Housing Market & Trends

[GCrites]

37 minutes ago, Z said:

"Better" for who? 

 

Anyone who isn't holding real estate for appreciation.

[Brutus_buckeye]

2 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

I'm a bit nervous that residential rents are going to dip markedly as leases expire.  A lot of people who bought rental properties in the last 1-2 years are going to be losing money every month for many months.  Some highly leveraged mini-empires are going to collapse.  

 

For apartments I am not too worried, especially class B and C apartments. Class A may be hit but those are often held by institutional investors who dont have the liberty to drop their rents much or else they risk violating debt covenants which can get trickier. There are certainly going to be some defaults coming for people who bought in at the very top and had very high leverage with no cushion. Overall, apartments will be fine because 1) People need to live somewhere and 2) There is already an under-supply in this asset type. 

 

I would not be in student housing now, but that was a crash that was going ot hit in a couple more years regardless of the pandemic.

 

Office and Retail will get hammered but they have been struggling already.  

[Z]

13 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

 

Anyone who isn't holding real estate for appreciation.

Rising prices are an important incentive to invest in NEW housing. Housing isn't a  zero sum game, well, at least not in most metros. 

Edited April 23, 2020 by Z

[GCrites]

It doesn't need to be rising 15-20 percent a year though. 

[DEPACincy]

14 hours ago, Z said:

The residents of those cities share less tradition and heritage of those particular cities and neighborhoods than anywhere on the planet. I'm not talking about buildings and street festivals. I'm talking about the social experience of living in a place. The population of manhattan must have a 90% turn over rate every decade. Only the super rich stick around that long these days. 

 

Thanks for letting us know that you've never met anyone from New York.

[Z]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/early-data-point-slight-housing-040028517.html

 

In metros with high property values and/or high numbers of transactions, these declines mean that either sellers have less incentive to sell now. In metros with lower values and/or low numbers of transactions, these declines show that more limited markets are less affected by macroeconomic forces. The pandemic is shuffling things dramatically, though temporarily, I'm sure. Dallas and Cincinnati, for example, couldn't be more different housing markets. 

[Z]

5 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

Thanks for letting us know that you've never met anyone from New York.

Tell us about New York. 

[GCrites]

^LOL, there's a lot of people there that have never even left the city and don't even know what an Interstate is.

[Z]

13 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

It doesn't need to be rising 15-20 percent a year though. 

Values aren't rising 15-20 percent a year in Columbus, Indy, or various southern boomtowns. Cincinnati and SF are at opposite ends of the spectrum of housing markets. Almost every metro in America is somewhere between these two extremes in most measures of housing markets. Increasing values are an important incentive for investment. To pretend otherwise is an example of the defensiveness I've described.

[Z]

There's some hopeful news for Cincinnati's housing market in this article on March housing markets. https://www.gjsentinel.com/news/colorado/re-max-national-housing-report-for-march-2020/article_4e0202ce-fded-5e0d-a6e7-75ad6a5a95c3.html

[GCrites]

^^What part of Cincinnati am I from?

Edited April 23, 2020 by GCrites80s

[Z]

Cincinnati renters are among the least "burdened" renters in America. That is, there's less incentive to invest in rental property in Cincinnati than in most metros in America.https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/many-renters-are-burdened-housing-costs.

[Z]

https://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/news/coronavirus-wont-lead-to-another-great-recession-for-housing

"By metro area, Cleveland home prices grew the most at 3.5%, trailed by 1.4% in Milwaukee and 0.8% in Cincinnati. The greatest decreases came with San Francisco's 8.4%, Boston's 8.2% and Denver's 8.1%." Again and again, you'll find that Cincinnati is at one end of virtually every spectrum of economic activity. It's not "in line" with other metros. It's not a moderate, average, or representative metro when it comes to housing or most other measures of economic activity. 

[Z]

23 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

^LOL, there's a lot of people there that have never even left the city and don't even know what an Interstate is.

How do you know that?

[Z]

Cincinnati's housing markets share some significant characteristics with the vibrant and appealing metros of Youngstown, Scranton, and Wichita. https://www.businessinsider.com/most-popular-housing-markets-metro-areas-for-generation-z-homebuyers#2-metro-area-grand-rapids-wyoming-mi-9

[Cavalier Attitude]

30 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

^LOL, there's a lot of people there that have never even left the city and don't even know what an Interstate is.

