Won’t You Be My Neighbor?

David Wilson

Realtor.com quoted me in Are Neighborhood Watch Signs Killing Home Sales? I reads, in part,

Neighborhood watch programs proclaim that a community’s members have one another’s backs, a collective way of saying, “Hey, we got you covered.” So home shoppers who see neighborhood watch signs plastered on telephone poles and in parks should feel confident about settling down in that community, right?

Not necessarily.

A debate is brewing, most recently in Longboat Key, FL, over whether neighborhood watch signs are good or bad for property values. While some think these safety-first signs raise home prices, former Mayor George Spoll is arguing the opposite: that they make an area look crime-ridden, sinking home prices and scaring off potential buyers in the process.

*     *      *

“It would be hard to say that a watch sign on its own is a good or bad thing, but in particular contexts it could make a difference,” says David Reiss, research director at the Center for Urban Business Entrepreneurship at Brooklyn Law School. After all, he points out, “If home buyers have heard that crime is an issue there, neighborhood watch signs may give comfort that the neighborhood is doing something about it. On the other hand, if it’s a neighborhood that is not facing major crime issues, signs may be a confusing signal.” 

Bottom line: If you’re a home buyer and see these signs, do your homework and research crime in the area. Go ahead and ask your seller and Realtor about crime in the area; call local law enforcement or search online on sites such as Crimemapping.com or Neighborhoodscout.com.

Wednesday’s Academic Roundup

The Dense State of NYC’s Housing

NYU_Campus

NYU’s Furman Center released its State of New York City’s Housing and Neighborhoods in 2014. I found its discussion of urban density to be the most notable aspect of this nexcellent and data-rich annual report. The discussion on density concludes,

The renewed attractiveness of New York City since the 1970s means population will likely keep increasing, and so will population and housing density. In 2010, few other U.S. cities had any neighborhoods that matched the density experienced by the typical New Yorker. Yet, by recent historical standards, today’s density levels are not extreme. In recent years, the typical New Yorker lived in a lower-density neighborhood than the typical New Yorker in 1970, as population growth in the city since 1980 was focused in moderate-density neighborhoods. Further, while great disparities in education and crime across neighborhoods exist, these differences are not generally associated with density levels.

High density cities like New York are playing an increasingly important role in the economy as drivers of productivity and innovation. This means the accessibility of the city to new residents is important both for New Yorkers and the nation. We have demonstrated that significant numbers of new residents can be accommodated without elevating density to levels above what the city has historically experienced, and that high-density neighborhoods do not perform lower on key quality of life indicators. City officials will need to ensure that neighborhoods have sufficient infrastructure to accommodate their new residents. (20)

This last point is key: density is not a problem so long as the appropriate infrastructure is built to support it. And while current residents are concerned about the impact of local increases in density, the city as a whole benefits from the increased economic activity and cultural creativity that comes along with heightened density. The De Blasio Administration knows this. Other local elected officials should sign on to increased density along with thoughtful zoning and infrastructure policies.

As a final note, I would compare the transparent acknowledgement of the report’s financial sponsors in the front matter with the much less transparent acknowledgment found in Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies State of the Nation’s Housing 2015 report that I blogged about yesterday.

Location, Location, Location of NYC Affordable Housing

NYU’s Furman Center has released a white paper, Housing, Neighborhoods, and Opportunity: The Location of New York City’s Subsidized Affordable Housing. The report opens,

Rent burdens for low- and moderate-income renters continue to grow in New York City, inviting calls for more affordable housing. While the primary goal in developing affordable housing should arguably be to provide safe housing at a reasonable cost so that households have more residual income available for food, medicine, transportation, and other essential goods, housing programs also take people to particular neighborhoods. New York City neighborhoods provide widely varying access to services and opportunity. Thus, city policymakers need to pay attention not only to the number or quality of subsidized, affordable units produced, but also to the characteristics of the neighborhoods where those units are built. (1)

In order to provide some data about that, the paper examines where 235,000 units of subsidized rental housing are in New York City. Unsurprisingly, many of the units are in neighborhoods like Upper Manhattan, the South Bronx and Central Brooklyn where land costs were historically low.The paper studies important characteristics of neighborhoods where the subsidized housing stock is located: isolation from the rest of the City; student performance; public amenities like parks; public safety; poverty; and housing cost. It also looks at how these characteristics have changed in the 2000s.

One key finding from the report that will be of interest to those who think about how New York City is changing over time: tens of thousands of properties have opted out of affordability restrictions, particularly in more expensive neighborhoods like Manhattan below 96th Street, and it looks like tens of thousands more will opt out over the next decade.

As the Mayor’s team develops its affordable housing strategy of building and preserving 200,000 units of affordable housing, this report presents some sobering data on the affordable housing challenges that the City faces. My takeaway is that the City should be doing more to encourage housing construction more generally to increase the overall supply, in addition to subsidizing affordable housing directly. Subsidies will never create enough units on their own to house all of the people who call and want to call NYC “home.”

Do Foreclosures Cause Crime?

The Furman Center says yes.  The Center conducted an empirical study in New York City and found that “foreclosure activity appears to be linked to subsequent crime” if “there have been three or more foreclosure notices issued on a blockface.” (4)

The study may give law enforcement agencies something to chew over now (perhaps CrimeStat should track foreclosures?!?), but it should also give those who study housing finance policy something to plan for as we look ahead to the next foreclosure crisis.  If this finding is replicated in other jurisdictions, should federal and state governments put into place any policies and programs that will address this foreseeable consequence of concentrated foreclosures?  The Furman study suggests some policies on its last page.