Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Danbury Station in Washington, DC


Danbury Station is offering "new townhomes in Washington DC. Just minutes from Bolling Airforce Base and I-295. Offers one car garages." Based Priced from the 300's.

"Danbury Station is conveniently located near Bolling Air Force Base and I-295 at the intersection of S. Capitol Street and Danbury Street in the Southwest quadrant of Washington, DC. Danbury will be part of the new redevelopment of the Bellevue neighborhood!! Brand new Centex Homes floorplans will be introduced to this community which will include three levels of finished space, a rear load garage, 2 Bedrooms and 1-2 Bathrooms."

It is a low income neighborhood that has a high crime rate. Will Centex Homes be able to sell all the new townhouses under construction at their target price?

45 comments:

  1. This is a gutsy attempt. Bolling AFB has been ramping up personnel with the large gains in Defense Intelligence Agency and the Director of National Intelligence moving on to the base temporarily. Can the developers convince some of the employees to move closer to work in exchange for a dicey neighborhood with little amenities? One thing's sure, it beats commuting from Fredericksburg.

    ReplyDelete
  2. When I was looking for a rental a couple of months ago, I came across one on Craig's List for $1600 in this development. One drive down there made me decide it was not a good idea. The metro station closest to this is Congress Heights, and the walk from this neighborhood to that metro station is particularly unsafe. I would not rent there, much less buy.

    Northern Virginia Bubble Blog

    ReplyDelete
  3. Let's intepret what David really means:

    low income neighborhood = black people

    ReplyDelete
  4. Maybe David would feel safer living in such a scary neighborhood if the building put up a high fence around the perimeter and had guards patrolling the grounds.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Crime is crime, no matter what color the people are committing it. This is not a race issue, it's a crime issue.

    ReplyDelete
  6. $300K for a whole house anywhere in DC seems like a great opportunity for someone who is just getting into their first home. When I read the disdain a lot of these "starter-home" areas are held in, I can't help but wonder whether the posters realize that as recently as 10 - 15 years ago areas such as Dupont Circle, Mount Pleasant, and Adams Morgan were no more "safer" or filled with amenities (stores/restaurants) than these areas are today. Places such as Shaw and Logan Circle were still crime-filled and out-right dangerous as recently as 5 - 6 years ago. Individuals with little cash, but lots of courage and foresight, went in and bought homes in the areas and changed them for the better. The "I can't afford to buy anywhere but in a bad neighborhood" dilema isn't anything new ... It's always existed. And yes, some folks are lucky in that they've got wealthy parents to help them move right into the kind of neighborhood they want to be in right out of school ... Most of us aren't that lucky.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oh, not the race card! Folks in DC are masters at this cynical game. Paint David as a racist and avoid addressing the argument he makes. Classic Opposition Politics 101. Good DC sport, chaps.

    As for you, Lance. Well, in the words of the Gipper, "There you go again" - with your faith-based arguments, that is:

    "I can't help but wonder whether the posters realize that as recently as 10 - 15 years ago areas such as Dupont Circle, Mount Pleasant, and Adams Morgan were no more 'safer' or filled with amenities (stores/restaurants) than these areas are today."

    Shouldn't the housing market - and those who promote - be required by law to post a warning like mutual fund companies are - "past performance does not guarantee future returns"?

    ReplyDelete
  8. I love this. Idle real estate agents = civil rights activists. Nice try, fellahs.

    And Lance, Dupont and Adams Morgan were not much different 10-15 years ago than today. More affordable, sure, but other than that pretty much the same.

    Did you know that Senator John D. Rockefeller IV has lived in Mount Pleasant for decades? I bet you didn't. That neighborhood hasn't changed that much either. Oh, except for condo prices.

    I doubt he'll be running over to Bolling to bid on one of these things, though.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Exactly. And his rent no doubt reflects his surroundings, unlike his new, owner-neighbors who have paid Foxhall prices for tacky little houses. Good for David.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Oh wait, all the land near the new baseball stadium suddenly became valuable because of bubble factors. Not.

    Betcha David and others who stay out of "high crime" neighborhoods eventually end up going to lunch before a Nationals game in Anacostia and talk about what a nice place it is. Then they'll go back home after the game to where they are "safer".

    ReplyDelete
  11. So basically, Sen. Rockerfeller lives in a "high crime neighborhood"? Next you're going to be telling us that he never ventures outside in his neighborhood; or that he lives there because he doesn't like the neighborhood.

