DC Expensive Real Estate causing Millennials to leave for the suburbs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also have known plenty who have sent their kids to DC public schools and they did not turn out poorly

As well as folks who sent their kids to BCC HS and they turned out no better than DCPS kids.

Parenting also has a lot to do with it! Some prefer the schools to parent while they do other things.

Good point. My kid has a friend who graduated from BCC who is a huge pothead and living off of mommy and daddy. My kid is drug and alcohol free and working hard and spent most of her school career in DCPS.

Actually, "can my kid turn out well in DCPS" is not the question. The real question is "could my kid have done better in FX/MOCO/ARL schools." You aren't comparing average or anecdotal outcomes. You're looking, or you should be, for the best educational environment for your specific child, not looking to clear some (ridiculously low) bar like absence of substance abuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I'll bite. I know this commute well. I live in Brookland/Woodridge, about .75 miles from the Brookland metro station. I can get to Foggy Bottom by transit in about 30. My commute to my office in Georgetown, door to door, via transit is about 45 minutes and driving it's 30 minutes.

If you live less than a mile from a metro station, you are not a part of this discussion. Honestly. What percentage of DC territory do you think is located within .75 of a metro station? This discussion is about DC neighborhoods that are well removed from the public transit options.

Actually a working knowledge of DC geography would be helpful here - many of the "out there" neighborhoods are located within a mile or less of the metro. Brookland, Michigan Park, Riggs Park, Takoma, etc...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every time I hear someone talking about how they "can't afford anything" in DC it makes me wonder if they've only looked on U Street, in Tenleytown, Cleveland Park, etc. Sure there are lots of houses for sale in DC in that range, but there are houses in nice parts of NE (not talking about H Street) for under $300k, and friends have bought in Shaw for under $450k. It's not nothing, and yeah, you're still taking the charter school gamble but houses in the burbs aren't going for much less. If you really want to live in the city, you probably can. If you just want to live in the super hip area, then good luck.

What nice parts of NE?

I own a condo near H St and wouldn't dream of raising my son there.

What property did your friends buy in Shaw for 450K?

I don't think anyone argues that if you really want to live in the city, you can; it's just that the way you will live without a huge budget (cramped place, marginal neighborhood, school anxiety) is not appealing.

Again, not H street. Brookland, Riggs Park, parts of Michigan Park, Takoma (DC, not Takoma Park, MD). All of which have nice houses at reasonable prices close to the metro.

I hear you on the NE neighborhoods, but first, discussions are underway whether Riggs Park and Takoma are in fact nice. And secondly, most of these neighborhoods are completely suburban in nature. So why deal with suburban dreariness AND urban problems rolled into one property?

I believe the point that was trying to be made was that there are indeed affordable nice neighborhoods in DC. It is irritating to hear the city isn't affordable when it is really a matter of people not wanting to compromise on what they can afford vs. what they want.

In that case, why fault someone for choosing to live in (Falls Church/Silver Spring/Bowie) instead of a part of DC with no urban amenities and lots of problems?

There's no faulting anyone for living where they like. And just because a DC neighborhood might not be well known doesn't mean it doesn't have amenities and has lots of problems. It's more a response to the "Wah! I can't live in DC!" When, if you really want that, you can. Maybe you just can't live in the heart of Columbia Heights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I'll bite. I know this commute well. I live in Brookland/Woodridge, about .75 miles from the Brookland metro station. I can get to Foggy Bottom by transit in about 30. My commute to my office in Georgetown, door to door, via transit is about 45 minutes and driving it's 30 minutes.

If you live less than a mile from a metro station, you are not a part of this discussion. Honestly. What percentage of DC territory do you think is located within .75 of a metro station? This discussion is about DC neighborhoods that are well removed from the public transit options.

Actually a working knowledge of DC geography would be helpful here - many of the "out there" neighborhoods are located within a mile or less of the metro. Brookland, Michigan Park, Riggs Park, Takoma, etc...

No doubt, many are. But many more aren't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

There's no faulting anyone for living where they like. And just because a DC neighborhood might not be well known doesn't mean it doesn't have amenities and has lots of problems. It's more a response to the "Wah! I can't live in DC!" When, if you really want that, you can. Maybe you just can't live in the heart of Columbia Heights.

