The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
A Path to Housing Opportunities Cincinnati Lending Analysis cr C O M M U N I T Y REINVESTMENT report SUMMER 2004 PUBLISHED BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF CLEVELAND T his report seeks to present the conditions and capacity of designated neighborhoods in Cincinnati with regard to housing, homeownership, and mortgage lending. We intend this baseline assessment to contribute to the community’s ongoing discussion of strategies toward better housing opportunities for all residents. Using Home Mortgage Disclosure Act and census data, we compare mortgage lending activity in the Empowerment Zone, other designated census tracts (comparison tracts), and the City of Cincinnati from 1997 to 2002. We also discuss housing data germane to the topic and include anecdotal information from community stakeholders regarding the housing situation. Executive Summary A Note From the Community Affairs Office The research and analysis suggests the following: COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 2 Reserve Bank of Cleveland examined that city and its neighborhoods in an attempt to understand the crisis from a community development perspective. CR (Community Reinvestment) Forum issued a special edition, “Bridging the Economic Divide: Cincinnati’s Crisis Presents New Opportunities,” which explored the economic and social history of the affected areas, particularily the >> Lending is taking place in city with regard to available Zone and in other low- and housing and homeownership moderate-income neighbor- rates. The housing stock in the hoods (the comparison tracts). Empowerment Zone is older >> Application activity differs between the comparison tracts and the Empowerment Zone. The lending level in the Empowerment Zone remained End, Avondale, and Walnut Hills. That steady during the observation discussion highlighted some of the period, while other areas of underlying economic conditions that the city experienced increased Over the past few decades, the Overthe-Rhine neighborhood experienced cantly lags the rest of the Cincinnati’s Empowerment neighborhoods of Over-the-Rhine, West may have contributed to the crisis. anecdotal reports, it is evident the Empowerment Zone signifi- In the fall of 2001, as a result of the civil unrest in Cincinnati, the Federal >> Based on census data and levels of activity. than that of the rest of the city, and anecdotal evidence suggests the higher vacancy rate in the Empowerment Zone may be due to factors unrelated to lending practices. The city, county, developers, lenders, and community organizations should continue to devise and implement >> The Empowerment Zone strategies for enlarging the exhibits patterns similar to the stock of suitable and affordable population shift from white to black; comparison tracts in terms of owner-occupied housing in the from working-class to a more impover- application approvals and Empowerment Zone. ished class; and from a larger, stable denials. many changes. There has been a gradual population to a smaller more transient one. The construction of major highways through Cincinnati and affordable housing programs of the 1960s contributed to shifting neighborhood KEY TERMS dynamics. As people were displaced Census tract A subcounty area designated by the U.S. government. Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county. They usually have 2,000–8,000 residents and, when originally delineated, are designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. Census tracts are used to evaluate information in relatively small geographic units and can be used to track loan, mortgage, and business activity in the CRA and HMDA regulations. Cincinnati CMSA Cincinnati–Hamilton County consolidated metropolitan statistical area (includes Hamilton, Butler, Brown, Clermont and Warrant counties in Ohio; Dearborn and Ohio counties in Indiana; and Boone, Campbell, Gallatin, Grant, Kenton and Pendleton counties in Kentucky). Cincinnati, the City The area bounded by the City of Cincinnati limits. CRA Community Reinvestment Act from areas where highways were built, they moved into Over-the-Rhine and adjacent neighborhoods to obtain affordable housing. The highways severed these neighborhoods from other areas, limiting employment and other opportunities, and creating geographic isolation. Simultaneously, as incentives were increased to create affordable housing, single-family homes were subdivided to create multi-unit housing. Comparison tracts The other 47 low- and moderate-income tracts in the City of Cincinnati not included in the Empowerment Zone. Introduction This report accomplishes the This document