    Face it: Sen Rockerfeller has bigger 'nads than you. He's the one who is supposed to be the candy-ass, not you poor working stiffs.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dupont and Adams-Morgan weren't any different 15 years ago than they are today? Are you being serious? They are incredibly safer, with many more restaurants/bars/clubs, and many more working people (and less drg dealers and hookers).

    And I notice you forgot to include Mount Pleasant in your comparison. Amazing coincidence.

    Also, Sen. Rockefeller lives in Crestwood, not Mount Pleasant. Crestwood has always been known for its single-family homes and upper middle class black families. It is not the same as Mount Pleasant, neither in history or demographics.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Here is a simple, oft-unspoken truth. When white suburbanites venture into "off the beaten path" neighborhoods in a city with a 60+% black population, they will find themselves the only white face around.

    This, in turn, immediately translates into "not a safe place", no matter how sophisticated the suburbanite believes himself to be.

    If you dispute this, yet you go home to a building and a neighborhood that are predominately white (Upper NW DC, Clarendon, Fairfax, Bethesda, etc.) then you have some re-thinking to do.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Crestwood, Mount Pleasant." These are distinctions reserved for real estate agents. Just like 15th and K NE is "Capitol Hill." Right.

    Besides, the people who bought in these places years ago bought something no one else would have - it was cheap and affordable. That is the way to go.

    And I will not stand for any Realtor telling me what my neighborhood was like 10-15 years ago - I was there, you can not have been, or you are a liar.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Right. It's all about distinctions made by real estate agents. And, oh yeah! The fricking city too. And the historical societies of each neighborhood. And the ANCs of each neighborhood.

    I'm not a realtor, real estate agent or anyone connected to that industry. I'm just someone who knows DC history and knows where different neighborhoods are.

    And oh yeah! I like to know what I am talking about before making myself out to be an expert and instead looking like a buffoon.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Then show yourself, anonymous. And when you do, tell us why it is such a fabulous idea to buy a townhouse/condo in front of Bolling at what is likely nine or ten times neighborhood median income. Is it the nightlife, retail amenities or world class public elementary school that justifies the price? Easy access to 295? What?

    ReplyDelete
  17. dc-too said "Is it the nightlife, retail amenities or world class public elementary school that justifies the price?"

    "justify the price" ... ?? What century are you living in? $300K translates to something like only 6 times the median family income for US families ... about as cheap historically as it's ever been!

    ReplyDelete
  18. There. I have revealed myself.

    ReplyDelete
  19. waiting for godotJune 20, 2006 2:11 PM

    I am not a racist, I dislike everyone equally

    ReplyDelete
  20. The SW Waterfront does have a lot of potential, and may not be far away. I'm not particularly down on this neighborhood. (I also don't think it will be Dupont in 10 years, and Dupont was not a disaster 10 years ago either).

    Having said that, as someone else pointed out, 5-6 times the median national income is a lot to pay for a townhouse. A lot more than I think it's worth.

    A Redskins fan

    ReplyDelete
  21. Perhaps. But as you have posted on here multiple times, if you were in the market (which you have said you are not), you would not pay more than $200k for just about anything.

    ReplyDelete
  22. DC_Three: Touche. I am impressed.

    Lance, "Only 6 times" median income is outrageously high, particularly in a neighborhood like that. And it is nine or ten times median income for that neighborhood. "Historically" speaking, you are way out of line.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Is it the nightlife, retail amenities or world class public elementary school that justifies the price? Easy access to 295? What?

    It's the wonderful sewage smell that permeates the area. Yum yum!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous said...
    The SW Waterfront does have a lot of potential, and may not be far away. I'm not particularly down on this neighborhood. (I also don't think it will be Dupont in 10 years, and Dupont was not a disaster 10 years ago either).

    Having said that, as someone else pointed out, 5-6 times the median national income is a lot to pay for a townhouse. A lot more than I think it's worth.

    A Redskins fan

    This isn't the SW waterfront where the new stadium is going. This is the SW waterfront that is the armpit of the armpit of DC, south of the Anacostia river.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Silly me. I forgot the appeal of the neighborhood with a gentle south wind blowing across the Blue Plains sewage treatment facility...

    ReplyDelete
  26. "Face it: Sen Rockerfeller has bigger 'nads than you. He's the one who is supposed to be the candy-ass, not you poor working stiffs."

    > Wow, the macho, hard-core studs on this blog! Talk dirty to us, big man!


    "Lance, 'Only 6 times" median income is outrageously high, particularly in a neighborhood like that. And it is nine or ten times median income for that neighborhood. 'Historically' speaking, you are way out of line."

    > Things like history, speculation, and economics matter little to Lance. You see, there's this new real estate paradigm he peddles here and on another blog.