I think here again, you refuse to understand (or to accept) that when people say "live in the city", they imply a certain set of amenities that makes the city. Not that their house must have a dc zipcode.

[Anonymous]

Hi-- .75 mile poster here. I listed how far we are because I think-- compared to many locations in DC-- that we wouldn't be considered to be that close to a metro station. Definitely more of a bus ride (which runs pretty frequently) than a walk. I wish we were closer, but being a little farther out meant that our house was that much more affordable.

As some of the PPs have said, our neighborhood isn't (or wasn't, until recently) considered a "hot" part of DC. But it's a great place to live. We have a nice sized house and a great yard. Nice neighbors, with a chill, down to earth vibe. Our kids go to an excellent Chinese immersion public charter school. We're happy with how city living is working out so far.

[Anonymous]

I live in Falls Church. We have good schools, ethnic diversity, great restaurants - all sorts of cuisine - a great public library, access to metro and Tysons Corner, great recreational opportunities for the kids and a small town feel. Why would I want to live in DC? It takes me 30 minutes to get to my office from my home in Falls Church via metro. 15 minutes driving when traffic is light. I was really shocked when my employer inadvertantly withheld DC income taxes from my check. Holy Shit! All that money and for what? No thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There's no faulting anyone for living where they like. And just because a DC neighborhood might not be well known doesn't mean it doesn't have amenities and has lots of problems. It's more a response to the "Wah! I can't live in DC!" When, if you really want that, you can. Maybe you just can't live in the heart of Columbia Heights.

I think here again, you refuse to understand (or to accept) that when people say "live in the city", they imply a certain set of amenities that makes the city. Not that their house must have a dc zipcode.

You clearly know very little about DC. One of the most expensive neighborhoods in DC proper (the country actually) is VERY suburban - Chevy Chase. Most people use the bus to get to the Metro station and there is very little retail (other than the broad branch market) within the sfh residential part of the neighborhood. However, it is clearly highly desirable (considering the median sale price of sfh is now over 1 million) and I bet those people consider themselves to be very much in the city.

[Anonymous]

That's exactly what PP is saying. It's "in the city" but is not urban at all, so what's the point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There's no faulting anyone for living where they like. And just because a DC neighborhood might not be well known doesn't mean it doesn't have amenities and has lots of problems. It's more a response to the "Wah! I can't live in DC!" When, if you really want that, you can. Maybe you just can't live in the heart of Columbia Heights.

I think here again, you refuse to understand (or to accept) that when people say "live in the city", they imply a certain set of amenities that makes the city. Not that their house must have a dc zipcode.

You clearly know very little about DC. One of the most expensive neighborhoods in DC proper (the country actually) is VERY suburban - Chevy Chase. Most people use the bus to get to the Metro station and there is very little retail (other than the broad branch market) within the sfh residential part of the neighborhood. However, it is clearly highly desirable (considering the median sale price of sfh is now over 1 million) and I bet those people consider themselves to be very much in the city.

You clearly are trying very hard to misunderstand. People who live in Chevy Chase aren't gripped by anguish that they can't afford "to live in the city." They clearly have opted (not were forced to, opted) to live where they live. Would you advise the frustrated milennials to move to Chevy Chase-DC? No? Do you think it's the Chevy Chase way of life they are crying about losing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hi-- .75 mile poster here. I listed how far we are because I think-- compared to many locations in DC-- that we wouldn't be considered to be that close to a metro station. Definitely more of a bus ride (which runs pretty frequently) than a walk. I wish we were closer, but being a little farther out meant that our house was that much more affordable.

As some of the PPs have said, our neighborhood isn't (or wasn't, until recently) considered a "hot" part of DC. But it's a great place to live. We have a nice sized house and a great yard. Nice neighbors, with a chill, down to earth vibe. Our kids go to an excellent Chinese immersion public charter school. We're happy with how city living is working out so far.

