Homeless shelter being put in our neighborhood-How bad will it hurt our resale?

[Richards 0]

My wife and I recently bought a condo in one of those rezoned areas where they are changing the look to condo developments. Ours is one of several fairly unique buildings that have been put up in an area that is expected to have more condos built.We were very meticulous about looking into the surrounding neighborhoods to be sure there was nothing that could potentially lead to high crime or poor resale value (meth clinics, shelters, subsidized welfare projects being put up...etc).

Anyway, very shortly after we signed on the dotted line the city announced that they were going to put a fairly big homeless shelter fairly close to our building. Doh!! It was battled by several home-owners and business's and it looked as though the city was reconsidering but then they just recently confirmed that they will go ahead with it.

I am obviously concerned about this as we saved forever to be able to make a down payment on a small condo primarily just to get into the market, so we could build some equity and hopefully upgrade. While I worry about potential crime ; More importantly I am concerned about how much impact this will have on the resale of our home. I had had a coworker who lived near one and the neighborhood turned into a cesspool (he was a bit closer than we are), but since he was renting he had no info on change in housing prices.

It seems like the city planners could not have picked a worse location since this is supposed to be a new investment area and many of the new developers they hoped to bring in might back out. What goes in instead when the expected condos don't go up? Subsidized housing? Rehab centers? This could be disastrous for our investment.

Does anyone have any real stats on the impact of new homeless shelters on real estate prices? I am doing some research now but am only finding opinions and usually from partisan sources. Looking for any first hand experience anectotes and preferably some statistics from a non-partisan source.

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[happythoughts 0]

Find another one and drive by. Within a 3-block radius, there are people walking around at all hours.

I know of two in different cities. People cross the street to pass because of the tenants out loitering on the sidewalk in front. People don't want to eat at a fast food place nearby.

Bad for business, neighborhoods, property values.

This is a NIMBY scenario. A lot of people are for the idea until it moves in next to them. Then, it is Not In My Back Yard. I understand that.

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

Find another one and drive by. Within a 3-block radius, there are people walking around at all hours.

I know of two in different cities. People cross the street to pass because of the tenants out loitering on the sidewalk in front. People don't want to eat at a fast food place nearby.

The other one that I know of is bigger than the one going in here but the neighborhood which looks like it once was pretty nice (old well designed victorian homes), now looks like a cesspool. He basically found that almost every morning when he left for work, he had to step over a random homeless guy who for whatever reason did not sleep in the shelter that night. When he started rousing them off his porch at all hours so as to send a message, they retaliated by deficating on his porch every-time he wasn't around. Lose-lose so he left.

Quote

Bad for business, neighborhoods, property values.

I was trying oh so hard to remain positive about this but you are right. My investment is going to get hurt.

Quote

This is a NIMBY scenario. A lot of people are for the idea until it moves in next to them. Then, it is Not In My Back Yard. I understand that.

I have never agreed with moving them into residential neighborhoods. All you do there is randomly pick some unfortunate homeowners and tell them "sorry, your property values just took a hit" I am all for helping the poor but this is ridiculous. With clubs and restaurents nearby, and all kinds of residents (who carry spare change) the neighborhood may go to shit. When I look at the locations that seem to get picked for these, I almost feel that the social worker making the decision is some anti-establishment type who derives pleasure from creating an obvious conflict which will hurt a neighborhood so he/she can "stick it to the man"

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[gofast_ER 0]

Personally I think it is a great thing to do. Well most people that are homeless put themselves in that sitituation themselves they are still people...humans. I think we have a responsibility to do our best to help these people whatever way we can. Not just on Christmas or Thanksgiving. Year round.

"And yet I recognize the irony the system I oppose affords me the luxury of biting the hand that feeds thats exactly why privileged folks like me should feel obliged to whine and kick and scream until everyone has everything they need"
....... ,,,,,,,,, '''''''' (go ahead and put em in where you want if you want)
Words from propagandhi

Hm, maybe this shoulda been in the speakers corner. Oh well.

