Millennials aren't going to buy your ugly mcmansions, silly Boomers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm 36. Married. One kid. Live on Capitol Hill. Fuck the burbs. The commute. Just everything. No.

And for every you there are many more in your demographic in the burbs. But I'm sure it's cool to think you're special, at least until your spouse or kid comes home with 1/3 of their brain on a sidewalk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm 36. Married. One kid. Live on Capitol Hill. Fuck the burbs. The commute. Just everything. No.

And for every you there are many more in your demographic in the burbs. But I'm sure it's cool to think you're special, at least until your spouse or kid comes home with 1/3 of their brain on a sidewalk.

Oh dear, the mask comes off. Its not about different choices for different folks, or the space needs of families with 2 or more kids. Its the city is evil and dangerous, and any one with a choice who lives there is irresponsible.

Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just turned 31 and have two babies. We bought a historic home with a decent commute in the close in burbs. McMansions are gross. Our next house will be another historic home.

That was me ten years ago. Actually were on our second historic home. And now we live in a large newer construction home with our 12 and 9 year old and would never go back. Only the young insist they will never change.

Luckily we can afford a larger home that's not a McMansion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just turned 31 and have two babies. We bought a historic home with a decent commute in the close in burbs. McMansions are gross. Our next house will be another historic home.

That was me ten years ago. Actually were on our second historic home. And now we live in a large newer construction home with our 12 and 9 year old and would never go back. Only the young insist they will never change.

Well, you're wrong actually. Lots of old and older people insist they will never change, have never changed, despite decades of evidence to the contrary, and "newer construction" does not necessarily mean "McMansion." I'm not opposed to buying a new home, but neither am I buying some crapshack built to spec by a builder who knows nothing about design and is proud of it. - the 36 year old Millennial

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gen Xer here with two middle school kids in McLean VA. My wife and I knocked down our tiny 1960s split level (worth $~750K) and built a new home (now worth ~$1.6 million). The neighborhood we live in has a mix of tear downs and older homes. It's a large home, but we still have a nice backyard and added many upgrades that weren't cheap although I think the haters would still call it a McMansion. However, I don't understand the desire for the alternative. Here's what I mean:

Our old home had a brick exterior, no house wrap, tiny windows, squeaky floors, no drain tile so the basement leaked, no basement vapor barrier so radon was leaking up, and no character. The original kitchen contained asbestos tiles (which was covered up). The energy efficiency of the house was terrible. Why is what I described better than a new home? Sure, we decided to use HardiPlank vs. brick on the outside but that’s a personal design preference but everything else in the new place is superior to the old one. I hear comments from people that our old home used plywood and solid wood beams but the new home uses Advantech OSB and beams. Well, science tells us that the products are structurally equivalent and OSB is stronger in shear values. The new home has a radon system, better drainage, large windows so we don’t need to use as much electricity, sensors that shut off lights to save energy, and is air tight. The floor doesn’t squeak and is less likely to in the long run, our fire alarm is integrated into home security system which makes it a much safer home (e.g., the air conditioner shuts off if a fire is detected). And yes, we now use our gourmet kitchen to cook most of our meals because it’s just much easier and fun (our old kitchen was tiny and it sucked to cook in)! Why is our ‘McMansion’ worse than our old home?

I'm the 37yo PP who lives in DC in a SFH. Sounds like a sound decision to me to knock down the old house. We wouldn't live that far out because our jobs are in DC, but if you don't have/don't mind a long commute, it sounds like the new build definitely allows better quality of life than the older house.

We have an older house (1930s), but thus far we haven't encountered too many problems in terms of maintenance, have had pretty great appreciation over the past few years, and bottom line, we just felt it was worth it to live in the city, with a short commute. YMMV.

Thanks for recognizing that every situation is different and many of us "McMansion' owners have good reasons to tear down the old...By the way, I work in DC as well and my morning commute is 20 minutes in (@7am) and 20 - 35 minutes coming home depending on traffic (leaving ~4:30). I don't think that's such a long commute. When I lived in NYC, my commute from the upper east side down to mid-town was about the same (but I was able to get some exercise by walking part of the way so it's not exactly equivalent)

37yo PP here again. A few random observations (slow work day, as our office is closing early for the holiday weekend).

