Anonymous wrote:Wow, most of DCUM is bad, but this thread really sets a new low for self-indulgent self-pitying.
DC was a relatively small city/metro area until the Depression (ie, wasn't one of the 15 largest cities in the country until the New Deal and WWII mobilization). So much of the housing here was built either during the Depression and WWII (when resources were scarce and the clientele was middle class govt workers) or after the war. And the fact is MOST postwar suburban housing in the US (please don't tell me about Brad Pitt's mansion in Malibu...) is pretty drab. Honestly, people here are are pining for NY but some of the dated 1960s housing stock in the lesser parts of Westchester and Long Island and NJ looks locations for a bad Mad Men spinoff (although i will admit the NJ housing in the Sopranos was incredibly classy). Do people move to the San Fernando Valley or Lakewood for the charming architecture? I'm not sure why the OP so dislikes split levels - they're actually efficiently designed, and mid-century design has been in vogue for about a decade -- but they're pretty commonplace across the nation.
Yes, you can look at prewar suburbs in one-percenter suburbs like Bronxville or Oyster Bay or the Upper Merion and say "why don't houses in Chantilly have the same charm - that's so unfair to me!" but it's a completely inapt comparison. If you look at DC's prewar luxury homes in Forest Hills or Foxhall or Chevy Chase Village, you'll see comparable houses.
Whining that one's dollar can buy so much more in Baltimore or Shady Side or Shaker Heights or Grosse Pointe than in DC is just silly. Obviously prices are depressed there because of economic or other challenges (yeah, I want the housing costs of metro Cleveland but the professional and cultural offerings of greater DC too -- pls make it happen). Furthermore, comparing the sales prices alone isn't useful because those lower-priced old suburbs generally have much higher property tax rates to provide the services that their residents expect (notwithstanding lower home values).
Ironically, many people who come to DC find that the original prewar housing stock -- the 19th century townhouses of the original city, the 20th century row houses in the outlying parts of the city -- to be not just charming but distinctive. I thought it was a triusm that all taste is subjective, but apparently not on DCUM.
Real estate everywhere involves trade offs, including location, size, age and that ineffable category of charm/appeal. OP thinks they (or all DMV residents) are uniquely vexed in facing that tradeoff -- they're not.
+1 I can’t imagine people moving away from the DMV and telling their friends it was because they couldn’t find an attractive looking house and that the whole region is hideous.
Unless you have a $3 million plus budget, it really is hard to find curb appeal and character here. Lots in DC proper, Chevy Chase, Bethesda, and a few homes on the VA side in that range but if you’re looking outside DC for under that, it’s slim pickings. Lots of drab, cheap builds in the style of the moment from every decade.
This sounds like a very extreme point of view
I challenge you to find good design, curb appeal, and character for under $3 million in the suburbs. There are just a few.
Here are some random selections that sold in the last 6 months:
I could go on. I literally just clicked on ones for a couple of minutes. If you have 3mm, you can get a beautiful house around here in the suburbs, with plenty of land, and easy access to a city with great jobs and great cultural amenities. If you think the the Main Line, or Shaker Heights, is superior, you are a philistine. Sorry.
The only two of those houses I like are the Holly Ave in Takoma Park and the Wise Out Way in Great Falls. But in any case, we're really moving the goal posts if now the ceiling is $3m and not $1.2m. And you can find lots of housing on the Main Line or in Shaker Heights that is much more attractive than any of the houses you just posted, but for under $1.2m instead of under $3m. Which is the whole point -- DC does have some attractive housing, but because of price increases, most UMC people are priced out of it, and are left with the cheap, post-war garbage or the teeniest of row houses. Even if you are willing to commute a bit. Other cities might have that ugly post-war housing or tiny pre-war urban housing, but it's much less expensive than in DC.
