Cities with No Children
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I am not saying that rising RE prices in NYC and DC are not a problem, they are. I mean even large apts in NYC are expensive because supply has failed to keep up with demand. All I am saying is that to make it possible for families to live in high demand cities, we need BOTH sufficient apartment/condo supply to be relatively affordable, AND we need it to be acceptable to raise a family in an apt/condo. The latter is already the case in NYC, but the former fails. In DC we don't have quite as far to go on the former, but further to go on the latter. |
Anonymous
They hate almost everything new and anything that doesn’t specifically cater to them or their needs/wants. It’s ridiculous that so few people who aren’t all that long for this world wield so much power in Arlington. I know that’s harsh and callous, but it’s true. They have an outsized say in just about everything, and they aren’t the elder statesmen of yore, who have an eye to the future. The boomers don’t seem to think it’s fair to have to pay fair taxes to support educating the current baby boom. They can just go to school in shifts. |
Anonymous
This is simply not true, I am raising kids in NYC, so do many others. NYC is very dense, there is simply no other option other than apartment living unless you move way far out to deeply residential parts of outer boroughs where there is supply of SFHs, or somewhat residential with TH living, the rest is apartment living through and through unless you have many millions to spend on a rowhouse. Even rich live in apartments, it's just a different culture. Rich who want a spacious SFH with land move to the burbs, which in NYC are way further out than in DC metro due to density. The other factor contributing to keeping families in NYC is the fact that job market is Manhattan centric with only some employment in outer boroughs, very limited, there are not other sizable job centers outside of Manhattan DT, Midtown and Jersey city. All of this makes outer boroughs not as desirable outside of certain closer-in trendier parts, so keeps prices there relatively low and affordable. It is different from DC metro which has Tysons, Reston and MD job centers in addition to DC DT, which isn't the only place people commute to, plus you don't have to go far at all to get a detached SFH, TH is even easier, you can get this without selling your organs and your firstborn in the city proper. To force DC families to cram into apartments while supply of THs in the close-iin trendy areas and SFHs nearby is so abundant is foolish unless population explodes. Some may live in apartments, usually foreigners and former NYers who are used to it, or younger families with babies/toddles. It's the case in most cities. Bay Area is another example where more families would live in the city, but it's very very residential compared to NY, you do have tons of TH living, garages galore, the only thing keeping families from staying is more difficult school situation and insane prices in SF burbs and SV due to the fact that job market there is also not DT centric like DC, there are employment centers in the burbs, so people can have their SFHs and live relatively near to jobs given they can pay through the nose. In order to force people in the US to raise families in apartments you need density, which only exists in NYC and city centric jobs which make commutes from residential parts very painful. |
Anonymous
It's acceptable in NYC, because there is simply NO.OTHER.OPTION. A fixer upper crappier rowhouse in Manhattan, not in the best area is 5 mil, in Park Slope, which has 45 min commute to most city jobs is 2m minimum. That's a house that needs work. RE Taxes are also way higher in Manhattan. Most people given choice would not choose to live in apartments, but they must compromise commuting, and driving between boroughs and Manhattan is way more of a nightmare than driving between burbs in DC due to geography and sheer number of cars and population, even on weekends. So many don't want to go to Brooklyn and instead buy a 3 bedr apartment in Manhattan (a starter one would run you about 2 mil in a good school zone) even though they could buy a small brownstone or a rowhouse somewhere in closer parts of Brooklyn which are trendy enough. Most buildings are coops and people pay into this, they also pay way crazier condo/coop fees and RE taxes than other cities (even SF). Lots of people rent as a result and then many do move to the burbs and commute by train when they can establish that only one income is enough to survive and/or they can arrange partial telecommute. Otherwise, they join the grind of 2 parents being away from home for 10 hours a day 5 days a week, with commute consuming 3 hours of their time door to door, with lucky ones living maybe 1 hour each way door to door. 45 min door to door commutes mean you live in Manhattan or have a very lucky arrangement of outer borough/close-in Jersey living with your job and your home very close to a subway/train. Also transit costs are exorbitant when you use LIRR/Metro North vs. Subway/city bus, but it's way more comfortable. Do you get it now why and what forces families to embrace family apartment living? |
Anonymous
I'm not sure what you're saying? People move to the suburbs all the time, whether affluent suburbs or affordable suburbs, from NYC. All the time. It's the standard migration. Chasing after the cheaper housing, more space and better schools. Are you saying this is not true? |
Anonymous
