Favored Quarters

[Hash]

Here's France:

Paris: The wealthiest parts of the city and its metropolitan area clearly spread westwards from the centre of the city. The 6th, 7th, 8th, 16th and southern half of the 17th arrondissements are the traditional beaux quartiers (lit. 'nice neighbourhoods'). The 7th and 8th are the most traditional centres of the French/Parisian bourgeoisie. The western half of the first arrondissement is also very wealthy. Nowadays, with the completion of gentrification in the four inner arrondissements of the right bank, essentially the entire downtown/central core of the city is prohibitively expensive for housing. The western suburbs of Paris in the Hauts-de-Seine and Yvelines are the wealthiest.

Lyon: In Lyon proper, the wealthiest parts are the 2nd and 6th arrondissements. The second is part of the central core of Lyon and is the southern half of the Presqu'île formed by the Rhône and Saône rivers. The slopes and hill of the Croix-Rousse in the 1st and 4th arrondissements are historically working-class silk workers' neighbourhoods, today largely gentrified. Ainay was the historical heart of the nobility and upper-bourgeoisie of Lyon. The 6th arrondissement (Les Brotteaux) is on the right side of the Rhône and northeast of the city. It was largely developed as a upper-end bourgeois area in the nineteenth century. Its favoured status may owe to the fact that it orders a large urban park. Lyon's wealthiest suburbs are the communes in the Monts d'or hills, to the northwest of the city.

Marseille: Marseille is a unique city, always. The traditional divide oft quoted is between the poor north and wealthier, or more diverse, south. The old bourgeoisie deserted the noisy and tumultuous old port hundreds of years ago, moving south. The traditional wealthy areas are in the south of the city, in the 6th, 7th and 8th arrondissements. Contemporary 'traditional' upper-bourgeois neighbourhoods grew west of the Prado avenue in the nineteenth century, while working-class areas and factories were built to the east of that avenue. The wealthy areas of Endoume, Bompard, Périer and Roucas-Blanc are all located close to the ocean (and beaches). Proximity to the ocean and the Calanques has also made old fishing villages further south into expensive places, although their politics tend to be different from the old bourgeois establishment areas. The 11th and 12th arrondissements have upper middle-class suburban neighbourhoods, developed in the 20th century, which are slightly higher in elevation on a plateau between the Jarret and Huveaune river valleys. Those narrow valleys, particularly the latter, tend to be more industrial/commercial and the main arteries of communication out of the city to the east.

Toulouse: I don't know all that much about this city, but the historic centre (hyper-centre) is the wealthiest. There are some wealthy neighbourhoods on more elevated grounds to the east and southeast of the central core (Côte Pavée). The wealthiest suburban communes are to the south along the Garonne river.

Nice: The city's wealthiest areas tend to be in the hills, most notably Cimiez or Gairaut in the north, or the chic late nineteenth century waterfront along the Promenade des Anglais. Lower-income, historically industrial and working-class, areas are in the valleys, most notably the Paillon valley and La Madeleine.

Nantes: The historic centre around the cathedral and Graslin, slightly west of the centre, used to be the wealthy areas of the city (they still are, slightly less so). Wealthy neighbourhoods have moved west along the quiet valleys of small rivers. Nantes' wealthy suburbs developed to the north and west, while areas directly on the Loire river all the way to Saint-Nazaire were working-class.

Montpellier: I don't know much about this city's different areas, and the patterns are confusing and messy. Parts of the historic centre and areas to the north are traditionally the most bourgeois but also at the same quite artsy and young, and poorer areas are now - as in many French cities - in the peripheries.

Strasbourg: The modern affluent neighbourhoods, since I think the late nineteenth century and early 20th, are in the north: Quartier des Quinze, Orangerie, Contades, and Robertsau in the far north of the city. The European institutions are also in this area. Nowadays, with gentrification, the entire old city and Krutenau (which was historically a working-class area), are also affluent (and very expensive).

Bordeaux: The wealthy areas are the centre and the west (Caudéran). There's a pretty clear north/centre/south and east/west split in terms of wealth which also shows up in voting patterns. Within the broader metro, the east (right bank of the Garonne) is the poorest (Lormont, Cenon, Floirac), as were, historically, communes to the south of Bordeaux like Bègles. On the other hand, Le Bouscat and Bruges, two communes to the northwest of Bordeaux, are the wealthiest inner suburbs.