is not intended to In the Fall 2001 issue of CR following: serve as (a) an econometric analysis (Community Reinvestment) Forum, >> Synthesizes the 2000 Census of lending practices, (b) an analysis and 1997–2002 HMDA data of the effectiveness of Cincinnati’s Cincinnati Crisis Presents New (most current available) Empowerment Zone strategies, or Opportunity,” the Federal Reserve >> Compares the mortgage lending Bank of Cleveland explored activity in the Empowerment Cincinnati’s development history Zone (EZ), a set of comparison and prevailing economic conditions. tracts, and the City of In April and November 2001, civil Cincinnati from 1997 to 2002 >> Presents housing data that damage, expenses for the community, illustrates the availability and and lost business; those events were quality of existing units in the impetus for the report. The these areas analysis, which is the basis of this >> Provides anecdotal information report, compares access to credit from interviews with community throughout targeted Cincinnati stakeholders about actual and neighborhoods. By examining the perceived lending practices in availability of mortgage credit in the Cincinnati area and serves some of Cincinnati’s low- and as a starting point from which moderate-income neighborhoods, community members can we intend this baseline assessment discuss and develop economic to contribute to the community’s strategies and solutions to ongoing discussion of next steps challenges in the area. toward better housing opportunities for all residents. Empowerment Zone A HUD-designated, economically distressed area. In this report, the EZ comprises nine low- and moderate-income neighborhoods in central Cincinnati: Avondale, Corryville, Evanston, Fairview-Clifton Heights, Mt. Auburn, Over-the-Rhine, Queensgate, Walnut Hills, and West End. HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development HMDA Home Mortgage Disclosure Act area. The views expressed are those of the Community Affairs Office and not of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland or the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. unrest in Cincinnati resulted in millions of dollars in property (c) an evaluation of banks in the LMI Low- and moderate- income Minority American Indian or Alaskan, Asian or Pacific Islander, Black, Hispanic, and other MSA Metropolitan statistical area, a core area containing a substantial population nucleus and the adjacent communities having a high degree of economic and social integration with that core area. Observation period 1997–2002 COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 3 “Bridging the Economic Divide: Demographics 61.00 62.01 1990 CENSUS TRACT BOUNDARIES FOR THE CITY OF CINCINNATI 80.00 COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 4 Empowerment Zone Comparison Tracts Remainder of Cincinnati 80.00 75.00 79.00 78.00 63.00 73.00 ST BERNARD 74.00 NORWOOD 85.02 77.00 66.00 69.00 88.00 67.00 38.00 40.00 28.00 39.00 32.00 34.00 36.00 29.00 30.00 41.00 33.00 89.00 35.00 37.00 87.00 25.00 21.00 43.00 26.00 22.00 14.00 23.00 92.00 15.00 16.00 19.00 17.0018.00 94.00 1.00 3.018.00 10.00 97.00 95.00 93.00 11.00 2.00 9.00 91.00 3.02 86.01 W E S 55.00 68.00 100.02 N 54.00 44.00 47.02 96.00 4.00 103.00 104.00 Cincinnati’s Empowerment Zone The City of Cincinnati comprises designated the Cincinnati EZ, which comprises nine low- and moderateincome (LMI) neighborhoods in 117 census tracts. Of that number, central Cincinnati: Avondale, Corryville, 21 are within its Empowerment Zone Evanston, Fairview-Clifton Heights, (EZ), an economically distressed area Mt. Auburn, Over-the-Rhine, designated by the U.S. Department Queensgate, Walnut Hills, and West of Housing and Urban Development End. The Cincinnati Empowerment (HUD). In 1998, HUD defined and Corporation oversees the spending TABLE 1 COMPARATIVE DEMOGRAPHICS 2000 Empowerment Zone Comparison Tracts Cincinnati Number of census tracts 21 47 117 Total population 44,453 127,152 331,285 $15,339 $19,434 $25,145 White 21.6 43.0 53.0 Black 74.8 52.5 42.9 Hispanic 1.2 1.3 1.3 3.7 4.4 4.1 1 Per capita income Racial composition (percent) 2 Other 1 Population age 15 and over. 2 Includes American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, and other. comparison of lending conditions income tracts falls within 50 percent– has committed approximately between the EZ and either the city 79 percent of the MSA, and low- $24 million to the EZ, and the area’s or the entire metropolitan region income tracts have a median family designation is effective until 2009. would be misleading. To produce income of 50 percent or less than Businesses that locate in EZs more meaningful information, this