Brookland?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Show me what houses have been sitting? Only ones I see are the ones way out in Woodridge that are either developer flips and overpriced, or developer flips bought in 2018ish that are also still overpriced.

On the market since 12/23

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/641-Franklin-St-NE-Washington-DC-20017/491886_zpid/

Been sitting since May

https://www.redfin.com/DC/Washington/3219-12th-St-NE-20017/unit-101/home/101837406

Been sitting since March

https://www.redfin.com/DC/Washington/524-Regent-Pl-NE-20017/home/45505562


There are others, but homes are definitely sitting even in my zip code of 20011 as well.

First one has seen two price cuts and then one price increase (for some reason). Now sits at 11 percent below original asking price. Don't know what the other red flags are but the fact that it still can't sell after all these months and all these price cuts is a big one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Show me what houses have been sitting? Only ones I see are the ones way out in Woodridge that are either developer flips and overpriced, or developer flips bought in 2018ish that are also still overpriced.

On the market since 12/23

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/641-Franklin-St-NE-Washington-DC-20017/491886_zpid/

Been sitting since May

https://www.redfin.com/DC/Washington/3219-12th-St-NE-20017/unit-101/home/101837406

Been sitting since March

https://www.redfin.com/DC/Washington/524-Regent-Pl-NE-20017/home/45505562


There are others, but homes are definitely sitting even in my zip code of 20011 as well.

First one has seen two price cuts and then one price increase (for some reason). Now sits at 11 percent below original asking price. Don't know what the other red flags are but the fact that it still can't sell after all these months and all these price cuts is a big one.

While close to Monroe street and all it has to offer, who wants to spend that kind of money near Edgewood? The crime over there occurs quite often and it’s pretty sketchy.

[Anonymous]

The number of people willing to pay a mint for lousy schools and crime has declined. I think a lot of Brooklanders (me included) took a healthy real estate market for granted. The people who sold in 2020 and bought in Arlington are brilliant and I wish I'd done the same.

[Anonymous]

I hope that the DC council understands that people are leaving DC. Forget about tax hikes, the council needs to focus on bringing down crime. Not just violent crime, but petty theft as well. So tired of going into stores where everything is locked up.

[Anonymous]

No one is leaving Cleveland park so

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope that the DC council understands that people are leaving DC. Forget about tax hikes, the council needs to focus on bringing down crime. Not just violent crime, but petty theft as well. So tired of going into stores where everything is locked up.

Ha a couple of houses selling for $950k instead of $1.1 million isn't "people leaving DC". It's higher interest rates hurting buying capacity of non-rich buyer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope that the DC council understands that people are leaving DC. Forget about tax hikes, the council needs to focus on bringing down crime. Not just violent crime, but petty theft as well. So tired of going into stores where everything is locked up.

Ha a couple of houses selling for $950k instead of $1.1 million isn't "people leaving DC". It's higher interest rates hurting buying capacity of non-rich buyer.

I realize comparing DC to states is dicey, but DC has the third-worst rate of net population gains among people earning at least $200k/year, ahead of only California and Illinois. People of means and their taxable income are not exactly seeking out DC right now, and a whole lot of them are leaving. Any population growth DC is seeing right now -- and it's basically a rounding error -- is because of births and international in-migration, which is a bad, bad sign for the city.

https://x.com/CatoEdwards/status/1818395452565250196

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in 20011 and homes have been sitting, even a few in Crestwood. Real estate agent said market in DC has softened. One reason is crime, but I suspect work from home is also a reason. I hope the situation improves.

Hybrid work is a major trend impacting this. When you combine only have to work in DC 2-3x/week + crime issues + schools + higher interest rates, it is prompting more people with $1 million+ to spend to choose to buy in close-in suburbs over DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope that the DC council understands that people are leaving DC. Forget about tax hikes, the council needs to focus on bringing down crime. Not just violent crime, but petty theft as well. So tired of going into stores where everything is locked up.

Walk around NoMa or Union Market sometime. Commerical and residential patterns might be changing, but people are decidedly not leaving the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope that the DC council understands that people are leaving DC. Forget about tax hikes, the council needs to focus on bringing down crime. Not just violent crime, but petty theft as well. So tired of going into stores where everything is locked up.

DC's population is actually growing (slowly) it's just not growing the demographic that buys million dollar houses in Brookland.