Lille: The centre and Vieux-Lille, in the north of the city near Vauban's citadel, are now the wealthiest and most expensive areas of the city. This wasn't always the case, as there's been significant gentrification and soaring real estate prices in those areas. Outside the city, the wealthy suburbs are to the north of the city core and to the west of the industrial cities of Roubaix and Tourcoing.

Rennes: As mentioned, the city's wealthiest area is in the inner northeast, close to the Thabor botanical gardens, although the old centre is quite wealthy as well today. These areas are to the north of the Vilaine river, historically infamous for flooding. This has been the case for a long time: André Siegfried mentions these same areas in 1913 as the area of residency of the traditional nobility. And it's still distinctive in its politics. In the metropolitan area, it's the north that is wealthier (Saint-Grégoire) and the east, to a lesser extent (Saint-Grégoire).

Reims: The city centre appears to be the wealthiest area.

Toulon: Probably because of the harbour and naval base, the centre (particularly the oldest part, the lower town) is poor and has suffered from urban decay, a pattern found in several other Mediterranean cities in France. The wealthiest areas seem to be in the hills to the north of the city, and to the east on higher ground overlooking the sea (Cap Brun). So these patterns appear similar to Marseille and Nice.

Le Havre: The wealthy areas are largely concentrated in the west, on the waterfront. The separate commune of Sainte-Adresse, surrounded by Le Havre to the north and east, is a very wealthy resort town. Upper middle-class suburban development has continued to the north of Ste-Adresse, in the neighbourhood of Dollemard. Le Havre's downtown, almost entirely rebuilt post-war, is also quite wealthy as are residential neighbourhoods immediately north and west.

[CityByTheValley]

San Francisco--Not an obvious favored quarter?

Since a lot of this thread is more dedicated to metro areas than just central city limits, I think when talking about San Francisco you can really look at the Bay Area as a whole and in that sense yes, there isn't an obvious favored quarter because there really are three distinct bubbles of affluence with around 2 million residents shared between them. It initially seems like the main San Francisco metro counties (SF, Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, Marin) and Santa Clara (At this point San Jose's really not a unique metro, imo) are one interconnected chain of wealth, all being some of the wealthiest counties nationwide and with median incomes of over $100,000 stand out despite containing large cities. Here, this income does not go as far, however, so the bar is a bit higher when considering "favored quarters" and these six counties can be split into areas of wealth with Central and Northern SF combining with Marin to form one bubble, Western Santa Clara and Southern and Central San Mateo combining to form another bubble, while the third area is Southern and Central Contra Costa and the Eastern portion of Alameda.

The SF/Marin bubble is probably the whitest out of the three, and is distinct due to its mixture of old and new money with finance billionaires and tech billionaires dominating Pac Heights and North SF in city while old school doctors, lawyers, and business professionals live in Marin and the suburban hilly parts of central SF. This area basically takes in the whitest parts of the city and adds them to even whiter Marin to stand out as probably the only place that matches the stereotypical idea of suburbia, but is somewhat analogous to New York and Westchester (despite those two counties not connecting). Politically, you see a LOT of NIMBY culture that is shrouded in liberalism and this is what you imagine when you think of stereotypical hypocritical liberals who are all in on BLM but don't particularly like the homeless. Easily the most liberal out of the three regions.

The Silicon Valley bubble of Santa Clara and San Mateo is probably the most asian out of the three, and is distinct due to its clear dominance of tech culture in a line from Hillsborough (arguably closer in culture to the SF bubble, but geographically absorbed into SV) down to Los Gatos with parts of San Jose included. I'm most familiar with this part of the Bay Area and would say you have the billionaire class generally in the hilly portions of this region, with a large number of Asian professionals living side by side their white counterparts. Politically, again there's a LOT of NIMBY culture but one that is definitely more openly anti-homeless and not as concerned about a liberal facade, with this region more moderate than the previous one and closer to the tech-bro stereotype (although libertarians are fairly rare, that part's not true whatsoever imo), but for the Bay Area moderate is closer to 75-25 D compared to the 85-15 of the last group.

