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 04-10-2011, 06:23 AM
 
2,886 posts, read 4,198,991 times
Reputation: 1503

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhiggins View Post
Private Complexes are proven to be much much nicer and safer than public, and I definitely wouldn't mind this, but public are the ones in question. Hell, they might as well annex parts of Green and Anderson Township.
What I'd like to see is numbers for single-family residences, duplexes or even four-plexes, as compared to large apartment complexes. The ones I mentioned in Mt. Airy are privately owned and they're obviously nothing to write home about as decent places for anyone to live. It seems to me that if this program's going to work without doing damage to neighborhoods, the density of the housing units has to be reduced.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-10-2011, 07:26 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati, Oh
295 posts, read 850,148 times
Reputation: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhiggins View Post
It doesnt have to be Cincis problem at all. But i dont know what these idiots were thinking upon choosing a location for the new section 8. Why not place them in an area like Hamilton, Greenhills, Mt Healthy, or Lockland? These areas have obviously come and gone, and basically area already going downhill.

Why ruin good communities on the Westside and Eastside so that people move even further away from the city?

Never mind. It's simply not worth it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2011, 02:03 PM
 
405 posts, read 785,200 times
Reputation: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by blowingdown View Post
The majority of families on Section 8 were born into poverty. This is a completely different animal than when people fall on hard times.

When you are born into poverty,
1.) you're poor
2.) your immediate family is poor
3.) your extended family is poor
4.) your neighborhood is poor
5.) your schools are poor
6.) your friends are poor

Resources and networking that encourage upward mobility are nearly nonexistent. Blaming Section 8 doesn't address the issue of longstanding poverty in particular communities. Section 8 is designed to address nos. 4-6. If a child attends better schools and is around kids that see college as part of their future, that individual is in a much better position to improve his or her standing in society. Section 8 fails because it cannot address nos. 1-3, which would be attacking the root of poverty, which is disenfranchisement based on discriminatory housing, administrative (gov't) and employment practices based on community and/or ethnicity.
Nice post. The roots of poverty are deep. So deep that our society has been helpless to do anything about it. I dare say there are more families below poverty line now than in 1960.

The vicious cycle just keeps churning around destroying lives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2011, 08:48 PM
 
Location: Cambridge, MA
4,771 posts, read 11,617,168 times
Reputation: 6557
Default Another pent-up goyguy ramble unleashed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarah Perry View Post
What I'd like to see is numbers for single-family residences, duplexes or even four-plexes, as compared to large apartment complexes. The ones I mentioned in Mt. Airy are privately owned and they're obviously nothing to write home about as decent places for anyone to live. It seems to me that if this program's going to work without doing damage to neighborhoods, the density of the housing units has to be reduced.
That definitely is the key IMHO. In Massachusetts, by law the developer of any new apt/condo building or complex has to set aside a given percentage of the units for "affordable housing." Several good-sized developments have gone up in my neighborhood thanks to "urban removal" , and the market-rate purchase or rental costs are still overpriced despite there being the presence of subsidized apartments within the same walls. There has been NO effect on the excellent quality of life in the community - and there's no telling who's paying what. Undoubtedly there was also an uproar to some extent in the '70s (before my time here) when a big ten-story structure went up right around the corner from me that's "mixed use." Persons aged over 55 and/or with physical limitations, all of whom qualify for rent assistance, are the primary tenants. But a good number of the apartments also command competitive rates, and a few are Section 8. Other than a TV that's occasionally turned up too high, the place is pin-drop quiet as well as immaculate.
Yes, there's a building within sight of my front porch where vouchers are accepted and some of the tenants think it's perfectly OK to jabber away at top volume out back while obnoxious hiphop blares. But that all quiets down as the night goes on. The same can't be said for the apartment house behind mine, where "entitled" 20-somethings love to have after-parties and noisy conversations outside until either sunrise or until after the cops have been by enough times to give them a final warning. It's the "market rate" noise pollution source to which I had to call the fire department once, after high winds forced the brats indoors. They blithely let a tiki torch blaze away on the porch of a wooden building on a block lined with such buildings.

