Our City Online

Messageboard - Development

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Weinland Park Redevelopment - News & Updates

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Development Weinland Park Redevelopment – News & Updates

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 440 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #424784

    News
    Participant

    Changes in Weinland Park may chase away some residents
    Monday, July 25, 2011
    BY MARK FERENCHIK
    THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

    Bill Woods shovels dirt from the basement at 1391-1393 Indianola, a Hometeam Properties project. Hometeam has purchased 15 homes in the Weinland Park area since 2009.

    As landlords buy and fix up homes, and as civic leaders chart a new course for the Weinland Park neighborhood north of Downtown, some residents such as Leannette Lyles are being pushed out.

    READ MORE: http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2011/07/25/price-of-progress.html?sid=101

    #424785

    berdawn
    Member

    Suggesting an income diverse neighborhood is heresy.

    #424786

    jimbach
    Participant

    It’s absurd that anyone could think a neighborhood could improve yet still maintain the same levels or concentration of poverty.

    #424787

    beersie1
    Participant

    I also find it sort of hard to believe there weren’t any other Weinland Park rentals available for $600 or less..

    #424788

    lifeontwowheels
    Participant

    jimbach said:
    It’s absurd that anyone could think a neighborhood could improve yet still maintain the same levels or concentration of poverty.

    I don’t think anyone is asking to maintain the same levels of poverty, just expressing a desire to not see people pushed out of their neighborhood when rents spike. The real key is probably what was mentioned in the article: offering options that lead to ownership.

    It’s good to see these places fixed. It would probably make diversity more attainable if it was owner occupants fixing it up rather than landlords trying to make a profit.

    #424789

    jimbach
    Participant

    lifeontwowheels said:
    I don’t think anyone is asking to maintain the same levels of poverty, just expressing a desire to not see people pushed out of their neighborhood when rents spike. The real key is probably what was mentioned in the article: offering options that lead to ownership.

    It’s good to see these places fixed. It would probably make diversity more attainable if it was owner occupants fixing it up rather than landlords trying to make a profit.

    “Spiking” rents are a direct result of neighborhood and/or property improvements. What incentive, other than higher rent, is there for a property owner to make improvements? Given that I want improvements in the rental property in my neighborhood, by extension I want, or at least am not bothered by, higher rents. In fact, I welcome them.

    The sad fact is that owner occupancy in WP is so low as to be almost minuscule. Of the five Census tract block groups in the neighborhood, the highest has owner occupancy at 18%, the lowest, 2%. With this the case, it’s difficult to imagine that any time in the near future when we talk about property owners in Weinland Park we wouldn’t be referring to landlords. Yes, owner occupants fixing up their homes would be great, but in 2011 it’s not the prevalent housing profile in the neighborhood.

    #424790

    lifeontwowheels
    Participant

    jimbach said:
    “Spinking” rents are a direct result of neighborhood and/or property improvements. What incentive, other than higher rent, is there for a property owner to make improvements? Given that I want improvements in the rental property in my neighborhood, by extension I want, or at least am not bothered by, higher rents. In fact, I welcome them.

    The sad fact is that owner occupancy in WP is so low as to be almost minuscule. Of the five Census tract block groups in the neighborhood, the highest has owner occupancy at 18%, the lowest, 2%. With this the case, it’s difficult to imagine that any time in the near future when we talk about property owners in Weinland Park we wouldn’t be referring to landlords. Yes, owner occupants fixing up their homes would be great, but in 2011 it’s not the prevalent housing profile in the neighborhood.

    But given the two, which would you prefer? Who is going to be more involved in improving the neighborhood over time? And yes, owner-occupants can be just as shitty as landlords.

    Like I said, it’s great that these places are being fixed up. I’m not knocking landlords for investing and wanting a profit off that investment. I just don’t see why the solution to our inner city neighborhoods has to be whole-scale removal of residents based solely on income.

    #424791

    jimbach
    Participant

    lifeontwowheels said:
    But given the two, which would you prefer?

    I don’t understand the question, i.e., the choice you’re asking me to make.

    lifeontwowheels said:
    I just don’t see why the solution to our inner city neighborhoods has to be whole-scale removal of residents based solely on income.

    As if that were even remotely the case here.

    #424792

    Mercurius
    Participant

    berdawn said:
    Suggesting an income diverse neighborhood is heresy.

    In my experience, a neighborhood can keep some income diversity – but there is a sweet spot that still encourages gentrification and new development while keeping a percentage of CMHA/Section 8. In Italian Village, the New Village Homes development has 20% subsidized housing. The caveat being they only accept tenants that:

    New Village Homes, 135 E. 2nd Avenue, Columbus, Ohio, 43201,
    Only accepts head of household or co-head with two years of continuous employment.

    In addition, there are many more CMHA owned housing units in Italian Village that this development is probably similar to the community as a whole in percentage of low income housing. While anecdotal and I’m sure Weiland Park has more than it’s fair share of section 8/CMHA, it seems a neighborhood can support some income diversity.

    Italian Village is a better place to live because of it now.

    #424793

    lifeontwowheels
    Participant

    jimbach said:
    I don’t understand the question, i.e., the choice you’re asking me to make.

    As if that were even remotely the case here.

    Landlord vs. Owner Occupant

    #424794

    jimbach
    Participant

    lifeontwowheels said:
    Landlord vs. Owner Occupant

    I want more owner occupancy, of course. It’s not even a serious question. IMO the problem is that a lot of the development seems designed for current WP residents to transition from renters to homeowners, and I just don’t see that as realistic in most cases. I’d love to be proven wrong on that. In the meantime, Weinland Park is a renter’s neighborhood, and the only way for it to improve is for rents to go up and price a lot of current residents out of the market and neighborhood.

    #424795

    lifeontwowheels
    Participant

    jimbach said:
    I want more owner occupancy, of course. It’s not even a serious question. IMO the problem is that a lot of the development seems designed for current WP residents to transition from renters to homeowners, and I just don’t see that as realistic in most cases. I’d love to be proven wrong on that. In the meantime, Weinland Park is a renter’s neighborhood, and the only way for it to improve is for rents to go up and price a lot of current residents out of the market and neighborhood.

    I just don’t see why the solution to our inner city neighborhoods has to be whole-scale removal of residents based solely on income.

    #424796

    jimbach
    Participant

    lifeontwowheels said:
    I just don’t see why the solution to our inner city neighborhoods has to be whole-scale removal of residents based solely on income.

    You can keep making that statement as many times as you like, but it still won’t apply to what’s happening in Weinland Park.

    #424797

    lifeontwowheels
    Participant

    jimbach said:
    You can keep making that statement as many times as you like, but it still won’t apply to what’s happening in Weinland Park.

    I’m sorry but that seems to be exactly what you advocated: pricing people out based solely on their ability to afford the new and improved. If you want improvement, why not tackle crime or other issues? Why frame it around economics and pricing people out en masse as a solution?

    #424798

    joev
    Participant

    If you rent in a gentrifying neighborhood, getting priced out of it over time is a risk you take knowingly.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 440 total)

The forum ‘Development’ is closed to new topics and replies.