This house needs a number of updates but is loaded with charm, IB for great schools, and is a 5 minute walk to a train that will get you right into the heart of Philly in about 25 minutes, and sold for less than $500k last year (leaving tons of room for updates): https://www.redfin.com/PA/Wynnewood/1519-Crest-Rd-19096/home/38501274
Housing in DC is very expensive for what you get. It is what it is, but you absolutely can buy objectively better housing for less, sometimes much less, in other cities all over the country. Housing in DC really is uniquely bad, I'm sorry. There are other reasons to live here, but if your dream is to own a charming house in a great neighborhood, and your make less than like 500-600k/yr, you will be disappointed in DC in a way that you absolutely would not be in other cities.
It is not moving the goal posts. It was a direct response to the poster above, who used the 3mm dollar figure.
And I would rather live 30 minutes from DC than from Philly or Cleveland. DC is a far better city, culturally, historically, in terms of jobs. I used to live in Philly, in a really nice part of town that felt quite suburban, and I'd never move back, and certainly not to Wynnewood. Not to mention, the really nice parts of the Main Line, comparable to Chevy Chase or McLean, are really quite expensive, too.
And if Philly or Cleveland were as desirable as DC, those houses would be much more expensive, so I'm not just speaking for myself.
Having said all that - yes, the DC burbs are pretty ugly for the most part.
My point is that the entire thread is moving the goal posts if this is where the conversation has gone. The whole premise of the thread is “it’s very hard to find attractive housing in this area for under 1.2m.” If we’re now posting cute houses for 2.7m, we’ve basically proven the premise of the thread.
And as I said, there are plenty of reasons to live in DC other than housing stock. But many of us had dreams for our lives that involved owning a home we really like the look of, that felt good to be in. And worked hard in life to earn enough to buy something like that. Shopping for real estate in DC for me is sad because I feel like I have to let that dream go in order to satisfy more practical concerns like commute and schools. Not a tragedy, but I definitely envy friends and family in other cities who own pretty homes that they easily bought for like 500-700k. And now can afford to do things like renovate kitchens, or just save more or take nice vacations because where they live has a more favorable average salary to cost of housing ratio. In DC, we have found we pretty much always buy at the tip top of our budget just to get something satisfactory. Housing in this area is tough and it’s weird to argue it’s not, relative to other cities.
Because it isn't tough relative to any peer city. It just isn't.
Anonymous wrote:$600-$800,000 still gets you a squatter and no inspection. Dystopian.
I spent within that range just outside the beltway, less than a mile to a metro stop (Forest Glen), within past year and a half and I think my house and community are lovely. People need to realize there is more to the DMV than upper NW and Bethesda.
Anonymous wrote:Wow, most of DCUM is bad, but this thread really sets a new low for self-indulgent self-pitying.
DC was a relatively small city/metro area until the Depression (ie, wasn't one of the 15 largest cities in the country until the New Deal and WWII mobilization). So much of the housing here was built either during the Depression and WWII (when resources were scarce and the clientele was middle class govt workers) or after the war. And the fact is MOST postwar suburban housing in the US (please don't tell me about Brad Pitt's mansion in Malibu...) is pretty drab. Honestly, people here are are pining for NY but some of the dated 1960s housing stock in the lesser parts of Westchester and Long Island and NJ looks locations for a bad Mad Men spinoff (although i will admit the NJ housing in the Sopranos was incredibly classy). Do people move to the San Fernando Valley or Lakewood for the charming architecture? I'm not sure why the OP so dislikes split levels - they're actually efficiently designed, and mid-century design has been in vogue for about a decade -- but they're pretty commonplace across the nation.
Yes, you can look at prewar suburbs in one-percenter suburbs like Bronxville or Oyster Bay or the Upper Merion and say "why don't houses in Chantilly have the same charm - that's so unfair to me!" but it's a completely inapt comparison. If you look at DC's prewar luxury homes in Forest Hills or Foxhall or Chevy Chase Village, you'll see comparable houses.
Whining that one's dollar can buy so much more in Baltimore or Shady Side or Shaker Heights or Grosse Pointe than in DC is just silly. Obviously prices are depressed there because of economic or other challenges (yeah, I want the housing costs of metro Cleveland but the professional and cultural offerings of greater DC too -- pls make it happen). Furthermore, comparing the sales prices alone isn't useful because those lower-priced old suburbs generally have much higher property tax rates to provide the services that their residents expect (notwithstanding lower home values).