Look, I am glad that Brookland is working out for you. However, I don't think you can call Brookland urban. Also, your kids had to lottery into the school - it had nothing to do with you living in Brookland, and they could have hit a losing ticket in the lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi-- .75 mile poster here. I listed how far we are because I think-- compared to many locations in DC-- that we wouldn't be considered to be that close to a metro station. Definitely more of a bus ride (which runs pretty frequently) than a walk. I wish we were closer, but being a little farther out meant that our house was that much more affordable.

As some of the PPs have said, our neighborhood isn't (or wasn't, until recently) considered a "hot" part of DC. But it's a great place to live. We have a nice sized house and a great yard. Nice neighbors, with a chill, down to earth vibe. Our kids go to an excellent Chinese immersion public charter school. We're happy with how city living is working out so far.

Look, I am glad that Brookland is working out for you. However, I don't think you can call Brookland urban. Also, your kids had to lottery into the school - it had nothing to do with you living in Brookland, and they could have hit a losing ticket in the lottery.

Lotteries are getting more and more competitive, and I think a lot of millennials were really banking on the charter school option but realizing the reality now hence moving to zoned schools that work for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I'll bite. I know this commute well. I live in Brookland/Woodridge, about .75 miles from the Brookland metro station. I can get to Foggy Bottom by transit in about 30. My commute to my office in Georgetown, door to door, via transit is about 45 minutes and driving it's 30 minutes.

If you live less than a mile from a metro station, you are not a part of this discussion. Honestly. What percentage of DC territory do you think is located within .75 of a metro station? This discussion is about DC neighborhoods that are well removed from the public transit options.

Np here. One who is sick of this attitude invariably hurled by our newest friends who live in Clarendon ("for the white people") today, but were living in [spat] suburban Ohio less than 7 years ago. With a quick stop in Columbia Hts in between.


Can you please name four neighborhoods in the District of Columbia that are "well removed from public transit options"?

Before you spew your preconceived answer, keep in mind that "public transit" very much includes ..... buses. I'm looking at a map with all routes shown in overlay and I can only pick out a whopping 2-3 neighborhoods that are perhaps underserved by transit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I'll bite. I know this commute well. I live in Brookland/Woodridge, about .75 miles from the Brookland metro station. I can get to Foggy Bottom by transit in about 30. My commute to my office in Georgetown, door to door, via transit is about 45 minutes and driving it's 30 minutes.

If you live less than a mile from a metro station, you are not a part of this discussion. Honestly. What percentage of DC territory do you think is located within .75 of a metro station? This discussion is about DC neighborhoods that are well removed from the public transit options.

Np here. One who is sick of this attitude invariably hurled by our newest friends who live in Clarendon ("for the white people") today, but were living in [spat] suburban Ohio less than 7 years ago. With a quick stop in Columbia Hts in between.


Can you please name four neighborhoods in the District of Columbia that are "well removed from public transit options"?

Before you spew your preconceived answer, keep in mind that "public transit" very much includes ..... buses. I'm looking at a map with all routes shown in overlay and I can only pick out a whopping 2-3 neighborhoods that are perhaps underserved by transit.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I'll bite. I know this commute well. I live in Brookland/Woodridge, about .75 miles from the Brookland metro station. I can get to Foggy Bottom by transit in about 30. My commute to my office in Georgetown, door to door, via transit is about 45 minutes and driving it's 30 minutes.

If you live less than a mile from a metro station, you are not a part of this discussion. Honestly. What percentage of DC territory do you think is located within .75 of a metro station? This discussion is about DC neighborhoods that are well removed from the public transit options.

Np here. One who is sick of this attitude invariably hurled by our newest friends who live in Clarendon ("for the white people") today, but were living in [spat] suburban Ohio less than 7 years ago. With a quick stop in Columbia Hts in between.


Can you please name four neighborhoods in the District of Columbia that are "well removed from public transit options"?

Before you spew your preconceived answer, keep in mind that "public transit" very much includes ..... buses. I'm looking at a map with all routes shown in overlay and I can only pick out a whopping 2-3 neighborhoods that are perhaps underserved by transit.

I live WAAAY out in the suburbs (Alexandria part of Fairfax County), and I have three buslines within .25 mile of my house. I would hardly classify my house as "close to transit".