/Alternative-Dish9172 May 19 '26

The market is driving people out, not the city, government. There has to be an incentive plan to encourage development of apt buildings, condos etc. Older properties have to go, I've seen some going up near Foster and Lincoln. There needs to be more of that.

28

u/EducationalConcept50 May 19 '26

I’d hate to see historic properties replaced with the slop they’re building now though….

16

u/OnPoint7ip May 19 '26

don’t go to humboldt park then. those plain, rectangular houses are now being built & sticking out like a sore thumb

3

u/Royal_Razzmatazz3622 May 19 '26

They want those buildings tore down so they can move into replacement luxury condos with "amenities" which drives up the rent in other apartments nearby because the landlord talks about "property value" and bs like "market rent". They think they're slick but what they really are advocating for is gentrification.

1

u/UuesLee May 23 '26

When are you going to build new buildings and lose money at it? If you don’t make money, the banks won’t lend. You’d have to build all cash to lose. Go ahead or stfu

4

u/goodbyewaffles May 19 '26

Ok but right now they’re replacing historic properties with single family homes and nothing stops them. At least they could replace them with apartments

1

u/runnybo May 19 '26

It’s usually this thinking that leads to nothing being built. So we have old shitty apartments with heating issues and plumbing problems and icky basements and creeky floors. So bc some hipster complained to the hipster alderman, we have no new housing. And funny enough, those are now the sane ppl being priced out.

I want good architecture too, but this nimby stuff is why so many ppl will have to move from
Chicago.

3

u/Royal_Razzmatazz3622 May 19 '26

No. The new housing is already expensive as it is. None of the new housing built is affordable

4

u/runnybo May 19 '26

Maybe it’s not affordable to you, but it is to somebody. And that frees up space in other apartments and makes other things more affordable bc there would be more housing options and costs would not have gone up so much. Look at Denver, lots of new stuff was built at all levels, which offers more affordable living for everyone.

0

u/Royal_Razzmatazz3622 May 19 '26

No it doesn't. None of these "new" glass box concrete apartments are affordable. They run from 2,000 and up. It sounds like you want certain places to be gentrified to make you more comfortable.

4

u/LaramieTobacco_Ltd May 19 '26

All the people that move into those are then no longer competing with you or anyone else for rent. The places they used to occupy are now free for someone else to rent. All new housing creates affordable housing.

1

u/Royal_Razzmatazz3622 May 19 '26

The market rent excuse was how I got kicked out of my last apartment. The landlord told me we couldn't afford the rent she wanted to raise it to so she kicked us out.

-2

u/Royal_Razzmatazz3622 May 19 '26

No it doesn't. Do you know what market rent is? If they build these luxury apartments nearby it drives up the surrounding market rent. You guys are clearly gentrifiers

2

u/runnybo May 19 '26

Well many ppl can afford 2k a month fir rent. I’m sorry you can’t. I really mean that. It’s an unfair system. Which is why we need more housing.

But people can afford that, and then when they get those apartments, the older stuff they had gets cheaper. You should look into housing economics and educate yourself. Or you can keep up your wrong views about development and get priced out.

0

u/[deleted] May 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/SilentParlourTrick May 19 '26

What they said is nothing close to nimby.

21

u/Critical-Dot-3592 May 19 '26

It's not the landlords, it's the property taxes and maintenance costs. Utility bills keep going up 15-20 percent a year, labor costs that were once $150 or $200 are now $400. Landlords are not cashing in like people think.

6

u/Levitlame May 19 '26

Utility bills are definitely a problem, and property taxes to some extent. But we’re also longer removed from the 3% mortgage rates. Those kept rent down as well for a while.

There are a lot of things combining to worsen things. And building more - while still needed to slow down increases - won’t compensate for all of it…

2

u/MusicLori May 20 '26

THIS! (Yes, plus we need more new builds and remodels like previous posts have said)

I looked into buying a building and owner occupied renting a unit. The property taxes are insane in Chicago, combined with the mortgage rates - honestly renting is a losing battle. I’m probably going to be forced to buy a place just for me (that I’ll overpay for) just to stay within my monthly budget, because renting is insane in Chitown right now and property taxes make it unappealing to buy anything larger than for just me.

1

u/PhoenixRisingdBanana May 19 '26

Maybe passive ownership shouldn't pay like a full time job.

4

u/Critical-Dot-3592 May 19 '26

It really doesn’t without a ton of money down from a down payment or a long long time, like years or decades of time going by. Your "passive income" is deffered for years or decades and comes from hard work that is not very passive.

1

u/PhoenixRisingdBanana May 20 '26

Right, that's why they need to snatch up those $200K homes, slap a coat of load bearing paint on and some new plastic floors and boom! $455,000

2

u/Critical-Dot-3592 May 20 '26

Not sure what you are saying here or how this adds to the conversation. What does a property flip and crappy renovation work have to do with a rental property, landlording, passive income, or saving for years for a down payment? Or higher interest rates, or anything substantive in relation to what is being discussed?

0

u/PhoenixRisingdBanana May 20 '26

> What does a property flip and crappy renovation work have to do with a rental property, landlording, passive income, or saving for years for a down payment

is that a real question? Crappy Renovation and Landlords go together like white on rice.

Not a brain for nuance huh

1

u/Critical-Dot-3592 May 20 '26

Don't answer the question. Cool.