Ironically, many people who come to DC find that the original prewar housing stock -- the 19th century townhouses of the original city, the 20th century row houses in the outlying parts of the city -- to be not just charming but distinctive. I thought it was a triusm that all taste is subjective, but apparently not on DCUM.
Real estate everywhere involves trade offs, including location, size, age and that ineffable category of charm/appeal. OP thinks they (or all DMV residents) are uniquely vexed in facing that tradeoff -- they're not.
+1 I can’t imagine people moving away from the DMV and telling their friends it was because they couldn’t find an attractive looking house and that the whole region is hideous.
Unless you have a $3 million plus budget, it really is hard to find curb appeal and character here. Lots in DC proper, Chevy Chase, Bethesda, and a few homes on the VA side in that range but if you’re looking outside DC for under that, it’s slim pickings. Lots of drab, cheap builds in the style of the moment from every decade.
This sounds like a very extreme point of view
I challenge you to find good design, curb appeal, and character for under $3 million in the suburbs. There are just a few.
Here are some random selections that sold in the last 6 months:
I could go on. I literally just clicked on ones for a couple of minutes. If you have 3mm, you can get a beautiful house around here in the suburbs, with plenty of land, and easy access to a city with great jobs and great cultural amenities. If you think the the Main Line, or Shaker Heights, is superior, you are a philistine. Sorry.
The only two of those houses I like are the Holly Ave in Takoma Park and the Wise Out Way in Great Falls. But in any case, we're really moving the goal posts if now the ceiling is $3m and not $1.2m. And you can find lots of housing on the Main Line or in Shaker Heights that is much more attractive than any of the houses you just posted, but for under $1.2m instead of under $3m. Which is the whole point -- DC does have some attractive housing, but because of price increases, most UMC people are priced out of it, and are left with the cheap, post-war garbage or the teeniest of row houses. Even if you are willing to commute a bit. Other cities might have that ugly post-war housing or tiny pre-war urban housing, but it's much less expensive than in DC.
This house needs a number of updates but is loaded with charm, IB for great schools, and is a 5 minute walk to a train that will get you right into the heart of Philly in about 25 minutes, and sold for less than $500k last year (leaving tons of room for updates): https://www.redfin.com/PA/Wynnewood/1519-Crest-Rd-19096/home/38501274
Housing in DC is very expensive for what you get. It is what it is, but you absolutely can buy objectively better housing for less, sometimes much less, in other cities all over the country. Housing in DC really is uniquely bad, I'm sorry. There are other reasons to live here, but if your dream is to own a charming house in a great neighborhood, and your make less than like 500-600k/yr, you will be disappointed in DC in a way that you absolutely would not be in other cities.
It is not moving the goal posts. It was a direct response to the poster above, who used the 3mm dollar figure.
And I would rather live 30 minutes from DC than from Philly or Cleveland. DC is a far better city, culturally, historically, in terms of jobs. I used to live in Philly, in a really nice part of town that felt quite suburban, and I'd never move back, and certainly not to Wynnewood. Not to mention, the really nice parts of the Main Line, comparable to Chevy Chase or McLean, are really quite expensive, too.
And if Philly or Cleveland were as desirable as DC, those houses would be much more expensive, so I'm not just speaking for myself.
Having said all that - yes, the DC burbs are pretty ugly for the most part.
My point is that the entire thread is moving the goal posts if this is where the conversation has gone. The whole premise of the thread is “it’s very hard to find attractive housing in this area for under 1.2m.” If we’re now posting cute houses for 2.7m, we’ve basically proven the premise of the thread.
And as I said, there are plenty of reasons to live in DC other than housing stock. But many of us had dreams for our lives that involved owning a home we really like the look of, that felt good to be in. And worked hard in life to earn enough to buy something like that. Shopping for real estate in DC for me is sad because I feel like I have to let that dream go in order to satisfy more practical concerns like commute and schools. Not a tragedy, but I definitely envy friends and family in other cities who own pretty homes that they easily bought for like 500-700k. And now can afford to do things like renovate kitchens, or just save more or take nice vacations because where they live has a more favorable average salary to cost of housing ratio. In DC, we have found we pretty much always buy at the tip top of our budget just to get something satisfactory. Housing in this area is tough and it’s weird to argue it’s not, relative to other cities.