The real problem though isn't crime, despite the weird obsessions of this board, it's that houses in Brookland were only worth a million dollars with a 3% interest rate. A $900,000 mortgage at 3% is $3,794 a month, which is a totally reasonable price to pay to live in a SFH in a decent part of the city with a good commute despite not having amazing schools or walkability. A $900,000 mortgage at 7% is $5,988, which is absolutely not a reasonable price to pay for that same neighborhood.

If people listed their homes at $600-700K to get that sub-$4k mortgage payment houses in Brookland would sell like hotcakes, but nobody wants to lower their price and take a haircut.

Something's got to give though, because there are only so many buyers who can afford a million plus and they have no reason to pay that in Brookland when that same money could get them so much more elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope that the DC council understands that people are leaving DC. Forget about tax hikes, the council needs to focus on bringing down crime. Not just violent crime, but petty theft as well. So tired of going into stores where everything is locked up.

DC's population is actually growing (slowly) it's just not growing the demographic that buys million dollar houses in Brookland.

The real problem though isn't crime, despite the weird obsessions of this board, it's that houses in Brookland were only worth a million dollars with a 3% interest rate. A $900,000 mortgage at 3% is $3,794 a month, which is a totally reasonable price to pay to live in a SFH in a decent part of the city with a good commute despite not having amazing schools or walkability. A $900,000 mortgage at 7% is $5,988, which is absolutely not a reasonable price to pay for that same neighborhood.

If people listed their homes at $600-700K to get that sub-$4k mortgage payment houses in Brookland would sell like hotcakes, but nobody wants to lower their price and take a haircut.

Something's got to give though, because there are only so many buyers who can afford a million plus and they have no reason to pay that in Brookland when that same money could get them so much more elsewhere.

DC's population is growing (not just slowly, but extremely slowly) because of births and international in-migration, which is not sustainable. Domestic migration continues to be a net loss, particularly among higher-income residents that DC needs for its tax base.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope that the DC council understands that people are leaving DC. Forget about tax hikes, the council needs to focus on bringing down crime. Not just violent crime, but petty theft as well. So tired of going into stores where everything is locked up.

Walk around NoMa or Union Market sometime. Commerical and residential patterns might be changing, but people are decidedly not leaving the city.

Census statistics say otherwise. Vibes-based assertions just aren't going to fly anymore.

[Anonymous]

DC itself's growth is actually outpacing close in suburbs.

https://www.axios.com/local/washington-dc/2024/03/25/population-growth-beltway

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope that the DC council understands that people are leaving DC. Forget about tax hikes, the council needs to focus on bringing down crime. Not just violent crime, but petty theft as well. So tired of going into stores where everything is locked up.

DC's population is actually growing (slowly) it's just not growing the demographic that buys million dollar houses in Brookland.

The real problem though isn't crime, despite the weird obsessions of this board, it's that houses in Brookland were only worth a million dollars with a 3% interest rate. A $900,000 mortgage at 3% is $3,794 a month, which is a totally reasonable price to pay to live in a SFH in a decent part of the city with a good commute despite not having amazing schools or walkability. A $900,000 mortgage at 7% is $5,988, which is absolutely not a reasonable price to pay for that same neighborhood.

If people listed their homes at $600-700K to get that sub-$4k mortgage payment houses in Brookland would sell like hotcakes, but nobody wants to lower their price and take a haircut.

Something's got to give though, because there are only so many buyers who can afford a million plus and they have no reason to pay that in Brookland when that same money could get them so much more elsewhere.

DC's population is growing (not just slowly, but extremely slowly) because of births and international in-migration, which is not sustainable. Domestic migration continues to be a net loss, particularly among higher-income residents that DC needs for its tax base.

Hopefully that means the housing market will soften. If higher income residents are leaving and not being replaced, we'll see their properties sit on the market or reduce prices if they need to leave ASAP. I'd gladly trade reduced tax base for more affordable housing. We're not going back to the 90s because of a minor dip in tax revenue, and if we did it would be because of commercial entities leaving, not a handful of individual taxpayers.

[Anonymous]

The first house listed is on a busy street, and it's closer to the crimey parts. I live nearby, and wouldn't want to live on Franklin.

Both of the listings are technically Edgewood, btw, not Brookland