There is no housing crisis in MoCo or most of the DMV for that matter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm just waiting for the condo market to tank so I can swoop in and buy a great one for a song that I can keep as my city retirement pad. All I see are big condo/apartment building going up and I have no idea who is buying them all. The Whole Foods at Walter Reed has been open for months. I live a mile away and can't be bothered to go check it out. It would require figuring out where the parking garage entrance is. I'm sure that place is going to be a bust.

You might want to check to see how much foreign/institutional investment money is parked in those condo buildings before you get too excited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just waiting for the condo market to tank so I can swoop in and buy a great one for a song that I can keep as my city retirement pad. All I see are big condo/apartment building going up and I have no idea who is buying them all. The Whole Foods at Walter Reed has been open for months. I live a mile away and can't be bothered to go check it out. It would require figuring out where the parking garage entrance is. I'm sure that place is going to be a bust.

You might want to check to see how much foreign/institutional investment money is parked in those condo buildings before you get too excited.

At least they'll pay their bills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of Moco is actually very cheap once you get about 25 minutes outside the beltway.

Not many places that are less than an hour outside a major global city where you can buy SFHs for under 500k. There are TONS in Germantown, Montgomery Village, Laytonville, Damascus, etc

That's funny, because I just checked Redfin, and they have zero (0) listings in Montgomery Village for SFHs under 500k. Germantown has one (1), listed at $400,000 which is a short sale. Laytonsville has one (1), listed at $499,900. Damascus has zero (0). I can't check etc.

That's because there is intense competition, and so they all sell quickly. Lots of people don't sit around whining, they get out there and make offers. You can check the sold listings. Houses like this:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Silver-Spring/12106-Foley-St-20902/home/11025196

There are two housing crises. One is the shortage of deeply affordable units. For-profit developers aren’t building these, but YIMBYs would like you to think that they are. The other is the shortage of single family homes. YIMBYs want to reduce the stock of single family homes even more.

lol, this is the best summary I’ve read on the topic.

I think a very reasonable and middle ground approach would be to encourage the building of substantially more townhouses. You could tight communities with townhouses that include some green space.

Builders do not need encouragement to build more attached houses. They are doing it without encouragement. Unless you're referring to building attached houses in residential areas where currently, only detached houses are allowed?

DP but why not more townhouse developments where new condos/apts are planned instead? There are a lot of apt vacancies but they just keep building more. I just assume the profit margin must be higher for them.

Why do builders keep building new condos/apartments? Because there is demand, or they believe there is demand. And I'm inclined to believe the builders over the anonymous commenters on DCUM who insist that nobody wants new condos/apartments and the units are all sitting empty, because the builders have their money on the line.

They build them because they have the highest profit margin not because of demand. The highest demand is for entry level small houses and townhouses but those have the lowest profit margin.

^^ This.

I’d be curious to know the proportion of empty apt units that are “new” vs. older. Are newer buildings getting filled at the expense of existing, more dated options?

In other words, people with more money move into the newer units, leaving the older units to be more affordable for people with less money? Yes, that's how it's supposed to work.

So the older, slightly more affordable options are all full then? They need to take all the lease advertisements down rather than keep putting more up, it’s misleading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just waiting for the condo market to tank so I can swoop in and buy a great one for a song that I can keep as my city retirement pad. All I see are big condo/apartment building going up and I have no idea who is buying them all. The Whole Foods at Walter Reed has been open for months. I live a mile away and can't be bothered to go check it out. It would require figuring out where the parking garage entrance is. I'm sure that place is going to be a bust.

Not everything has to be for you, and that's ok.

There is very little chance that most of the condos being built will be appreciate much in value. Investing in a condo in DMV to grow one's wealth makes no sense here.

Condos are housing. For people to live in. The main benefit of housing is that people have a place to live.

Unfortunately the people who need housing most can’t these. Why isn’t MoCo building more subsidized housing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of Moco is actually very cheap once you get about 25 minutes outside the beltway.

Not many places that are less than an hour outside a major global city where you can buy SFHs for under 500k. There are TONS in Germantown, Montgomery Village, Laytonville, Damascus, etc

That's funny, because I just checked Redfin, and they have zero (0) listings in Montgomery Village for SFHs under 500k. Germantown has one (1), listed at $400,000 which is a short sale. Laytonsville has one (1), listed at $499,900. Damascus has zero (0). I can't check etc.

