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

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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[/quote]

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.[/quote]

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[/quote]

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.[/quote]

lol, this is the best summary I’ve read on the topic.[/quote]

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.  [/quote]

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?[/quote]

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.[/quote]

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.
[/quote]

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.[/quote]

^^ 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?[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics