DC Chosen Best Place to Raise a Family

[jsteele]

I expected someone else to post this, but since nobody did, here it is:

http://www.parenting.com/gallery/2011-best-cities-to-live?pnid=381614

Parenting Magazine selected DC as the best city in which to raise a family:

"The history, the government, the breathtaking architecture and inspiring monuments—you don't have to be a child to get an amazing education in this city. Our nation's capital is also known for its plenitude of museums—in fact, there are 44, second only to the Big Apple! If your kid enjoys visiting the National Air and Space Museum, imagine fostering his love of airplanes with trips to nearby Gravelly Point Park for front-seat views of the takeoffs and landings at Reagan National Airport. The Capital Crescent Trail, a hard-surface trail from Georgetown to Bethesda, MD, developed on an abandoned rail bed, is a great bike trip that is off the beaten track."

[Anonymous]

Of course, this is a wonderful place to raise children.
But I had to laugh at the prospect that D.C. meets the critera mentioned: reasonable commutes (low traffic) and afordable homes. D.C. has neither.

[Anonymous]

Actually, Parenting Magazine is talking about in the city. Commutes are actually fantastic if you live in Capitol Hill and commute to, say, DOJ. I walk my kid the half block to school every morning, and my neighbors do the same, then ride their bike the 20 min to work. The commute is not just "reasonable", but enjoyable. As far as "affordable homes", it depends on where you draw the baseline. Obviously a house is going to be cheaper out in the exurban wastelands of the greater Manassass/Dumfries metropolitan area--but then of course you're living in Manassass/Dumfries.

I know plenty of folks who've moved to DC from NYC specifically because it's more family friendly and comparatively dirt-cheap.

[Anonymous]

Just to reiterate, in this case Parenting Magazine is not following the DCUM convention of calling everything from Leesburg, VA to Salisbury, MD "DC". DC is DC.

I was pretty shocked as well, jsteele. Usually these things tend to pander so severely to the prejudices of their exurban subscribers that it's laughable. The fact that this made it to the presses is more an indicator of the rise of "the Millennials" and the waning market-share of Boomers as parents.

Boomers love them some sprawl; millennials tend to despise it on a molecular level.

[Anonymous]

If it's simply talking about DC, then I'd like to know where the affordable neighborhoods with the great schools are.

Also, can we please not start another suburbs vs. city debate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it's simply talking about DC, then I'd like to know where the affordable neighborhoods with the great schools are.

Also, can we please not start another suburbs vs. city debate?

EXACTLY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it's simply talking about DC, then I'd like to know where the affordable neighborhoods with the great schools are.

They don't exist. DC (proper) is great place to raise a family, if you are high-income. Otherwise, not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it's simply talking about DC, then I'd like to know where the affordable neighborhoods with the great schools are.

Also, can we please not start another suburbs vs. city debate?

Sure. First, head on up to Brooklyn. Look around. Get a nice feel for the prices. Now show me a $700k 3BR/2.5BA townhouse that's walking distance to one of NYC's major job centers--as you can walk to the HOB/SOBs from Capitol Hill--and we'll talk about how DC is expensive. It's even less expensive if you want to live someplace like Columbia Heights or Brookland.

DC is only expensive to those who move here from some place like Houston or Lincoln, Nebraska.

[Anonymous]

I like living in the District with kids. Yes, it is a different pace of life than if we lived in the exurbs. Not sure why these discussions always boil down to a city v. Exurbs battle. People like different things. DC offers a lot, if you can afford it.

[Anonymous]

You do realize that $700K is a HECK of a lot of money, right? A huge portion of the population of THIS area cannot afford that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's simply talking about DC, then I'd like to know where the affordable neighborhoods with the great schools are.

Also, can we please not start another suburbs vs. city debate?

Sure. First, head on up to Brooklyn. Look around. Get a nice feel for the prices. Now show me a $700k 3BR/2.5BA townhouse that's walking distance to one of NYC's major job centers--as you can walk to the HOB/SOBs from Capitol Hill--and we'll talk about how DC is expensive. It's even less expensive if you want to live someplace like Columbia Heights or Brookland.