That's because there is intense competition, and so they all sell quickly. Lots of people don't sit around whining, they get out there and make offers. You can check the sold listings. Houses like this:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Silver-Spring/12106-Foley-St-20902/home/11025196

There are two housing crises. One is the shortage of deeply affordable units. For-profit developers aren’t building these, but YIMBYs would like you to think that they are. The other is the shortage of single family homes. YIMBYs want to reduce the stock of single family homes even more.

lol, this is the best summary I’ve read on the topic.

I think a very reasonable and middle ground approach would be to encourage the building of substantially more townhouses. You could tight communities with townhouses that include some green space.

Builders do not need encouragement to build more attached houses. They are doing it without encouragement. Unless you're referring to building attached houses in residential areas where currently, only detached houses are allowed?

DP but why not more townhouse developments where new condos/apts are planned instead? There are a lot of apt vacancies but they just keep building more. I just assume the profit margin must be higher for them.

Why do builders keep building new condos/apartments? Because there is demand, or they believe there is demand. And I'm inclined to believe the builders over the anonymous commenters on DCUM who insist that nobody wants new condos/apartments and the units are all sitting empty, because the builders have their money on the line.

They build them because they have the highest profit margin not because of demand. The highest demand is for entry level small houses and townhouses but those have the lowest profit margin.

^^ This.

I’d be curious to know the proportion of empty apt units that are “new” vs. older. Are newer buildings getting filled at the expense of existing, more dated options?

In other words, people with more money move into the newer units, leaving the older units to be more affordable for people with less money? Yes, that's how it's supposed to work.

So the older, slightly more affordable options are all full then? They need to take all the lease advertisements down rather than keep putting more up, it’s misleading.

People move in. People move out. That is well known.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just waiting for the condo market to tank so I can swoop in and buy a great one for a song that I can keep as my city retirement pad. All I see are big condo/apartment building going up and I have no idea who is buying them all. The Whole Foods at Walter Reed has been open for months. I live a mile away and can't be bothered to go check it out. It would require figuring out where the parking garage entrance is. I'm sure that place is going to be a bust.

Not everything has to be for you, and that's ok.

There is very little chance that most of the condos being built will be appreciate much in value. Investing in a condo in DMV to grow one's wealth makes no sense here.

Condos are housing. For people to live in. The main benefit of housing is that people have a place to live.

Unfortunately the people who need housing most can’t these. Why isn’t MoCo building more subsidized housing?

Who doesn't need housing? Everyone needs housing.

The county is building affordable housing. For example here: https://moco360.media/2023/01/19/195-unit-affordable-housing-project-unveiled-in-veirs-mill-corridor/ Could they build more? Sure. I doubt this will be the one and only such project ever built.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just waiting for the condo market to tank so I can swoop in and buy a great one for a song that I can keep as my city retirement pad. All I see are big condo/apartment building going up and I have no idea who is buying them all. The Whole Foods at Walter Reed has been open for months. I live a mile away and can't be bothered to go check it out. It would require figuring out where the parking garage entrance is. I'm sure that place is going to be a bust.

Not everything has to be for you, and that's ok.

There is very little chance that most of the condos being built will be appreciate much in value. Investing in a condo in DMV to grow one's wealth makes no sense here.

Condos are housing. For people to live in. The main benefit of housing is that people have a place to live.

Unfortunately the people who need housing most can’t these. Why isn’t MoCo building more subsidized housing?

Who doesn't need housing? Everyone needs housing.

The county is building affordable housing. For example here: https://moco360.media/2023/01/19/195-unit-affordable-housing-project-unveiled-in-veirs-mill-corridor/ Could they build more? Sure. I doubt this will be the one and only such project ever built.