Because it isn't tough relative to any peer city. It just isn't.
But that's not the total picture. I gather PP's point is that she COULD find a house within her budget, but it will be ugly or inconvenient.
I wonder whether there is any city of significance where that is not the case. The Boston suburbs that are anywhere near the city are expensive, or ugly, and sometimes both. The Philly Main Line has gotten very expensive in the past few years. The NYC suburbs are either very difficult commutes, very expensive, very ugly, or sometimes all three.
But yeah, the DC burbs are pretty ugly. Takoma Park is nice and still on the edge of affordability. Parts of Alexandria (although those parts are far from the city), a few pockets of Silver Spring.
Anonymous wrote:$600-$800,000 still gets you a squatter and no inspection. Dystopian.
I spent within that range just outside the beltway, less than a mile to a metro stop (Forest Glen), within past year and a half and I think my house and community are lovely. People need to realize there is more to the DMV than upper NW and Bethesda.
I love the vibe of Forest Glen, but it falls into the aesthetics issue that OP is complaining about.
Anonymous wrote:$600-$800,000 still gets you a squatter and no inspection. Dystopian.
I spent within that range just outside the beltway, less than a mile to a metro stop (Forest Glen), within past year and a half and I think my house and community are lovely. People need to realize there is more to the DMV than upper NW and Bethesda.
Those were in South Arlington and Annandale. Glad you found something though.
Anonymous wrote:Wow, most of DCUM is bad, but this thread really sets a new low for self-indulgent self-pitying.
DC was a relatively small city/metro area until the Depression (ie, wasn't one of the 15 largest cities in the country until the New Deal and WWII mobilization). So much of the housing here was built either during the Depression and WWII (when resources were scarce and the clientele was middle class govt workers) or after the war. And the fact is MOST postwar suburban housing in the US (please don't tell me about Brad Pitt's mansion in Malibu...) is pretty drab. Honestly, people here are are pining for NY but some of the dated 1960s housing stock in the lesser parts of Westchester and Long Island and NJ looks locations for a bad Mad Men spinoff (although i will admit the NJ housing in the Sopranos was incredibly classy). Do people move to the San Fernando Valley or Lakewood for the charming architecture? I'm not sure why the OP so dislikes split levels - they're actually efficiently designed, and mid-century design has been in vogue for about a decade -- but they're pretty commonplace across the nation.
Yes, you can look at prewar suburbs in one-percenter suburbs like Bronxville or Oyster Bay or the Upper Merion and say "why don't houses in Chantilly have the same charm - that's so unfair to me!" but it's a completely inapt comparison. If you look at DC's prewar luxury homes in Forest Hills or Foxhall or Chevy Chase Village, you'll see comparable houses.
Whining that one's dollar can buy so much more in Baltimore or Shady Side or Shaker Heights or Grosse Pointe than in DC is just silly. Obviously prices are depressed there because of economic or other challenges (yeah, I want the housing costs of metro Cleveland but the professional and cultural offerings of greater DC too -- pls make it happen). Furthermore, comparing the sales prices alone isn't useful because those lower-priced old suburbs generally have much higher property tax rates to provide the services that their residents expect (notwithstanding lower home values).
Ironically, many people who come to DC find that the original prewar housing stock -- the 19th century townhouses of the original city, the 20th century row houses in the outlying parts of the city -- to be not just charming but distinctive. I thought it was a triusm that all taste is subjective, but apparently not on DCUM.
Real estate everywhere involves trade offs, including location, size, age and that ineffable category of charm/appeal. OP thinks they (or all DMV residents) are uniquely vexed in facing that tradeoff -- they're not.
+1 I can’t imagine people moving away from the DMV and telling their friends it was because they couldn’t find an attractive looking house and that the whole region is hideous.
Unless you have a $3 million plus budget, it really is hard to find curb appeal and character here. Lots in DC proper, Chevy Chase, Bethesda, and a few homes on the VA side in that range but if you’re looking outside DC for under that, it’s slim pickings. Lots of drab, cheap builds in the style of the moment from every decade.