the MSA (see table 2). receive tax incentives, grants, loans, report examines the EZ relative to and technical assistance from the the other 47 low- and moderate- compared to other LMI tracts in the federal government. Ideally, stimula- income tracts in the city—referred City of Cincinnati, which helps to tion of public–private partnerships in to here as the comparison tracts. identify lending patterns. Although an EZ will stabilize an area’s economy The EZ and comparison tracts are loans are made to individuals based by focusing on economic and work- similar in that they consist only of on their unique circumstances, we force development, improving housing LMI tracts, so we are especially would expect to find that lending and neighborhood environments, interested in whether lending patterns patterns in the EZ and the compari- promoting family and individual appear similar across those two areas son tracts would be broadly similar well-being, and bolstering the (see table 1). to the extent that people in these civic infrastructure. Data on the EZ census tracts are tracts have similar income and other Low- and Moderate-Income Areas Comparison Tracts As defined by HUD, low- and The EZ is made up entirely of low- moderate-income areas have a median and moderate-income tracts. The family income less than 80 percent City of Cincinnati and the Cincinnati– of that of its metropolitan statistical Hamilton County CMSA have middle- area (MSA). The 2002 median family and upper-income tracts and higher income for the Cincinnati– Hamilton income levels in general than the County CMSA was $64,300. The population of the EZ. Therefore, a median family income in moderate- relevant borrower characteristics. TABLE 2 INCOME AREA DEFINITIONS FOR THE CINCINNATI MSA Relative median family income Income range in Cincinnati CMSA Low-income Less than 50 percent Less than $32,150 Moderate-income Greater than or equal to 50 percent but less than 80 percent $32,151–$51,439 Middle-income Greater than or equal to 80 percent but less than 120 percent $51,440–$77,159 Upper-income Equal to or greater than 120percent $77,160 and above COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 5 of federal dollars in this EZ. HUD Homeownership COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 6 In addition to helping individuals and families build wealth, homeown- about the resale value of homes ership helps to stabilize neighbor- purchased in the EZ; property may hoods. This section examines the be under-appraised simply because housing characteristics of the EZ, of the ZIP code in which it is located. the comparison tracts, and the city. Interviews with community According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the City of Cincinnati’s homeownership rate was 39 percent, one of the lowest in the country. >> Potential buyers are concerned members and observers revealed the local perception that outside factors influencing the EZ have resulted in a lack of attractive, affordable housing >> New development in the city can be unprofitable for developers because no large tracts of undeveloped land are available, and the development process itself can be difficult to navigate. for residents despite high vacancy rates: >> Much of the older housing stock has been divided into rental units. Homeownership Rates Homeownership rate is calculated by dividing the number of owner- >> Developers and potential occupied housing units by the number homeowners may be unwilling to of occupied housing units in an area. rehabilitate older stock because According to the U.S. Census Bureau, they assume the property may the City of Cincinnati’s homeowner- have lead or asbestos problems. ship rate was 39 percent, one of the lowest in the country and the lowest Available Housing Stock Federal Reserve District. The rate One of the key factors contributing Programs Encouraging Homeownership of homeownership in the comparison to low homeownership rates is a The Federal Home Loan Bank of tracts, 33.7 percent, was close to that limited housing stock from which Cincinnati announced its American for the city as a whole, but the rate to choose. Housing stock includes Dream Home-ownership Challenge, in the EZ was strikingly low—only the number and condition of offering a $1 million incentive to 17.7 percent. These figures are well available units. Little new housing below the state of Ohio average of stock (about 3 percent) was built groups needing assistance in purchasing 71.3 percent and the national average in the EZ, comparison tracts, or homes in the Greater Cincinnati area. of 67.4 percent. The rate for the city between the 1990 and 2000 Cincinnati– Hamilton County CMSA