I think this whole discussion is pretty silly, but just wanted to point out that Manhattan probably has a much higher turnover % than the other boroughs.

[Z]

1 minute ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

I think this whole discussion is pretty silly, but just wanted to point out that Manhattan probably has a much higher turnover % than the other boroughs.

It is. The lengths some will go to in order to prevent an honest discussion of how Cincinnati works is silly. 

[Cavalier Attitude]

1 minute ago, Z said:

It is. The lengths some will go to in order to prevent an honest discussion of how Cincinnati works is silly. 

The way I see it, you took personal umbrage and started a little tiff in an unrelated topic. I don't really care "how Cincinnati works" but there are plenty of places to discuss that on these boards.

[DEPACincy]

38 minutes ago, Z said:

Tell us about New York. 

 

I used to visit NYC on a monthly basis. My ex lives on the Upper West Side. She was born in Greenwich Village. Her grandparents live on the Lower East Side. Her entire family has been there their entire lives. Her experience is typical of a LOT of people. The typical Greenwich Village, UWS, or UES resident has lived in Manhattan for decades. Your 90% turnover claim is just ridiculous and shows you have zero familiarity with the city. It's also right in line with all of your claims about the housing market. You keep making wild claims with zero actual facts to back them up. 

[taestell]

FYI - the account "Z" has been banned. The person behind this account previously had another account on UrbanOhio, and had been banned several years ago. Per our forum guidelines, "Any member who is banned and creates a new account will have their new account banned."

 

Maybe we can get this thread back on topic now...

[ryanlammi]

FYI, I moved all of the home improvement discussions into the appropriate thread. Continue over there with the discussion!

 

 

[Brutus_buckeye]

I have to feel that for the time being and even after this Covid 19 thing subsides this real estate trend is likely to struggle.

 

https://www.apartmentlist.com/rentonomics/micro-apartments/

[KJP]

32 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I have to feel that for the time being and even after this Covid 19 thing subsides this real estate trend is likely to struggle.

 

https://www.apartmentlist.com/rentonomics/micro-apartments/

 

Why? There seems to be a large number of young people who don't like to stay at home, let alone spend more money for space they don't want or need. They consider the city to be their living room and are involved in active sports, not so much in watching it. And considering how many more people I see in the parks, walking and biking in the last couple of months, I think even more people will consider the city as their living room.

[Brutus_buckeye]

9 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Why? There seems to be a large number of young people who don't like to stay at home, let alone spend more money for space they don't want or need. They consider the city to be their living room and are involved in active sports, not so much in watching it. And considering how many more people I see in the parks, walking and biking in the last couple of months, I think even more people will consider the city as their living room.

Because in the time of social distancing 

1) people do not want to be stuck in a 300' apartment and cant go out, etc. 

2) common areas and community areas will likely not be able to operate, thus limiting the appeal of these places.

3) some of these places offer more dorm style living with common kitchens between living suites, which again would likely not be too appealing in the social distancing age. 

[Clefan98]

7 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Because in the time of social distancing 

1) people do not want to be stuck in a 300' apartment and cant go out, etc. 

2) common areas and community areas will likely not be able to operate, thus limiting the appeal of these places.

3) some of these places offer more dorm style living with common kitchens between living suites, which again would likely not be too appealing in the social distancing age. 

 

Your logic seems off....Why can someone leave their house, but not their 300' apartment? Your first premise is bunk so I didn't even bother reading points 2 or 3.

[SAABn]

10 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Why? There seems to be a large number of young people who don't like to stay at home, let alone spend more money for space they don't want or need. They consider the city to be their living room and are involved in active sports, not so much in watching it. And considering how many more people I see in the parks, walking and biking in the last couple of months, I think even more people will consider the city as their living room.

 

Largely true, but then your employer decides they don't want to reconfigure the open plan office and tells you to work from home - 300 sq ft might start to seem a bit too small.

[KJP]

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Because in the time of social distancing 

1) people do not want to be stuck in a 300' apartment and cant go out, etc. 

2) common areas and community areas will likely not be able to operate, thus limiting the appeal of these places.

3) some of these places offer more dorm style living with common kitchens between living suites, which again would likely not be too appealing in the social distancing age. 

 

While I won't address your first point which I don't understand at all, I do hope that a majority of prospective renters are not making their residential decisions based on a once-in-a-century emergency. 

 

1 hour ago, SAABn said:

 

Largely true, but then your employer decides they don't want to reconfigure the open plan office and tells you to work from home - 300 sq ft might start to seem a bit too small.

 

I don't except employers will continue to ask employees to work from home. Most of the people I work with (either through my condo flipping or through interviews I've done via NEOtrans) say that their companies' level of productivity has dropped since people started working from home. The reason why cities and communal workplaces exist is because commerce, collaboration and innovation are ignited through proximal interaction.

 

The many plagues throughout human history have never changed this fact or made cities and communal workplaces too risky or unnecessary. I don't believe technology will change this fact either.

Edited April 30, 2020 by KJP

[GCrites]

^Yeah, people forget that stuff like this went on all the time until the 1930s. In some parts of the world it never stopped.

[taestell]

I don't think there's any truth to the idea that this pandemic will scare people away from urban areas. If anything, some people will be drawn to areas where they can more easily get out and walk to parks or jog on the sidewalk.

 

While this crisis has forced companies to adapt and allow WFH, I don't think it's the end of offices at all. At best, most companies will allow employees to work from home 1-2 days per week, but will expect them in the office the other 3-4.

 

Companies with open offices (extremely common in tech) are scrambling to build makeshift cubicle farms.

 

 

[Gramarye]

1 hour ago, Clefan98 said:

2 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Because in the time of social distancing 

1) people do not want to be stuck in a 300' apartment and cant go out, etc. 

2) common areas and community areas will likely not be able to operate, thus limiting the appeal of these places.

3) some of these places offer more dorm style living with common kitchens between living suites, which again would likely not be too appealing in the social distancing age. 

 

Your logic seems off....Why can someone leave their house, but not their 300' apartment? Your first premise is bunk so I didn't even bother reading points 2 or 3.

 

That clearly wasn't his point.

 

The point is that if you're going to be compelled to stay at home, you'd probably rather have one larger than 300sf.

 

Sheltering in place even in 3500+ sf hasn't been easy.  I'm glad I'm not still at my old downtown Akron apartment.  (Granted, I also have six people in the house, so that's a little different than the typical micro-apartment tenant, too.)

[GCrites]

31 minutes ago, taestell said:

I don't think there's any truth to the idea that this pandemic will scare people away from urban areas. If anything, some people will be drawn to areas where they can more easily get out and walk to parks or jog on the sidewalk.

 

While this crisis has forced companies to adapt and allow WFH, I don't think it's the end of offices at all. At best, most companies will allow employees to work from home 1-2 days per week, but will expect them in the office the other 3-4.

 

Companies with open offices (extremely common in tech) are scrambling to build makeshift cubicle farms.

 

 

 

 

Open floor plans were dumb anyway. Study after study shows that they hinder workflow due to too much noise and distraction and lack of privacy. Harvard Business Review articles tear them to pieces. All they were was a way to look "cool" and 'hip" like Apple since people that graduated college between 1999 and 2011 thought that would be the best place to work in the world. I don't even know if Apple even had open floor plans then, but it was perceived that they did so every other company wanted to do what they were doing to be "cool".

[BigDipper 80]

Heck, I get distracted enough as it is even working in a cube farm. I'd hate an open office. With Skype/Slack, it's just as easy to message a team member when you have an idea, you don't need to be literally staring at them.

[DEPACincy]

28 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

That clearly wasn't his point.

 

The point is that if you're going to be compelled to stay at home, you'd probably rather have one larger than 300sf.

 

Sheltering in place even in 3500+ sf hasn't been easy.  I'm glad I'm not still at my old downtown Akron apartment.  (Granted, I also have six people in the house, so that's a little different than the typical micro-apartment tenant, too.)

 

My house is like 2000 square feet, but I've spent most of my time in just a couple rooms. Work in the dining room, watch tv in the den, cook in the kitchen, sleep in my room. The guest bedrooms and extra bathroom don't really change my experience since I'm not going to be in them ever anyway. I would probably have the same experience in half the space.

 

More important to my mental health during this time has been that I live in a dense neighborhood with lots of sidewalks, multiple parks, and businesses I can walk to. I don't need to drive to Kroger to get a loaf of bread or a six pack of beer. It's saved me a TON of stress.

[jjakucyk]

4 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

More important to my mental health during this time has been that I live in a dense neighborhood with lots of sidewalks, multiple parks, and businesses I can walk to. I don't need to drive to Kroger to get a loaf of bread or a six pack of beer. It's saved me a TON of stress.

 

That's the part that is missed by all the "pandemic is the death of density" doomers.  The counter-argument being made by Strong Towns is as follows:

 

Quote

To summarize, traditional development patterns are based off an assembly of neighborhoods. Each neighborhood is its own independent unit in some state of maturity. You can live in a neighborhood and get food, work, recreation, and all your other needs without being forced to leave the neighborhood. (For those of you that didn’t read that closely, I’ll note that you can leave if you choose, but you’re not forced to leave.)

 

Many neighborhoods come together to form a city. We can travel from neighborhood to neighborhood, city to city, but each are their own fully functional unit. Not to get too technical, but this is what Benoit Mandelbrot described as a fractal pattern of development.

 

In a pandemic, if there is a breakout in one neighborhood, it can be temporarily closed and isolated from other neighborhoods without destroying the function of either place. In one neighborhood there can be a shelter-in-place impacting everyone in that neighborhood, and in the adjacent neighborhood there would be no need for any restriction except one on travel to and from the infected neighborhood. Our local economy can be open for business and closed for transmission simultaneously.

 

The suburban experiment includes a false sense of security of allowing people to isolate in a pod of residential dwellings. That is, isolated until they need to go get food. Or go to work. Or, as was apparently happening in my hometown this weekend, when half the population of Central Minnesota needs to get out and buy mulch at Home Depot. It is at this point that everyone in the entire region congregates in one of the efficient pods we’ve set up for commercial transactions. For spread of a virus, there is no better petri dish than the frequent mass clustering of people demanded by the Suburban Experiment.

 

So yeah, it may be easier to self-isolate at *home* in the suburbs, exurbs, or country, but as soon as you need to buy food or go to work then you're traveling over much larger distances and mixing with a more widely distributed crowd of people.  Even if you have everything delivered, those delivery people and packages are a vector as well, and they're also being spread far and wide.  

[Clefan98]

48 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

That clearly wasn't his point.

 

The point is that if you're going to be compelled to stay at home, you'd probably rather have one larger than 300sf.

 

Sheltering in place even in 3500+ sf hasn't been easy.  I'm glad I'm not still at my old downtown Akron apartment.  (Granted, I also have six people in the house, so that's a little different than the typical micro-apartment tenant, too.)

 

It obviously wasn't a very clear point or factual point. If I am living in a 300' apt, I'm going to be outside MORE. Sheltering place doesn't =  being inside 24/7.

 

We'll never agree on this because we don't think alike. His points might be true for him and you, but not for a lot of younger people like me and many others I know.

 

 

 

Edited April 30, 2020 by Clefan98

[Gramarye]

25 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

My house is like 2000 square feet, but I've spent most of my time in just a couple rooms. Work in the dining room, watch tv in the den, cook in the kitchen, sleep in my room. The guest bedrooms and extra bathroom don't really change my experience since I'm not going to be in them ever anyway. I would probably have the same experience in half the space.

 

Hah!  I remember the days when we had "guest" bedrooms.  Those are kids' bedrooms.

 

Almost every square inch of our house is used on a daily basis, certainly on a weekly basis.  And this is without my inlaws visiting from India (and they may move here permanently if/when they become Medicare-eligible).

 

The home office is cramped now that both my wife and I have desks in there, but we can't feasibly split up with the kids at home because whoever tries to work from a laptop in the kitchen or dining room will be Zerg-rushed by toddlers every bit as long-winded as I am, and considerably more indefatigable.  The home office is in a remote corner of the house that allows us to be out-of-sight, out-of-mind.