I have millennial friends/coworkers who live in the suburbs (Bethesda, Rockville), and I also have friends who live in DC.

Re: my own neighborhood, where entry SFHs are going for $800K and up (and those that need significant work are going for $700K), almost every new listing is being snapped up by early-late 30-somethings moving from areas like Petworth with 1-2 infants/toddlers.

We ourselves were not firmly in either the suburb or city camp. We lived in the suburbs for a little while when we first moved to the area. One of us likes suburbs, the other likes city living. We looked in a range of close-in suburbs (Bethesda, Chevy Chase, Silver Spring, Takoma Park), but we happened to like the house and the DC neighborhood where we ended up buying, which is sort of smack in the middle of all of these. It also seemed to have the best value in terms of appreciation. We live close to Rock Creek Park, and our low-density neighborhood of SFHs is arguable pretty suburban despite being in DC.

What I find to be different re: our suburban friends:

1) They are more risk-averse re: schools. They understandably didn't want to play around with the school situation. They wanted a sure thing, and the DC school situation just seemed too daunting/too time-consuming to figure out, especially for those who already have demanding/time-consuming jobs. (Ironically, some of them have their kids in private anyway.)

2) They are more risk averse re: safety. Staying in the city, with all the dangers of violent crime, etc., is just something they didn't want to deal with.

3) They just prefer suburbs, with more green space, etc.

Re: our city friends:

1) Some of them just REALLY wanted to live in the city, whether natives or transplants, and were willing to take more risks re: schools to make it work. Check the DC public school boards for a sampling of the angst, indecision, and hand-wringing re: the school situation, especially with the PARCC test results now released (and I say this with no judgment as someone with a child in our local DCPS). OTOH, some of the folks I know who live in DC and have kids in public schools are relatively laid-back about the school situation, and feel their kids will do fine.

2) Some really don't want long commutes, which just seem to be getting longer over the years as traffic in the area increases. Even if it means buying a smaller SFH, rowhome, or a condo, they were willing to sacrifice for the short commutes.

3) Some had decent enough HHIs to either buy in the best DC school districts and/or can afford privates.

4) Some wanted more diversity, or a certain type of diversity. Many of our neighbors would cite ethnic/racial diversity and/or proximity to places of worship as reasons for moving here (large AA and Jewish populations).

Tl; dr: Different strokes for different folks.

P.S. Twenty minutes is an awesome commute, PP. My commute is actually much longer (but I incorporate walking into my commute for exercise).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the same reason big apartments over on New Mexico and Mass Aves west of Wisconsin aren't selling either. There's nothing interesting over there.

That's not why, it's because they have insane condo or coop fees. It's like a $1,000-plus.

[Anonymous]

Our reason for living in suburbs: it is where our jobs are.

[Anonymous]

I don't see a ton of empirical evidence that well-heeled DC parents are prepared to put in the sweat equity to make their public school options attractive. They go private, move, or hold their noses and do Deal/Wilson if that's an option. But seeing how schools like Hardy and Roosevelt in prime locations remain perpetually under-enrolled and under-performing tells you that many of those parents spend more time trying to convince others that suburban life sucks than they do trying to make urban life attractive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't see a ton of empirical evidence that well-heeled DC parents are prepared to put in the sweat equity to make their public school options attractive. They go private, move, or hold their noses and do Deal/Wilson if that's an option. But seeing how schools like Hardy and Roosevelt in prime locations remain perpetually under-enrolled and under-performing tells you that many of those parents spend more time trying to convince others that suburban life sucks than they do trying to make urban life attractive.