This sounds like a very extreme point of view
I challenge you to find good design, curb appeal, and character for under $3 million in the suburbs. There are just a few.
Here are some random selections that sold in the last 6 months:
I could go on. I literally just clicked on ones for a couple of minutes. If you have 3mm, you can get a beautiful house around here in the suburbs, with plenty of land, and easy access to a city with great jobs and great cultural amenities. If you think the the Main Line, or Shaker Heights, is superior, you are a philistine. Sorry.
The only two of those houses I like are the Holly Ave in Takoma Park and the Wise Out Way in Great Falls. But in any case, we're really moving the goal posts if now the ceiling is $3m and not $1.2m. And you can find lots of housing on the Main Line or in Shaker Heights that is much more attractive than any of the houses you just posted, but for under $1.2m instead of under $3m. Which is the whole point -- DC does have some attractive housing, but because of price increases, most UMC people are priced out of it, and are left with the cheap, post-war garbage or the teeniest of row houses. Even if you are willing to commute a bit. Other cities might have that ugly post-war housing or tiny pre-war urban housing, but it's much less expensive than in DC.
This house needs a number of updates but is loaded with charm, IB for great schools, and is a 5 minute walk to a train that will get you right into the heart of Philly in about 25 minutes, and sold for less than $500k last year (leaving tons of room for updates): https://www.redfin.com/PA/Wynnewood/1519-Crest-Rd-19096/home/38501274
Housing in DC is very expensive for what you get. It is what it is, but you absolutely can buy objectively better housing for less, sometimes much less, in other cities all over the country. Housing in DC really is uniquely bad, I'm sorry. There are other reasons to live here, but if your dream is to own a charming house in a great neighborhood, and your make less than like 500-600k/yr, you will be disappointed in DC in a way that you absolutely would not be in other cities.
It is not moving the goal posts. It was a direct response to the poster above, who used the 3mm dollar figure.
And I would rather live 30 minutes from DC than from Philly or Cleveland. DC is a far better city, culturally, historically, in terms of jobs. I used to live in Philly, in a really nice part of town that felt quite suburban, and I'd never move back, and certainly not to Wynnewood. Not to mention, the really nice parts of the Main Line, comparable to Chevy Chase or McLean, are really quite expensive, too.
And if Philly or Cleveland were as desirable as DC, those houses would be much more expensive, so I'm not just speaking for myself.
Having said all that - yes, the DC burbs are pretty ugly for the most part.
My point is that the entire thread is moving the goal posts if this is where the conversation has gone. The whole premise of the thread is “it’s very hard to find attractive housing in this area for under 1.2m.” If we’re now posting cute houses for 2.7m, we’ve basically proven the premise of the thread.
And as I said, there are plenty of reasons to live in DC other than housing stock. But many of us had dreams for our lives that involved owning a home we really like the look of, that felt good to be in. And worked hard in life to earn enough to buy something like that. Shopping for real estate in DC for me is sad because I feel like I have to let that dream go in order to satisfy more practical concerns like commute and schools. Not a tragedy, but I definitely envy friends and family in other cities who own pretty homes that they easily bought for like 500-700k. And now can afford to do things like renovate kitchens, or just save more or take nice vacations because where they live has a more favorable average salary to cost of housing ratio. In DC, we have found we pretty much always buy at the tip top of our budget just to get something satisfactory. Housing in this area is tough and it’s weird to argue it’s not, relative to other cities.
Because it isn't tough relative to any peer city. It just isn't.
This graph and article are misleading. Some of those communities listed (many at or near the ocean!) have wealthy retirees with little or not active income.
Anonymous wrote:Wow, most of DCUM is bad, but this thread really sets a new low for self-indulgent self-pitying.
