Anderson is declining? (Cincinnati, Mason, Reading: low income, real estate market, apartment complex)

[progmac]

i'd say if you're going to buy in the burbs, buy in the burbs. find a new, fully occupied strip mall or lifestyle center and buy something close to there.

90% of the inner-ring and 50s suburbs are on an inevitable downward trajectory. the bones aren't good and land further out is cheap; our population growth is minimal; there is just very little incentive to fix up the early auto-centric suburbs.

one exception might be if you can figure out where the future light rail will stop. buy something close to there.

[unusualfire]

What? There was problems 15 years ago. See this is called denial.

[progmac]

Originally Posted by n8buckeye08

The other thing I would add... there may be some inceased drug- and or poverty-related crime near the Section 8 Housing when you look at crime maps, I get the impression that this is not some colossal urban decay.

Frankly, I'm hopeful that the home prices will welcome many first-time buyers that can renew the area. It's a quick shot down Beechmont Levy to Columbia Parkway, many excellent built homes, nice landscapes, and the makings of a nice main strip. I'm not saying I think this is likely to happen, but a little positive momentum could really do a lot for the neighborhood.

I think some of the early suburban houses are great homes, not just for first-time buyers but for anyone. The small houses in golf manor or deer park or the older parts of anderson twp are a breeze to maintain, give you room for a car or two, and are close enough together that you get to know your neighbors and have a lot of amenities in either walking or very-shrot drive distances. But as much as I admire a family seeking simplicity, the reality is that most people want something new and with as many square feet as they can possibly afford. These days, people won't even buy a house without a "man cave," much less a house with a galley kitchen, one car garage, and 10x10 bedrooms.

[Montrell]

Originally Posted by t45209

No one was up in arms 15 years ago because the problems weren't there 15 years ago.

Exactly. The arrests, the constant loitering, the burglaries, the Section 8, the abandoned homes and the blight on Beechmont was not there in Mount Washington 15 years ago.

[thatswanlady]

We like our house in Anderson -- it has a two car garage, a nicely-sized kitchen (though probably smallish and simple by today's standards, it suits me really well), a flat fenced yard, and it's near the end of a cul-de-sac. Our neighbors are nice, and I like that there are kids around playing, even if we don't have any of our own yet. The houses are of the late 1960s/early 1970s era, and people really seem to take pride in their houses around here. There aren't a lot of listings for sale in the neighborhood (I can think of only two) and so far as I can tell, we're one of a small scattering of renters. Everyone else seems to own their home.

Coming from Memphis, where areas seem to deteriorate fast and horribly, I guess I have so much trouble imagining that this area, with its excellent schools and general amenities, is going to decline so drastically due to its proximity to Mt Washington -- an area that still seems mostly fine to me, if a bit rough around the edges.

Montrell mentioned areas like East Colerain and Mt. Airy as a sign for the way Mt Washington is going -- what were those areas like before the decline? What are they like now? Are there other areas that were impacted as a result of the decline of those two places?

I apologize if this all sounds ignorant, I'm just really trying to understand the way this sort of thing happens in Cincinnati, and where to find my best options.

[Ohiogirl81]

Of all the things there are to worry about in the world .... Anderson Township declining is not one of them.

[goyguy]

Eastern Colerain Township and Mt Airy, among other communities, have in common that they experienced most of their "housing starts" after WWII and then went on to become host to large apartment complexes. Said complexes were all the rage among college students and other young singles. Then by about the 80's they weren't, and devolved into Section 8 developments. Between the deterioration of the complexes and the fading from favor of the single-family homes you have the very recipe for a neighborhood slipping downhill.
From my experience "Section 8" is often, and unjustifiably, used as code for "racial change." I want no part of that discussion either. What gets conveniently overlooked is that residences, particularly apartments, wind up being subsidized rentals because the area has already gone into decline. Landlords begging for tenants have government assistance programs as a convenient lifeline to bring bodies back into properties. If the property is a house, or a "brick box" or other 4-8 unit apartment building, chances are maintenance will be taken care of and potential residents screened. Otherwise forget it. You get what's resulted in McFarlan Woods, Williamsburg of Cincinnati, etc.
My guideline for urban OR suburban home searches would include checking for apartment developments in the vicinity. What's "hot" for a bachelor(ette) pad today will most assuredly not be in another generation. Literally dozens of complexes around Greater Cincinnati bear testimony to this.
Agreed - school quality is a keystone to community stability. For that reason I think Anderson Twp will stand the test of time as a good place to put down roots.

[t45209]

Originally Posted by unusualfire

What? There was problems 15 years ago. See this is called denial.

Please provide the data to support this, otherwise...

[natininja]

Originally Posted by t45209

Please provide the data to support this, otherwise...

I think goyguy put forth a plausible reason to believe this: that subsidized housing shows up when neighborhoods are already in decline. So if you're seeing a significant amount crop up, it's because a downward trend has had the time to snowball.

[unusualfire]

Originally Posted by natininja

I think goyguy put forth a plausible reason to believe this: that subsidized housing shows up when neighborhoods are already in decline. So if you're seeing a significant amount crop up, it's because a downward trend has had the time to snowball.

Also there was no forum to vent back then as they do now on the internet.

Incase you want to look up stats. http://news.cincinnati.com/interacti...20409502581066