July 14, 2006
Young and Not So Rich
As housing markets have exploded over the last several years, the pricey luxury condos springing up in many neighborhoods are seen as a sure sign that the city is on its way to a fully revitalized future. However, great as ultra-modern condos may be for developers and landlords, they don't exactly fit the requirements of aspiring young artists, chefs, actors, and entrepreneurs (much less students, teachers, and cops) who can bring a great deal of talent and ambition to the city. What's worse, despite modest incomes, these people are often seen in the same light as the high-income lawyers, lobbyists and financiers who are more likely to isolate themselves with their wealth if they even choose to remain in the city at all after starting a family.
Coinciding with the housing boom, the market for apartments has tightened considerably, and rents have risen in most parts of the city. A shortage of moderately priced housing could stymie D.C.'s redevelopment efforts if the very people the city is trying to attract - people who will invest and plant roots in the city - can't find a place to live. Could it be that all this development, touted by D.C. officials as an indicator of "progress," is actually just pushing out to the suburbs those talented young people who want to contribute their talents (and tax dollars) to D.C.?
Photo by ohad*
For any city on the long road to revitalization, maintaining such a core population of ambitious, creative people who are committed to their neighborhood and city is just as important as other factors - good schools, safe streets, convenient transportation. These are the people who invest themselves in the local businesses that give a city character and make it great - places like the galleries and cafes along Barracks Row, the restaurants, boutiques, and music clubs around U Street and 14th, theaters like the Warehouse or Rorschach, and local (for now) pubs such as The Argonaut or Wonderland. The success of such neighborhood cornerstones is crucial. But in order for them to be successful, the people who make these ideas reality count on moderately priced housing and services to support them as they build their business.
Group housing does provide a cheaper option close to the city's core. But as the Post reports, there is a serious shortage of it, a trend that extends to other types of moderately priced housing in the city as well. What other options does a young, underpaid overachiever have?
Much as we might be loath to admit it, D.C. could look to New York City for some ideas on how to deal with this issue. New York has long been known as a city of exorbitant rents that pushes low to mid-income people to the outer boroughs or [gasp] New Jersey. City official are becoming worried that such patterns might be draining New York of an important group of residents. In a recent New York Times article, the director of a non-profit community development organization pointed out that "young professionals get less attention than other financially struggling groups because they are more mobile and have options. [However] they, too, are wrestling with the city’s shortage of lower-cost housing." This trend can have a large negative impact on a city's development efforts. As one of New York's chief economists said, “Sometimes we underestimate how important that is in generating the city’s creativity. To the degree that housing costs become a barrier to that group, it can in the long run sap us of that creative potential that we would otherwise have.”
As a result, New Yorkers are finding innovative ways to offer the highly creative yet lowly paid the urban environs they desire. For example, the article describes how a recent trend of mid-income housing co-ops is helping young professionals who are not exactly rolling in dough find a good place to live in the city. Described as urban dorms for adults, the idea is to bring young, creative, and not-so-rich people together to share an apartment complex. In addition to keeping housing costs down, a careful screening process enhances the safety of the building. The concept also brings together diverse groups of talented young people, building unique communities that might not otherwise exist.
While D.C. does have limited programs to help mid-income people find their place in the city, we hear too many stories from friends unable to find housing they can afford in the District. All too often, Northern Virginia or Maryland ends up hosting these potential city dwellers instead. High-end development as well as preservation and creation of low-cost housing are both critical to Washington's future. But like New York, the District would do well to remember that in between the rich and the poor lies a population that also has a great deal to offer. It would be a shame for D.C. to cede all that talent, energy, and ambition to suburbia, just because Craigslist could not deliver the right price.
|
Yes, but I've found the solution. Move to Shaw in a group house of 14 people. I pay almost nothing to live in my yuppie tenament, and the location is awesome. I may kill my roommates if they don't start doing some goddamn dishes however.
does anyone know the avg rent for a 1-brd or 2-brd by districh in dc? just curious.
Great story. Artistic dude here who has a well-paying association job and does income-bringing artistic things on the side. Meanwhile, my rent was just raised $56 dollars this year -- the biggest increase to date since I moved here in 1998. Back in '98, a studio apartment in my building cost me $680. The same-styled studio in the same building today costs $1200. To live in a 1-bedroom in the Dupont/Logan/Adams Morgan area is at least $1200 to $1500. I figured out that that would be approx. 65% of my monthly income.