DC was a relatively small city/metro area until the Depression (ie, wasn't one of the 15 largest cities in the country until the New Deal and WWII mobilization). So much of the housing here was built either during the Depression and WWII (when resources were scarce and the clientele was middle class govt workers) or after the war. And the fact is MOST postwar suburban housing in the US (please don't tell me about Brad Pitt's mansion in Malibu...) is pretty drab. Honestly, people here are are pining for NY but some of the dated 1960s housing stock in the lesser parts of Westchester and Long Island and NJ looks locations for a bad Mad Men spinoff (although i will admit the NJ housing in the Sopranos was incredibly classy). Do people move to the San Fernando Valley or Lakewood for the charming architecture? I'm not sure why the OP so dislikes split levels - they're actually efficiently designed, and mid-century design has been in vogue for about a decade -- but they're pretty commonplace across the nation.
Yes, you can look at prewar suburbs in one-percenter suburbs like Bronxville or Oyster Bay or the Upper Merion and say "why don't houses in Chantilly have the same charm - that's so unfair to me!" but it's a completely inapt comparison. If you look at DC's prewar luxury homes in Forest Hills or Foxhall or Chevy Chase Village, you'll see comparable houses.
Whining that one's dollar can buy so much more in Baltimore or Shady Side or Shaker Heights or Grosse Pointe than in DC is just silly. Obviously prices are depressed there because of economic or other challenges (yeah, I want the housing costs of metro Cleveland but the professional and cultural offerings of greater DC too -- pls make it happen). Furthermore, comparing the sales prices alone isn't useful because those lower-priced old suburbs generally have much higher property tax rates to provide the services that their residents expect (notwithstanding lower home values).
Ironically, many people who come to DC find that the original prewar housing stock -- the 19th century townhouses of the original city, the 20th century row houses in the outlying parts of the city -- to be not just charming but distinctive. I thought it was a triusm that all taste is subjective, but apparently not on DCUM.
Real estate everywhere involves trade offs, including location, size, age and that ineffable category of charm/appeal. OP thinks they (or all DMV residents) are uniquely vexed in facing that tradeoff -- they're not.
+1 I can’t imagine people moving away from the DMV and telling their friends it was because they couldn’t find an attractive looking house and that the whole region is hideous.
Unless you have a $3 million plus budget, it really is hard to find curb appeal and character here. Lots in DC proper, Chevy Chase, Bethesda, and a few homes on the VA side in that range but if you’re looking outside DC for under that, it’s slim pickings. Lots of drab, cheap builds in the style of the moment from every decade.
This sounds like a very extreme point of view
I challenge you to find good design, curb appeal, and character for under $3 million in the suburbs. There are just a few.
Here are some random selections that sold in the last 6 months:
I could go on. I literally just clicked on ones for a couple of minutes. If you have 3mm, you can get a beautiful house around here in the suburbs, with plenty of land, and easy access to a city with great jobs and great cultural amenities. If you think the the Main Line, or Shaker Heights, is superior, you are a philistine. Sorry.
The only two of those houses I like are the Holly Ave in Takoma Park and the Wise Out Way in Great Falls. But in any case, we're really moving the goal posts if now the ceiling is $3m and not $1.2m. And you can find lots of housing on the Main Line or in Shaker Heights that is much more attractive than any of the houses you just posted, but for under $1.2m instead of under $3m. Which is the whole point -- DC does have some attractive housing, but because of price increases, most UMC people are priced out of it, and are left with the cheap, post-war garbage or the teeniest of row houses. Even if you are willing to commute a bit. Other cities might have that ugly post-war housing or tiny pre-war urban housing, but it's much less expensive than in DC.
This house needs a number of updates but is loaded with charm, IB for great schools, and is a 5 minute walk to a train that will get you right into the heart of Philly in about 25 minutes, and sold for less than $500k last year (leaving tons of room for updates): https://www.redfin.com/PA/Wynnewood/1519-Crest-Rd-19096/home/38501274
Housing in DC is very expensive for what you get. It is what it is, but you absolutely can buy objectively better housing for less, sometimes much less, in other cities all over the country. Housing in DC really is uniquely bad, I'm sorry. There are other reasons to live here, but if your dream is to own a charming house in a great neighborhood, and your make less than like 500-600k/yr, you will be disappointed in DC in a way that you absolutely would not be in other cities.
It is not moving the goal posts. It was a direct response to the poster above, who used the 3mm dollar figure.
