Cleveland Named #1 Least Expensive City (Columbus, Cincinnati: real estate, houses, neighborhoods)

[BelieveInCleve]

http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate...for-Homeowners

As you can see, Cleveland was named the least expensive major city.

Do you see this as a positive or negative for Cleveland?

BTW Columbus was 2nd, and Cincinnati 10th.

[NewToCA]

Could be a major positive boost for the city.

To me, Cleveland has a few great things going for it, the lake, a downtown area with some construction and expansion, low cost of housing and very nice suburban areas.

[airics]

power boost if you have money and a job, negative if you don't

[Hatless Wonder]

That's good if you want to buy a home, bad if you already own one. For $125,000, you can buy a home in Cleveland that would cost at least $300,000 here in Boston.

On the other hand, my aunt lives in a nice part of Cleveland Heights. A house in her neighborhood sold for $30,000 last month.

[airics]

$125k in cleveland??? way to much.. you can buy for under $20k all day long..... you can also buy hud homes for under $10k in alot of communties...

the cleveland area for homes is funny, some areas (euclid for example), depreciated heavily in this mess... other areas beachwood, mayfield, geauga county... prices have held steady.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by Cle440

http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate...for-Homeowners

As you can see, Cleveland was named the least expensive major city.

Do you see this as a positive or negative for Cleveland?

BTW Columbus was 2nd, and Cincinnati 10th.

Wow. I figured Columbus would be the most expensive in Ohio. I guess I was wrong. I figured Cincinnati would be cheaper. I am not surprised with Cleveland being very cheap.

[hillside]

there's three sides to this story.

-columbus is cheap because it only has a handful of suburbs to compete with. the housing is fairly new for a northern city, and many neighborhoods are designed as part of the "new city" plan, where neighborhoods contain elements of self-maintenance. cleveland is an early example of this.

-cincinnati is cheap, but not quite as cheap as columbus and cleveland due to the rich areas of the eastside. the neighborhoods are older, thus the urban value increases. the majority of the city outside these enclaves is very cheap because it's old and not in the best shape.

-cleveland is the cheapest because the neighborhoods are somewhat self-maintaining and old but generally historic in design more than architecture. also, the overall situation of the economy and poverty in the city and metro forces things to be cheap. overall, i'd say it reflects well on columbus for quality of life, poorly on cincinnati's geographic socioeconomics when examined closely, and poorly on cleveland's economy and peak neighborhood value.

[Pgserge27]

sounds like you live in Columbus. If it only has a handful of suburbs to compete with wouldn't that make it more expensive? The less competition the more expensive things are, basic economic principal of a monopoly. Your argument doesn't fly. Columbus is cheap for the same reason C-town and the natti are, Ohio's urban areas do not meet with traditional real estate demands for high price housing, locations, location, location. If it's not a location people want to live than the housing values will be less.

[TheProf]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

Could be a major positive boost for the city.

To me, Cleveland has a few great things going for it, the lake, a downtown area with some construction and expansion, low cost of housing and very nice suburban areas.

I'd say Cleveland has more than "a few great things going for it." Try LOTS of great things going for it.

[ottomobeale]

Interesting. With housing being such a major component. I know a couple cities where you can get much nicer houses cheaper.

Try moving to Jersey. Ugh. 125K a year income for a basic house.