There are people that NEED housing and don’t currently have it, and there are those that WANT different housing that what they already have. People with more means have more choices and are not out on the street homeless. People who are wringing their hands about acute housing needs in MoCo seem to have a disconnect about this. The luxury condos going up are not helping the unhoused population no matter how much you want to convince yourself that is the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just waiting for the condo market to tank so I can swoop in and buy a great one for a song that I can keep as my city retirement pad. All I see are big condo/apartment building going up and I have no idea who is buying them all. The Whole Foods at Walter Reed has been open for months. I live a mile away and can't be bothered to go check it out. It would require figuring out where the parking garage entrance is. I'm sure that place is going to be a bust.

Not everything has to be for you, and that's ok.

There is very little chance that most of the condos being built will be appreciate much in value. Investing in a condo in DMV to grow one's wealth makes no sense here.

Condos are housing. For people to live in. The main benefit of housing is that people have a place to live.

Unfortunately the people who need housing most can’t these. Why isn’t MoCo building more subsidized housing?

Who doesn't need housing? Everyone needs housing.

The county is building affordable housing. For example here: https://moco360.media/2023/01/19/195-unit-affordable-housing-project-unveiled-in-veirs-mill-corridor/ Could they build more? Sure. I doubt this will be the one and only such project ever built.

There are people that NEED housing and don’t currently have it, and there are those that WANT different housing that what they already have. People with more means have more choices and are not out on the street homeless. People who are wringing their hands about acute housing needs in MoCo seem to have a disconnect about this. The luxury condos going up are not helping the unhoused population no matter how much you want to convince yourself that is the case.

The range of people who need housing is a bit broader than (1) people who are currently unhoused and on the street and (2) people who can afford to live in new apartments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just waiting for the condo market to tank so I can swoop in and buy a great one for a song that I can keep as my city retirement pad. All I see are big condo/apartment building going up and I have no idea who is buying them all. The Whole Foods at Walter Reed has been open for months. I live a mile away and can't be bothered to go check it out. It would require figuring out where the parking garage entrance is. I'm sure that place is going to be a bust.

Not everything has to be for you, and that's ok.

There is very little chance that most of the condos being built will be appreciate much in value. Investing in a condo in DMV to grow one's wealth makes no sense here.

Condos are housing. For people to live in. The main benefit of housing is that people have a place to live.

Unfortunately the people who need housing most can’t these. Why isn’t MoCo building more subsidized housing?

Who doesn't need housing? Everyone needs housing.

The county is building affordable housing. For example here: https://moco360.media/2023/01/19/195-unit-affordable-housing-project-unveiled-in-veirs-mill-corridor/ Could they build more? Sure. I doubt this will be the one and only such project ever built.

There are people that NEED housing and don’t currently have it, and there are those that WANT different housing that what they already have. People with more means have more choices and are not out on the street homeless. People who are wringing their hands about acute housing needs in MoCo seem to have a disconnect about this. The luxury condos going up are not helping the unhoused population no matter how much you want to convince yourself that is the case.

The range of people who need housing is a bit broader than (1) people who are currently unhoused and on the street and (2) people who can afford to live in new apartments.

DP and I agree with this, but it’s also true that condo/apt dwellers tend to be more transient. We lived in an apartment for years, in MoCo because it was cheaper than DC, then we were able to buy a SFH in MoCo. but honestly if we were doing so today, I suspect we’d have moved further out due to competition/prices/remote work. We had no interest in raising kids in an apartment long term.

Obviously the builders and county have a pulse on what kind of housing is needed and maybe it’s fine that they are focusing on smaller dwellings since there’s no real plan to increase school capacity either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of Moco is actually very cheap once you get about 25 minutes outside the beltway.

Not many places that are less than an hour outside a major global city where you can buy SFHs for under 500k. There are TONS in Germantown, Montgomery Village, Laytonville, Damascus, etc

That's funny, because I just checked Redfin, and they have zero (0) listings in Montgomery Village for SFHs under 500k. Germantown has one (1), listed at $400,000 which is a short sale. Laytonsville has one (1), listed at $499,900. Damascus has zero (0). I can't check etc.

That's because there is intense competition, and so they all sell quickly. Lots of people don't sit around whining, they get out there and make offers. You can check the sold listings. Houses like this:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Silver-Spring/12106-Foley-St-20902/home/11025196

There are two housing crises. One is the shortage of deeply affordable units. For-profit developers aren’t building these, but YIMBYs would like you to think that they are. The other is the shortage of single family homes. YIMBYs want to reduce the stock of single family homes even more.

lol, this is the best summary I’ve read on the topic.