What's done in apartment complexes of a certain age, all over the place inside of the 275 loop and west of I-75, is that they'd slid far enough downhill that it only made good business sense to convert them completely to subsidized rentals. And when there are absentee landlords involved who care only about keeping the buildings occupied and the cash flowing it's a recipe for disaster. Maintenance is compromised if not worse, and the "bad apples" can misbehave at will knowing that the management response will be lackadaisical. It's disheartening to see this play out at the once sought-after Williamsburg of Cincinnati complex, which borders the Valleydale community of Springfield Township near Hartwell (popularly thought of as an extension of Hartwell) as well as Wyoming. Folks clamored to get in there when there were guards posted 24-7 at both gates and a big singing fountain greeted you as you rolled in off Galbraith Rd. Inviting brick apartment buildings meshed comfortably with trendy townhouses. Parking was easy and not confined to one huge lot or garage. There was an appealing mix of retirees, young couples and singles, and small families. Local companies rented units to keep available for their employees in transition - Goyguy family friends were able to stay in one after a fire in their home, and my family itself was set up with a townhouse when we returned from overseas and the renters of our house hadn't finished out their tenancy. Nowadays the loss of the fountain isn't all that's changed for the worse. Williamsburg is now owned by a real-estate "empire" in Cleveland, the same one that ordered the shoddy maintenance on a complex in Woodlawn which caused a small fire to grow into a blaze causing over $1 million in damage as firefighters frantically tried to find hydrants that worked. Section 8 came to Williamsburg during the '90s, not throughout the place but at least to a noticeable extent. Calling it a pit of poverty and crime would be a major stretch, BUT things go on there which would've been unheard of back in the day. Last week a resident was robbed at gunpoint as she parked her car. During the summer an "unstable" tenant (whether subsidized or not is beside the point) decided that the solution to her issues was to torch her own apartment. From time to time there've been other reports of break-ins and even a home invasion. No matter that negative occurrences may be few and far between, the points are that they once never took place and that they cast the community in a bad light - which potentially gets a familiar negative cycle underway. With the main gatehouse now partly an ATM, security staffing far from guaranteed, and a management company five hours away that has a sketchy track record it doesn't appear things will improve any time soon. But IMHO Section 8 is not to blame. Any place with efficient, vigilant, and responsive oversight is going to be one that's safe and pleasant to live in regardless of who shares the property. No matter which apartment development (Walden Glen, Hawaiian Terrace, McFarlan Woods, and Four Worlds among them) you care to name, the common denominator in their sorry state isn't so much the income of the tenants but the detached state of their owners.

My far briefer post earlier in this thread may have rubbed some the wrong way, but my tolerance for prejudiced right-wing NIMBY's is "barely there." Lower-income folks of any shade aren't the Redcoats of 236 years ago, a reason for a panicked call to arms. The way the cost of living has spiraled in the city where I live now, I myself qualify for even public housing. And I'd rather have another houseful of people on assistance cranking hiphop who have the decency to shut up after 11 PM or so, than one of perpetual adolescents with silver spoons in their mouths who have to have the cops and sometimes the fire department called on them week after week. Because the numerous subsidized apartments in my neighborhood are effectively run and residents are bound to high standards, a lot of good people can enjoy this great community who would've been priced out. My property value only goes up. And there are some excellent people in my existence whose only crime is to not earn enough money to afford the COL around here. To me it's a win-win proposition.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2011, 10:59 PM
 
Location: Green Township
329 posts, read 596,429 times
Reputation: 139
Wow I can see eventually anything within 275 being bad like in Atlanta... Oh boy here we go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2011, 07:39 AM
 
Location: Columbus, Ohio
1,733 posts, read 2,343,429 times
Reputation: 6504
Lightbulb Now This Is Stretching Things JUUUST A Little...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhiggins View Post
Wow I can see eventually anything within 275 being bad like in Atlanta... Oh boy here we go.
First of all, remember, Atlanta has nearly 3 times the population of Cincinnati...

Secondly, there are entirely too many people here, including some of our fellow posters, who are NOT gonna stand by and let something like what you prophesy so loudly to happen...

Third, instead of turtling-up and playing Chicken Little (AHHHH!!! The sky is falling!!! Martians on Section 8 are invading Cincinnati!! Lock yer doors!! RUN AWAY!!), why not stick around, and be like say, SarahPerry...her posts here make good sense, especially her latest one about trying to find numbers on housing, and reducing the density of same...

