Subsidized housing is contrary to the free market wherever it is located.

 

   

So Sherman, you support the concentration of the poor and poverty stricken?  It has been well documented that when poverty is concentrated, other social ills like crime, drugs, and continued poverty become a much much bigger issue.  And these issues are regional problems, not neighborhood-only ones.  We all pay for welfare, emergency room runs for the uninsured, etc. and if we allow for it to stay concentrated, we will always be paying more.  What's cheaper, to continue to support concentrated poverty because that's what the market says is correct or actually do something about it and perhaps, in the long term, pay less towards social services, etc. because poverty isn't as concentrated. 

 

Clearly, the federal government has taken the latter opinion.  I aree with the policy of deconcentrating poverty.  This is very important.  What is unclear as of now is what this does to people's social capital.  While it may increase their economic capital, their social capital is severed when they move out of the neighborhood they grew to rely on.   

But it shouldn't be "policy." It should be the free will of the free market to make these decisions, based upon routine economic decisions, such as land value costs, materials and design.

 

You have misinterpreted my comments. I made the comment that moving Section 8 into a suburban area where crime generally did not exist brings along with it the ills of possible deranged tenants, or tenants that are more susceptible to crime. This is a fact (a general query into Xavier's database provides many such examples) that cannot simply be brushed under, that there is a correlation between section 8 vouchers and crime.

 

That said, my stance has been the same as it has in the past: remove public subsidizes for public housing and allow developers to build based upon free market conditions. Let the poor or disadvantaged locate where the market is willing to support such a demographic -- in Lower Price Hill, Lincoln Heights, West Chester or wherever the free market dictates that a developer can earn a profit based upon the factors I outlined above. This removes the inherent problem with concentration and government intervention -- which has shown to fail time and time again.

The point is that the free market is a joke in this regard, because it completely fails at providing affordable housing.  The only time a private developer builds affordable units is when they're heavily subsidized by the government to make their bottom line work.  It's much more advantageous for a home builder to build $300,000 homes and let the banks worry about affordability through gimmick loans.

 

So by your ideal scenario Sherman there would be no affordable housing built, because the profits aren't there for the private industry.  A government subsidy is absolutely needed, this does not have to be a bad thing, but we need to come to grips that the almighty free market is not always perfect.

In my commentary against Section 8, here is what happens when you plop Section 8 in the middle of a middle-income neighborhood and/or in a more desirable location:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090915/NEWS0107/309150052/1055/NEWS/Girl+allegedly+stabbed+walking+from+fight

 

There are a LOT of complexities that go into social behaviors and patterns that go far beyond a direct tie between crime and the location of Section 8 housing vouchers.

 

With that said, I think we need to understand how Section 8 works.  Any landlord can turn their property into one that accepts Section 8 vouchers if they meet the proper zoning codes and what not.  Section 8 is a compromise program of sorts that came out as a reaction to the government dictated housing projects of the 60's.  Many conservatives cheered this approach when it first came out because it does exactly what you're advocating Sherman...if a landlord can not attract market rates for their properties (obviously more desirable financially), then they move to Section 8 vouchers where there is a built-in demand needing to be met.  The only way the government plays a role is through filling the gap between what the tenant can reasonably afford to pay based on their take-home income.

 

Let me repeat, the government does not locate Section 8 housing.  It is located where it is based on the decisions of landlords.  Something that always ticks me off is when people blame the tenants or the government for the problems of Section 8 housing near them.  The reality is that the blame should be aimed directly at the landlords not maintaining their properties and not attracting the best potential tenants.  It's like when the Bengals suck...sure the players aren't playing well on the field, but the buck stops with Mike Brown.  He's the one who put the team together and he's the one in charge.

but we need to come to grips that the almighty free market is not always perfect.

 

Especially, that inflated housing free market and the lies and scams we've been sold for years.  We are only beginning to see what 22 million empty homes nationwide will have on this supposed free market for decades to come considering our population as a nation is starting to plateau.

Cincinnati regains its housing values way ahead of curve

Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Steve Watkins

 

Cincinnati and boomtown don’t usually go together.  But one look at some stats showing which U.S. markets have experienced the biggest recent housing price gains shows Greater Cincinnati is right near the top.  The local market ranked fourth with a 21.4 percent average home price increase in the four months ended Aug. 25 compared with the prior quarter. That’s according to data from Clear Capital Inc., a Truckee, Calif.-based real estate valuation analysis firm.

