The Need for Aged Buildings in Norwood (Part 2)

People are reinvesting in Norwood. My walks are data enough, though qualitative.

Some people would rather pay for improvements in their living conditions partly in labor and ingenuity, and by selecting which improvements are most important to them, instead of being indiscriminately improved, and all at a cost of money. “The Need for Aged Buildings” The Death and Life of Great American Cities (p194)

Norwood is surrounded by Cincinnati. It cannot annex new territory for new development. It has built itself out. But why is the housing stock so much older than other built out areas? Has construction ceased? The answer is no. Norwood has seen industrial and commercial construction over the decades that show little to no new housing starts. As mentioned in the previous post, Ohio municipalities live and die by the local income tax. Norwood’s aim, stated or not, is to achieve a fiscally sustainable land use mix.

That houses still stand is not a failure. The construction of a new home simply cannot compete - on price alone - with a renovated, existing structure. The cost of materials and labor is too high. While an example from the world of physics might not be any more accessible, consider the difference between potential and kinetic energy. The embodied energy of an existing building retains value, despite the label of “blight” or the historical lending actions known as district “redlining.”

In successful districts, old buildings “filter up.” “The Need for Aged Buildings” The Death and Life of Great American Cities (p193)

These days, it is hard to imagine any housing market improving. Norwood’s may continue to trend up. Perhaps, someday, its market position - price determined by demand - will be able to bear the cost of new home construction. Until then, the supply of bargains is simply too good to pass up.