censuses; nationwide, housing stock and SmartMoney is creating individual was 72.5 percent. grew nearly 15 percent during the development accounts to assist same period. In addition, existing Cincinnati residents that meet income in the city than in the EZ and the housing in these areas is considerably requirements to save toward a down comparison tracts. Given the existence older than the national average. payment on a house. of middle- and upper-income tracts Approximately 40 percent of the The City of Cincinnati has proposed a in the city, this is to be expected. But housing units in the comparison mortgage assistance program that would the comparison tracts have a notably tracts and the city, and more than eliminate down payment requirements higher homeownership rate than the half the units in the EZ, were built for homes in Over-the-Rhine, allowing EZ. This may be the result of the before 1940. Nationwide, only lack of available housing stock in 15 percent of the total housing stock Private banks would assume mortgage the EZ, as well as the higher share was built before 1940 (see table 3). costs, and the city would provide Homeownership rates are higher of moderate-income tracts in the eligible member banks to use as they guide minorities and other targeted A partnership between GE Capital an estimated 500 homeownership units to be purchased over a 10-year period. gap financing. comparison tracts. TABLE 3 HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS, 2000 Empowerment Zone Comparison Tracts City of Cincinnati Population 44,453 127,152 331,285 Number of housing units 24,207 60,518 166,012 Occupied 82.0 86.9 89.2 Vacant 18.0 13.1 10.8 Built 1990-2000 3.1 2.7 3.0 Built before 1940 51.0 41.1 40.0 Owner 17.7 33.7 39.0 Renter 82.3 66.3 61.0 Unit characteristics (percent) Residents’ characteristics (percent) COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 7 among Ohio cities and the Fourth Mortgage Lending COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 8 HMDA data is reported by >> Origination: The financial area. During 1997–2002, the number individual lending institutions and institution accepts the appli- of applications increased 52 percent compiled by the Federal Financial cation and creates the loan. in the city and 36 percent in the Institutions Examination Council. >> Purchase: The financial institu- This data reports lending action by tion purchases the original census tract; the loan is attached to loan from another institution. in the EZ. Year-to-year trends are similar, with growth averaging 10 percent in the city and 7.3 percent the census tract in which the mortgaged land is located. As a result, comparison tracts, but only 6.5 percent >> Approved, but not accepted: in the comparison tracts, but less the data do not reflect the activity The financial institution than 2 percent in the EZ. Clearly, of banks located in a specific area, accepts the application and there was no relative increase in as the banks lending to homeowners offers a loan, but the applicant lending activity in the EZ compared in the EZ, comparison tracts, or the does not accept the loan. to the comparison tracts and the city. city may be local or nationwide. Mortgage lending includes applications for home mortgages, home improvement loans, refinancing, and multifamily lending. The sum of this >> Denied: The financial institution rejects the application. >> Withdrawn: The applicant removes the application. In 2002, the loan application denial rate was 27 percent in the EZ (29 percent average over the sixyear observation period), 26 percent in the comparison tracts (27 percent activity is the best measure of total >> Closed for incompleteness: The average) and 19 percent in the city lending activity, and therefore it is application is not acted upon (22 percent average). It is obvious used in this report. An individual because critical information that as applicant income rises, so applies for a loan, which is processed is missing (see table 4). does the approval rate for loans. In by the financial institution; the The number of applications Cincinnati, on average, there is a application results in one of the received by lending institutions 47 percent approval rate on applica- following outcomes: indicates the amount of lending tions from applicants in the lowest activity—real or potential—in an income range, while the approval rate for applicants in the upper TABLE 4 MORTGAGE APPLICATIONS AND OUTCOMES 2002 (1997—2002 Average) Empowerment Zone Comparison Tracts City of Cincinnati Applications 2,772 (2,807) 10,481 (9,883) 32,821 (28,564) Originations, approvals, and purchases (percent) 57.7 (56.1) 60.7 (58.7) 68.6 (65.9) Denials (percent) 27.2 (29.0) 25.5 (26.9) 19.4 (21.7) Note: Originations, approvals, and purchases are, from the applicant’s view, an acceptance, indicating that credit was extended. Data in regard to single-family homeown- Home Mortgage Disclosure Act with income ranges in between— ership and mortgage refinancing The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act moderate and middle—show increased activity with respect to the rest of (HMDA) is a federal law enacted in approval rates as income rises. In Cincinnati. 