Cleveland Neighborhood Progress outlines ‘middle neighborhoods’ rehab strategy, cites $3M state and $7.2M city investments

Cleveland Neighborhood Progress leaders told the Select Committee on Housing that a concentrated program of home rehabs and commercial corridor repairs can reverse long-term disinvestment in so-called "middle neighborhoods." The presenters described a two-pronged strategy: renovate clusters of homes to close an "appraisal gap" and pair that work with storefront and streetscape improvements to attract private investment.

"Middle neighborhoods" were described by Tanya Menas, who identified herself as CEO and president of Cleveland Neighborhood Progress, as historically single-family, walkable areas whose housing stock and commercial districts have aged. Menas said those conditions have opened the market to "predatory investors who are buying up many of these homes, putting the lipstick on a pig and flipping them or really turning a lot of our...very strong homeowner communities into rental communities." She argued that targeted, place-based investment can retain residents and attract new homeowners.

Casey Petritis, identified in the presentation as vice president of real estate, told the committee the program aims to demonstrate consistent, market-rate resale values by renovating substantial clusters of houses—in some neighborhoods the goal is roughly 50–75 home renovations—to signal to private lenders and builders that the market is viable. "If we make these initial investments...the private market starts to come in and do true renovation, not flipping," he said.

Panelist Kimberly Hurt presented a completed single-family rehab in North Collinwood (Muskoka Street) as a case study. The team bought the property from an LLC and converted an unusable attic into livable space by adding dormers, creating three bedrooms and adding a bathroom, modernizing the kitchen and upgrading mechanical systems. For that project the presenters said the program purchased the home for about $85,000 and that total development costs ran to about $330,000; they said the program is designed to take an initial loss (they estimated roughly a $70,000 loss on that project) in order to sell a high-quality product that helps re-stabilize surrounding property values. The presenters said the house was being listed at a competitive market price (stated in the record as "2.69 9"), and they framed the loss as a deliberate, time-limited subsidy to prime private investment.

Menas said the program uses a Neighborhood Development Index built with the city that looks at 18 place-based criteria (sales activity, structural indicators, commercial vibrancy) rather than race or demographics, and she urged applying that index to other Ohio cities to identify tipping points. She contrasted that place-based approach with the National Community Stabilization Trust’s national, income-based method.

On funding, Menas told the committee the initiative currently relies on a $3,000,000 grant from the state (from the most recent general operating budget) and a $7,200,000 investment from the city of Cleveland to underwrite the first phase of work. The presenters said they expect to step back from direct investment once neighborhoods reach market stability and private lenders and developers resume activity.

During questions, committee members raised local details about price points, typologies and program eligibility. The presenters clarified the current model focuses on market-rate sales (not income-restricted units) but said future iterations could include partnerships with Habitat and CHN Housing Partners to introduce mixed-income elements.

The presentation closed with an emphasis on pairing housing rehabilitation with main-street work—storefront white-boxing, match grants for businesses and streetscape improvements—to create complete neighborhood improvements. The presenters offered to continue working with committee members on scaling the approach to other Northeast Ohio jurisdictions such as Canton and Euclid.

Next steps: presenters said they would continue outreach with local elected officials and stated the program’s intent to target adjacent blocks once initial clusters show market movement. No formal action or vote was recorded during the session.