I may not agree with what you have to say but i'll defend to the death your right to say it.

[jshatzkin 0]

It would be easy to throw a shelter in the middle of nowhere, or downtown near warehouses. But the purpose of the shelter transcends just giving people a place to sleep. Shelters are often located near public health clinics and social service agencies (and places to get jobs within walking distance). Most shelters only allow residents inside during the night time (usually from 6 pm to 8 am). the idea is that during the day, these people are out trying to get their lives together. Unfortunately, it usually equates to roaming around. Most homeless folks have some sort of mental illness. I am not justifying devaluing a neighborhood. That sucks and I know I would be upset as well. We also have to think about placing shelters where people can build their lives back. It's a catch 22.

Jen

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

Personally I think it is a great thing to do. Well most people that are homeless put themselves in that sitituation themselves they are still people...humans. I think we have a responsibility to do our best to help these people whatever way we can. Not just on Christmas or Thanksgiving. Year round.

It's not that black and white. Putting a shelter is fine, but everyone even the media have agreed that the choice of location is a disaster. It is smack dab between the clubs/restearents and a new development area. Putting it several blocks away where it is outside of either residential or consumer/commercial would make it just as attainable to the homeless without the degree of friction.

Have you ever lived near one? The other one I see has so completely fucked up the neighborhood that the residents who had nice expensive homes now cannot sell them. They now rent them out ( low rental) because that is all they can do with them. Is it critical to destroy someones life investment to do this? People simplify this to a case of "Oh the big meany hates poor people". When you cannot step out your front door without having to step over some drunk guy and/or a pool of vomit, without being aggressively panhandled that is ridiculous. Imagine drunks pissing in the steets which they do around these shelters. Since many (seemingly most) are addicts their suppliers go where the demand is which is right in your neighboorhood. THen follows the crime.

My wife and I saved for years and still had to borrow for a down-payment to be able to afford a one bedroom condo. Our plan was to buy it, make as much of the additional principle payments as possible and hopefully if the market did not turn, get a little equity with which we could turn around and maybe move up to a 2-3 bedroom which would allow us to start a family (something that would not be feasible in our current location). Due to our income vs housing costs in the city we had no choice but to take a 35 year mortgage. With that sort of payment plan the amount of principle we could pay off in 5 years would be almost zip so we would have to wait about 8 years and make additional payments before we could afford to move up. With this new shelter it is highly that our property value will decrease by a much greater amount than our principle depletion thus leaving us with negative net equity. Is that a good thing? Hard working people who waited for years saving (staying away from skydiving) to be able to afford their first home now have their investment destroyed?

This shelter could have gone six blocks away in an area where they would have not been right in the new residential area. This would have mitigated friction, allowed them an area to panhandle outside of a tourist area (bad for the tourism industry) and not fuck up peoples investments. If a 2 year old was a city planner they could have seen that the current choice of location is a disaster.

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

• Quote

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

It would be easy to throw a shelter in the middle of nowhere, or downtown near warehouses. But the purpose of the shelter transcends just giving people a place to sleep. Shelters are often located near public health clinics and social service agencies (and places to get jobs within walking distance).

There are no social services near our neighborhood. A little further north or east would have put them close to a hospital, a meth clinice, substance abuse counselling centres. There are no such facilities near us.

Quote

Most shelters only allow residents inside during the night time (usually from 6 pm to 8 am). the idea is that during the day, these people are out trying to get their lives together. Unfortunately, it usually equates to roaming around. Most homeless folks have some sort of mental illness. I am not justifying devaluing a neighborhood. That sucks and I know I would be upset as well. We also have to think about placing shelters where people can build their lives back. It's a catch 22.

