U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-08-2013, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Cincinnati
4,007 posts, read 4,827,918 times
Reputation: 924

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by OHKID View Post
2. Schools - a lot of people do not want to send their kids to private school when they can move to a decent district where public school is "free" (taxation issues are a whole different ballgame...).
I looked into private schools as an option to CPS (I love CPS and SCPA) before I learned more about CPS. You can get decent private schools for around $5,000 a year. Cincy has very affordable private schools. Where it would get really expensive is with multiple children. But $16,000 is very expensive for Cincy. Not Philly, or NYC though, actually, $16,000 a year would be a steal for Philly or NYC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-08-2013, 01:52 PM
 
1,295 posts, read 1,519,013 times
Reputation: 687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Briolat21 View Post
Also, I'm truly interested in knowing what separates the residential areas of Cincinnati along the edges from suburbs other than their location within the city border? Really, if I drove through Hyde Park without knowing it was in Cincinnati, I would think it a suburb. Same with Westwood (though a moderately different economic status from Hyde Park).

I just don't see the difference (other than commute time) between people wanting to live there (nice housing stock, primarily residential, close to shopping of some sort) and people wanting to live in the further out spaces (or exurbs as they're now commonly termed) who appreciate the same things?
This is the point I was making when I was saying the outer neighborhoods are at a structural disadvantage -- all the extra costs of being in the city, with a living environment almost indistinguishable from the suburbs. Now, there are significant differences between Hyde Park and the exurbs. Hyde Park has a more cozy, old-timey feel, and a fairly significant neighborhood business district, and other neighborhood business districts nearby, and it is much closer to the city center. But if you compare Hyde Park to a closer-in suburb, the differences diminish drastically. And it's definitely true that the difference between Hyde Park and Mason is much less than, say, Northside and Mason, or Downtown and Mason. If a city neighborhood is offering a product similar to what you can get outside the city for cheaper, it's got an uphill battle.

This is why the city would see diminishing returns on investment in the outer neighborhoods that are in decline. This lack of ability to differentiate between these neighborhoods and the suburbs is not under the city's control; it's a fact of the market. It's a stretch to say the decline of Westwood and College Hill is a failure of city council, rather than a market trend, but some suburban advocates will shout this fallacy from the mountaintops. The primary thing the city can do to make those neighborhoods more viable is to develop from the core out to the point that development spills into those areas. So that the people moving to them are people who would probably rather live closer in, but the economics don't work for them. That's how the outer neighborhoods came into existence in the first place, and it is how they can become thriving again. It's an act of reverse-engineering which accepts market realities, rather than fighting them (which has long been attempted and failed).

To address your complaint about city advocates claiming suburbanites want to see the city fail... I mentioned how suburban advocates will point to market trends playing out and using it as proof of the city's ineptitude. There is a constant flow of predictions of city policy failures coming from the suburban set, and a lot of "I told you so's" when these events come to fruition, many of these events not being policy failures at all (e.g. the emptying out of suburb-indistinguishable neighborhoods, and corresponding population decline). When these predictions turn out to be wrong, there is no comparative reaction, often a silence or denial of the inaccurate prediction, and in some cases a downplaying of the success. You can see how this might appear to be championing failure. In the abstract, I have no doubt suburbanites want the region to succeed, but in practice it seems they really want to see self-affirming justification for their choice to live outside Cincinnati or Hamilton County.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2013, 03:11 PM
 
Location: Cincinnati
4,007 posts, read 4,827,918 times
Reputation: 924
Quote:
Originally Posted by natininja View Post
To address your complaint about city advocates claiming suburbanites want to see the city fail... I mentioned how suburban advocates will point to market trends playing out and using it as proof of the city's ineptitude. There is a constant flow of predictions of city policy failures coming from the suburban set, and a lot of "I told you so's" when these events come to fruition, many of these events not being policy failures at all (e.g. the emptying out of suburb-indistinguishable neighborhoods, and corresponding population decline). When these predictions turn out to be wrong, there is no comparative reaction, often a silence or denial of the inaccurate prediction, and in some cases a downplaying of the success. You can see how this might appear to be championing failure. In the abstract, I have no doubt suburbanites want the region to succeed, but in practice it seems they really want to see self-affirming justification for their choice to live outside Cincinnati or Hamilton County.
Glad I am not the only one to notice this playing out around here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2013, 05:53 AM
 
3,750 posts, read 10,203,909 times
Reputation: 6560
Well, my apologies - I honestly have only been addressing what I've seen on this board, and on this board, I have not seen suburbanites (the few of us who speak) actually championing the city's failure.

