I don't know new york but some areas that spring to mind: notating hill, islington, Victoria park village, shad Thames, clapham, fulham, hampstead, spitalfields (market yes, not so much where people live...), kings road in Chelsea, richmond (a bit farther out).,.

Our favourite curry is in shad Thames bengal clipper: http://www.bengalclipper.co.uk/

Notting hill argh stupid autocorrect!

ChgoGal:

Another Chicagoan here...

What about the Marylebone area? Quite upscale with a neighborhood feel and yet close to everything:

http://www.marylebonevillage.com/en/marylebone-village/

Chelsea, nice parts of holland park, hampstead is kind of far for a tourist. (We stick with Covent Garden, Knightsbridge or Mayfair - but we live on the upper west side and like being more central and to walk to quite a few sights.

I like Chelsea, we stayed in the Sloane Square Hotel and loved it. The neighbourhood is lovely, all manner of shops from high end designer on Sloane St. to a mix of mid priced English chains and interesting independent shops on the King's Road.

Lots of restaurants, good people watching, beautiful buildings, a tube station right there on the Square. Also on the square is the Royal Court Theatre if plays interest you, and a short walk away is the Saatchi Gallery if you like modern art and it is free.

I saw lots of cafes, bakeries, no panhandlers and all was clean and pleasant.
We were there six days and had breakfast at the Botanist next door to the hotel every morning.Fun to sit at the big windows and watch the schoolchildren on their way to school and people off to work.

I wouldn't disagree with any of the posts so far, but I would add parts of Bloomsbury (say, around Red Lion St, Marchmont St and the Brunswick Centre) - and point out to the unwary that, anywhere where the kind of cachet you're looking for attaches to the name of a district, that district will turn out to have pretty elastic boundaries for some advertisers. Always check the exact postcode on the map, and use Google Streetview to check out exactly what's in the locality.

Meant to add, Hackney would be a prime example where district names need to be checked: it's a London Borough (i.e. quite a large area) comprising a number of different districts. There are areas of re-gentrified Victorian villas, areas of arty/creative eccentricity (and/or squalor, depending on your taste), areas of depressed public housing, areas of deprivation, and just plain grotty industrial/commercial areas.

The social obsession of a label as eerily precise as "upper middle class" is simply unLondon: it's a concept that might have some relevance in a socially fossilised society like the United States but is completely alien in a dynamic modern society like SE England.

Nowhere in London, except its three gated communities (for which you need to be Prime Minister, the Queen or the Israeli Ambassador to live in) is devoid of extremely poor inhabitants, litter, Big Issue salespeople, young people just asking for "any spare chayyynge" or dogpoo. Or (except for Marylebone High St, which has no parks or garden squares, but aggressive selection of who's allowed to set up shop) of chain retail.

The past century's urban destructions by Hitler and insensitive local councils, combined with the slummification/gentrification cycle that's affected almost all housing built between 1750 and 1920, mean that just about every pretty or interesting neighbourhood in London has, within a hundred yards or so, houses selling for several million pounds and socially-owned estates containing the highest levels of destitution. This usually doesn't just mean poverty but discarded needles and affluent schoolchildren who'll get mugged for their mobile phones at least once before they're ten

On the other hand, lots of neighbourhoods that don't feature in Hugh Grant films have extraordinarily lively (and safe) street life, wonderful parks, terrific restaurants, but a population that a class obsessive would describe as working class. Probably poor, and many going on most very likelily not very white.

Intense social heterogeneity (something no major city on earth rivals London in) aside, there's also the complication that Londoners are generally unhappy about letting hotels be built where they live, rarely rent their houses out while on holiday and generally bar hotels from their garden squares. So it's not easy to spend a holiday in or near Stoke Newington Church Street (possibly the single location that best combines street life, restaurants and a park, but has more than its share of poor inhabitants) or Brixton for example.

Each of the neighbourhoods listed above has its virtues. None have all the qualities the poster seeks.

It's not clear whether the poster is looking for somewhere to live/stay or sort of hang out. The whole thing's complicated by another London uniqueness as well.

We don't have the American system of zoning, so there are very few thoroughly "residential" neighbourhoods. A street like Islington's Upper Street, for example is pretty and close to tranquil by day (though by many American city standards, rather traffic-choked: almost all interesting London streets are also bus and lorry routes) but a seething mass of youth-oriented wine bars and cheap eateries most nights. The pubs in St John's Wood High St look charming mid-morning but can get quite unpleasant when the local office workers pour in at lunchtime or after 6 (a time when bits of Sloane Square get really rather horrid).

If the poster's looking for somewhere to stay, she not only has to prioritise between Starbucks-freeness and a view of greenery, but accept that wherever she chooses will be a bit of London, not an upper middle class neighbourhood. The ways it fails to meet that American standard might be trivial for some but serious for others. If she's looking for somewhere to hang out, she should just shop around between the places mentioned in this thread, accepting that if she wants to keep away from the lower orders, London is about the last place on earth to choose.

We always stay in South Kensington or near Gloucester tube. It is within a short distance of Chelsea and the shops alongKin's Rd all kinds on services and eating places nearby and walking distance to 2 museums/ Good tranpsortation too
Close to green areas too,you can walk to kensington Gardens

>> if she wants to keep away from the lower orders, London is about the last place on earth to choose.<<

And even some upper middle class Londoners might as well be common as muck for all the manners they have, but that's another story. The terminology here is full of heffalump traps - some "upper middle class" Londoners might adore to patronise some charming "little" independent cheese-maker, others would turn their noses up at anything that doesn't come from Horrids, and so on, and so on. We could be here all night.