Living in the 'burbs ain't as cheap as it sounds. Many of us live in the District because we don't have cars and like walking, seeing contemporaries on the sidewalks, and using the Metro system. Try apartment hunting in Arlington or Silver Spring (near a Metro) and the prices are nearly identical.
Am I to move *way* out in order to save a few hundred dollars on rent, only to spend that savings on the cost of owning and operating a car? And with the high cost of gas these days .... oy!
I agree completely here. Some folks are simply being priced out of living in DC. I haven't had roommates or lived in a group situation since 1996. I make more money than I did in 1996, yet I still can barely afford to live on my own. Granted, I did not take the "professional route" and commit to a high-paying career job. But I am a college educated, smart and hard working dude who just wants to make a living wage.
The American Dream: own a house and car. I'd settle for a 1 bedroom apartment in a neighborhood where I won't fear for my life.
Sorry, but I'm not buying it. Where's the data to back that up? Everyone I know that wants to live in DC finds a place in DC. There are plenty of affordable places to rent or own in DC. Sorry, not everyone can - or ever will - be able to afford Georgetown, Chinatown or Dupont. There are other great neighborhood, and maybe Mt. Pleasant and Columbia Heights is getting expensive, Petworth, Park View, and Brookland still have plenty of deals. In fact, there is a really nice building right above the Petworth metro where you can rent an old but cool apartment for 700.00 a month. There big too. Maybe there are just too many people who think the choice is Adams Morgan or Fairfax.
It's not like this problem is exactly new. "Hip" neighborhoods become excessively expensive and only rich folks can live there. Hipsters then usurp another struggling area, anoint it "hip," and the cycle repeats. The people that give a neighborhood its coolness become something of a Hipster Appleseed, spreading their fruity coolness to the barren urban enclaves. Arguably, it's healthy for the city, as these are the folks at the forefront of urban revitalization.
The thought that they will desert to suburbia is preposterous. Aspiring young artists, chefs, and actors aren't about to set up shop in Columbia anytime soon. These people are innately urban.
seriously. I can barely afford my studio apartment. forget the dream of ever owning a house... not in DC!
How ironic that the same board lamenting the poor and downtrodden of DC and how the city elites forget all about them turns right around and publishes this NW-centric view of city living.
I'm with Mike on this one. Why can't the creative and ambitious put some of that talent toward finding somewhere to live other than G'town, Adams Morgan or Dupont?
Petworth is affordable, as is Shaw, Brookland, and the DC side of Takoma. NE Capitol Hill (north of H Street) is also pretty cheap. The Georgia Ave corridor north of Euclid is dirt cheap. And let's not forget the much maligned east of the river....it's rents don't exactly match those of the Riviera.
Whatsamaata? Too many dangerous black people in those neighborhoods for your artistic temperament?
Comparing the housing price problem in D.C. to that in New York is a pretty serious exaggeration. The distance from Petworth, Crestwood, Brookland or any number of neighborhoods with reasonable priced housing to Downtown D.C. is nowhere approaching the distance from the distance you'd have to live from Midtown to get a proportionally priced apartment. Those neighborhoods are all cheaper than apartments in the inner ‘burbs too.
As a Petworth resident, who could no longer afford an apartment for my partner and I in Columbia Heights -- I agree with the sentiments above: there are lots of great places outside of the "cool" areas and people are starting to notice. There are lots of abandoned storefronts too, in the commercial districts on Kennedy Street and 14th Street around Spring Street and at Colorado Avenue. But the city could help here: it could look to Providence, RI, which created loan and tax programs for artist and designer businesses to fill it's vacant storefronts. It could create a TIF to create a design area, and it could ease the construction permitting process to allow more artists to convert industrial buildings into live/work lofts. Real lofts with industrial elevators. Room to do large scale works. Not overpriced "loft-like" condos. They could also have not taken an actual club and artist district like that around the Navy Yard: and turned it into a baseball-based entertainment theme park. The problem is that artists and designers aren't even on the raider screen with DC planners. Or even authenticity. The 'powers that be' seem to be only interested in redeveloping every square inch of the city into outdoor malls, with chain restaurants and stores and hastily built condos.
and yes, quite frankly, as a single woman who lives by herself - many neighborhoods outside of the NW area DO have too many dangerous people (read: men) in them (though I'm happy to include dangerous white, hispanic, and asians as well as blacks in that mix). I'm by no means safe living in NW, but am I SAFER? Yeah, I'd be willing to bet I am.