1975, then amended and extended Cincinnati, 34 percent of applications Overall, mortgage lending in permanently in 1988. It requires most depository institutions and specific from low-income applicants were Cincinnati increased during 1997– denied, whereas only 13 percent of 2002, though the increases were not applications from upper-income evenly distributed among census applicants were denied. On balance, tracts. Mortgage loans increased purchases of home mortgage loans, the EZ and comparison tracts appear 35 percent in low-income tracts, home improvement loans, and to be similar with respect to overall 32 percent in moderate-income refinancings. Data fields requested mortgage approval and denial rates. tracts, 67 percent in middle-income include the type, purpose, and amount tracts, and 111 percent in upper- of the loan; the applicant’s race or Also, the type of applications differed between the city, comparison income tracts. for-profit, nondepository institutions to collect, report, and disclose data about applications, originations, and national origin, sex, and income; and the location of the property. tracts, and EZ. From 1997 to 2002, Predictably, the growth rates for mortgage applications (conventional LMI areas lag upper-income areas, and government) increased 31 percent where applicants have access to more in the city and 44 percent in the resources than those in LMI areas. comparison tracts, but declined On average, 66 percent of all HMDA- lending enforcement. The data do not 1.4 percent in the EZ. Refinancing reportable applications in the city include credit information or debt- application activity in the EZ were originated, purchased, or to-income ratios. increased at only one-third the rate approved; in the comparison tracts of that in the comparison tracts 59 percent were approved, and 56 (25 percent and 78 percent, respec- percent in the EZ were approved. tively). From 1997 to 2002, only It is apparent that LMI areas in multifamily housing loans increased Cincinnati have lower levels of and significantly (96 percent) in the EZ; differences in lending growth exist there was a 20 percent annual between LMI neighborhoods inside growth rate. These loans increased and beyond the EZ. Between 1997 32 percent in the comparison tracts and 2002, approvals increased and actually declined 95 percent in 34 percent in the comparison tracts the city during this period. Clearly, the but remained relatively unchanged EZ appears to be relatively stagnant in the EZ. HMDA helps regulators to determine whether financial institutions are serving their communities’ mortgage lending needs and assisting in fair COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 9 income range is 71 percent. Applicants Observations and Opportunities COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 10 Demographic and HMDA data and interviews with community development practitioners provide encouraging evidence that mortgage lending activity in Cincinnati is increasing in all areas, including This structure includes commitments by nonprofit organizations, government agencies, and the corporate sector to support development in these areas. LMI neighborhoods. Although there are differences in lending experiences in these areas compared with Cincinnati as a whole, a structure exists to address this issue. This >> Stock of architecturally significant buildings >> Music Hall, Findlay Market, and the School of Performing Arts structure includes commitments by nonprofit organizations, government agencies, and the corporate sector to >> Topographical attraction of the downtown area city and with community groups (community urban redevelopment corporations) to renew surrounding neighborhoods. More than $300 million in construction is anticipated. An important component of continued and accelerated economic progress is bridging the gap between support development in these areas. >> Downtown residents who serve It also utilizes loan funds, technical as a consumer market segment services offered by lending institutions assistance, and job-creation programs needing goods and services and the clients and consumers they in LMI neighborhoods. Financial