Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small deal.

Really? I'd consider it a big factor in choosing a home.

+1

This, plus no sidewalks are a deal breaker - mostly because the no sidewalks areas are too expensive NOT to have sidewalks. Ridiculous.

Yeah. No sidewalks is a bigger deal. I'm not a fan of visible power lines though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small deal.

Really? I'd consider it a big factor in choosing a home.

+1

This, plus no sidewalks are a deal breaker - mostly because the no sidewalks areas are too expensive NOT to have sidewalks. Ridiculous.

I dint think it affects property values. It's not like one house has it and the house across the street doesn't.

I live in Cleveland Park and would love to see the wires buried like they are in Woodley and Georgetown. Pepco has actually been "heavying up" the above ground wires, putting in taller poles (often without removing the old ones) and stringing more cable. The result is that Pepco butchers the tree canopy, often cutting major branches on the street side of trees - which leaves them unbalanced and likely to topple toward houses in a major storm. People talk a lot about green energy and conservation, and a thick tree canopy reduces air conditioning demand in the warmer months significantly. DC should study how other cities have set up financing schemes so that utilities can borrow at low interest rates to bury their infrastructure to improve reliability and enhance the environment. Sadly, though, it's pretty clear that the present administration and council do basically what Pepco (soon Exelon) wants.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So if you are the type who only thinks new builds are good and loves cookie-cutter McMansions in a new subdevelopment, then you may actually care about those things.

And this. This issue has never occurred to me and I have bought four houses.

Weird. I guess in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

You would make it a deal breaker for a house? THAT's weird.

Everything is above ground where we live and prices keep rising, so ....

Anonymous wrote:

So if you are the type who only thinks new builds are good and loves cookie-cutter McMansions in a new subdevelopment, then you may actually care about those things.

And this. This issue has never occurred to me and I have bought four houses.

Weird. I guess in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

So if you are the type who only thinks new builds are good and loves cookie-cutter McMansions in a new subdevelopment, then you may actually care about those things.

And this. This issue has never occurred to me and I have bought four houses.

Anonymous wrote:Well none of them are buried in any of the areas in my close-in suburb, so you would have to rule out entire regions.

This.

The neighborhoods are going to be what they are. Around here, the older, more established neighborhoods are going to have above-ground utilities unless the house is an in-fill house, knockdown, or had a major renovation. So if you are the type who only thinks new builds are good and loves cookie-cutter McMansions in a new subdevelopment, then you may actually care about those things.

Below-ground is nicer, but I would never actually put that on the "list"

Well none of them are buried in any of the areas in my close-in suburb, so you would have to rule out entire regions.

It is much better to have them buried. But there are bunches of old neighborhoods where this was never done and never will be. I'd prefer a house across from
The poles rather than one with he pole on its property which is what I have now but it's at the street and my house is set back pretty far so I can't see it from inside anyway.

Anonymous wrote:Small deal.

Really? I'd consider it a big factor in choosing a home.

Small deal.

Do above ground wires on the street have a big impact on property values? It seems so much better to have them buried. Do realtors know if this is a big deal or small deal? Thanks