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.
All in all I am just not very impressed with what that budget can buy in what is billed as a cheap metro area.
Perfect summary. In other Midwest metros there would be great options. Here it seems pick the least bad option.
The entire Cleveland area seems stuck decades in the past in many regards. Just astetically most places seem tired and from an era goneby. Newer PUDs seem haphazardly placed and don't flow well with surroundings.
I have to wonder if Shaker’s tax base would remain relatively constant if they just eased off on taxes, precipitating a rise in housing values which would allow homeowners to gain some equity.
I think this is the case. Most people budget by total monthly payment, regardless of how it's broken down by principal, insurance, taxes, and interest. Obviously cash buyers and those with a large down payment care less about this, and there are probably a disproportionate amount of people in this category in Shaker, but not enough to negate the fact that the higher tax rates depress housing prices.
Or maybe the low housing prices increase the tax rates. Chicken and egg.
My friends and family around the country absolutely balk at the ~4% property tax rate, yet many of them pay higher taxes in terms of actual dollars.
OP, Shaker Heights was never designed for a diverse tax base. In the early 1900s, the Van Sweringen brothers envisioned a garden city suburb in its truest sense, which meant a leafy residential community for primarily the executive class, architecturally distinct homes, curvilinear street network, homesites tucked into topography and rapid transit to connect Shakerites with the commercial and industrial core of Cleveland. This model worked reasonably well while Cleveland maintained its status and the region experienced growth through the 1960s. However, since that time there has been a reversal in both the region's population trend and the primacy of Cleveland. In slow recognition of these trends, Shaker Heights has recently tried to reimagine itself with more non-residential uses to diversify its tax base and, ultimately, reduce the burden on residential payers. This is not an easy implement in a region that has spread out with fewer people for the past 50 years. However, Shaker has enjoyed some success through efforts around Chagrin/Lee and ShakerTowne Centre and the Van Aken District. The jury is still out on how successful VAD will actually be, but reviews thus far have been very positive. Shaker has also maintained rigorous adherence to its strict building codes and does not hesitate to demolish properties that no longer meet standards. Northeast Ohio's shrinking population and continued new construction maintain an excess supply of housing; Shaker is no exception, particularly in the southwest neighborhoods of Moreland, North Moreland, and West Lomond. One final exacerbation: Shaker once contained a significant population of black homeowners, which has shrunk over the last 12 years in response to a very hard hit by the foreclosure crisis. Loss of housing stock in those neighborhoods mentioned above may partly explain the shrinkage of Shaker's black residential population, evidenced by a 25% decline in black student enrollment in Shaker Schools since 2010. The aftershocks of this event are still felt as homes continue to fall into foreclosure and demolition orders are still given.
With regard to taxes, regular readers of this forum may recall multiple occasions when I have reminded all that any community is a value proposition for a prospective homebuyer. It is essential that people lay out all of the costs associated with investment in a particular property, including purchase price, taxes, and maintenance/updates, but also other costs that are less explicit (including non-deductible transportation costs, association dues, etc.) and stack those against the property itself and the location's amenities. In short, what do you receive for the money you pay? Many of the people who invest in Shaker Heights choose to do so because they value its aesthetic, the mature trees, the sidewalks, the streetlights, the walkable neighborhoods, the city's services, access to public transit, proximity to major employment centers and its citizenry (diverse, progressive, educated, community-oriented, etc.). If people consider all of these things and determine other communities offer what they want at a better price, then that's where they should move. Most people who move do so without so much public production about the decision. The people who don't want/can't afford to live in Shaker Heights simply don't live there.
As for the gentleman from South Carolina who recently relocated to Shaker to support his wife's medical career, welcome. However, please be mindful of the statements you make about the community you now call home. Just as you cite examples of homes in Shaker Heights with tax bills you feel are unjustified, there are other examples of Shaker homes with more reasonable tax bills that don't necessarily support your argument. The same is true with regard to your comments about interior design, construction quality and architectural integrity. It is in your best interest, both financially and socially, to be positive about your new neighborhood and support its improvement in every aspect, just as you support your family in the difficult decision to relocate so far from a home you obviously love and miss.
I think this is the case. Most people budget by total monthly payment, regardless of how it's broken down by principal, insurance, taxes, and interest. Obviously cash buyers and those with a large down payment care less about this, and there are probably a disproportionate amount of people in this category in Shaker, but not enough to negate the fact that the higher tax rates depress housing prices.