The last bubble is the closest to generic suburbia without its own real culture and is an amalgamation of quickly growing cheaper exurbs and suburbs far flung from SF as well as Oakland's Eastern hills and its "suburbs" (think sun belt suburbs for the most part combined with a detached and somewhat more conservative part of the first bubble). In my experience a lot of people live in the second bubble for the nationally ranked schools and when their kids get to college they sell and get a house twice the size in this area, but this area is up-and-coming in its own right. You have Asian dominance in Fremont, San Ramon, and Pleasanton, while there's a far larger white population in Lamorinda, Alamo, Danville, and in Eastern Oakland and Berkeley's hills. Politically, you don't have a lot of NIMBY culture when you're in the Southern half of this area since new homes are being built almost daily, but when you get to Berkeley and Oakland's hills it almost matches SF, although overall this area is the most conservative of the three, but again in the Bay Area that's closer to 70-30 D.

[Brittain33]

In contemporary cities, there's an obvious advantage to being east of the city, which is that you face away from the sun on your commute in both the morning and the evening. It's not clear if this has made a difference in any American cities, but it's why residence of Sydney's western suburbs are called squinters.

Phoenix says hi. Their favored quarter is northeast to Scottsdale and there has been overall much more development to the east of the city, while the west is less affluent and has more seniors.

[Battista Minola 1616]

Toulon: Probably because of the harbour and naval base, the centre (particularly the oldest part, the lower town) is poor and has suffered from urban decay, a pattern found in several other Mediterranean cities in France. The wealthiest areas seem to be in the hills to the north of the city, and to the east on higher ground overlooking the sea (Cap Brun). So these patterns appear similar to Marseille and Nice.

I find this interesting (surprising?) because my city also has a harbour and a naval base just beside the centre and sits in the Mediterranean - in fact, La Spezia is twinned with Toulon! - but "poor" and "urban decay" are the last words I would associate with our lower old town.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Here's the best of the state quarter designs.

[Kamala's side hoe]

SF/Marin bubble: Politically, you see a LOT of NIMBY culture that is shrouded in liberalism and this is what you imagine when you think of stereotypical hypocritical liberals who are all in on BLM but don't particularly like the homeless. Easily the most liberal out of the three regions.

muh “white liberal elite” that lfromnj goes to painstaking lengths to poke fun of

Silicon Valley bubble: Politically, again there's a LOT of NIMBY culture but one that is definitely more openly anti-homeless and not as concerned about a liberal facade, with this region more moderate than the previous one and closer to the tech-bro stereotype (although libertarians are fairly rare, that part's not true whatsoever imo), but for the Bay Area moderate is closer to 75-25 D compared to the 85-15 of the last group.

I’d argue the futuristic “tech bro” mentality is more liberaltarian than straight-up libertarian.

East Bay bubble: Politically, you don't have a lot of NIMBY culture when you're in the Southern half of this area since new homes are being built almost daily, but when you get to Berkeley and Oakland's hills it almost matches SF, although overall this area is the most conservative of the three, but again in the Bay Area that's closer to 70-30 D.

Do places like Walnut Creek fall into this bubble?

[CityByTheValley]

Do places like Walnut Creek fall into this bubble?

I'd probably say SV bubble includes Hillsborough, Burlingame's hills, San Mateo's hills, Belmont's hills, San Carlos, Western Redwood City, Atherton, Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Los Altos Hills, Los Altos, Southern Mountain View, Southern Sunnyvale, Cupertino, Saratoga, Western San Jose (Willow Glen down to Los Gatos border), Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, and Southern San Jose (Almaden and its hills).

The East Bay bubble includes Fremont's hills, Pleasanton, Dublin, parts of Livermore, San Ramon, Alamo, Blackhawk, Diablo, Danville, Walnut Creek, the Lamorinda trio (Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda), Kensington, Northern and Eastern Berkeley by the hills and east of the university, Oakland's Rockridge and Eastern hills, and Piedmont.

I actually mapped both bubbles out in DRA and they're large enough to have their own congressional districts that end up being >90% White and Asian and the least Hispanic districts in the entire state. The SV district is also the least Black district possible I think at <1%. I'd assume they would end up being the first and second wealthiest districts nationwide if made a reality.

[TJ in Oregon]

Cleveland: The favored quarter is definitely, although perhaps unexpectedly, the east. This was always the old money part of town with the ornate gilded age mansions. The Heights are the suburban extension of this, complete with their own century old mansions. What is strange about this is that the Southeast and Northeast are the least favored quarters, and that the east side of the city of Cleveland proper is in pretty unfortunate shape these days, so it may mask the fact that the east side is the favored quarter. The remains of the favored quarter are now something more like a wedge between the poorest parts of the city. The west side, which has the reputation of having more stable neighborhoods, was always a working class part of town and mostly remains a stable working class area, albeit with some gentrification in the inner and lakefront areas.