I think a very reasonable and middle ground approach would be to encourage the building of substantially more townhouses. You could tight communities with townhouses that include some green space.

Builders do not need encouragement to build more attached houses. They are doing it without encouragement. Unless you're referring to building attached houses in residential areas where currently, only detached houses are allowed?

DP but why not more townhouse developments where new condos/apts are planned instead? There are a lot of apt vacancies but they just keep building more. I just assume the profit margin must be higher for them.

Why do builders keep building new condos/apartments? Because there is demand, or they believe there is demand. And I'm inclined to believe the builders over the anonymous commenters on DCUM who insist that nobody wants new condos/apartments and the units are all sitting empty, because the builders have their money on the line.

They build them because they have the highest profit margin not because of demand. The highest demand is for entry level small houses and townhouses but those have the lowest profit margin.

^^ This.

I’d be curious to know the proportion of empty apt units that are “new” vs. older. Are newer buildings getting filled at the expense of existing, more dated options?

In other words, people with more money move into the newer units, leaving the older units to be more affordable for people with less money? Yes, that's how it's supposed to work.

Unless developers overestimate demand, it doesn’t work that way because they build barely enough new units each year to house the households with more money. In staging development this way, they prevent rents from falling at older buildings so nothing becomes more affordable (let alone absolutely affordable) for people with less money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Signed, a boomer that got their housing for 3 blueberries back in 1940 from a Sears catalog. Go talk to young people, even high earners, on how difficult it is to buy a house nowadays.

No Boomer was buying a house in 1940, on grounds that no Boomer was even born yet in 1940.

Yup, younger posters here are angry and jealous, as well as ignorant.

When you bet against the younger generation, you always lose.

Baby Boomers have done quite well betting against younger generations. They had the relative population/social-voting power to do so.

Their Social Security isn't in danger. The government has massively enabled and bailed out their market investments. Tax cuts have hit their life-stage sweet spots, from the vast increase in the allowable untaxed estate from their parents to the even-more-tax-advantaged-than-1031 capital appreciation exemption for housing. The immense debt that resulted is primed to fall on the generations immediately after them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just waiting for the condo market to tank so I can swoop in and buy a great one for a song that I can keep as my city retirement pad. All I see are big condo/apartment building going up and I have no idea who is buying them all. The Whole Foods at Walter Reed has been open for months. I live a mile away and can't be bothered to go check it out. It would require figuring out where the parking garage entrance is. I'm sure that place is going to be a bust.

Not everything has to be for you, and that's ok.

There is very little chance that most of the condos being built will be appreciate much in value. Investing in a condo in DMV to grow one's wealth makes no sense here.

Condos are housing. For people to live in. The main benefit of housing is that people have a place to live.

Unfortunately the people who need housing most can’t these. Why isn’t MoCo building more subsidized housing?

Who doesn't need housing? Everyone needs housing.

The county is building affordable housing. For example here: https://moco360.media/2023/01/19/195-unit-affordable-housing-project-unveiled-in-veirs-mill-corridor/ Could they build more? Sure. I doubt this will be the one and only such project ever built.

There are people that NEED housing and don’t currently have it, and there are those that WANT different housing that what they already have. People with more means have more choices and are not out on the street homeless. People who are wringing their hands about acute housing needs in MoCo seem to have a disconnect about this. The luxury condos going up are not helping the unhoused population no matter how much you want to convince yourself that is the case.

Except where people who might be living in a Luxury apartment go into a luxury condo. Then someone from a mid level apartment that can afford luxury but can’t get it because the market is tight moves in there. Then the lowest end people who can afford move into a higher end one…and then people who might have had even less resources can move into the cheapest, and if they can afford that without q voucher, all the better. Especially since people waiting for vouchers are sometimes double and triple up with family (if they are lucky) and not just included in the explicitly unhoused stats.

Trickle down does actually work for apartments. And if vacancy rates in apartments go up then there is pressure to lower rents, a much more immediate result than lowering cost of real estate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of Moco is actually very cheap once you get about 25 minutes outside the beltway.