I agree with DCMatt--rent in the suburbs is not very much lower than in DC, especially once you factor in the cost of commuting. I lived in Fairfax until 2003 and at the end spent $9 on metro and parking a day, plus the cost of gas and the tedium of the commute. That's easily $200+ a month, not counting the annoyance, and rents are generally not $200 cheaper than in DC (maybe a little bigger, though). I live on upper Mass Ave now and spend a whopping $2.50 per day on a 20 minute commute to work, and my rent is below $900. It's not exactly glamorous or happening, but it's a safe area and there's good bus service.
I pay about 40% of my income to live in Columbia Heights, in a neighborhood that is by no means safe (my upstairs neighbor got his nose broken two days ago when he was mugged), and yet, because of all of the ridiculous high-end condos going up around me (look at all the places going up on 14th street), my rent is going to skyrocket. I think a lot of you have missed the point the author was trying to make- it's not about which neighborhood is "hip", "cool", or "trendy", it's about providing viable housing options somewhere between luxury condos and section 8 housing.
I just returned to the area after three years. I lived in Philly for the first half and NYC for the second half. I grew up in Prince George's County and all my life thought that a house with a yard in the 'burbs was where it's at. Now that I'm back here with my mom in the 'burbs I'm struggling to readjust and find myself running to DC every chance that I get. My friends think I'm nuts for not wanting to own a car and viewing ZipCar as a more economically sound option. My best friend and I have been discussing all the places in DC that are now on the borderline of prosperity and poverty; we see plenty of options outside of the Adams Morgan/Dupont Circle/U Street Corridor/Georgetown areas of the city. One person tells me that it's cheaper to live in Maryland than in the city, however you make up for the cost difference in your daily commute by car(especially by car) or metro. I just think everyone I know has their priorities messed up along with a lot of other people in this area.
my bo and i live in cohi and lvoe it. there are many of the gays here. it is unsafe though. many poor black men with guns robbing people.
I'm not buying this 'crisis'. We all make tradeoffs when we find property and we can't have everything. Sure, prices in the suburbs are often as expensive as they are in the city, but that's most often due to proximity to metro or being in a wealthy neighborhood. If one of your requirements is to live near metro and ditch your car, expect to pay for it. As has been pointed out, there are plenty of affordable options in the city, but you have to acknowledge the fact that you can't socially engineer affordable housing in the most expensive markets in the city. Stop lamenting the fact that poor to middle income 'artists' and others can't walk out their front door and stumble onto dupont circle. For one, no one is prevented from contributing to the culture of the city by living away form tis center, and second, new neighborhoods are often created by these kinds of urban shifts. Would you rather that everyone with something to offer become congregated in a tiny area of the city, or that the city becomes even more of a network of diverse, unique, and interesting neighborhoods that each contribute to the overall tapestry of our city. Stop whining about how 'normal' people can't choose to live wherever they want - that's reality; and stop thinking that social engineering, price controls, subsidies, etc. can solve the world's income inequities.
Has the thought ever crossed your mind that the city doesn't care about the creative class because its not in the cities best interests long term?????? DC is not able to tax all those VA's and MD's who come in and tear up the infrastructure and services but pay zero in taxes....Where can the city go to make up the difference but property taxes. The Developers and the city are in the same bed and you can bitch and complain all you want but you'll still keep coming to the city because there is absolutely nothing to do in the suburbs...I feel bad for the people in MD who left to escape the crime because its slowly but surely getting pushed out to em....
I agree with Clare. Why does every new development have to be 'luxury' condos? How about 'nice and affordable.' Now there's a good marketing pitch for a post-housing bubble economy.
I live in Silver Spring because the rent is cheaper than most close in DC neighborhoods and frankly Brookland and Petworth are far more suburban in feel than Silver Spring... granted they have row homes but other than that there isn't too much too do nearby, hence the reason every weekend silver spring is brought to a crawl with traffic from DC residents living in those area just south of here. Not to mention I live very near the metro station and large bus hub so I don't have to dish out the money for a car and my rent is quite a bit cheaper than anything in DC with even close to the same amenties. Then there is the fact that silver spring also has broad racial AND socio-economic deiversity good luck finding that in any DC neighborhood (new hispters in the process of kicking out the very poor traditional residents doesn't count). So as much as I'd love to live in DC, I've accepted that I'll just be a "suburbanite" in Silver Spring until I leave the area.