Some are more vocal than others about the charms of the suburbs (hey, if I could have afforded the house/neighborhood I wanted in the city, I would have lived in the city) -- but even the most stringent suburban advocate (on this board) does not actually seem to be saying "Yippee!! Burn Cincy Burn!".

Natininja I agree with most of what you've said. As far as this set of Hyde Park's specifics ("Hyde Park has a more cozy, old-timey feel") that you mention (i.e. not commute time), I wonder if that is more a case of the fact that a certain set of people prefer "older, more established" areas?

I prefer them myself, it just wasn't economically feasible for me at the time I purchased.

Which, seems like what has continued to fuel the expansion of housing in this and most metro area - at first within the city's own borders (or the city initially continued to annex land and expand its own borders) - and then eventually into the surrounding farm land. "I want a nice single family home, but X is too expensive, so if I go to the end of the (insert transportation method over the decades: trolley line/bus line/ road) maybe it will be a little more affordable".

I hope that Cincy does continue to revitalize its core, and hope that some of the neighborhoods that have yet to be focussed on for redevelopment benefit from that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2013, 12:42 PM
 
1,295 posts, read 1,519,013 times
Reputation: 687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Briolat21 View Post
As far as this set of Hyde Park's specifics ("Hyde Park has a more cozy, old-timey feel") that you mention (i.e. not commute time), I wonder if that is more a case of the fact that a certain set of people prefer "older, more established" areas?
Definitely, it's all about preference (and economic feasibility, as you also pointed out). I was just pointing out that this was a point at which preferences might diverge. So, even if you ignore commute time/physical location, Hyde Park is not equivalent to exurbs because it offers an older style, which is something that can sway opinions. On the more objective side, it is usually true that older construction is built to a higher quality standard, so that might make the long-term economics better if one plans on living in the same house for many years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2013, 01:00 PM
 
Location: Cincinnati
4,007 posts, read 4,827,918 times
Reputation: 924
Quote:
Originally Posted by natininja View Post
On the more objective side, it is usually true that older construction is built to a higher quality standard, so that might make the long-term economics better if one plans on living in the same house for many years.
Though, I don't have too many intentions of staying in the same home at the moment, this describes me and my family to a T. We prefer older homes. I own two that are dated 1910 and 1893, and am about to move to one made in 1860. The quality if far above and beyond what is churned out today. I spent years as a carpenter (frame and trim) and know first hand the difference between new construction and restoration. Plus I like the character and feel of old homes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2013, 01:35 PM
 
1,295 posts, read 1,519,013 times
Reputation: 687
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomJones123 View Post
Though, I don't have too many intentions of staying in the same home at the moment, this describes me and my family to a T. We prefer older homes. I own two that are dated 1910 and 1893, and am about to move to one made in 1860. The quality if far above and beyond what is churned out today. I spent years as a carpenter (frame and trim) and know first hand the difference between new construction and restoration. Plus I like the character and feel of old homes.
So, for you, it is probably more a preference thing than an economic thing in terms of choosing old construction vs. new. But for someone looking for a long-term investment, the repairs that come along with an old house may be much less significant than the repairs of an exurban tract home which has hit its life expectancy of 40 years or whatever.

What neighborhood are you moving to, with the 1860 house? I'm guessing OTR, since there aren't a lot of houses that old outside the basin. Also your daughter (not sure I got the gender right) goes to school in OTR, which would be a bonus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2013, 01:50 PM
 
Location: Cincinnati
4,007 posts, read 4,827,918 times
Reputation: 924
Quote:
Originally Posted by natininja View Post
So, for you, it is probably more a preference thing than an economic thing in terms of choosing old construction vs. new. But for someone looking for a long-term investment, the repairs that come along with an old house may be much less significant than the repairs of an exurban tract home which has hit its life expectancy of 40 years or whatever.