Madison: The favored quarter is unambiguously the west (though not including the southwest). The least favored quarters are the south, and to a lesser extent the north.

Portland: The favored quarter is the southwest, although there are favored patches on all sides of the city. But the West Hills provides such a clear natural advantage to the West that this should be pretty predictable. The least favored quarter historically has been the north, but the north is slowly being gentrified and the far southeast is declining.

[Alcibiades]

Borrowing from Batista, here are my guesses for the 10 largest Spanish cities:

Madrid: Unclear. The richest areas in the city proper would be the neighbourhoods of Salamanca, Retiro or Chamberí in the Northeast. However, right after you cross the area delimited by highway M-30, income drops like a rock. Plus, the eastern suburbs like Coslada, Torrejón de Ardoz or Alcalá de Henares are fairly middle class. Meanwhile it is the western suburbs that are where the super rich live.

In Madrid if anything it makes more sense to talk of an "unfavoured quarter", southern Madrid is very firmly poor.

Barcelona: West. Barcelona has a much clearer favoured quarter. This one goes from the Eixample (just nord of the old city), which is upper middle class, and follows "Diagonal Avenue" to the west, up until the mountais. The wealthiest part of the city is just on the foothills (Pedralbes, Sarriá, etc). It is such a distinct area that "Upper Diagonal" is often used as a synonym of the rich people of Barcelona and what not.

Valencia: East. In the city proper, starting in the old town (which unlike in Madrid and Barcelona is fairly wealthy, especially in the eastern half), you go east to neighbourhoods like Eixample or El Pla del Real. It is worth noting that in terms of suburban areas, the rich ones in Valencia are to the northwest (there is a sort of V shape, but the western half is more like middle class until you are well outside city limits)

Seville: South. The richest parts of Seville seem to be the southern half of the old city, and the neighbourhoods just outside it (Los Remedios, Nervión). Worth noting that if you go too far south you get to Las 3000 viviendas, which is the poorest and worst neighbourhood in all of Spain arguably.

Zaragoza: South. The favoured quarter here is fairly clear. It starts just outside the old city, and goes south along Paseo de la Gran Vía.

Málaga: East. In the area immediately next to the city centre, there doesn't seem to be a clear pattern. However once you start getting to even slightly more peripheral neighbourhoods, the east gets very wealthy, very fast.

Murcia: North. Again a very clear one.

Palma de Mallorca: West. This is a weird one because the city centre is richer than any area surrounding it. However when you head east, you get to the poorest neighbourhoods and it never picks up from there. Meanwhile, when you head west there is a middle class area and then super rich suburbs.

Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: East. This is a very clear one. Las Palmas is a very mountainous town, and the coastal areas on the east are the ones that are very clearly richer than the inland ones. There is a rich strip all the way from Ciudad Jardín to the old city in Triana. Meanwhile, inland neighbourhoods on the hills and mountains are way poorer (Schamann, San Juan, Las Rehoyas, etc)

Bilbao: West. Bilbao is a weird one because the city centre does not coincide with the old town. In any case, the rich areas are to the west of the old town. (Abando, Indatxu)

So overall it is:

1 North
2 South
3 West
3 East
1 Unclear

So interestingly Spain doesn't really seem to have a preference of East vs West. I guess perhaps it is because Spain never really had much industry to begin with? (so the prevailing winds argument is much weaker).

What is interesting is that, although the PP obviously dominate such wealthy areas, Vox got a clear second place in many of them (of course except in Barcelona and Bilbao). They seem to be fairly unique among European far right parties in managing to win a decent amount of the traditional well-off conservative vote (their best areas though seem to be the Madrid exurbs (what is the income level of these?) and the coastal regions of Andalucia and Murcia). Would I be correct in suspecting that this anomaly among European nations is at least partially due to historical patterns of support for Francoism, and the more recent polarising debates on Catalan independence?

[Former President tack50]

What is interesting is that, although the PP obviously dominate such wealthy areas, Vox got a clear second place in many of them (of course except in Barcelona and Bilbao). They seem to be fairly unique among European far right parties in managing to win a decent amount of the traditional well-off conservative vote (their best areas though seem to be the Madrid exurbs (what is the income level of these?) and the coastal regions of Andalucia and Murcia). Would I be correct in suspecting that this anomaly among European nations is at least partially due to historical patterns of support for Francoism, and the more recent polarising debates on Catalan independence?

