Reply to Washington, DC Metropolitan Area's Housing Stock Is UGLY

Forum Index » Real Estate

Reply to "Washington, DC Metropolitan Area's Housing Stock Is UGLY"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I am the OP, and I have been away from this thread for a while.

Though I only submitted my original post, it appears that many of the subsequent posters have confused/conflated me with a subsequent poster who is currently house hunting with a $1.3 million budget.

That is not me, I am not currently house hunting, and I am not from Wichita (though a lovely place, I am sure).

I just think that the neighborhoods and subdivisions full of the 1990s' and 2000s' idea of "quality new builds" --  as well as the equally hideous add-on renovations to existing houses done during that era -- all with two-story foyers and family rooms; excessive square footage and improper scale, for no purpose other than to flex one's money muscle; a mishmash of architectural styles and influences; low ceilings (in older homes) or too-high of ceilings (in the new ones); extraneous design columns; tumbled marble backsplashes; vinyl windows; no interesting interior details; wall-to-wall carpet; builder's grade everything.

And for the poster who asked, I generally prefer the character, variety, detail, architectural vision and planning, and builder's quality and integrity of established neighborhoods on the West Coast.[/quote]
No one puts a gun to your head to look at these neighborhoods exclusively, and they are in no way unique to DC.

What's unique to DC is Georgetown rowhouses, Logan Circle italianates, Dupont Circle brownstone, and you could have marveled at those. If you prefer to pretend DC consists of latter-day subdivisions, I guess it says more about your selection bias than about DC in general.[/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