 

We probably aren't moving until 2022 when I have my car paid off, but I doubt we'll be getting anything under 6000sf (counting finished basement space) at that point.  I have to at least consider the possibility of a nine-person household with at least one spouse needing a home office that allows for sufficient isolation to be effective (and me likely working from home far more often than I did a year ago).

 

I think a major trend in the housing market in the years to come after this, at least for a while, will be more attention paid to home offices, even in medium-small homes.  The dominant philosophy for the past couple of decades is to basically treat them as interchangeable with an extra bedroom, which kind of rendered them an afterthought.  I could definitely see that changing.

 

25 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

More important to my mental health during this time has been that I live in a dense neighborhood with lots of sidewalks, multiple parks, and businesses I can walk to. I don't need to drive to Kroger to get a loaf of bread or a six pack of beer. It's saved me a TON of stress.

 

Curbside carryout has been my go-to during this.  Some new stresses and challenges, but definitely better than going into the store.  My home isn't within walking distance of the store, but that's irrelevant when I'm buying $200+ of groceries every two weeks; it's not like I was going to be walking home with it even if I lived a block away.

 

Online grocery shopping has grown up in a hurry in response to this pandemic.  I'm preparing a much longer review and comparison of Acme and Giant Eagle's curbside carryout services (I've done at least 4 orders from each of them during the past 1.5 months), but they've actually both changed considerably in that span, so my earlier notes are already obsolete.

 

ETA: Though I'm not getting my beer from stores.  I'm committed to buying local through the peak of this.  I've spent about $450 on alcohol in the past month, all at Wolf Creek, R. Shea, and Akronym.

[Clefan98]

7 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

Hah!  I remember the days when we had "guest" bedrooms.  Those are kids' bedrooms.

 

Almost every square inch of our house is used on a daily basis, certainly on a weekly basis.  And this is without my inlaws visiting from India (and they may move here permanently if/when they become Medicare-eligible).

 

The home office is cramped now that both my wife and I have desks in there, but we can't feasibly split up with the kids at home because whoever tries to work from a laptop in the kitchen or dining room will be Zerg-rushed by toddlers every bit as long-winded as I am, and considerably more indefatigable.  The home office is in a remote corner of the house that allows us to be out-of-sight, out-of-mind.

 

We probably aren't moving until 2022 when I have my car paid off, but I doubt we'll be getting anything under 6000sf (counting finished basement space) at that point.  I have to at least consider the possibility of a nine-person household with at least one spouse needing a home office that allows for sufficient isolation to be effective (and me likely working from home far more often than I did a year ago).

 

I think a major trend in the housing market in the years to come after this, at least for a while, will be more attention paid to home offices, even in medium-small homes.  The dominant philosophy for the past couple of decades is to basically treat them as interchangeable with an extra bedroom, which kind of rendered them an afterthought.  I could definitely see that changing.

 

People don't even need a home office anymore. I am happily working from the couch with laptop by my side, and my wife is sitting at our island with hers.

 

There's nothing wrong with wanting more space, but I think that is becoming less and less true for most people overall. I would say 60-70% of my newest neighbors in Gordon Sq are ex suburbanites who were looking to downsize.

Edited April 30, 2020 by Clefan98

[Gramarye]

2 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

People don't even need a home office anymore. I am happily working from the couch with laptop by my side, and my wife is sitting at our island with hers.

 

There's nothing wrong with wanting more space, but I think that is becoming less and less true for most people overall. I would say 60-70% of my newest neighbors in Gordon Sq are ex suburbanites who were looking to downsize.

 

Do you have kids?  If so, what do they do during the day?

[Clefan98]

2 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

Do you have kids?  If so, what do they do during the day?

 

Yes, and why does that matter?

[E Rocc]

6 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

Do you have kids?  If so, what do they do during the day?

 

My daughter can be kept busy a little while with electronics (her aunts work out of the house) and has some school stuff to do, but eventually she has to go somewhere,  even in a Sagamore Hills house.   

[KJP]

12 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

Do you have kids?  If so, what do they do during the day?

 

This crisis is a short-term blip. They will go to school and spend time in sports or in parks after school. And why would families live in microunits? I would think they would live in larger housing designed for families.
 