DC is only expensive to those who move here from some place like Houston or Lincoln, Nebraska.

And it's only inexpensive if you compare it to New York or San Francisco. I don't know how many U.S. cities there are, but I'm pretty sure there are more than 6.

And you didn't even address the issue of schools. Capitol Hill has great schools? I haven't heard that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You do realize that $700K is a HECK of a lot of money, right? A huge portion of the population of THIS area cannot afford that.

Well of course not. But a close-in 3 BR row house is a luxury item. We live in a 2BR/1BA 1000 sq ft rowhouse. It's small enough that "a huge portion of the population of THIS area" would scoff at the idea of living here. People make choices based on their priorities.

Anyway, the reason it's expensive is that a big portion of the population of this area can afford it. Otherwise it would be cheaper. You're competing now just with folks in this area, but all up and down the east coast. As I said, I know many couples who've moved out of NYC area to live in DC and are just happy they could afford a walkable, urban neighborhood that's *cheap*. At least relatively speaking. They move into a 700 sq foot rowhouse and can't believe how spacious it is.

Anyway, if Conde Nast put out an issue where they ranked Costa Rica as the number one vacation destination, would you reject that because a huge portion of the population of this area cannot afford to go? Of course not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's simply talking about DC, then I'd like to know where the affordable neighborhoods with the great schools are.

Also, can we please not start another suburbs vs. city debate?

Sure. First, head on up to Brooklyn. Look around. Get a nice feel for the prices. Now show me a $700k 3BR/2.5BA townhouse that's walking distance to one of NYC's major job centers--as you can walk to the HOB/SOBs from Capitol Hill--and we'll talk about how DC is expensive. It's even less expensive if you want to live someplace like Columbia Heights or Brookland.

DC is only expensive to those who move here from some place like Houston or Lincoln, Nebraska.

And it's only inexpensive if you compare it to New York or San Francisco. I don't know how many U.S. cities there are, but I'm pretty sure there are more than 6.

And you didn't even address the issue of schools. Capitol Hill has great schools? I haven't heard that.

More suburban "common sense". Our DD goes to a neighborhood DCPS Cap Hill elementary school, and I'd say an overwhelming number of the parents are delighted with it. Well, at least as many parents as would be happy with any school, suburban or city.

That DC schools are uniformly bad seems to be an article of faith to those who left for the 'burbs. Some are; some aren't. There's definitely a sunk-cost effect going on as parents sit in traffic for 2 or 3 hours a day--after all, we're doing it for the kids!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do realize that $700K is a HECK of a lot of money, right? A huge portion of the population of THIS area cannot afford that.

Well of course not. But a close-in 3 BR row house is a luxury item. We live in a 2BR/1BA 1000 sq ft rowhouse. It's small enough that "a huge portion of the population of THIS area" would scoff at the idea of living here. People make choices based on their priorities.

Anyway, the reason it's expensive is that a big portion of the population of this area can afford it. Otherwise it would be cheaper. You're competing now just with folks in this area, but all up and down the east coast. As I said, I know many couples who've moved out of NYC area to live in DC and are just happy they could afford a walkable, urban neighborhood that's *cheap*. At least relatively speaking. They move into a 700 sq foot rowhouse and can't believe how spacious it is.

Anyway, if Conde Nast put out an issue where they ranked Costa Rica as the number one vacation destination, would you reject that because a huge portion of the population of this area cannot afford to go? Of course not.

If I happened across a list that said that Costa Rica was the #1 vacation destination because it has fabulous skiing and you will receive a million dollars the moment you arrive, yes, I would reject that list, because neither of those things is true.

[Anonymous]

If you read the article it also notes that they relied heavily on culture and charm for kids (museums, kid friendly restaurants, outdoor music festivals, other stuf like that). So it makes sense that D.C. would be high ranked and Arlington fell to number 70! I actually find that there are a lot more affordable places to live in D.C. than in Arlington housing wise if you are willing to step out of NW. I used to live at the waterfront and felt perfectly safe there. There are some awesome large townhomes that are under 600K, plus you are close to the metro. Schools are another story in that neighborhood but I would send my kids to many of the charter schools in D.C.