 

It easily topped the nation’s 7.3 percent gain. But the surprising thing is the dominance of Midwestern markets at the top of the list. Cleveland, Columbus, Louisville, Milwaukee, Chicago and Minneapolis are all in the top 10.  Most of the Midwest didn’t fall the way home prices did on the coasts and in the Sun Belt, so you would expect the more stable markets to not rise as fast, either.  But that’s just the point. Because those markets didn’t fall as far, they were able to rebound first.

 

Read full article here:

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2009/09/21/story14.html

Older areas near city’s core fare better than outlying suburbs

Location still king

Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Steve Watkins

 

Beth Morgan liked the Sycamore school district so much that when she sold her house in Montgomery, she made sure to stay in the district when she bought a different one. And she doesn’t even have any kids in school anymore.  Jeff Welsh and Martha Ferguson liked it so much they moved into the district when they recently relocated to Greater Cincinnati.

 

The district’s strong reputation is one big reason homes there didn’t lose their value as much as some other parts of the region did. As a general rule, homes in areas closer to downtown held their value better than the outlying areas.  Madeira, Mariemont, Mount Lookout, Fort Thomas, Fort Wright and Fort Mitchell are among other pockets in which housing prices have held up well through the slump. But the outlying areas that had fast growth a few years ago fell just as fast as they climbed.

 

Most of the areas that remained stable share some key characteristics. They’re fairly close to downtown, for example. They’re older areas that are fully developed, for the most part. So very little new housing stock has come on the market in recent years. That means supply is limited. And they are considered desirable neighborhoods, with homes on the higher side of the market. So there’s plenty of demand to move into those neighborhoods.

 

Those types of areas have thrived because of the throngs of young buyers who are interested in those markets, said Cincinnati Area Board of Realtors President-elect Tim Mahoney, who throws Hyde Park and Oakley into the mix of areas that have held up well.

 

Read full article here:

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2009/09/21/story13.html

10 Cities for Real Estate Steals

 

#10 Cincinnati

"Home prices in Cincinnati have remained relatively affordable throughout the nation's recent boom-and-bust cycle."

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnews/20100218/ts_usnews/10citiesforrealestatesteals

Public housing slated for demolition

Sharon Coolidge, [email protected] 9:02 a.m. EDT May 27, 2014

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2014/05/26/public-housing-slated-demolition/9602943/

 

Some of Cincinnati's largest public housing complexes are slated for demolition – a prospect that could transform neighborhoods but has both tenants and West Side leaders on edge.

 

Roughly 1,400 housing units could disappear as Findlater Gardens and Winton Terrace in Winton Hills and Stanley Rowe Towers in the West End be turned to rubble, according to a plan posted on the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority's website. The land will become "green space," according to the plan.

 

And the people who live there now? They'll be given Section 8 vouchers and sent to find housing in the community.

but - "Right now, though, there is a waiting list for Section 8 vouchers, as well as a waiting list to get into public housing units."

This whole plan seems (on the surface) short sighted. I understand there are issues with large scale public housing buildings in poor neighborhoods, but how do you simply evict all of these people at once and give them a voucher to find a new place... Hopefully they have a mechanism for transferring building operation dollars into Section 8 dollars...

This will instantly erase those projected census gains.

I was actually thinking the same thing.

 

So should we start a campaign to have all of these residents move to Price Hill and Westwood to keep them in the city limits? Hopefully those residents would be supportive  :roll:

I have been inside Stanley Row towers and know several people who live there now.  From what I have seen it is a great benefit to those older people who live there.  Generally I don' like towers of subsidized housing, but for the elderly, it kinda makes sense because they have elevators, and centralized services.  I really think they are making a mistake.

The majority of the remaining "towers" are in Avondale and Walnut Hills:

https://www.cintimha.com/high-rise-low-rise.aspx

 

Hopefully at the the meeting tonight at the Cintas Center they will share more details about what the long term plans are.

I was actually thinking the same thing.

 

So should we start a campaign to have all of these residents move to Price Hill and Westwood to keep them in the city limits? Hopefully those residents would be supportive  :roll:

 

 

Price Hill and Westwood will gladly take one Sec 8 for each Sec 8 that Oakley and Hyde Park welcome in.