I was keen to add my own views until I saw flanner setting the pace, upper-middle-class ..... somewhere between having to shave himself or having the butler do it I guess

I am from Chicago too and lived a year in London five years ago. Things change but I do recommend Sloane Square (althought that's maybe more like near Oak Street in Chicago as a bit more "posh"), Nottinghill or Islington as comparable to Old Town or Lincoln Park. For restaurants, entertainment etc. I highly recommend the on line edition of Time Out magazine. www.timeout.com. Has very good coverage of London and good search features for what you might be looking for.

Just chiming in to agree with the others – comfortable, aflluent areas tend towards the northwest and southwest of the city, so South Kensington, Kensington, Chelsea, Holland Park, parts of Notting hill, Putney, Richmond, Hampstead and the lists go on. Has anyone yet mentioned Maida Vale or Primrose Hill?

Certainly not Hackney though (boast warning coming up - I live next door to Michael Fassbender, although sadly not yet on sugar borrowing terms) - it is hipster central. I'm the oldest, fuddy-duddyist girl in town. Although I would recommend visiting Broadway Market on a Saturday for a different side of London from the posh bubble you're looking for.

no matter where you decide - it will be a totally mixed bag. Except maybe Mayfair (where I wouldn't personally stay) - most anywhere else there will be very posh houses, public housing, grotty corner shops and exclusive boutiques, wonderful pubs and nasty ones, grafitti, blue plaques. The whole gamut.

We happened on, through AtHomeinLondon, an agency that handles B&B's, the Belgravia area which was so great. Had rooms off Kinnerton Street. Two minutes walk to busy Knightsbridge, but it felt like being in a "village." Local pubs full of local people. Short walk to bakeries and local Waitrose. Some restaurants. Sloan Square area with its high class shopping nearby. Short walk to Hyde Park and Hyde Park tube stop. Short walk to Harrods (Horrids? always fun for a gawk, though) Quiet and peaceful and homeyfeeling yet sooooo convenient. In terms of actual residences and maybe most hotels in Belgravia, it might be more upper class? I know our rooms were unexpectedly way below the average cost of the area which is how we were able to stay there. But I loved the whole atmosphere and while never pretending to be a local, I did feel much more a part of a safe, clean, upper middle class or upper class neighborhood than when I stayed in 3 other areas of London. (I always have felt safe in London; this was just the nicest neighborhood I've stayed in.)

I remember enjoying a pint at The Red Lion, in St. James, and being impressed by the diversity of the clientele -- everyone from laborers to Saville Row Suits enjoying their pints of Fuller's. (Great pub, with stunning cut glass mirrors. Must have started life as a Gin Palace.) It does seem to me that the pub is a more democratic institution than the American bar. I don't recall the London neighborhoods, especially most of those mentioned above, as being particularly integrated economically. I suppose they are in comparison to our gated communities, but those are a suburban phenomena (and pretty rare in my part of the country, the Northeast.)

I stayed in Hampstead at my cousin's (husband a VP at Barclay's) and would describe the neighbourhood as being upper middle class generally. Since I fall into an unquestionably lower middle class status, I quantify this by the fact that I never would have been able to afford to live there.

I'll check off what you're looking for:

Independent cafes/bakeries (by Hampstead tube stop): CHECK

Employed Busy 30/40-somethings present: CHECK

Few panhandlers: CHECK (though I was shocked at the behaviour of loud youth each time I went to a Finchley Road Internet cafe)

Nice resto with view of park/lively street: Not sure you'll find what you want here. Hampstead Heath is huge and gorgeous, but a restaurant overlooking is what I'm balking on. I did see some "nearby" restaurants that you might like. Finchley Road is the busiest street but I wonder if it'll have the ambience you're looking for.

Not "hipster": CHECK

Clean, wide sidewalks: A few wide. Most are endearingly narrow. Seemed pretty clean (except perhaps Finchley Road).

I found Hampstead a good location for exploring London & vicinity. Have a great trip! Daniel

I think a bunch of people here are not really familiar with neighborhoods in US cities - which are also usually quite diverse.

We live on the upper west side (the real upper west side - not the section between 96th St and Morningside Heights which is more mixed (a LOT of public housing mixed in with the gentrified blocks and the mansions on Riverside). Even though this is primarily upper middle class (and some wealthy on Central Park West and Riverside) there are still some small public housing projects as well as a number of brownstones that haven;t been upgraded since being built in the 1890s. There are a significant number of people who are poor, working class or lower middle class - but the area in general has an UMC vibe. This is true all over NYC - unless you live on Park or Fifth in the 60s/low 70s - in which case you ARE wealthy (or inherited a rent-controlled apt from an elderly relative).

As for the US being fossilized - this is a nation of immigrants - and everyone I know can look back 1 or 2 or 3 generations to family who came here essentially penniless - and have lived the american dream to become upper middle class. (I must admit most of my friends are comfortable - but none of them have ancestors who came over on the Mayflower, or live in a $10 million Park Ave co-op - and they represent a broad mix of nationalities, religions and races.

nytraveler, wow, I didn't think anyone still took FLUK's dyspeptic splutterings about the U.S. seriously. (Or to use another comparison, bring up anything about the U.S. to FLUK and you know he will start thrashing and throwing toys out of his pram.)

The best that can be said about the areas people have mentioned is there might be a better chance in finding what you want in those areas as opposed to other areas, but how to find what you want would be haphazard. You would really need to have a specific address because the atmosphere can change quickly and sometimes drastically just turning a corner.