| Summary | National Percentile | Rank vs Metro |
|---|---|---|
| Housing | 51st | Best |
| Demographics | 41st | Good |
| Amenities | 34th | Best |
Multifamily Valuation
| Property Details | |
|---|---|
| Address | 163 Meadowpark Dr, Cambridge, OH, 43725, US |
| Region / Metro | Cambridge |
| Year of Construction | 1997 |
| Units | 39 |
| Transaction Date | --- |
| Transaction Price | --- |
| Buyer | --- |
| Seller | --- |
163 Meadowpark Dr Cambridge Multifamily Investment
1997 vintage positions this 39-unit asset competitively versus older local stock, with renter demand supported by neighborhood fundamentals, according to WDSuite’s CRE market data.
The property sits in a suburban Cambridge neighborhood rated A and ranked 3rd out of 24 metro neighborhoods—top quartile locally. Neighborhood occupancy trends are around the metro middle with slight improvement over five years, suggesting stable, if not tight, leasing conditions for well-positioned assets.
Renter-occupied housing accounts for a meaningful share of units (neighborhood renter concentration), indicating a defined tenant base for multifamily. Within a 3‑mile radius, population has held steady and is projected to grow through 2028 alongside a notable increase in households and smaller average household size—factors that typically expand the renter pool and support occupancy stability.
Amenity access skews practical: grocery and restaurant density ranks 3rd of 24 metro neighborhoods and sits above national medians, while parks, cafes, and childcare are thinner. For investors, this mix favors day‑to‑day convenience but limits lifestyle differentiation, putting more emphasis on on‑site features and unit quality.
Home values in the neighborhood are lower relative to many U.S. areas, yet the value‑to‑income ratio is elevated versus national peers. That combination points to a high‑cost ownership market for local incomes, which can reinforce reliance on rental housing. Neighborhood rent levels register as relatively accessible with moderate rent‑to‑income, a backdrop that can aid retention and reduce turnover risk when paired with disciplined lease management.
The average neighborhood construction year skews older (late 1960s). Against that context, a 1997 asset has relative competitive positioning, though investors should still plan for targeted modernization to keep interiors and building systems compelling against both aging local stock and newer deliveries in the broader region.
Safety signals are mixed. Within the Cambridge metro, the neighborhood’s overall crime rank sits in the less favorable half (rank 9 out of 24). Nationally, selected offense rates compare above the median for safety, indicating comparatively better outcomes than many U.S. neighborhoods. Trends can shift year to year, so underwriting should incorporate recent local data and property‑level security measures.
The area’s employment base includes regional logistics, supporting workforce renters who value reasonable commutes. Nearby distribution operations are a practical driver of steady, shift‑based housing demand.
- AutoZone Distribution Center — logistics/distribution (15.3 miles)
This 39‑unit, 1997‑built property benefits from a neighborhood that ranks top quartile in Cambridge and posts strong income performance metrics at the neighborhood level, with NOI per unit averaging among the best locally and in the upper tier nationally. Relative to the area’s older housing stock, the vintage provides competitive positioning, while neighborhood rents and renter concentration support a stable tenant base. According to CRE market data from WDSuite, local occupancy trends sit near the metro middle and have edged up, a backdrop favorable to well‑managed assets.
Looking forward, 3‑mile demographics point to population growth, more households, and smaller household sizes by 2028—factors that typically expand the renter pool. The ownership landscape shows elevated value‑to‑income ratios for the neighborhood, which can sustain rental demand and aid lease retention, though investors should manage affordability pressure and amenity‑light trade‑offs with targeted improvements and service quality.
- Competitive 1997 vintage versus older neighborhood stock with potential for targeted modernization
- Neighborhood income performance is strong (NOI per unit ranks among the best locally and upper tier nationally)
- 3‑mile outlook shows population and household growth with smaller household sizes, supporting renter demand
- Risks: amenity‑light mix (parks/cafes), mid‑pack local occupancy and mixed safety signals warrant conservative underwriting