I would not be against the idea of some sort of halfway house for people who are assessed as hard luck cases who are trying to get on their feet actually looking for work. In this case they are putting in one that is aimed more at substance abuse cases (there will be some sort of rehab service offered there). These are not going to be hard luck cases. These are going to be the kind who have no inclination to change their lives and will walk around the neighboorhood stoned/drunk and urinating/deficating wherever suits their fancy, while they aggressively seek sources of funds to feed their addictions be it by aggressive panhandling (even new yorkers up here have commented on how aggressive our panhandlers are) or stealing. THis would be better suited well to the east of here where there is a hospital, several related social services and not a new investment community which even without the shelter could have gone either way. This will bring the drunks/druggies from the bad neighborhood directly into ours. When the demand (for drugs) moves into our neighborhood so will the supply (drug dealing gangs) and thus so will violence. What will not be moving into our neighborhood is any kind of new positive investment.

We paid a fortune to move into a very small condo but we accepted that because it was a neighborhood that was expected to appreciate in value. If you were looking to buy, and you came to check out our home and saw drunk people passed out in the streets, litter everywhere and general filth, were aggressively panhandled while entering the building with your real estate agent, and stepped in vomit/urine while walking in and then got hassled again on the way out would you buy our condo? So what do you think happens to our value. Our own mortgage/debt doesn't adjust to reflect this devaluation. We will be up to our ears in debt paying to live in a place that we cannot sell for anything but dolar store prices.

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

• Quote

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

With that sort of payment plan the amount of principle we could pay off in 5 years would be almost zip so we would have to wait about 8 years and make additional payments before we could afford to move up. With this new shelter it is highly that our property value will decrease by a much greater amount than our principle depletion thus leaving us with negative net equity. Is that a good thing? Hard working people who waited for years saving (staying away from skydiving) to be able to afford their first home now have their investment destroyed?

I think you are mixing two different issues: a home and an investment.
Buying a home is fairly risk free (barring earthquakes, hurricanes, mudslides, etc...) decision. However, an investment, by definition, comports risks.
If you buy a "home", then ask yourself whether you could spend the rest of your life living there, regardless of most unforeseen events.
If you decide to invest, the perimeters should be different.
Sometimes, one can combine both. But most of the time, those with big returns are the ones who thought about the "home" factor ahead of the investment factor. And happened to buy in a neighborhood which appreciated.
Quick return is risky. If you can stick it out for many years, you may be able to outlast the shelter, and turn in a profit.
I bought a house I loved in 1998, in a supposedly "gang infested neighborhood." (hence the purchase price was low). It has appreciated 150% over the years.

Anyway, WTF am I doing talking investments when I should be drinking more wine (and staring at these 10 year old Apple shares in my drawer...)

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[squirrel 0]

In California at least, you have 17 days now to "discover" evidence that may affect the value of your real estate purchase, and you can withdraw basically for any reason with no penalties or loss of down payment. Used to be only on land purchase, but now structures as well.

________________________________
Where is Darwin when you need him?

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

In California at least, you have 17 days now to "discover" evidence that may affect the value of your real estate purchase, and you can withdraw basically for any reason with no penalties or loss of down payment. Used to be only on land purchase, but now structures as well.

It would be nice if the city compensated owners financially for their loss , or at the very least drastically adjusted our property taxes and utilities costs to help keep our resale competitive.

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[Richards 0]

Quote

I think you are mixing two different issues: a home and an investment.
Buying a home is fairly risk free (barring earthquakes, hurricanes, mudslides, etc...) decision. However, an investment, by definition, comports risks.
If you buy a "home", then ask yourself whether you could spend the rest of your life living there, regardless of most unforeseen events.
If you decide to invest, the perimeters should be different.

We dould live here forever so long as we have no desire to have children. To have kids we will need to move into something bigger, no ifs ands or buts. This place is for a bachelor or a couple, that is it. In Toronto housing prices are ridiculous and even highly paid professionals often have to start with a one bedroom condo. There is no other way into the market here so it is structured so that you have no choice but to treat your first home as a starter home investment. There is no other way in this city for most workers. This will be devastating to the resale, and we would like to have kids someday while we are still young enough.