And I would rather live 30 minutes from DC than from Philly or Cleveland. DC is a far better city, culturally, historically, in terms of jobs. I used to live in Philly, in a really nice part of town that felt quite suburban, and I'd never move back, and certainly not to Wynnewood. Not to mention, the really nice parts of the Main Line, comparable to Chevy Chase or McLean, are really quite expensive, too.
And if Philly or Cleveland were as desirable as DC, those houses would be much more expensive, so I'm not just speaking for myself.
Having said all that - yes, the DC burbs are pretty ugly for the most part.
My point is that the entire thread is moving the goal posts if this is where the conversation has gone. The whole premise of the thread is “it’s very hard to find attractive housing in this area for under 1.2m.” If we’re now posting cute houses for 2.7m, we’ve basically proven the premise of the thread.
And as I said, there are plenty of reasons to live in DC other than housing stock. But many of us had dreams for our lives that involved owning a home we really like the look of, that felt good to be in. And worked hard in life to earn enough to buy something like that. Shopping for real estate in DC for me is sad because I feel like I have to let that dream go in order to satisfy more practical concerns like commute and schools. Not a tragedy, but I definitely envy friends and family in other cities who own pretty homes that they easily bought for like 500-700k. And now can afford to do things like renovate kitchens, or just save more or take nice vacations because where they live has a more favorable average salary to cost of housing ratio. In DC, we have found we pretty much always buy at the tip top of our budget just to get something satisfactory. Housing in this area is tough and it’s weird to argue it’s not, relative to other cities.
Because it isn't tough relative to any peer city. It just isn't.
This graph and article are misleading. Some of those communities listed (many at or near the ocean!) have wealthy retirees with little or not active income.
Anonymous wrote:$600-$800,000 still gets you a squatter and no inspection. Dystopian.
I spent within that range just outside the beltway, less than a mile to a metro stop (Forest Glen), within past year and a half and I think my house and community are lovely. People need to realize there is more to the DMV than upper NW and Bethesda.
I love the vibe of Forest Glen, but it falls into the aesthetics issue that OP is complaining about.
It does, but close-by Woodside Park does not. But it's expensive.
Anonymous wrote: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.
The underlying history behind the DMV’s ugly housing stock:
DC like Baltimore, Richmond, and cities further south, lack the townships and towns of the traditional Mid Atlantic (north of Maryland) and New England. Mostly rural counties surrounded Southern cities in the 19th and early 20th centuries, with market or port towns like Alexandria Va. or Ashland Va. being the exceptions. D.C., Richmond, and Baltimore all have historic rowhouses in the historic core, then bungalows, capes, and Williamsburg inspired colonials (single family homes) further out, and then newer tract housing. The quaint commuter towns of the traditional Mid Atlantic and New England did not develop here.
I’m seeing the same. All of the stock is so poor and cheap looking and overpriced for what you get. I don’t want to pay a million for a standard 1990s style colonial with an outdated kitchen but here we are.
Anonymous wrote:I’m seeing the same. All of the stock is so poor and cheap looking and overpriced for what you get. I don’t want to pay a million for a standard 1990s style colonial with an outdated kitchen but here we are.
Way better than paying a million for a 1950s rancher. I live in a 1990s colonial. It’s wonderful once we fixed the kitchen. The floor plan is really wonderful.
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!!! All that junk in Arlington used to be for LMC/LC people. Maybe some Feds w/ a SAHM would buy there. Then they built some bars and restaurants and suddenly dual lawyer families pay a fortune for this crap.
Yep. That’s what happened to places like Arlington in a nutshell. Even back in the 80s and 90s, Arlington wasn’t that expensive. Now it’s 1 million for a shack just because of the land it sits on. It’s sad.
Anonymous wrote:$600-$800,000 still gets you a squatter and no inspection. Dystopian.
I spent within that range just outside the beltway, less than a mile to a metro stop (Forest Glen), within past year and a half and I think my house and community are lovely. People need to realize there is more to the DMV than upper NW and Bethesda.
Those were in South Arlington and Annandale. Glad you found something though.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}