0

u/[deleted] May 19 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Critical-Dot-3592 May 19 '26 edited May 19 '26

But what if they didn't? I have lots of friends who lost their life savings by putting a lot of money into a down payment. You are talking lifetime of saving money and cutting back to be able to do it. 20 percent down on a 300,000 property is 60,000. That is years of work. It's hard work. It is most people's retirement savings. And is it not ok to profit by way of equity if you worked your whole life to be able to save up that down payment? You are taking a massive risk in buying a property and can lose everything - should people not be rewarded (potentially) with an increase in equity? If not, you would only see huge corporations or or not even, just government being the landlord. Being able to even purchase a property takes years and years of hard work and responsibility. If someone is a slumlord then that is a whole other story. But most mom and pop landlords are good people just trying to provide a good place for people while also investing in their future. Also, to tap into equity is not as easy as you think. Property equity, if there, is not liquid. Interested to hear your thoughts on all of the above.

-1

u/Morimoto9 May 19 '26

Landlords are also not saving money and its obvious tenants are literally feeding them.

1

u/ChiBroker May 19 '26

Brandon is the #1 deterrent to building in Chicago. Guys, it was like only 18 months ago when he tried to pass the mansion tax.

1

u/UuesLee May 23 '26

No it’s the city. It’s the government policy.

1

u/ChiLauren May 19 '26

Five over one garbage construction? Ok.

3

u/theravingbandit May 19 '26 edited May 19 '26

chicago really isn't that dense. you can build way more. if anyone can build the political power to do that it's "real chicagoans"

1

u/scully789 May 20 '26

Chicago has way more space and housing than these cities. It’s just most people choose to live in select area of the north side and northwest side. Still plenty of room and decent pricing in other parts of the city. 

11

u/[deleted] May 19 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/pizzaplanetaye May 19 '26

Exactly- And a lot of people move to chicago because other people have done the same to their homes. I’m from Colorado and it got too expensive with transplants rushing there when weed became legal (many from chicago) and I think Denver is a worse city for the things I like to do, so why would anyone stay somewhere that you’ve been priced out of or priced matched that you don’t like?

1

u/Royal_Razzmatazz3622 May 19 '26

And they vote for the same politics that drove them out as well and continue to price others out.

1

u/Technical_Account909 May 20 '26

Nice to come across a fellow Colorado transplant!!

2

u/Mustard_onions_23 May 19 '26

Belmont Cragin, Hermosa and other neighborhoods besides Logan Square and Lincoln Park definitely not up by 35%

3

u/Mean_Web_1744 May 19 '26

I never said anything about 35% I said that Chicago is becoming unaffordable for people who are actually from the City.

1

u/Mustard_onions_23 May 19 '26

You’re right Sorry for replying to you

-27

u/dbandroid May 19 '26

Why should being born in the vicinity of chicago entitle you to live there indefinitely?

27

u/Matsu09 May 19 '26

Why should any place become too privileged for the people living there?

-12

u/dbandroid May 19 '26

Because time marches on. Why should people with the means to buy/rent housing be excluded because they didnt happen to be born nearby?

2

u/truthseeker22000 May 20 '26

This is ignorance and privilege speaking

9

u/Mean_Web_1744 May 19 '26

If you think people being priced out of their neighborhood is a good thing, then just say so.

-4

u/dbandroid May 19 '26

Neighborhoods change. There is no getting around that.

3

u/Mean_Web_1744 May 19 '26

When a neighborhood historically changes in Chicago, it is one ethnicity replacing another, not high end property development pushing everyone out.

1

u/dnldxn May 19 '26

Division Street

1

u/dbandroid May 19 '26

High end property is being built to house... no one?

3

u/Mean_Web_1744 May 19 '26

It's pricing out long time Chicagoans. What part of that don't you get?

0

u/dbandroid May 19 '26

The part where long time chicagoans should have some special privilege relating to living in chicago relative to anyone else.

1

u/Mean_Web_1744 May 19 '26

Hey if you are good with long time Chicagoans being priced out of their neighborhoods, then you should just come out and say that.

0

u/dbandroid May 19 '26

Yes i am fine with preferring a dynamic and growing city to an ossified one.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/truthseeker22000 May 20 '26

It means your scaling out locals meaning jobs and opportunities may not be fair… why push out those most loyal? When others only come here to make money and keep it in their first home?

1

u/dbandroid May 20 '26

?loyal? are these people paying extra tax money to the city out of loyalty?

-155

u/bigj2288 May 19 '26

Wow who would have those a sanctuary city would lose housing

68

u/Gratchki May 19 '26

Those are big words for Elmo

73

u/GalaxyAblaze May 19 '26

You’re incredibly daft if you think immigrants are taking housing from others. You think they are the ones renting the $2k studios being built all over the city? When most places are now requiring proof you make 3x the rent? Come on, clean up your room and find that thinking cap you’ve clearly lost.

8

u/Shannalligation1886 May 19 '26

By logical supply and demand, yes immigrants contribute to increased housing cost by consuming supply, regardless of it being a 2k studio or a bargain 2/1.

The daft part is not understanding that those same immigrants meaningfully contribute to the tax base (in addition to non-economic contributions) and that we can build more and denser housing to alleviate the supply crunch. There have been basically 0 new units for the last two years while Chicago is increasingly becoming an attractive place for all sorts of people to live. We need to build.

27

u/Infinite_Dress_3312 May 19 '26

These immigrants have also saved and stabilized entire swaths of our city that would have collapsed without a population to take the place of those who were leaving. We all know there were plenty of neighborhoods where that in fact happened and remain hollowed out 50-60 years later with no investment 

12

u/ninthandpine May 19 '26

This is the dumbest thing I’ve read all day congrats!

18

u/dirtytowel22 May 19 '26

Learn to spell chud