While the rising costs of rent is pushing out artists, non-profit workers, activists or anyone who has a general interest in the northwest part of the city(really, who wasn't interested in living in DC long term when they moved to Columbia Heights/Petworth/Mt. Pleasant area before the housing boom?), the worst part is who they are being replaced by. Say what you will about artist/hipsters being the first wave of gentrifiers to a new neighborhood, but at least they're not the cookie cutter unoriginal, uncreative, more money than sense yuppie scum who have been taking their place. If you're dumb enough to buy a "luxury condo" in columbia heights or off of Georgia ave, I hope you and your 'the world owes me' attitude gets mugged and scares you back to the bodunk midwest town you came from.
I am "normal" -- young, single, educated, non-profit employee. My complaint is not that I can't choose to live *wherever* I want. It's that there don't seem to be *any* choices for me that offer a lifestyle I can deal with. I don't want to live in the suburbs and drive for hours to get anywhere. I picked a city for a reason ...
I'd love to live in Petworth/Brookland/Shaw/etc., but even places there are out of my price range, and the places where I might find something that I can afford (8th Ward, Anacostia, across-the-river, etc.) are so dangerous that I wouldn't be safe walking down the street at night. I don't care what color anybody's skin is, but I can read the crime reports!
I moved to DC two years ago hoping to stay here long-term, but I'm sad to say that it's not going to happen. I'll be interested to see, 10 years from now, what the city's like when no "normal" people or families have managed to stay and the condo boom is dead and buried.
Rothko, the reason that luxury condos are built, is that they make more money
Rothko, the reason that luxury condos are built, is that they make more money.
Not to mention that most people, money aside, would rather live in an apartment advertised as "luxury" rather than one advertised as "cheap." I remember once reading a prospectus for a company that made home appliances, which said something along the lines of "we don't make very good products, but they're significantly cheaper than the competition's." That was the only time I ever saw a company admit that their products weren't "state of the art" or "of the highest quality" or some similar boast. Everyone else was above average. Likewise, all condos are luxury.
There are plenty of listings on Craigslist right now that are looking for roomates at 500-700 a month in desireable places. I'm sure you can find even better deals with a bit more dilligence. These are affordable for most young professionals (who were apparently the subject of this essay).
I have a lot more sympathy for lower or middle class families looking for housing than I do for a 20 somethings who are too picky to take what they can get for that relatively short period of their lives when their income is at the lowest it will ever be.
Young people and cities are like water and foundations: somehow they'll find a way in. It's families I worry about.
While artists, activists, and so forth are an indispensable part of a city, let's not forget that their salaries are low because their supply exceeds the demand for them. For every genuinely talented graphic designer you know, don't you know three kids who could draw decently but got into the field primarily because they liked to smoke weed and didn't want to [insert hippie cliche about working for the man]? No one likes corporate jobs, but unfortunately society doesn't function without CPAs. When you go into a creative, low-paying field you take the risk that you don't have the talent to succeed; and it's up to you to make it, because the rewards are potentially astronomical. Reid is right - Kyle with the hemp bracelet is not who we should be worrying about, because he'll make it if he's good enough, and if not there are 75 hemp bracelets behind him; rather it's young families that should be the focus of our attention.
I cannot wait to leave all this behind. My biggest problem with this city is how much the rent is for nothing. I cannot understand how people are willing to pay this much to live in DC. It's small, full of crime, and not particularly amazing.
Thank you Reid and Matt for injecting some sanity into this discussion.
As much as I'd like to vent some spleen agains "cookie cutter unoriginal, uncreative, more money than sense yuppie scum" like Mr. SickAndTired, grown-ups realize that if you want a nice/safe/luxury place to live in a neighborhood that has amenities, you have to get a job that pays the bills.
It's a much bigger problem for the city that service industry folks can't afford to live in the area, and given the limited extent of our mass transit, probably can't afford to have a car to get to their jobs. "Customer Service" generally sucks in DC, and I believe it's largely because decent folks who would otherwise work various sales and restaurant jobs wind up living somewhere cheaper and won't commute into DC.
Like Matt said, if you want to be successful as an "artist" then you have to be a damn good one. If you can't afford the lifestyle you want doing your "art," then think about either settling for what you can afford, or go back to school and learn to do something that pays well (nursing, accounting, etc.). Otherwise, quit your whining and deal with your "creative" lifestyle choices.
I agree w/ Anti-Hip, Reid & Matt; however I do think it's a shame when cities lose young creative types, and I don't really like the idea of cities without communities of artists, musicians, writers and the like. But the idea government and/or nonprofits subsidizing housing for them is a little disconcerting.
