So tired of the crappy housing stock in the DMV combined with skyrocketing prices

[Anonymous]

I'm the PP CA poster.

I hear ya about the look of the homes, though. I hate colonials. The victorians here are nice, but they are usually money pits.

I miss the spanish style bungalows in CA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are comparing apples to oranges.

The examples you provided in CA or not in the city. They are suburbs of LA. DC is a city. Like for like would be like SF city to DC city. Like for like, DC is still cheaper than SF city.

You can get nice sfh in the DC suburbs for under $1mil.

I lived in SoCal for 25 years, then SF Bay area for another 15. DC area home prices are expensive, but not like CA expensive.

No, you cannot.

[Anonymous]

House prices in the DC area are not comparable to LA. Homes are dramatically more affordable here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are comparing apples to oranges.

The examples you provided in CA or not in the city. They are suburbs of LA. DC is a city. Like for like would be like SF city to DC city. Like for like, DC is still cheaper than SF city.

You can get nice sfh in the DC suburbs for under $1mil.

I lived in SoCal for 25 years, then SF Bay area for another 15. DC area home prices are expensive, but not like CA expensive.

No, you cannot.

PG County counts as DC suburbs. You can definitely find one there. Also in the less popular parts of Montgomery county are less than 1 mil.

[Anonymous]

Yeah any place in eastern Montgomery county or PG county it is easy to find a good place for under a million. Also North Bethesda, Rockville, or further out on the west

[Anonymous]

As a previous Bethesda and Chevy Chase resident (born and raised), now living in LA suburbs, you cannot compare Monrovia to any neighborhood within an hour's drive to DC. Monrovia is in the foothills of the San Gabriels, close to Pasadena. It's over an hour drive to Santa Monica, and close to an hour to get to DTLA. It's fine, but it's just a suburb.

Also home affordability in the DMV is still better than LA, Orange County, San Diego, and of course SF area. There's just no comparison. You still get more house for your money in the DMV than you do here. Of course there are anomalies and outliers, but by and large homes in the DC area are way more affordable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a previous Bethesda and Chevy Chase resident (born and raised), now living in LA suburbs, you cannot compare Monrovia to any neighborhood within an hour's drive to DC. Monrovia is in the foothills of the San Gabriels, close to Pasadena. It's over an hour drive to Santa Monica, and close to an hour to get to DTLA. It's fine, but it's just a suburb.

Also home affordability in the DMV is still better than LA, Orange County, San Diego, and of course SF area. There's just no comparison. You still get more house for your money in the DMV than you do here. Of course there are anomalies and outliers, but by and large homes in the DC area are way more affordable.

+1. We moved from SF. People in the Bay Area would be absolutely thrilled to have the number of $2m options we have here.

[Anonymous]

There is also plenty of ugly housing in the LA area. I do agree that outdoor spaces tend to be nicer there, but, it is SoCal. You can be outside year round. I really think DC area and LA area are apples to oranges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is also plenty of ugly housing in the LA area. I do agree that outdoor spaces tend to be nicer there, but, it is SoCal. You can be outside year round. I really think DC area and LA area are apples to oranges.

more like apples to bananas - they're both fruit but that's where it ends. You can't beat SoCal weather, and beauty of the landscape and terrain. Also people in Southern CA are just happier and much nicer than in the DMV.

[Anonymous]

I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you OP, but I think housing stock in the US for the most part is depressing. DH and I have toyed with the idea of moving elsewhere, but look at the junky new construction in places like FL and NC with the garage as the focal point. I couldn’t stand to live in some ugly gigantic snout house. And sure there are cute older neighborhoods in some more northern states, but then you’re dealing with really cold winters. So no thanks to that. Texas and Arizona housing is just depressing. I looked at real estate around Denver and thought a lot of it looked junky. Maybe there are nice homes in the Midwest?