Has there been any public announcement about the plans for Stanley Rowe Towers site, if CMHA goes forward with demolishing it?

 

Following the public meeting in May (at which no new details were revealed), CMHA posted this Q&A: https://www.cintimha.com/Data/Sites/1/media/Questions%20from%20Strategic%20Plan%20Community%20Meeting%20May%2027%202014.pdf

 

The Q&A is sort of interesting, but it doesn't directly answer any questions about if/when any demolitions would occur and if so, what would happen on those sites.

 

Has the City ever announced any plans for completing City West? They have a huge block of vacant land just 3 blocks from the streetcar between Ezzard Charles, Cutter, Clark, and John.

It seems like it would be best for the development if they wait until OTR is more fully built out (post streetcar, at least). The original phase of City West wasn't a complete failure, but it's had its fair share of struggles.

It would certainly help if the next phase of City West felt like an actual urban development instead of a bunch of Drees and Fischer Homes shoehorned into an urban setting.

It would certainly help if the next phase of City West felt like an actual urban development instead of a bunch of Drees and Fischer Homes shoehorned into an urban setting.

 

I like the town home concept but the miss was on the driveways and alleys.  They are way too wide and built to some kind of suburban new home spec.  Some of the streets have long-ish driveways going to each house, which is a lot of space taken up by pavement, which may have otherwise given each unit some private outdoor space.  Also there are some awkwardly shaped cul de sacs between Court and Elizabeth St. that take up a lot of space.

 

Has the City ever announced any plans for completing City West? They have a huge block of vacant land just 3 blocks from the streetcar between Ezzard Charles, Cutter, Clark, and John.

 

There are other big chunks of land over there too.  For example, I think you could build out some denser multi-unit housing around the Laurel semi-circle park. There's also space for denser housing further north along Laurel Park Drive.  You could add something on the north side of the Hays-Porter school (there's also a field to the east of the school by the church that could be developed but I kind of like having that open for when I walk my dog. :-) )  There's land south of the old Hostess factory (which I have no idea what is being used for now) on Richmond St. There's land and parking lots on the NW corner of Lynn and Ezzard Charles. In general, I think any new development over there should strive to be denser than existing with maybe some mixed-use with storefronts along Ezzard Charles.

 

It seems like it would be best for the development if they wait until OTR is more fully built out (post streetcar, at least). The original phase of City West wasn't a complete failure, but it's had its fair share of struggles.

 

Perhaps this is true. Another thing to consider, and I don't want to get into all the pros and cons and rights and wrongs hornet's nest of this, is that I think the government is shifting its strategy away from big housing projects, which may change the whole dynamic of the neighborhood in the coming years.

 

All in all I think those City West homes are a great value and my next move may be over there. 

Know More ‏@knowmorewp  3h3 hours ago

Map: The salary you need to buy a home in 27 U.S. cities http://wapo.st/193fmwQ 

 

Looks like the West End might be heating up.  Somebody just listed a bunch of vacant properties for higher-than-junk prices.  I'm really kicking myself for not buying that vacant triple lot on York back in 2013 for like $8,000. 

 

 

828 Livingston $19,000:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1490897/828-Livingston-St-City-OH-45214

 

415 Horace $24,900:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1490895/415-Horace-St-City-OH-45214

 

442 Dayton $34,000:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1490888/442-Dayton-St-City-OH-45214

 

444 Dayton $34,000:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1490893/444-Dayton-St-City-OH-45214

 

416 Dayton $49,000:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1490136/416-Dayton-St-City-OH-45214

 

 

 

Looks like the West End might be heating up.  Somebody just listed a bunch of vacant properties for higher-than-junk prices.  I'm really kicking myself for not buying that vacant triple lot on York back in 2013 for like $8,000. 

 

 

828 Livingston $19,000:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1490897/828-Livingston-St-City-OH-45214

 

415 Horace $24,900:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1490895/415-Horace-St-City-OH-45214

 

442 Dayton $34,000:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1490888/442-Dayton-St-City-OH-45214

 

444 Dayton $34,000:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1490893/444-Dayton-St-City-OH-45214

 

416 Dayton $49,000:

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1490136/416-Dayton-St-City-OH-45214

 

 

Well it's now mid-July and only 1 of those 5 listings has sold. 

 

 

 

^Almost a year and two of those still haven't sold. 