I am not sure, but I think you would be correct yeah. Vox tends to do better than your usual far right party among the "old money" people, and worse than your usual right populist party among more working class people. Though this got reduced quite a bit in the November 2019 election, Vox's gains were concentrated among poorer areas

Coastal Andalucia and Murcia can be explained due to muslim immigration. Those areas have high muslim immigration which causes quite a bit of conflict. Eastern Andalucia also has the highest concentrations of roma gypsies in Spain as well (though Murcia is average). The town of El Ejido in Almería province is still the home of the worst "race riots" in Spanish history (back in 2000)

[King of Kensington]

[Kamala's side hoe]

Cleveland: The favored quarter is definitely, although perhaps unexpectedly, the east. This was always the old money part of town with the ornate gilded age mansions. The Heights are the suburban extension of this, complete with their own century old mansions. What is strange about this is that the Southeast and Northeast are the least favored quarters, and that the east side of the city of Cleveland proper is in pretty unfortunate shape these days, so it may mask the fact that the east side is the favored quarter. The remains of the favored quarter are now something more like a wedge between the poorest parts of the city. The west side, which has the reputation of having more stable neighborhoods, was always a working class part of town and mostly remains a stable working class area, albeit with some gentrification in the inner and lakefront areas.

Claire Malone describes the West-East divide beautifully in A Tale of Two Suburbs

Portland: The favored quarter is the southwest, although there are favored patches on all sides of the city. But the West Hills provides such a clear natural advantage to the West that this should be pretty predictable. The least favored quarter historically has been the north, but the north is slowly being gentrified and the far southeast is declining.

You could say Portland’s favorite quarter extends into Lake Oswego, and arguably across the West Hills into unincorporated Washington County within the urban growth boundary. I can anecdotally second your observations about North Portland and the far Southeast, although most of the stories I hear about SE Portland have to do with the more gentrfied/whiter inner part, west of 82nd Ave.

[King of Kensington]

Toronto's "favored quarter" runs essentially through 4 electoral districts running north from the core: University-Rosedale (Annex, Rosedale), St. Paul's (Forest Hill, Yonge-St. Clair), Eglinton-Lawrence (North Toronto), and Don Valley West (Lawrence Park, York Mills).  These districts have populations of about 100,000 each (and all are rather mixed).

https://www.elections.ca/res/cir/maps2/mapprov.asp?map=Toronto&prov=35&b=n&lang=e

Average income:

Don Valley West $109,887
University-Rosedale  $98,820
St. Paul's  $92,952
Eglinton-Lawrence  $81,773

University degree:

University-Rosedale  67.1%
Don Valley West  62.7%
St. Paul's  60.5%
Eglinton-Lawrence  53.3%

[TJ in Oregon]

Cleveland: The favored quarter is definitely, although perhaps unexpectedly, the east. This was always the old money part of town with the ornate gilded age mansions. The Heights are the suburban extension of this, complete with their own century old mansions. What is strange about this is that the Southeast and Northeast are the least favored quarters, and that the east side of the city of Cleveland proper is in pretty unfortunate shape these days, so it may mask the fact that the east side is the favored quarter. The remains of the favored quarter are now something more like a wedge between the poorest parts of the city. The west side, which has the reputation of having more stable neighborhoods, was always a working class part of town and mostly remains a stable working class area, albeit with some gentrification in the inner and lakefront areas.

Claire Malone describes the West-East divide beautifully in A Tale of Two Suburbs

Reading that makes me miss Cleveland. Although I lived in Cleveland Heights, in the favored quarter, I was always more culturally in tuned to the lawn ornaments white ethnic Catholic crowd on the West side. I miss the processions, parades, restaurants, and civic events just thinking about it. Shake Heights/Cleveland Heights is an amazingly beautiful place even if I could never quite fit its politics.

On a sidenote back to this thread, it really is quite the stark boundary where the southern edge of the favored quarter ends; you go from burnt out apartment buildings to mansions with manicured lawns in a single block in some places. As that article mentioned in passing, Shaker Heights even built a wall on its southern border. Meanwhile the northern edge of the favored quarter, as you head towards the Cleveland Heights/East Cleveland border has some clear shifts in various locations but is generally more blurred than its southern counterpart.