I’m really not sure where there’s a critical mass of nice, well constructed, attractive homes with good schools for <$1.2m. Americans have prioritized square footage over quality for the most part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you OP, but I think housing stock in the US for the most part is depressing. DH and I have toyed with the idea of moving elsewhere, but look at the junky new construction in places like FL and NC with the garage as the focal point. I couldn’t stand to live in some ugly gigantic snout house. And sure there are cute older neighborhoods in some more northern states, but then you’re dealing with really cold winters. So no thanks to that. Texas and Arizona housing is just depressing. I looked at real estate around Denver and thought a lot of it looked junky. Maybe there are nice homes in the Midwest?

I’m really not sure where there’s a critical mass of nice, well constructed, attractive homes with good schools for <$1.2m. Americans have prioritized square footage over quality for the most part.

Most non-custom new construction is unappealing for sure, but nice homes are available in great locations for that budget all over the US. You just have to know where to look and it’s very localized (I.e. well established neighborhoods in second or third tier cities rather than suburbs or exurbs). The same can’t be said of DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That’s what you get when homes for poor people in the 1960s become homes for rich people in the 2020s. They were ugly as hell then, built for simple people (plumbers, nurses, teachers) over 50 years ago. They have not aged well, yet now house dual income professionals. Really makes you wonder whether you’ve come out ahead, doesn’t it?

This right here.

[Anonymous]

OP here. I take the point about Monrovia being a suburb. I wasn't trying to compared Capitol Hill to Monrovia -- I actually live on the Hill. But we'd move to a suburb happily. It's just that the housing stock there sucks too.

Someone said it would be more apt to compare Monrovia to Laurel, maybe even Columbia. Totally fair! No go find me a house in Laurel or even Columbia that has the charm of the one I linked to. You can't. You can find plenty of cheaper homes that are ugly, and you can find plenty for the same price that are ugly, and you can even find homes for more $$ that are somehow EVEN UGLIER.

My point is that in many parts of the country, you will find lots of ugly housing stock, but there's a discount because it's ugly or cheaply built. I just don't see the discount around here. I see many, many flipped houses or recent developer builds that are objectively unattractive -- weird proportions, no attention to scale, bad layouts, etc. -- and they still cost a premium. Even the ugly 90s McMansions with the weird foyers and ill-conceived kitchens, and cheap construction that you can already see needs major overhauls. Ugly, ugly, ugly.

And if you don't like the California comparison because it's too apples to oranges, then fine: look at houses off the Main Line outside Philly. You can find incredibly charming homes, some renovated and costing more, some unrenovated and with a discount to match, all along those commuter lines. You pay a premium for the better schools and proximity to Philadelphia, of course. But you can find attractive houses with good construction all over that area. Similar things in the New Jersey suburbs, outside Boston, in the Connecticut suburbs north of NYC. And you can find it in and around Chicago too, with more modern housing styles.

The DMV has uniquely ugly housing. Even row houses, which can be pretty on the outside, are often really ugly inside due to decades of weird, cheap updates where they've destroyed the original character of the home while adding nothing of value. When you find a row house in DC that isn't like this, it inevitably costs $2m+ even if it's small.

I stand by my assessment. I agree with the PP that the problem is that a lot of the houses in the 800k-150k range in this area were built cheaply for working class families and are now being sold to lawyers and doctors for 10x what they sold for in the 70s or 80s. Other cities built much more attractive or better quality housing for middle and working class people, so gentrification reveals lots of gems. This area did not.

[Anonymous]

We really do have the tackiest, most tasteless new builds I’ve seen (nova) So many look like they were designed by hobbyists with zero understanding of architecture or design. And I’ll be damned if I’m paying some stupid price like $2-3 million to own that garbage. So many look like dentist offices.

[Anonymous]

You don't even have to go all the way to California. The housing stock and neighborhoods are much nicer in the traditional NE suburbs of Philly and NY, with good/better schools and equivalent prices.