 

Meanwhile, this report ranks Cincinnati as the #3 affordable housing market in the world behind Rochester and Buffalo:

http://www.investors.com/news/real-estate/the-most-affordable-major-housing-markets-are-in-u-s-survey-says/

I don't know if this is the right thread, but Hamilton is starting a really interesting program to increase its urban population by paying STEAM college graduates to live there:

https://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/butler-county/hamilton/hamilton-will-pay-college-graduates-to-move-there

 

To receive the cash, which is paid in installments of $200 for up to 25 months, program participants must:

 

Not live in Hamilton at the time of the application process.

Have graduated within the past seven years from a "STEAM" program, meaning Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics.

Have at least $5,000 in outstanding student debt.

Move into Hamilton's urban core, which includes the specific neighborhoods of Downtown/Central Business District; Riverview; German Village; Dayton Lane; or Rossville.

Demonstrate employment in the greater Hamilton area or Butler County.

 

I'd already been sorta considering moving to Hamilton lately because it's the best urban environment in Butler/Warren county. This might be enough of a pull to seal the deal.

I watch listings every week and things are *really* heating up in many of the former super-cheap areas of Cincinnati.  The era of the $75k move-in ready bungalow & cape cod appears to be over.  All of those well-kept or flipped homes that were going for $75-100k a year ago are listing for over $125k now.  Seeing listings in Covedale, especially, regularly over that level, and flips in Westwood and Cheviot are now listing for over $100k. 

 

Not dirt cheap anymore:

Covedale

Westwood (except worst streets)

Norwood

Norwood near Bond Hill (Warren Ave., Globe).

Reading

St. Bernard

Cheviot

 

Still dirt cheap:

Elmwood Place

Carthage

Hartwell

Spring Grove Village

Evanston

South Cumminsville

Price Hill

Covington, KY south of MLK

I live in Madisonville and the housing prices here are also increasing greatly as well.

Madisonville is the next neighborhood to pop. Look at the area, it is surrounded by Indian Hill, Mariemont, Madeira, Oakley and Hyde Park is bound to improve. Couple that with Medpace and some of the offices going there and it is bound to boom.

It is strange that Madisonville sunk to begin with, given those factors. 

 

Madisonville has the same typical lot size as Oakley, usually 30-40 x 120-40.  Those lots are 2X as big as lots in CUF, by contrast.  So very small by postwar standards but gigantic compared to the 19th century sections of Cincinnati.  It enables back yards that are actually big enough for kids to play a game and have a swing set with some room to fly off.  But in our current era it means those areas are doomed to being drive-to urbanism and the sidewalks are filled mostly with dog walkers and joggers, not people walking to a local business or walking to a bus stop. 

 

 

Yes since I have lived there, bought my house in 2016 there has been a lot of younger couples that I have noticed move into the neighborhood. There is a lot going on in Madisonville, the Whetsel and Madison redevelopment is supposed to start this summer.

Fairfax is another area that is popping too and I think Madisonville reaps the dividends from that too.

Anything along or near I-71 is going to thrive because of proximity to jobs: https://cincinnatiideas.com/2016/07/25/why-west-siders-should-be-rooting-for-streetcar-success-more-than-anyone/

(I also think this post makes the case for a West Side Bridge to the airport)

West Side "starter" homes in move-in ready condition are getting expensive.  All of the little-old-lady houses with the old wallpaper (not flips) are listing for $125k+...Cheviot, Covedale, West Price Hill.  Even North College Hill is solidly over $100k again. 

 

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1575327/3972-Kenkel-Ave-Cheviot-OH-45211

West Side "starter" homes in move-in ready condition are getting expensive.  All of the little-old-lady houses with the old wallpaper (not flips) are listing for $125k+...Cheviot, Covedale, West Price Hill.  Even North College Hill is solidly over $100k again. 

 

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1575327/3972-Kenkel-Ave-Cheviot-OH-45211

 

That's great. More reasons to be hopeful about Cincinnati's economy.

Historic home torn down in Mt. Lookout/Hyde park so a developer could split the lot and build two houses:

http://local12.com/news/local/mount-lookout-home-demolished-after-debate-sparked-over-destroying-historic-homes

 

 

Is issuing demolition permits after midnight (on a Friday) common? Seems like there's more to the story.

Is issuing demolition permits after midnight (on a Friday) common? Seems like there's more to the story.

 

If you are friends with the right people, anything is possible, almost like you dont have to follow the rules at all sometimes.