Portland: The favored quarter is the southwest, although there are favored patches on all sides of the city. But the West Hills provides such a clear natural advantage to the West that this should be pretty predictable. The least favored quarter historically has been the north, but the north is slowly being gentrified and the far southeast is declining.

You could say Portland’s favorite quarter extends into Lake Oswego, and arguably across the West Hills into unincorporated Washington County within the urban growth boundary. I can anecdotally second your observations about North Portland and the far Southeast, although most of the stories I hear about SE Portland have to do with the more gentrfied/whiter inner part, west of 82nd Ave.

Yeah, I would say in Portland the gentrification border is also somewhat blurred, but you can see a shift between SE 60th or so to SE 82nd around most cross streets. NE 82nd has some roughness around the edges but is mostly gentrified these days. A quick jaunt around SE 82nd near Flavel or Crystal Springs can be a different kind of eye opening experience.

[lfromnj]

Cleveland: The favored quarter is definitely, although perhaps unexpectedly, the east. This was always the old money part of town with the ornate gilded age mansions. The Heights are the suburban extension of this, complete with their own century old mansions. What is strange about this is that the Southeast and Northeast are the least favored quarters, and that the east side of the city of Cleveland proper is in pretty unfortunate shape these days, so it may mask the fact that the east side is the favored quarter. The remains of the favored quarter are now something more like a wedge between the poorest parts of the city. The west side, which has the reputation of having more stable neighborhoods, was always a working class part of town and mostly remains a stable working class area, albeit with some gentrification in the inner and lakefront areas.

Claire Malone describes the West-East divide beautifully in A Tale of Two Suburbs

Portland: The favored quarter is the southwest, although there are favored patches on all sides of the city. But the West Hills provides such a clear natural advantage to the West that this should be pretty predictable. The least favored quarter historically has been the north, but the north is slowly being gentrified and the far southeast is declining.

You could say Portland’s favorite quarter extends into Lake Oswego, and arguably across the West Hills into unincorporated Washington County within the urban growth boundary. I can anecdotally second your observations about North Portland and the far Southeast, although most of the stories I hear about SE Portland have to do with the more gentrfied/whiter inner part, west of 82nd Ave.

Parma is on the South side, The western suburbs include Rocky River/ Lakewood which are also relatively UMC and upscale although its more of a new-money type.

[TJ in Oregon]

Cleveland: The favored quarter is definitely, although perhaps unexpectedly, the east. This was always the old money part of town with the ornate gilded age mansions. The Heights are the suburban extension of this, complete with their own century old mansions. What is strange about this is that the Southeast and Northeast are the least favored quarters, and that the east side of the city of Cleveland proper is in pretty unfortunate shape these days, so it may mask the fact that the east side is the favored quarter. The remains of the favored quarter are now something more like a wedge between the poorest parts of the city. The west side, which has the reputation of having more stable neighborhoods, was always a working class part of town and mostly remains a stable working class area, albeit with some gentrification in the inner and lakefront areas.

Claire Malone describes the West-East divide beautifully in A Tale of Two Suburbs

Portland: The favored quarter is the southwest, although there are favored patches on all sides of the city. But the West Hills provides such a clear natural advantage to the West that this should be pretty predictable. The least favored quarter historically has been the north, but the north is slowly being gentrified and the far southeast is declining.

You could say Portland’s favorite quarter extends into Lake Oswego, and arguably across the West Hills into unincorporated Washington County within the urban growth boundary. I can anecdotally second your observations about North Portland and the far Southeast, although most of the stories I hear about SE Portland have to do with the more gentrfied/whiter inner part, west of 82nd Ave.

Parma is on the South side, The western suburbs include Rocky River/ Lakewood which are also relatively UMC and upscale although its more of a new-money type.

There are definitely some upper middle class suburbs on both sides of the city, though Lakewood is more mixed than really upper class. No one really uses the phrase "South Side" except to describe Tremont itself (which is simultaneously consider to be on the Near West Side), or perhaps the Cuyahoga Valley. Cleveland is very East/West centric.

[Hash]

Doing this for Colombia's 5 largest cities now. This is interesting because many of Colombia's largest cities face natural obstacles in at least one direction to expansion - Bogotá is constrained by the Cerros Orientales to the west, Medellín is in a rather narrow valley and Cali is constrained by the Farallones de Cali to the east.