Or maybe the low housing prices increase the tax rates. Chicken and egg.
My friends and family around the country absolutely balk at the ~4% property tax rate, yet many of them pay higher taxes in terms of actual dollars.
The 4% rate in the Heights may be one of the highest in the country. And while there may be a small contingent folks in other parts of the country may pay more in absolute terms, at least in those areas you own property that is worth more. I have lived in numerous high cost of living cities across the U.S. and have never paid anywhere near 20k in property tax, which is what I would pay for a comparable Shaker property. Based on my very unscientific assessment of total tax burden (income, property, sales etc.), living in Shaker I would pay more in overall taxes than when I lived in Southern California.
All is well and good if the services provided by the city are commensurate with the tax burden. I just don’t see Shaker (or the rest of the Cleveland metro) setting themselves apart from other locales with less taxes. Couple that with RITA (how this even exists is beyond me) and you have a patchwork of tax rates throughout the county. The Balkanization of NE Ohio is some of the worst I have seen. Over 30+ “cities” in Cuyahoga county - driving 10 minutes you could blink and pass through 5 of them. In most other parts of the country many of these “cities” would be neighborhoods of a larger municipality and share the revenue pool.
The 4% rate in the Heights may be one of the highest in the country. And while there may be a small contingent folks in other parts of the country may pay more in absolute terms, at least in those areas you own property that is worth more. I have lived in numerous high cost of living cities across the U.S. and have never paid anywhere near 20k in property tax, which is what I would pay for a comparable Shaker property. Based on my very unscientific assessment of total tax burden (income, property, sales etc.), living in Shaker I would pay more in overall taxes than when I lived in Southern California.
All is well and good if the services provided by the city are commensurate with the tax burden. I just don’t see Shaker (or the rest of the Cleveland metro) setting themselves apart from other locales with less taxes. Couple that with RITA (how this even exists is beyond me) and you have a patchwork of tax rates throughout the county. The Balkanization of NE Ohio is some of the worst I have seen. Over 30+ “cities” in Cuyahoga county - driving 10 minutes you could blink and pass through 5 of them. In most other parts of the country many of these “cities” would be neighborhoods of a larger municipality and share the revenue pool.
Balkanization is a great word. Lots of "cities" that should not exist: i.e. Woodmere, Linndale, etc and appear from my research to be political fiefdoms ripe with corruption that exist off extorting non-residents i.e. artificially low speed limits, cameras, PUDs that funnel money to who knows here, etc
We just moved here from out of state for my wife's job. We had same price range, even a little higher. We found the housing stock here for the most part is crap compared to the rest of the country.
Your three options are:
(1) Century plus old house with radiators...
(2) 1960s-70s homes in various states of condition...
(3) 80s/90s McMansions in original condition...
We went well under our budget and bought for $400K in Shaker. It's not ideal as we have a 1960s house that was updated but it's still a lot of work and taxes are outrageous.
Just curious, but has anyone ever told you you were insufferable? First, are you actually insinuating that you know the condition of the entire housing stock in all areas of the country? Second, those are certainly NOT your only 3 options in the area and, if you're slumming it at $400K and your budget was $1MM+, why not just build in a desirable area for somewhere in between? From the tone of your relocation thread, you had absolutely no intention of giving the area a chance and were looking to crap all over it at every turn - mission accomplished. For your sake, I hope the bread winner in the family finds a career prospect in literally any other area since, according to you, the housing stock will definitely be more to your liking there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLEbound
All in all I am just not very impressed with what that budget can buy in what is billed as a cheap metro area.
Who told you this is a "cheap" metro area? It's on the slightly higher end of the mid-tier. It's still significantly less expensive than NYC or Chicago, but it's certainly not Jackson, MS either.
Balkanization is a great word. Lots of "cities" that should not exist: i.e. Woodmere, Linndale, etc and appear from my research to be political fiefdoms ripe with corruption that exist off extorting non-residents i.e. artificially low speed limits, cameras, PUDs that funnel money to who knows here, etc
As opposed to Chicago where they just extort everyone in real time with a $6 fee to cross a bridge, 10%+ sales tax and $4+/hr for street parking, etc.? I'll take my chances with the easily avoidable Linndale and Woodmere - 2 small cities which, for all the negative hype, have never once issued me or anyone I know a citation.
Last edited by Cleveland_Collector; 08-11-2020 at 05:02 PM..