I can see the usefulness in areas that need revitalizing (the nascent projects along the Rt. 1 corridor in Hyattsville & Mt. Ranier should be interesting); however it's hard to worry about taking care of people who are generally young, mobile, single, childless, and educated, and have elected career paths that don't tend to offer steady income even though they had/have other options. The housing crisis is so much more disruptive to lower-income families, who have less flexibility when it comes to things like safety, living arrangements, commuting, etc., and need to worry about things that the artist types usually don't (schools, childcare, etc.).
I think it's a shame when housing costs put a squeeze on those who contribute to the cultural life of the city; however they do have more options that the families who really need to be the focus for affordable housing programs.
Oh one more thing....SickAndTired accuses the "yuppie scum" of having an attitude of "the world owes me."
Wow, that's rich.....too bad "artists" aren't paid for their unintentional irony.
I agree with sqdc. People pursuing artistic careers know full well that sacrifices must be made to sustain that career. (Funny...the successful artists I know don't seem to be suffering from any illusions otherwise--what does that tell you?) My wife and I both participate in the city's artistic community, and while I'd say it took us a bit longer than most people to find the sort of full time work that supported us financially AND provided the time and space to work hard at our avocations, we are, more and more, finding ways to do it, and consequently, live pretty comfortably.
So, while I think highly of Richard Florida's thoughts on the importance of a "creative class" and the value they add to an urban environment, at bottom I can't escape the fact that I made a conscious choice to pursue the things I wanted to pursue. It's not at all equivalent to people in the city who are born into or end up through no fault of their own in desperate circumstances.
So while I think it's a good idea for urban communities to provide a welcoming environment for artists (and DC does a pretty good job at fostering one), I don't think that extends to the provision of subsidized housing. Wouldn't you reckon that a creative type should be able to apply a little creativity to that challenge?
I'm trying to think of a major city where living alone within 20 minutes walking of the business district and the major nightlife district is conceivable on entry-level non-profit salary. I can't, so I feel pretty fortunate despite the racial tension that consumes this area, and I'm not too surprised to feel the price squeeze. (But thanks to Mr. Graham's new rent control law I just might make it another year ...)
The truth is as Reid et al have said: families are the only viable community life, across all demographics. And unless there is some miracle in the school system, the present course will continue and maybe in ten or twenty years the artists who are pushed out today can look forward to another riot and the ensuing live-work bargains.
I'm trying to think of a major city where living within 20 minutes' walk of the business district and the major nightlife areas is conceivable on an entry-level nonprofit salary. I can't, so I'm feeling pretty fortunate despite the racial tension consuming this area, and I'm not too surprised to feel the price crunch. (Although thanks to Mr. Graham's new rent control law, I might make it another year...)
Reid et al are on the money: it's families that make a community viable, and barring some miracle in the school system we are likely to continue on the present trajectory--and perhaps ten, twenty years from now artists who are pushed out today can look forward to another riot or something to make the market collapse and live-work bargains available yet again.
I can't speak to the difficulties of graphic artists (or even if there are any), but Ian Svenonius wrote a nice piece about the relationship between real estate and rock music (based around the viability of drumsets in close quarters) that pretty well explains why at least one member of the band has to live in the suburbs, where houses with basements are more affordable. Link: http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/Content?oid=34073&category=22153
First, everything Matt said. Rents in the inner suburbs of DC are fairly comparable to those in DC. In fact, when I moved from my one-bedroom apartment in Alexandria to a much nicer one-bedroom apartment in Adams Morgan, my rent actually went down. I also got rid of my car, something that would have been a serious pain in Alexandria. Life can actually be much cheaper here in DC.
In some ways, that makes sense. School quality drives even the most dedicated city dwellers out of the district when their children reach a certain age. My neighborhood in Adams Morgan is filled with strollers, but there are almost no children over four here. Crime drives down demand too. As I heard some State Department worker sitting next to me at brunch in Adams Morgan say once, "I almost never come here, because, you know..,oooo, district,...scary."
Perhaps rents are slightly higher in Arlington for apartments comparable to those in DC, but that can, at least in part, be explained by the fact that someone choosing Arlington over DC has more money to spend on rent due to the large disparity in income tax loads.
this article reeks of yuppie apologia..
this article, on numerous acastions labels them as important to a thriving city.. with little to nunca factual info.
this article says a whole lot of nothing.
The antecedent to "them" is found in the independent clause of the post's second sentence.