There is a trend in many Colombian cities: historical centres of many cities have suffered from decay and neglect, with wealthier residents moving out and the old centres gaining a reputation for being sketchy, with lots of informal street vendors, homeless people, addicts etc., and therefore usually abandoned at night and only active during the day. This is the case in Bogotá, Medellín, Cali, Barranquilla, Manizales. Cartagena is a possible exception since its historical centre is a UNESCO World Heritage site and has therefore seen real estate speculation and wealthy investors (many foreigners) gobbling up properties.

Also, as can be expected in such an unequal country, there are usually pretty sharp geographic divides between rich(er) and poor(er) in the cities.

Bogotá: The capital's wealthiest areas are found in the north(west) in the localities of Chapinero and Usaquén, and to a lesser extent in Suba (northeast). The wealthiest neighbourhoods in the city/country are El Chicó, Santa Barbara, Santa Ana, Rosales and El Nogal (home of Bogotá's [in]famous Club El Nogal, hangout spot of the elite). That's where most of the high-end shopping malls, fancy restaurants/bars/clubs, top hotels, the country club etc. are located. Wealthy neighbourhoods to the north developed starting in the mid-20th century (1930s - 1950s) around former haciendas, and expansion continued in Usaquén (annexed as part of Bogotá in 1954). The growth of these affluent areas seems to have occurred near the former tram/railway, and now around the carrera 7a, the main exit point to the north. More recently, there's been development of affluent condo/apartment buildings on the foothills of the Cerros Orientales (coexisting with older, poor informal settlements nearby), exclusive gated communities in the far north of the city and other condo/apartment developments in Suba. The pattern of affluent suburban growth is now continuing to the north of Bogotá in the suburban municipality of Chía.

Medellín: Medellín's wealthiest neighbourhood by far is Poblado, in the southeast of the city. It's dominated by gated communities or high-rise apartments/condos, and it has also become a second downtown for rich people with several major businesses (meaning that a lot of wealthy residents probably don't need to commute far) and a centre for (high-end) nightlife and recreation. And also where less curious tourists tend to stick to. That development has spilled over to the south, in the municipality of Envigado, making it one of the most well-off in the country. El Poblado developed in the late 50s-70s, before that it was the favourite summer villas spot for industrialists and the rich. The comuna of Laureles-Estadio, to the west of the centre, developed in the 1930s as an upper middle-class area and is the city's second wealthiest area. 

Cali: The wealthiest part of Cali is comuna 22 in the far south of the city, which is a newer exclusive area almost entirely made up of private villas, gated communities and no less than four private universities. As in the other large cities, the wealthy and new middle-classes moved out of the centre and settled in new exclusive neighbourhoods between the 1930s and 1950s. In Cali these wealthier neighbourhoods developed on the foothills and flat ground to the west of the Cali river, both to the north and southwest of the historic centre. Today, the west and south of the city, except for old informal settlements on the mountain flanks, is the wealthiest part. Comuna 2 in the northwest is the second wealthiest part of the city, and like in other large cities, has also become a second downtown for wealthier people with more high-end shopping malls, restaurants, hotels and recreation areas.

Barranquilla: Here the divide is north vs. south: the city's wealthy neighbourhoods grew, starting with El Prado in the 1920s, to the northwest of the old centre (also increasingly rundown here). Today's wealthy neighbourhoods and associated amenities (fancy malls etc.) have expanded in the same northwest direction from El Prado. Working-class areas, 'pirate' settlements and informal settlements grew in the south of the city and neighbouring Soledad.

Cartagena: Obviously the city's wealthiest neighbourhood is the touristy, waterfront touristy and Miami Beach-like Bocagrande, located just south of the walled city. Because of the desirability of the waterfront, more recent touristic/residential development has continued along the coast in the other direction (northeast), displacing traditional fishing communities, towards La Boquilla. The older, wealthy traditional neighbourhood is Manga (southeast of the walled city in the bay), founded in the early 1900s and known for its old villas. As noted, because of the special status of the walled city, Cartagena's downtown is different from that of other major Colombian cities. The tourism boom has also led to gentrification of Getsemaní, an old working-poor neighbourhood directly outside the UNESCO walled city.