The 4% rate in the Heights may be one of the highest in the country. And while there may be a small contingent folks in other parts of the country may pay more in absolute terms, at least in those areas you own property that is worth more. I have lived in numerous high cost of living cities across the U.S. and have never paid anywhere near 20k in property tax, which is what I would pay for a comparable Shaker property. Based on my very unscientific assessment of total tax burden (income, property, sales etc.), living in Shaker I would pay more in overall taxes than when I lived in Southern California.
Advice: don't live their. The people who do seem to like what their money buys them. It isn't for anyone.
Comparison: In Independence, you'll pay around $5k per year for a $300k+ home. Independence has solid schools and some of the best amenities you'll find almost anywhere, especially for the cost.
It has never ceased to amaze me how much people from SoCal never figure in the fact that $600k buys you a nothing house on a postage stamp with a mortgage most people will have to pay on well into old age. The annual interest savings alone in our general area more than make up for the higher tax rate and you'll have a far better home at half the price.
As opposed to Chicago where they just extort everyone in real time with a $6 fee to cross a bridge, 10%+ sales tax and $4+/hr for street parking, etc.? I'll take my chances with the easily avoidable Linndale and Woodmere - 2 small cities which, for all the negative hype, have never once issued me or anyone I know a citation.
I'm not sure what you're talking about $6 to cross bridges. Skyway? No reason to ever take that. I think I've used it once or twice ever. Only tourists pay for parking too. True Chicagoans know how to park for free nearly anywhere at any time.
Crook County for sure has its share of problems and has gotten worse in recent years. I'm not defending it at all, but I feel like Cleveland is worse in many regards yet doesn't have the world-class city, the great housing, schools and everything that at least make the high taxes worthwhile. For a million dollar home in the near west suburbs of Chicago with one of the best school districts in the country my parents pay the same in property taxes as we do on a 400k home in Shaker Heights with schools not anywhere near that level. I'll leave out all the other commentary. The point is I don't feel that Shaker is a good value compared to where I grew up and compared to other places I've lived. Yet, so many think it is a utopia. Sure there are some nice things about it. There are beautiful streets, the nature center/parks. But there are lots of things about it that seem tired and struggling to be vibrant. The taxes are certainly a drag on things. There just don't seem to be many areas here near CCF that have newer homes, reasonable taxes and top notch schools. Sure Shaker and Cleveland Heights have some beautiful old homes. I appreciate the history and architecture. But they are old and money pits! I know this from experience growing up in one.
As for COL, If you're coming from California or New York of course Ohio is a bargain. Literally anywhere else in the US other than NY or CA is. But if you're coming from anywhere in the Midwest or the South it's either a wash or more expensive and lots of tradeoffs.
We looked at homes up to $1 million and we were not impressed as the other poster in this thread has also attested to. We have a few other friends that came here for the hospital that have come to the same conclusion.
We can't seem to find an area with the newer homes. In Chicago I could list dozens of suburbs immediately. Lots of in fill too. You don't see that here. Homes just are stuck in the past from the day they were built. As an example, I've never seen so many homes with massive 1940s metal awnings as I have seen here. Nothing is torn down and replaced. I'm finding very few similarities with areas in other cities where you can find what you are looking for in certain areas or tear downs are a great option and in progress.
As for the poster that crizitized our decision, we spent 400K in Shaker Heights so that my wife can be close to work and that we know we will be able to unload the house when we need to because Shaker Heights in the eyes of many is super desirable. The plan is it's a transitional house and we will build once we get the lay of the land and decide where we want to end up assuming we stay here long-term which I assume we will. To have bought an expensive house without knowing much at all about the area, in a pandemic without ability to see much in person, from 800 miles away remotely would have been absolutely insane. We are conservative in our spending.
When you grow up in a world-class global city and you've lived near the coast through that perspective hopefully you can understand why I would feel the way I feel about Cleveland. I'm just someone who says it as I see it. I see there is so much potential here to be a great city and area yet I feel like everything here is status quo and no one has any desire to change that and time has left this area behind. What this area really needs is more people with outside perspective to challenge the status quo and to improve things. You have a large native population that are heavy defenders of how it is and I spent 3 years in a place where a ton of people who have fled Cleveland moved to by choice and heard all of the reasons they left over and over.
As for Chicago, I'm embarrassed and angry by what's been going on in Chicago in recent years it's disgraceful and not representative of the place I grew up. I've encouraged many of my friends and family to leave there too.
Last edited by cubsguy81; 08-12-2020 at 11:09 AM..
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.
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.