institutions are exploring ways to stimulate markets in these neighborhoods and serve residents effectively. >> Proximity to the city’s economic engines and business core >> Willingness of key participants seek to serve. Opportunities for closing that gap include the following: >> Personal credit and the need for financial education were Working together, the public and (nonprofits, corporate identified as impediments to private sectors can stimulate supporters, and government accessing credit and capital economic revitalization in urban agencies) to collaborate and in the EZ. Such reported neighborhoods. rebuild the EZ’s neighborhoods. impediments are not unique Universities near the EZ are an to Cincinnati: Approximately Within the EZ, there are many assets that provide opportunities for excellent source of expertise and 10 million LMI households in the continued growth and stabilization: provide impetus for new initiatives. United States are “unbanked,” >> The residents themselves and The University of Cincinnati, Xavier meaning they do not have neighborhood pride University, and Cincinnati State all accounts in any financial insti- >> Faith-based initiatives have relationships with the city and tutions. This could be addressed other community groups to help through collaboration between improve the neighborhoods. For financial institutions, commu- example, the University of Cincinnati nity development corporations, has formed partnerships with the and faith-based organizations >> Strong grassroots organizations >> Financial institutions to reach this population. Lenders would learn more According to some community Housing Opportunities members, the EZ may have the The Cincinnati Development Fund has needs of LMI individuals, and demand for homeownership, but created the Urban Living Loan Fund, which those individuals would learn not necessarily the readiness. Those commits $40 million to promote housing more about the effective use of seeking homeownership could work development in Over-the-Rhine, West End, credit and capital, how to work with groups such as the Better and downtown Cincinnati. with a banker, and financial Housing League of Greater Cincinnati The Cincinnati Housing Develop-ment Fund institutions’ responsibilities and the HomeOwnership Center has committed $100 million to construction as businesses in the community, of Greater Cincinnati. These organi- loans to develop market-rate housing in subject to state and federal zations counsel LMI individuals and regulatory oversight. families on issues such as financing, The Walnut Hills Redevelopment Foundation homeowners’ responsibilities, home and Miller Valentine Group/MV Communities >> Alternative financing sources may help to satisfy needs that financial institutions are unable to meet in this niche market. When developing a new market, it is important to clarify the appropriate roles of corporate and financial institutions, government, and intermediaries. Establishing and articulating realistic expectations for each participant would help avoid duplication of effort and acknowledge the limitations of any single institution offering a comprehensive solution. >> Examining development from maintenance, and the use of financial the city’s distressed neighborhoods. have completed a $12.7 million restoration of the landmark Alexandra (constructed in services. Over time, if individuals 1902), which has created 83 affordable who want to remain in the city have rental apartments for senior citizens. the desire and the means to do so, Crawford Lofts created 18 moderately homeownership rates may increase. priced ($79,900– $165,000) condominiums This would create a more stable on Main Street in Over-the-Rhine. These neighborhood base, capable of units were sold within three weeks of supporting more business develop- completion. Planning is under way for six ment and benefiting from increased more condo projects in the area, comprising tax revenues. When communities 91 units. are built and expanded around social, economic, and political involvement, Cincinnati Housing Resources* neighborhood revitalization becomes Better Housing League of Greater Cincinnati a reality. Financial institutions will engage www.betterhousing.org 513/721-6855 in mortgage lending with borrowers Cincinnati Development Fund who are creditworthy. Some of the www.cincinnatidevelopmentfund.org 513/721-7211 community development practitioners Cincinnati Empowerment Corporation a market perspective would interviewed for this report cited an clarify some of the difficulties obstacle to increasing lending in LMI 513/487-5200 facing private-sector developers neighborhoods as consumers’ lack of interested in