Apparently Hardy's in-boundary enrollment has gone up (and no, we are not zoned for Hardy, but Deal) just in the past year or so. Buzz in the DC public schools thread suggests that this school year, there's even a higher % of IB kids enrolled. Test scores are also increasing, apparently:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/450/460867.page#9457261

[Anonymous]

I think you will still see large homes and I expect that we will see more. We recently custom built a "multi generational home". I would stop short and call it a McMansion, however. We used first rate materials, experienced labor, reputable architect, and a first rate builder. There is no siding outside and architectural elements, both on the exterior and interior are tasteful - at least that's what our guests tell us. Many factors dictated this investment. People are living longer and we wanted to take good care of our folks, children just don't move away after college any longer (due to high cost of living around here) so wanted space for them to hang around longer if need be, and we also wanted to not move out ourselves as we aged so included two main level bedrooms PLUS an elevator. The DC area is also becoming more and more ethnically diverse whereas multiple generations co-exist under the same roof. The contractor who built our home is super busy building this type of a product. So...yes it is a large home, but has a purpose other than to show off material wealth, and was designed well to fit the large 5 acre lot and consistent with the neighborhood theme.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see a ton of empirical evidence that well-heeled DC parents are prepared to put in the sweat equity to make their public school options attractive. They go private, move, or hold their noses and do Deal/Wilson if that's an option. But seeing how schools like Hardy and Roosevelt in prime locations remain perpetually under-enrolled and under-performing tells you that many of those parents spend more time trying to convince others that suburban life sucks than they do trying to make urban life attractive.

Apparently Hardy's in-boundary enrollment has gone up (and no, we are not zoned for Hardy, but Deal) just in the past year or so. Buzz in the DC public schools thread suggests that this school year, there's even a higher % of IB kids enrolled. Test scores are also increasing, apparently:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/450/460867.page#9457261

Comparing Hardy and Roosevelt is like comparing apples to oranges. There is literally nothing similar about them except that they are both schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just turned 31 and have two babies. We bought a historic home with a decent commute in the close in burbs. McMansions are gross. Our next house will be another historic home.

That was me ten years ago. Actually were on our second historic home. And now we live in a large newer construction home with our 12 and 9 year old and would never go back. Only the young insist they will never change.

Luckily we can afford a larger home that's not a McMansion.

Depends on how you define mcmansion sweetie. Some define it only be size and age. Stay charming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't see a ton of empirical evidence that well-heeled DC parents are prepared to put in the sweat equity to make their public school options attractive. They go private, move, or hold their noses and do Deal/Wilson if that's an option. But seeing how schools like Hardy and Roosevelt in prime locations remain perpetually under-enrolled and under-performing tells you that many of those parents spend more time trying to convince others that suburban life sucks than they do trying to make urban life attractive.

There are other ways to improve urban life (some much easier) than improving schools. There are a lot of people working to improve the elementary schools. And as said elsewhere, Hardy is definitely changing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm 36. Married. One kid. Live on Capitol Hill. Fuck the burbs. The commute. Just everything. No.

And for every you there are many more in your demographic in the burbs. But I'm sure it's cool to think you're special, at least until your spouse or kid comes home with 1/3 of their brain on a sidewalk.

Oh dear, the mask comes off. Its not about different choices for different folks, or the space needs of families with 2 or more kids. Its the city is evil and dangerous, and any one with a choice who lives there is irresponsible.

Wow.

It's a little late to put on the white gloves after jumping on a thread about "ugly McMansions" and following a post that said "Fuck the burbs." Screw the constant break-ins and frustrating charter lotteries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see a ton of empirical evidence that well-heeled DC parents are prepared to put in the sweat equity to make their public school options attractive. They go private, move, or hold their noses and do Deal/Wilson if that's an option. But seeing how schools like Hardy and Roosevelt in prime locations remain perpetually under-enrolled and under-performing tells you that many of those parents spend more time trying to convince others that suburban life sucks than they do trying to make urban life attractive.

There are other ways to improve urban life (some much easier) than improving schools. There are a lot of people working to improve the elementary schools. And as said elsewhere, Hardy is definitely changing.

Hardy is like Brazil - it's the middle school of the future and always will be.