Additionally, why should developers design housing as if everyone has kids? Only one-third of households have school-age children. And I suspect that number is dropping because young people are getting married later and having kids later. If developers build enough affordable inventory for young, single people, that will require thousands of additional micro units/workforce housing units in each of Ohio's 3Cs.

Edited April 30, 2020 by KJP

[GCrites]

Mandatory WFH also has the opportunity to show people that they don't like WFH. Back when I was in grad school (1-year accelerated program) my day was typically 3 hours WFH, 3 hours in-person group work and 3 hours in class. I definitely liked the WFH part the least. Almost 15 years later I've had to go back to WFH and I dislike it even more.

 

Now people with kids are a whole different story. They get to save an enormous amount of money not having to outsource child care and not having to rely exclusively on expensive outsourced meals. Plus, way less driving.

[Gramarye]

14 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

Yes, and why does that matter?

 

As I mentioned above, the main reason the extra space, and the home office in particular, has been so critical for us is because of the need for separated spaces where we can work while the kids play elsewhere.  My wife tried working in the dining room once.  Total bust.

 

7 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

My daughter can be kept busy a little while with electronics (her aunts work out of the house) and has some school stuff to do, but eventually she has to go somewhere,  even in a Sagamore Hills house.   

 

Admittedly, this is a self-inflicted challenge for us--our oldest is allowed about an hour of TV in the evenings; our second-oldest is completely screen-free.  But yes, that's the issue; they really need to go somewhere.  (Learning to ride  a bike is a high priority we have for them during the shelter-in-place order, especially if it continues much into the warmer months.)

 

5 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

This crisis is a short-term blip. They will go to school and spend time in sports or in parks after school. And why would families live in microunits? I would think they would live in larger housing designed for families.
 

Additionally, why should developers design housing as if everyone has kids? Only one-third of households have school-age children. And I suspect that number is dropping because young people are getting married later and having kids later. If developers build enough affordable inventory for young, single people, that will require thousands of additional micro units/workforce housing units in each of Ohio's 3Cs.

 

Agreed, families would not live in micro-units, and I'm hardly suggesting that all housing be designed like everyone has kids any more than I'm suggesting that all housing be designed like no one does.

 

That said, I'd question whether even a single, childless person would want a 300sf micro-unit if they were going to be working from home more and required to shelter-in-place or self-quarantine more.

 

The crisis is a short-term blip if we're just talking about the shelter-in-place order.  My current prediction would be that a more aggressive self-quarantine regime is going to be with us for a long while.  We won't lock down the entire economy (it's simply unsustainable), but individual people will be sometimes forced to self-quaranting for two week intervals (or other intervals) even after the statewide lockdown ends.

[E Rocc]

Just now, Gramarye said:

 

As I mentioned above, the main reason the extra space, and the home office in particular, has been so critical for us is because of the need for separated spaces where we can work while the kids play elsewhere.  My wife tried working in the dining room once.  Total bust.

 

 

Admittedly, this is a self-inflicted challenge for us--our oldest is allowed about an hour of TV in the evenings; our second-oldest is completely screen-free.  But yes, that's the issue; they really need to go somewhere.  (Learning to ride  a bike is a high priority we have for them during the shelter-in-place order, especially if it continues much into the warmer months.)

 

Fortunately Ardyn learned to ride a bike long ago and she has her hoverboard as well.  Perhaps even more fortunately, the combination of driving around and her electronics means she has no desire to actually get out and go anywhere.   Her aunts and I basically agree the "shelter in place" part of the order is invalid and we feel free to ignore it.   This does not equate to being careless or getting close to people outside our immediate circle.   I'm seeing a growth in that view among other parents.

 

 

[DEPACincy]

 

13 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

Fortunately Ardyn learned to ride a bike long ago and she has her hoverboard as well.  Perhaps even more fortunately, the combination of driving around and her electronics means she has no desire to actually get out and go anywhere.   Her aunts and I basically agree the "shelter in place" part of the order is invalid and we feel free to ignore it.   

 

The stay at home order never meant you couldn't go for a drive or exercise or go to a park.