Quote

I bought a house I loved in 1998, in a supposedly "gang infested neighborhood." (hence the purchase price was low). It has appreciated 150% over the years.

It worked for you. What I have seen is that in the other neighborhood this happened to, the residents were driven out, and couldn't resell so now expensive victorian homes are being rented out as low rental and the neighborhood is falling to crap.

Quote

Anyway, WTF am I doing talking investments when I should be drinking more wine (and staring at these 10 year old Apple shares in my drawer...)

Cheers

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[jenfly00 0]

I suppose all municipalities vary, but I strongly suspect this shelter has been proposed for a while.

In Miami a shelter for women had to go through a 26 month process including a series of meetings open to the public (required to be held in the area affected).

Did you do your homework before buying?

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

I suppose all municipalities vary, but I strongly suspect this shelter has been proposed for a while.

In Miami a shelter for women had to go through a 26 month process including a series of meetings open to the public (required to be held in the area affected).

It has been proposed for a fairly short time. We signed the contract quite a while ago and only took posession about two months ago. The isuue was proposed shortly after we had signed on the dotted line, so it was too late to back out. After that all we could do was hope that the public pressure would prevent it. They just recently confirmed that they were going to go ahead with it.

Quote

Did you do your homework before buying?

Meticulously. We turned down several appearingly good deals because through independant investigation we found out about things the developers were trying to hide from us. We did our homework on this area, and looked at all the planned investment in the area. Given the choice of location most people were astonished that the city would suddenly do this because it was clearly zoned for residential condo development and new business yet with no local social services, and not a big homeless problem. They are importing the problem into a new investment area.

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

• Quote

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

I think you are mixing two different issues: a home and an investment.
Buying a home is fairly risk free (barring earthquakes, hurricanes, mudslides, etc...) decision. However, an investment, by definition, comports risks.
If you buy a "home", then ask yourself whether you could spend the rest of your life living there, regardless of most unforeseen events.
If you decide to invest, the perimeters should be different.
Sometimes, one can combine both. But most of the time, those with big returns are the ones who thought about the "home" factor ahead of the investment factor. And happened to buy in a neighborhood which appreciated.
Quick return is risky. If you can stick it out for many years, you may be able to outlast the shelter, and turn in a profit.
I bought a house I loved in 1998, in a supposedly "gang infested neighborhood." (hence the purchase price was low). It has appreciated 150% over the years.

Um...I want to agree or disagree with you here. Care to elaborate?

My position is a home is always an investment.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[PhreeZone 15]

A home is a medicore investment choice. Yes, in the recent past the markts have allowed for nice return rates on a home purchase but in the last 2 years the average home has earned very little equity if any at all. A home has more risk factors to being an investment then many stocks do. Stocks don't lose value if a water main breaks and floods your finished basement and requires you to gut it. Stocks typically can get a 7-12% return rate depending on a few factors. Home rates are only at that level in a few areas and even there its filizzing out. If you want to make an investment in a house then you are typically looking at a depressed piece of property that you renovate and sell shortly after. That is the highest rate of return. That or you develop homes that are priced to be rented and self substaining on their mortages that way. You may make 10-20k selling a house if you hold onto it for 7-10 years but if you look at the stock market you are usually better off having invested that money into the market and would have had a higher return rate then if you put all the money into the house.

There is a difference between a house and a home, thats what people need to remember.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

A home is a medicore investment choice.

It seemed to me we were talking about whether or not it was an investment at all, not what type of investment choice it was.