What neighborhood are you moving to, with the 1860 house? I'm guessing OTR, since there aren't a lot of houses that old outside the basin. Also your daughter (not sure I got the gender right) goes to school in OTR, which would be a bonus.
Definitely preference. I can repair around 95% of problems in a home, so I only have to eat the materials and that usually washes somewhere on my return at tax time. I'll dm you rest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2013, 08:30 AM
 
3,750 posts, read 10,203,909 times
Reputation: 6560
I appreciate the look of an older, established neighborhood, and will totally agree to the stipulation that by that definition, a new suburb will always lack that (until of course that "new" suburb is pronounced historic - 80 years from now) -- but still, other neighborhoods in Cincy (I'll say Northside, because I lived there for a bit and am more familiar with it) definitely don't have that suburban vibe that Hyde Park does. Northside feels like an urban neighborhood, Hyde Park really does not.

And I'm sure there are suburbs with older areas (Princeton/Glendale comes to mind, I'm not sure if that's the school district specifically, or the area?) - just as Lebanon of course has a historic core. (That I don't live in!)

Its the same argument on the housing threads about why "new McMansions are a blight on the Earth and anyone who buys one is basically a morally bankrupt deviant who should be struck down" (I hyperbolize, but only a little) -- in general no matter how you try to parse it, it comes down to "I like old", which new will never be.

I have pointed out (numerous times) that the older homes people love so much now, were new at one time. And the older neighborhoods that people enjoy so much for their individuality were new, and a different type of cookie-cutter, 70 years ago. You can see in any city, one house serves as a pattern, and then several repetitions of that basic design were constructed. However in 50, or 75, or 100 years, individual owners do a lot to a property to differentiate it from others - and that is a tangible thing.

As far as the quality of housing stock, well, that's a discussion that has been addressed ad nauseum on the housing thread (though thank goodness not recently) - lets just say that as with everything else on these boards -- opinions differ based on personal preferences - and as with all these boards, few seem to be able to appreciate the viewpoint of others.

I'm glad that development (this thread started regarding the fastest growing suburban developments in the region) is picking up again. It is certainly evident in the Butler / Warren corridor I traverse regulalry, with builders signs returning to areas they left 4 years ago. Hopefully as the economy continues to rebound (a lot more "now hiring" signs out here as well) - the whole region gains.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2013, 08:57 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati
4,007 posts, read 4,827,918 times
Reputation: 924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Briolat21 View Post
Its the same argument on the housing threads about why "new McMansions are a blight on the Earth and anyone who buys one is basically a morally bankrupt deviant who should be struck down" (I hyperbolize, but only a little) -- in general no matter how you try to parse it, it comes down to "I like old", which new will never be.
I gotta say that sentiment is not mine. I think folks should be able to do what makes them happy, and if the McMansion fits the bill then have at it. I knock new construction from a craftsmanship point of view. It's one of the things that me and kjbrill agree on and have direct messaged each other in discussion.

There are so many economic ties to quality construction in today's world. I spent several years framing mansions for very rich people. We did true custom framing, where the home owners hired an architect to build every detail to suit the home owners whims. I'm talking homes that are 10,000 sq. ft. and up. The difference always comes back to money. If you can afford craftsmanship then you will get it.

I've also spent several years framing tract homes and remain disgusted at what people are actually getting for their money, but it's what they can afford, and the contractors have to move fast to make a profit.

You are very right about the how these older, once suburban, neighborhoods were developed. Several styles to choose from, pick one, alter it somewhat, build it up. Same thing goes on today.

The difference in materials is significant though. Unless you can afford quality, today's building materials are crap compared to what was used 100 years ago. Blame it on a devalued currency, modern building techniques, faltering economy, or whatever --- but it's the way it is.

I agree that it comes back to what people prefer and can afford. I personally prefer old, but that's just me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top