Not many places that are less than an hour outside a major global city where you can buy SFHs for under 500k. There are TONS in Germantown, Montgomery Village, Laytonville, Damascus, etc

That's funny, because I just checked Redfin, and they have zero (0) listings in Montgomery Village for SFHs under 500k. Germantown has one (1), listed at $400,000 which is a short sale. Laytonsville has one (1), listed at $499,900. Damascus has zero (0). I can't check etc.

That's because there is intense competition, and so they all sell quickly. Lots of people don't sit around whining, they get out there and make offers. You can check the sold listings. Houses like this:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Silver-Spring/12106-Foley-St-20902/home/11025196

There are two housing crises. One is the shortage of deeply affordable units. For-profit developers aren’t building these, but YIMBYs would like you to think that they are. The other is the shortage of single family homes. YIMBYs want to reduce the stock of single family homes even more.

lol, this is the best summary I’ve read on the topic.

I think a very reasonable and middle ground approach would be to encourage the building of substantially more townhouses. You could tight communities with townhouses that include some green space.

Builders do not need encouragement to build more attached houses. They are doing it without encouragement. Unless you're referring to building attached houses in residential areas where currently, only detached houses are allowed?

DP but why not more townhouse developments where new condos/apts are planned instead? There are a lot of apt vacancies but they just keep building more. I just assume the profit margin must be higher for them.

DP. Developers often specialize in one type of building (Apt/TH/detached).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Signed, a boomer that got their housing for 3 blueberries back in 1940 from a Sears catalog. Go talk to young people, even high earners, on how difficult it is to buy a house nowadays.

No Boomer was buying a house in 1940, on grounds that no Boomer was even born yet in 1940.

Yup, younger posters here are angry and jealous, as well as ignorant.

When you bet against the younger generation, you always lose.

Baby Boomers have done quite well betting against younger generations. They had the relative population/social-voting power to do so.

Their Social Security isn't in danger. The government has massively enabled and bailed out their market investments. Tax cuts have hit their life-stage sweet spots, from the vast increase in the allowable untaxed estate from their parents to the even-more-tax-advantaged-than-1031 capital appreciation exemption for housing. The immense debt that resulted is primed to fall on the generations immediately after them.

So far. With every passing year, they will have less power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm just waiting for the condo market to tank so I can swoop in and buy a great one for a song that I can keep as my city retirement pad. All I see are big condo/apartment building going up and I have no idea who is buying them all. The Whole Foods at Walter Reed has been open for months. I live a mile away and can't be bothered to go check it out. It would require figuring out where the parking garage entrance is. I'm sure that place is going to be a bust.

Not everything has to be for you, and that's ok.

There is very little chance that most of the condos being built will be appreciate much in value. Investing in a condo in DMV to grow one's wealth makes no sense here.

Condos are housing. For people to live in. The main benefit of housing is that people have a place to live.

Unfortunately the people who need housing most can’t these. Why isn’t MoCo building more subsidized housing?

Who doesn't need housing? Everyone needs housing.

The county is building affordable housing. For example here: https://moco360.media/2023/01/19/195-unit-affordable-housing-project-unveiled-in-veirs-mill-corridor/ Could they build more? Sure. I doubt this will be the one and only such project ever built.

There are people that NEED housing and don’t currently have it, and there are those that WANT different housing that what they already have. People with more means have more choices and are not out on the street homeless. People who are wringing their hands about acute housing needs in MoCo seem to have a disconnect about this. The luxury condos going up are not helping the unhoused population no matter how much you want to convince yourself that is the case.

Except where people who might be living in a Luxury apartment go into a luxury condo. Then someone from a mid level apartment that can afford luxury but can’t get it because the market is tight moves in there. Then the lowest end people who can afford move into a higher end one…and then people who might have had even less resources can move into the cheapest, and if they can afford that without q voucher, all the better. Especially since people waiting for vouchers are sometimes double and triple up with family (if they are lucky) and not just included in the explicitly unhoused stats.

Trickle down does actually work for apartments. And if vacancy rates in apartments go up then there is pressure to lower rents, a much more immediate result than lowering cost of real estate.

NP but thanks for explaining this to me- makes so much more sense now. I hope it all works and everyone can get housing that needs it.