Skip directly to: content | search

Case Studies

Well-crafted approaches use a multitude of data to understand regional and neighborhood markets. Let’s look at two places that have created neighborhood typologies and combined them with foreclosure data to reveal patterns and opportunities:

 

Case Study 1 - Memphis

Memphis’ Center for Neighborhood Building and Community Action (CBANA) Neighborhood “Zones”

  • CBANA overlays foreclosure data on their Zone Analysis and examines which Zones are being impacted most significantly.
  • Key Finding: Memphis’ traditionally impoverished neighborhoods (Zone 1) were not the ones most impacted by foreclosures in the first wave (2007). This may be because mortgage lending wasn’t high in those Zones to begin with. This also meant, from a policy perspective, the City and County had to re-think their traditional approaches to allocating resources based on needs defined primarily by poverty. For a detailed presentation on the CBANA Zone Analysis, click here.
  • Memphis – CBANA Neighborhood “Zones”
    • Zone 1: Classic Distressed Neighborhoods -High poverty
    • Zone 2: Vulnerable Swing Neighborhoods - Clear indications of decline
    • Zone 3: Neighborhoods of Choice - High housing demand
    • Zone 4: Up-Trending Transitional Neighborhoods - Urban pioneers, gentrification, reinvestment and redevelopment

[TOP]

Case Study 2: Cleveland

Cleveland’s NEO CANDO Neighborhood Market Typology

  • Key Finding: The City of Cleveland tailored strategic approaches to its Neighborhood Market Typology.
  • For its NSP 1 application, Cleveland developed a five-point market typology, based in part on data they accessed through the Cleveland NNIP organization Northeast Ohio Community and Neighborhood Data for Organizing (NEO CANDO).
  • Their typology looked at sales data, foreclosure data, vacant/distressed property conditions, and high-cost mortgage lending concentrations.
  • Read Cleveland’s NSP Application including maps and descriptions of market types and strategic approaches.
  • Cleveland’s NEO CANDO 5-Point Neighborhood Market Typology
    • Regional Choice: Areas of high value, strong appreciation, and excellent condition.
    • Stable: Areas of stable value and good condition.
    • Transitional: Areas with moderate housing values and signs of physical distress or market distress with significant foreclosure.
    • Fragile: Areas with low housing values, low appreciation marked by demolition and abandonment.
    • Distressed: Areas of low value, low appreciation, significant demolition and abandonment.

Using The Data

  • Cleveland’s "Regional Choice" and "Stable" Markets Strategic Approach
    • Encourage rehabilitation of properties by providing both development and homebuyer incentives for the purchase, rehabilitation and sale of vacant properties that were the subject of foreclosure action.
    • The ultimate purchaser of these properties will need to meet the NSP qualification of an income less than 120% of the median income for the MSA.
    • Demolition funds will be use sparingly to address only those blighted structures which cannot be returned to productive use.
  • Cleveland’s "Transitional" and "Fragile" Markets Strategic Approach
    • Cleveland has established 19 model block areas in neighborhoods that the Market Typology ranks as Transitional, Fragile or Distressed.
    • These blocks were selected by Cleveland’s non-profit CDC community based on the model blocks’ proximity to an anchor investment or neighborhood asset and an assessment of the potential for market recovery.
    • Cleveland proposes using NSP funds, in combination with HOME, CDBG and LIHTC resources to rebuild these areas.  
  • Cleveland’s "Distressed" Markets Strategic Approach
    • In areas where foreclosure and abandonment risk is high, but where the Neighborhood Market Typology suggests that the market is too weak (at the time) to create a sustainable homeownership rehabilitation market, Cleveland will concentrate on demolition, land banking and interim uses.

[TOP]

Other Examples:

  • The Reinvestment Fund in Philadelphia worked with the city to create a taxonomy of six market types (e.g., regional choice, transitional and stressed neighborhoods). TRF and the city linked the taxonomy to prioritization of public action (e.g., code enforcement, land assembly). The picture that emerged of the City served as a framework for its plan of action.
  • In New Haven, CT the ROOF Project (Real Options Overcoming Foreclosure) is a collaborative effort of the City of New Haven and local nonprofits to address the foreclosure crisis. For more information on its Neighborhood Stabilization efforts, click here.

[TOP]