[DEPACincy]

46 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

We probably aren't moving until 2022 when I have my car paid off, but I doubt we'll be getting anything under 6000sf (counting finished basement space) at that point.  I have to at least consider the possibility of a nine-person household with at least one spouse needing a home office that allows for sufficient isolation to be effective (and me likely working from home far more often than I did a year ago).

 

I appreciate your experience, but nine person households who need 6,000 square feet are much rarer than one person households who are fine in 300 square feet. My old apartment was 500 square feet when I was single and I had room to spare. I also had a pool, a gym, and a rooftop terrace I could use. And I was with a couple blocks of multiple parks. A small apartment doesn't mean you are confined to that space all the time, even during a pandemic. You can still take walks and go to parks. 

[DEPACincy]

49 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

ETA: Though I'm not getting my beer from stores.  I'm committed to buying local through the peak of this.  I've spent about $450 on alcohol in the past month, all at Wolf Creek, R. Shea, and Akronym.

 

We have a store in the neighborhood (5 minute walk) that is devoted to local/Ohio craft beer. I regularly go there for a six pack of Jackie O's Mystic Mama, the best IPA on planet earth. 

 

We also have two great breweries that are less than a 10 minute walk that have takeout beer available, so we've been supporting them too. I don't think I've spent anywhere close to $450 in the past month though. Maybe $200.

[Gramarye]

8 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

The stay at home order never meant you couldn't go for a drive or exercise or go to a park.

 

Shh!  Don't kill his buzz.

 

6 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

I appreciate your experience, but nine person households who need 6,000 square feet are much rarer than one person households who are fine in 300 square feet. My old apartment was 500 square feet when I was single and I had room to spare. I also had a pool, a gym, and a rooftop terrace I could use. And I was with a couple blocks of multiple parks. A small apartment doesn't mean you are confined to that space all the time, even during a pandemic. You can still take walks and go to parks. 

 

I appreciate that that situation is/would be unique (still not 100% certain that we're going to go the intergenerational housing route).  But would the pool/gym/rooftop terrace of your old apartment even be open for use by tenants right now, even if closed to the public?

 

Until this pandemic, I never really thought about having or needing a home gym, since I have one at my office (and I can do things like exercise videos with minimal equipment just in front of my TV at home).  But the gym at work has been closed for a while now.

 

6 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

We have a store in the neighborhood (5 minute walk) that is devoted to local/Ohio craft beer. I regularly go there for a six pack of Jackie O's Mystic Mama, the best IPA on planet earth. 

 

We also have two great breweries that are less than a 10 minute walk that have takeout beer available, so we've been supporting them too. I don't think I've spent anywhere close to $450 in the past month though. Maybe $200.

 

Heh.  Not sure if you're married/cohabiting.  I'm buying for two.  My wife has made it clear that keeping the beer fridge and wine cellar stocked is a mission-critical part of my husbandly duties until daycare reopens.

[DEPACincy]

13 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

I appreciate that that situation is/would be unique (still not 100% certain that we're going to go the intergenerational housing route).  But would the pool/gym/rooftop terrace of your old apartment even be open for use by tenants right now, even if closed to the public?

 

Probably not the pool or gym. But the rooftop and nearby parks would be accessible. 

 

14 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

Heh.  Not sure if you're married/cohabiting.  I'm buying for two.  My wife has made it clear that keeping the beer fridge and wine cellar stocked is a mission-critical part of my husbandly duties until daycare reopens.

 

I am buying for two. She is a lightweight though haha. 

[jjakucyk]

2 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

Now people with kids are a whole different story. They get to save an enormous amount of money not having to outsource child care and not having to rely exclusively on expensive outsourced meals. Plus, way less driving.

 

Except now they have to work well into the evenings to make up for all the lost time dealing with their kids.  They're bugging you all day, wanting cooked meals instead of a bowl of cereal for breakfast and a bagged lunch, or calling for help when the wifi goes down.  Plus if you don't have a home office, finding space for them to do their school Zoom sessions, your WebEx meetings, and the spouse's GoToMeeting conference calls, can be a real challenge.  Yeah if the kids are quiet and you all have good headsets then you can do work/school in closer proximity, but that's more of a best case scenario than the norm.  It is unfortunate that the "home office" is usually just a repurposed bedroom, because in a lot of houses bedrooms are lousy places to sit in all day.