[Craziaskowboi]

NORTH

Atlanta
Chicago
Columbus
Dallas/Fort Worth
Detroit
Indianapolis
New Orleans
New York
Oklahoma City
Orlando
Phoenix
Pittsburgh
San Antonio
San Diego
Tampa
Tucson


SOUTH

Birmingham
Charlotte
Denver
Jacksonville
Kansas City
Miami
Nashville
Providence
Rochester
Virginia Beach/Norfolk


EAST

Buffalo
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Grand Rapids
Louisville
Memphis
Riverside/San Bernardino
Sacramento
Salt Lake City
San Francisco/Oakland
Seattle


WEST

Austin
Baltimore
Boston
Hartford
Houston
Las Vegas
Los Angeles
Milwaukee
Minneapolis/St. Paul
Philadelphia
Portland
Raleigh
Richmond
St. Louis
San Jose
Washington DC

[Sol]

Some NC Favored Quarters:

Greensboro: Northwest
Winston-Salem: West-southwest
Asheville: South
Fayetteville: West, but some outer western suburbs are a bit more working class
Wilmington: Eastwards, towards the beach?

[Torie]

Cleveland: The favored quarter is definitely, although perhaps unexpectedly, the east. This was always the old money part of town with the ornate gilded age mansions. The Heights are the suburban extension of this, complete with their own century old mansions. What is strange about this is that the Southeast and Northeast are the least favored quarters, and that the east side of the city of Cleveland proper is in pretty unfortunate shape these days, so it may mask the fact that the east side is the favored quarter. The remains of the favored quarter are now something more like a wedge between the poorest parts of the city. The west side, which has the reputation of having more stable neighborhoods, was always a working class part of town and mostly remains a stable working class area, albeit with some gentrification in the inner and lakefront areas.

Claire Malone describes the West-East divide beautifully in A Tale of Two Suburbs

Portland: The favored quarter is the southwest, although there are favored patches on all sides of the city. But the West Hills provides such a clear natural advantage to the West that this should be pretty predictable. The least favored quarter historically has been the north, but the north is slowly being gentrified and the far southeast is declining.

You could say Portland’s favorite quarter extends into Lake Oswego, and arguably across the West Hills into unincorporated Washington County within the urban growth boundary. I can anecdotally second your observations about North Portland and the far Southeast, although most of the stories I hear about SE Portland have to do with the more gentrfied/whiter inner part, west of 82nd Ave.

Parma is on the South side, The western suburbs include Rocky River/ Lakewood which are also relatively UMC and upscale although its more of a new-money type.

There are definitely some upper middle class suburbs on both sides of the city, though Lakewood is more mixed than really upper class. No one really uses the phrase "South Side" except to describe Tremont itself (which is simultaneously consider to be on the Near West Side), or perhaps the Cuyahoga Valley. Cleveland is very East/West centric.

What I discovered about Cleveland while "enjoying" the hospitality of the Cleveland Heart Clinic for 40 days, is that the topography around the Cuyahoga River is really picturesque, and the money follows it, all the way down to "Hudson" in Summit County. Why was Hudson a wealth pocket I always wondered. Now I know. In LA, air quality caused the eastern suburbs to lose cachet for the west side, and when air quality improved, the east side wealth suburbs came roaring back with a vengeance, with the Chinese now displacing the WASPS en masse.

[Del Tachi]

Talking about Greater New Orleans using cardinal directions is a sin, but the most monied areas of the city are uptown of the French Quarter/CBD along St. Charles Avenue.  The Garden District and other uptown neighborhoods are historically rich and Anglo, which stands in contrast to the more Catholic "creole" neighborhoods of downtown.  It's practically two different cities.

I'm of the opinion that nothing beyond Claiborne Ave (i.e., "backatown") is actually New Orleans lol

Favored suburbs are Metairie, Jefferson and across the causeway in St Tammany; more downscale areas in St Bernard and the Westbank. 

[Sol]

Do folks know if Honolulu has one?

[ProgressiveModerate]

With all that's going on in Louisiana Redistricting, Baton Rougue stands out to me as a place not just with favored quarters but next to no development to the west of the river despite the proximity to downtown. Does anyone know why this is - is there a flood zone there or something?

[Tintrlvr]

Do folks know if Honolulu has one?

The east is wealthier than the west, with Kahala (around and just east of Diamond Head) as the wealthiest neighborhood. The west has worse geography (the airport and then military bases take up the waterfront, and those definitely harm property values even away from the water) and is of course more military-oriented.

[Del Tachi]

Multi-centric urban areas and water features kind of mess this up.  I can't really think of any logic for the location of the "preferred" suburbs on the MS Gulf Coast, for example.  Tampa Bay is another weird area.