 

Oh the, sneaky weekend overnight teardown. That's how Union Station in Columbus got demoed in 1977.

FYI here is the listing on the half mill house on grace that is all now in a landfill. http://www.finn-team.com/index.php?page=1228-grace-ave

Was it a nice house?  Sure, but look at the rest of the street.  It's totally helter-skelter with 1-story bungalows, 4-square houses, and other 1920s revival styles.  https://goo.gl/maps/DdnZBEG2PWv  The fact of the matter, however, is that this property is more than 3x the minimum size required by zoning, which is SF-6 (6,000sf lot size).  In fact, being a 100'x200' lot makes it fit the least dense single-family zoning classification in the city, SF-20.  Do we just downzone?  This isn't even a front-to-back kind of situation which blew everyone up about 10 years ago on Observatory Avenue. 

 

Fighting development like this only makes the problem worse because there's no other way to increase supply to satisfy the demand to live in these neighborhoods.  Even many of the 4-plexes on Linwood are disallowed by the current zoning and are merely grandfathered in.  Linwood would be a perfect street to have denser housing to soak up some of the demand and provide more foot traffic to Mt. Lookout Square, but hurr durr neighborhood character.  The thing is, if you look at Grace, fully half of the houses don't meet current zoning based on lot width alone.  In SF-6 they're supposed to be a minimum of 50' wide.  I won't even get into setbacks which I'm sure are all over the place too.  So the character they're supposedly trying to preserve is already more dense than what's allowed by right. 

Stan Chesley's house was listed for $7.5 million, sells for $5 million:

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2018/07/03/cincinnatis-most-expensive-home-sold-5-m/753093002/

 

Poor guy. 

Did you buy it Jake? I hear it could be a good rental or Airbnb?

Cincinnati's new apartments are nearly all luxury, study says

 

Nearly all of the new construction of apartments in Greater Cincinnati are priced at the top of the rental market, according to new data compiled by RentCafe, a nationwide apartment search website.

 

Ninety-three percent of the units constructed in Cincinnati in 2017 was high-end, with the region ranking sixth in the country out of the top 30 metro areas when it comes to luxury apartment construction, according to the study.

...

The top 10 markets for luxury apartment construction:

 

St. Louis: 100 percent of units

Las Vegas: 100 percent

Dallas-Fort Worth: 98 percent

Houston: 97 percent

Baltimore: 95 percent

Cincinnati: 93 percent

Boston: 92 percent

Kansas City: 91 percent

Atlanta: 90 percent

Washington, D.C.: 80 percent

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/09/27/cincinnatis-new-apartments-are-nearly-all-luxury.html

I have a couple questions regarding this article and the stats they present...

 

What exactly qualifies as "luxury apartments?" I am sure there is a metric, but I am unfamiliar with it.

 

Also, when they say "units constructed" does that only refer to new construction and not redevelopment? A lot of Cincinnati's more affordable housing occurs in older buildings, so perhaps this stat doesn't include those units being developed.

Matthew Yglesias made a good analogy about this on The Weeds podcast. When the US restricted how many cars foreign automakers could sell here, Toyota created the Lexus marquee. Because if they could only sell a small number of cars, they're going to be the ones with the highest profit margins possible. Likewise, when developers can only build a small number of housing units, due to NIMBYism and restrictive zoning codes downsizing every new project, they're going to focus on the high end.

I have a couple questions regarding this article and the stats they present...

 

What exactly qualifies as "luxury apartments?" I am sure there is a metric, but I am unfamiliar with it.

 

Also, when they say "units constructed" does that only refer to new construction and not redevelopment? A lot of Cincinnati's more affordable housing occurs in older buildings, so perhaps this stat doesn't include those units being developed.

Yeah - it's only counting *new* construction, and the "luxury" is defined at B+ or higher by this site's definitions: https://www.yardimatrix.com/About-Us/Our-Methods/How-We-Define-The-Apartment-Rental-Market

 

I just don't think that most people realize that it isn't much more expensive to build a luxury car or a luxury apartment as opposed to a standard one, but the margins are much higher.

 

Not only do you collect more rent but you can likely rent the units faster.  So the 100+ unit building fills up in six months and then you sell to a buy-and-hold company. 

You build luxury housing in order to turn former luxury housing into more affordable housing and moving down the food chain.