    The rest of us, well we just don't get it. His esoteric blog postings are years ahead of their time. He's the modern day housing market's intellectual champion - its Isaiah Berlin; the DC housing market's Cato, preaching the gospel of never-ending real estate returns to the cynical masses enamored by the media's newest dictorial darling, Caeser the Almighty Housing Bubble...

    ReplyDelete
  27. Oh, what a shitty, pretentious little place DC is. Ghetto-ized (not just in its real estate, but politics) and overpriced.

    Like a cheap, over-the-hill, Confederate whore trying to convince the world she's worth the ARM.

    Now, Rome. That's a city. Come on over here guys. The food is good and the women -- damn...

    ReplyDelete
  28. steinravnik-

    Oops, you are right. My bad. Should have known that a townhouse selling for only 5-6 times median income was too good to be true :)

    A Redskins fan

    ReplyDelete
  29. Great article on what determines median home prices in any given locale ... and why rents currently are less than mortgages.

    www.efficientfrontier.com/ef/405/housing.htm

    ReplyDelete
  30. http://matrix.millersamuel.com/?p=697

    See how DC's real estate is faring on CME's housing futures exchange.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Housing starts up 5% last month, according to the Wall St. Journal. PWN3D again, Davey.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous said...
    Housing starts up 5% last month, according to the Wall St. Journal. PWN3D again, Davey.

    I wouldn't be throwing a party in celebration of this. This only means that there be an even bigger glut of inventory added to the already historical amount. And what does the law of supply/demand say when this happens?

    ReplyDelete
  33. "
    I wouldn't be throwing a party in celebration of this. This only means that there be an even bigger glut of inventory added to the already historical amount. And what does the law of supply/demand say when this happens? "

    Yeah, I'm sure those self-interested economic actors are just running headlong into your scilla and charybdis.

    ReplyDelete
  34. "$300K translates to something like only 6 times the median family income for US families ... about as cheap historically as it's ever been!"

    4 times median income was the historic norm for DC prior to the boom.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Yeah, I'm sure those self-interested economic actors are just running headlong into your scilla and charybdis.

    Actors? What are you talking about? Oh, perhaps you mean "factors"? What factors are you talking about. Inventory? Inventory is at record levels, that's a fact. Sales are down- also a fact.

    Sorry to rain on your party, but adding more inventory at this juncture in time only means a bigger price correction in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  36. 4 times median income was the historic norm for DC prior to the boom.
    It was actually around 3. At any rate, it's deviated far from any historical norm.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "4 times median income was the historic norm for DC prior to the boom.
    It was actually around 3. At any rate, it's deviated far from any historical norm. "

    What's the median in NW DC? What's the median in NE DC?
    SW? SE?

    The city is divided into a number of very different areas. Any serious analyst would want to know these things.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Do you know how pathetic you sound trying to spin every piece of positive housing news into bad news for homeowners?

    Boy, you sound desperate. David, I think we have a bitter realtor here...

    ReplyDelete
  39. "
    Hey buddy, you said it. You're the imbecile. "

    Yeah, me and everybody else who used it in 428,000 Google hits. Not you, the guy who holds himself out as an analyst, but barely understands English.

    ReplyDelete
  40. What does an economic actor have to do with anything, Mr. Wizard?

    If you think you're so smart, explain your position instead of trying to start flamewars under an anonymous username.

    ReplyDelete
  41. "What does an economic actor have to do with anything, Mr. Wizard?

    If you think you're so smart, explain your position instead of trying to start flamewars under an anonymous username. "

    I was refering to homebuilders, shitforbrains. I can't believe you've humiliated yourself like this, Mr. Housing Analyst. Time to take down your blog.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I was refering to homebuilders

    Right, so a builder is an economic actor. Now we're starting to understand the meaning of real estate. Please continue Mr. Wizard...

    ReplyDelete
  43. I checked my zip in NoVa. and was suprised to that there has been no home sales since April.

    Also does anyone know why a seller requires you to use their company for closing? That is starting to show up in No.VA.

    thz

    ReplyDelete
  44. Are sellers requiring buyers to use their settlement companies? That's a bit odd, since traditionally the buyer picks the settlement company for closing. I wonder if some real estate offices don't have settlement subsidiaries and require their listings to use their companies? That would make some sense since then the real estate office would get the 3% commission plus some of the closing costs.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Hello Fritz the cat.

    Thats what I thought...milking more money by requiring their settlement office. Perhaps a kickback to the owner?

    stcamp

    ReplyDelete