rehabilitating understanding of the housing finance City of Cincinnati, Department of Community Development and Planning urban properties. Although system and lack of readiness to 513/352-6146 they have access to many of access and use available lending Hamilton County Development Company the right tools—tax increment products. Financial institutions may financing, tax credits, and need to offer more products tailored government support —their to the particular needs of LMI most critical need is a readily populations and develop marketing available, viable market to strategies and financial education support the costs of their programs that encourage individuals efforts. to use their local branches. www.empowercincy.org www.cincinnati-oh.gov www.hcdc.com 513/631-8292 Home Ownership Center of Greater Cincinnati www.hometoday.cc 513/961-2800 SmartMoney Community Services www.smart-money.org 513/241-7266 *partial list COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 11 about the specific financial Vice President and Community Affairs Officer Ruth Clevenger Managing Editor Cassandra McConnell Author and Research Analyst Conclusion In addition to HMDA statistics on lending activity and census data on homeownership and available housing stock, anecdotal Emma Petrie reports cited additional housing and lending trends in LMI areas Graphic Designer of Cincinnati and offered insight into other barriers to homeowner- Lori Boehm ship. Interviews with community development practitioners Special thanks to our colleagues at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, including Director Herb Brown, Barbara Henshaw, Candis Smith, and Jeff Gatica from the Cincinnati Office; and Mark Sniderman, Mark Schweitzer, Virginia Hopley, and Shadya Yazback from the Cleveland Office for their assistance with this report. suggest that homeownership opportunities in the EZ are more limited, primarily because of residents’ lower income level and for the reasons detailed in the “Available Housing Stock” section on page 7. Population migration is also a challenge for the community in general and for the EZ in particular. The length of time that individuals and families remain in the same residence influences Thanks to the following for their contributions to this report: the overall stability of a neighborhood. During 1995–2000, fewer INDIVIDUALS housing unit. In the comparison tracts, that figure was 43 percent, Cincinnati Empowerment Corporation Darrick Dansby SmartMoney Community Services Jeanne Golliher Cincinnati Development Fund W. James King Community Redevelopment Group Mark Lanear Miami Purchase Preservation Fund Alicia Townsend City of Cincinnati, Department of Community Development and Planning ORGANIZATIONS Better Housing League of Greater Cincinnati Greater Cincinnati Microenterprise Initiative Hamilton County Development Company Ohio Statewide Minority Business Development Center U.S. Small Business Administration FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS Fifth Third Bank Provident Bank PNC Bank Visit us on the World Wide Web www.clevelandfed.org The views stated here are those of the Community Affairs Office and are not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland or of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. We welcome your comments regarding this CR Report; please e-mail them, or requests for additional copies, to emma.r.petrie@clev.frb.org. Materials may be reprinted provided that the source is credited. Please send copies of reprinted materials to Emma Petrie, Community Affairs, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, P.O. Box 6387, Cleveland, Ohio 44101-1387. and 46 percent in the city. Nationally, nearly 55 percent of residents remained in the same housing unit between 1995 and 2000. These statistics do not reveal the reasons for migration, but they do suggest higher rates of movement detract from neighborhood stability. Mixed-income housing is becoming a reality in some communities within Cincinnati’s EZ, such as Avondale, Walnut Hills, East Walnut Hills, and the West End. Some older apartment buildings are being converted to condominiums in an effort to improve mixed-income, urban housing opportunities. However, as this takes place, many mixed-income areas become unaffordable for LMI residents. Although the EZ has abundant vacant housing (18 percent of existing units), there is minimal market demand for it. Without higher homeownership rates, neighborhood stabilization and future wealth building is unlikely to occur in the EZ. COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT REPORT 12 Harold Cleveland II than 39 percent of residents in the EZ remained in the same
@FedFRASER