To the rest of what you said I agree and disagree with certain points.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[Richards 0]

I maight have not explained myself well. When I say investment, I realised that the possibility of the home not appreciating (other than for inflation), was a distinct possibility. What I meant was simply having a chunk of it paid off so we actually qualify for a bigger mortgage since we now have more equity (down payment + principle paid off). Even if there is no appreciation we would have some equity to move to a better home eventually where we could start a family. We intended to live really frugally (remain in a temporary state of born-again-whuffo) and make the additional principle payments so we could have enough for a better place. This could potentially drive down the price to the point where the devaluation of the price eclipses the equity from the down payment and principle depletion. In effect we would be in less of a position to be buying a home than we were when we picked our current place.

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

You may make 10-20k selling a house if you hold onto it for 7-10 years but if you look at the stock market you are usually better off having invested that money into the market and would have had a higher return rate then if you put all the money into the house.

I have a natural affinity for real estate. I chose what & where I would buy my first home carefully. It seems I could get a 16%/year (worst-case scenario & not including dividends) return on my home if I sold today which admittedly is about 6% less/year than I was expecting before the market plummeted.

Still, it would potentially make a lot of sense for us to sell and upgrade--and yes, put the equity on this home down on our next. We would sell this home for 12% less than what our home might have sold for before the market turned (leaving us with the 16%/year return) and upgrade buying a more expensive home that has simlilarly been reduced by 12% or likely more given the market is even tougher on the higher-priced homes at this time.

Given that we have time on our hands, the more expensive property will yield a better return than our current home once the market changes again--which it inevitably will.

For us personally, there's still a lot to consider. Either way--stay or go--we'll have done well.

Furthermore:

Quote

If you want to make an investment in a house then you are typically looking at a depressed piece of property that you renovate and sell shortly after

We have talked extensively about getting into just this after we're into our second (next) home.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

To have kids we will need to move into something bigger, no ifs ands or buts. This place is for a bachelor or a couple, that is it.

Given what info you have given us, my personal opinion would be sell now, not later. It's unfortunate you will take a hit financially, but cut your losses now and take less of a hit then what you'd potentially lose when you were hoping to sell/upgrade.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

A home is a medicore investment choice. Yes, in the recent past the markts have allowed for nice return rates on a home purchase but in the last 2 years the average home has earned very little equity if any at all. A home has more risk factors to being an investment then many stocks do. Stocks don't lose value if a water main breaks and floods your finished basement and requires you to gut it. Stocks typically can get a 7-12% return rate depending on a few factors. Home rates are only at that level in a few areas and even there its filizzing out. If you want to make an investment in a house then you are typically looking at a depressed piece of property that you renovate and sell shortly after. That is the highest rate of return. That or you develop homes that are priced to be rented and self substaining on their mortages that way. You may make 10-20k selling a house if you hold onto it for 7-10 years but if you look at the stock market you are usually better off having invested that money into the market and would have had a higher return rate then if you put all the money into the house.

There is a difference between a house and a home, thats what people need to remember.

I think your calculation of ROI for a home does not include dividends. Every year you own your home you get to live in it and thus avoid the rent payments required for a similar accommodation. When you include that a home is a very good investment in most areas in most years.

[PhreeZone 15]

Yes, thats if you are living in it.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

Yes, thats if you are living in it.

But, wait--isn't that what Richards was talking about?

Thus what I meant by a home always being an investment (be it a good/bad one, preferred/not preferred one, intended to be/not intended to be one).

A vacation home is often purchased more for desire to getaway rather than turn a profit. Still, it's not likely when the owner sells they will not turn a profit, albeit it potentially small. But relatively speaking, vacation homes typically have larger returns given their location so...

Yup, sticking to home always being an investment.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[DougH 270]

Sue the city? Maybe you can force them to buy the property owners out within a certain radius?

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[PLFXpert 0]

This is just a peeve, mind you but...

I don't think you were responding to me.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[DougH 270]

You will get over it.

I have gotten over the fact that I don't like the way the reply button functions compared to almost every other site on the internet by using it where ever I please.

I am sure we can all understand the concept of context, we handle jumping out of planes after all.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P