There are tons of children in Manhattan too, the schools are overcrowded, there are waitlists and the admission to popular private schools and selective publics is cutthroat, don't see the signs of it changing. Many families also have 3 kids, raising kids in 2 bedr apartments. That's the thing, people make do and many many families live in 2 bedr - families of 4 and 5. The rich live in larger apartments, which cost exponentially more and brand new luxury buildings, which are incredibly exorbitant. For apartment living culture to become ubiquitous there has to be very pricey RE per square foot, premium pricing on private homes, city centric employment centers, and sufficient density. DC has none of this and it's not happening any time soon, there will be pockets of families living temporarily or trying to save money and/or wanting urban lifestyle and fast commutes, those who live in some form of subsidized rent control situations or public housing, and those who are too poor to afford more space. The city is too residential and low rise, population is not crazy, burbs are too close, large luxury apartments that could lure families are too expensive compared with rowhomes and SFHs, still enough neighborhoods where housing is very inexpensive comparatively if you want to save and need space that are not too far out. |
Anonymous
Increasing the housing supply won't reduce prices. Economists have written papers about this. https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2018035pap.pdf |
Anonymous
That paper doesn't say what you say it says. |
Anonymous
I see people moving to the burbs all the time, none of you is wrong. But there are simply just A LOT OF PEOPLE. Even if some move, there are new ones to take their place and stay. Lots of people move in and out of NYC all the time. In our good zoned elementary school the classes are always stuffed to the max, there are never empty spots even for a day. A kid moves away in the middle of the year, the very next day a new kid is taking the spot. True story. And there is simply not a mass exodus. My kid is going to MS now, so for all elementary years the core 70% of families did stay in the local area. Many of classmates are going to the MS with no indication of anyone moving. We do have neighbors in our building move to the burbs, so there is that too, but somehow it doesn't seem to make a dent. |
Anonymous
| We have a very nice looking 55+ neighborhood going in nearby, and I know of at least one older neighbor who is considering moving there to get away from the neighborhood kids who are destroying her hard and crashing their bikes into her cars. Their moms do nothing to control their children. I can't blame these neighbors; wish I could move there too but I'm not old enough yet. |
Anonymous
| ^^destroying her yard^^ |
Anonymous
And the article's data point is NYC post 9-11. |
Anonymous
"Even if a city were able to ease some supply constraints to achieve a marginal increase in its housing stock, the city will not experience a meaningful reduction in rental burdens." |
Anonymous
|
r apartment living culture to become ubiquitous there has to be very pricey RE per square foot, premium pricing on private homes, city centric employment centers, and sufficient density. DC has none of this and it's not happening any time soon, there will be pockets of families living temporarily or trying to save money and/or wanting urban lifestyle and fast commutes, those who live in some form of subsidized rent control situations or public housing, and those who are too poor to afford more space. The city is too residential and low rise, population is not crazy, burbs are too close, large luxury apartments that could lure families are too expensive compared with rowhomes and SFHs, still enough neighborhoods where housing is very inexpensive comparatively if you want to save and need space that are not too far out.
DC definitely has city centric employment centers. The premium pricing on SFHs is what we are discussing. Someone said that DC is going to become child free because of gentrification. Granted we are not there yet, at least for middle class families. There are still affordable SFHs, EOTR, and depending on what state of repair you consider acceptable, and exactly what income we are talking about, a few other places. Making more apts/condos more affordable with more supply would certainly help, and I think that is the direction much regional leadership wants to go in. As for the suburbs, large parts of the suburbs inside the beltway are already out of reach for middle class folks to afford a SFH. Which is why you now also see middle and UMC people with kids in apts/condos in there, especially in North Arlingon and Falls Church. There is still PG County of course, and a few other places inside the beltway. But again, my point was never that DC would become just like NYC. It was that as SFHs in DC become more expensive, the way to make it possible for non rich families to afford to live in DC, is for apt/condo living to become more acceptable for families. I don't see anything in your post contradicting that, other than your optimism that SFHs in DC will remain affordable for a long time. |
Anonymous
|
New York City is expensive because lots of people want to live there.
Many other people don't live there because it is expensive. They live somewhere else. If you tried to reduce housing prices in New York City by increasing the housing supply and you actually did build enough units to affect prices, you would encourage more people to move there because now it would be within their budgets. That would push prices back up. In that scenario, I don't know what is accomplished, unless the goal is to encourage as many people as possible to live in New York instead of somewhere else. |