If I'm looking for a solution, I'm more inclined to listen to someone like her, as opposed to automatically seeing the worst case scenario, loading up the ol' U-Haul, and running for some imaginary safety zone outside of I-275
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2011, 05:27 PM
 
Location: Green Township
329 posts, read 596,429 times
Reputation: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by captaincatfish View Post
First of all, remember, Atlanta has nearly 3 times the population of Cincinnati...

Secondly, there are entirely too many people here, including some of our fellow posters, who are NOT gonna stand by and let something like what you prophesy so loudly to happen...

Third, instead of turtling-up and playing Chicken Little (AHHHH!!! The sky is falling!!! Martians on Section 8 are invading Cincinnati!! Lock yer doors!! RUN AWAY!!), why not stick around, and be like say, SarahPerry...her posts here make good sense, especially her latest one about trying to find numbers on housing, and reducing the density of same...

If I'm looking for a solution, I'm more inclined to listen to someone like her, as opposed to automatically seeing the worst case scenario, loading up the ol' U-Haul, and running for some imaginary safety zone outside of I-275
Lol okay good job... You got me. I over reacted I know. But Cincinnati being the "very hard to pass any type of plan through" city we are, I dont see the section 8 happening in Green or Symmes townships to name the 2 with most opposition.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2011, 09:00 AM
 
Location: Covington, KY
1,898 posts, read 2,283,867 times
Reputation: 606
Okay, I admit here that I did not read all of this thread through carefully. But, I think there are a couple of things that need a little clarification.

1. There is a lot more to HUD than Section 8 housing.

2. Housing subsidies are based on market rate rents.

3. A subsidized "area" (for lack of a better word), is easier to manage administratively than if it were all individualized units. Say, for example, two adjacent buildings have a total of 400 apartments. An inspector only has to go two places. If those 400 apartments were in scattered four unit buildings, an inspector would have check out 100 sites.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2011, 09:50 AM
 
10,139 posts, read 23,780,910 times
Reputation: 8312
We welcome subsidized housing to Hyde Park! Persons with a voucher are very very lucke people. Losing that voucher is a big problem since the waiting list has been closed for more than two years. I would much rather have voucher people in the neighborhood than low-lifes with rent money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2011, 05:05 PM
 
Location: Indianapolis and Cincinnati
682 posts, read 1,442,457 times
Reputation: 610
There is a certain 'reality' that is sweeping the entire county and that is that section 8 housing will be more widely dispersed. There are several reasons for this.

Gentrification of OTR. Many "service providers" of services,who have been in OTR and West End for years are now selling off their buildings and moving becuase their 'clientel' is getting displaced.

Lead paint in pre 1978 housing; Thre are some tougher rules in the works regarding lead paint in HUD subsidized housing. Normal 'remediation' (painting over it), is not going to be allowed instead "total renmediation/removal" may be required. The cost of that typically is 30-40K and that has cause slumlords to walk away from more and more property in areas like Fairmount and Price Hill and those properties are starting to be bought by Old house lover who are restoring them. Price Hill Will is rehaibbng houses at market rates right and left and the Knox Hill Neighborhood in Fairmount may soon be a national historic district.

With MSD plans to "daylight" Lick Run creek and spend millions on a new high end greenspace park with new sidewalks and lighting jogging paths in the area between Westood BLVD and Queen CIty, South Fairmount is abouit to be the next "gentrification zone".

Westwood has wisely been systematically utilizing blight abatement funds to tear down apartment buildings in their community , reducing the availability of section 8.

Camp Washington has a very effective receivership program basically using the courts to take away property from bad landlords, rehab it and sell it to owner occupancy.

Prices are also going up around the universities too.

In short, there are MANY respond why section 8 is headed to the townships. If Cincinnati follows the course of many other cities. Downtown and near urban areas will be "gentrified" over the rest of this decade as people move back downtown and near downtown and there will be a "ring" around that in many township areas that will be in decline due to section 8 being moved farther and farther out. Mostly property that was once nice safe bedroom neighborhoods.

Those who can afford it will either liive downtown or in the "far burbs"

I am not saying its right. Its sad that governmental "decisions' destroy neighborhoods.

I saw the same thing happen when I lived in Indianapolis as downtown neighborhoods became restored . Section 8 was pushed out and once nice areas like Speedway , Lawrence and Warren Township have gone seriously downhill. You either live downtown OR you have an 1 1/2 hr commute.
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.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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