DC is Expensive Y'all
Since I will soon be looking for a new apartment to rent, the topic is fresh in my mind. Today I saw on Forbes that there are new rankings for the most expensive rental markets in the United States.
Washington, DC ranks 13th on the list, which seemed far lower than I would have guessed, but let's take a look at the markets that are actually more expensive than Washington, DC:
1. New York City - duh. 9.2 million people, 60% of which are renters, clearly there is going to be a larger range of prices than in most other cities. Demand is high, supply is limited, it's expensive as hell. On average $27.84 per square foot for a Class A apartment and $18.31 per square foot for Class B apartments. Class A would be your doormanned buildings in nice neighborhoods whereas Class B apartments are where the rest of us would live. There was no five year data to show if those numbers are increasing or decreasing, but I'd say its safe to assume they are going up.
2. San Francisco, CA - This did not surprise me. SF has always been expensive, both to buy a home or to rent an apartment. Class A apartments come in just slightly behind NYC at $27.17 and Class B at $19.91. So for those of us slumming it, it would be just as expensive in SF as in NYC. One thing to note is that in the past five years, the on average prices for rentals in the SF metro area has decreased nearly 20% for Class A units and 14% for Class B.
3. Los Angeles, CA - This one actually did surprise me because I have a lot of friends who live in LA who all pay far less in rent than I do or most people I know in DC. Class A units are $25.12 psf and Class B are $18.39 psf. That would mean the Class B apartments cost more in LA than in NYC! Seems odd to me. Especially since "LA" is a broad term used for a much larger geographic area than NYC. One thing to note is that pricing is increasing at 17% for A and 23% for B units.
4. Boston, MA - One of my favorite cities in the US, Boston comes in 4th with Class A units at $25.08 psf and B at $17.49 psf. There was a slight increase for B over the last five years, but both A and B unit pricing has remained relatively flat.
5. Honolulu, HI - I have nothing to say here. I'd prefer to stick with continental United States. Clearly HI is an expensive place to live. Limited land, limited supply, high-priced goods and services. It's a unique market for sure.
6. Northern NJ - Here is where I start to have my issue with the rankings. Clearly Northern NJ is NOT NYC, but I would still consider most of it suburban NYC. In any case, Class A units go for $23.35 psf and B for $15.80 psf. Little change over the last five years there as well.
7. Stamford - South CT - Again, this is another suburb of NYC. I know people who live there might argue that point, but whatever. It's a 'burb. An expensive one for sure. Class A - $23.22 psf. Class B - $14.30 psf.
8. Nassau-Suffolk, NY - Okay while I won't say this is a suburb, though it kind of is, I would point out that only 20% of the units there are even rentals. Class A - $22.40. Class B - $16.66. Pretty significant increases in rental pricing over the last five years, upwards of 15% in both categories of units.
9. Orange County, CA - While to me, a suburb of LA (though to me LA is basically a bunch of connected suburbs anyway), the OC comes in at 9th with Class A apartments at $21.71 psf and B at $17.94 psf, with large increases in rent over the last five years (15 - 20%). Maybe the popularity of shows like the OC or the Real Housewives of Orange County has made people flock there to live. Doubtful.
10. San Jose, CA - Part of the greater SF area if you ask me. Class A - $21.47. Class B - $17.51. Both classes have dropped nearly 30% in prices over the last five years.
11. San Diego, CA - Ahhh, the beautiful sunny city in the south of California. I knew it was expensive and was surprised it didn't outrank LA. Class A - $20.37. Class B - $14.96. Rental pricing has increased around 20% over the last five years.
12. Oakland - East Bay - Suburban San Francisco! Rental pricing has dropped nearly 20% over the last five years.
13. Washington, DC - The Nation's Capital, our home! DC ranks 13th with Class A units going at $18.85 psf and Class B at $15.15 psf. The Class B pricing would put DC higher than San Diego and some of the NY Suburbs for pricing for the same type apartment.
Here's my issue. The data for Washington, DC includes Northern VA, MD and even some parts of West Virginia! Okay so if DC pricing rankings includes three states and the District, clearly the pricing is going to be driven down. I would love to see how the data pulled would rank DC if we only included rental pricing in DC and the immediate surrounding counties (PG, Montgomery, Alexandria and Arlington). Or even just DC alone. It's not an even comparison to the other markets if you ask me, as they have rolled Northern Virginia and Suburban Maryland into the numbers. They didn't do that with NYC or San Francisco. Clearly you can never compare apples to apples when ranking the cities. But if we look at the data, essentially you have NYC (and surrounding areas), Los Angeles (and surrounding areas), San Diego, San Francisco, Boston and Honolulu ranking higher than DC, with DC ranking higher than San Diego for B Class units.
To put some perspective on this, I decided to calculate my psf for my rental unit. I am not sure if my apartment would be considered a Class A or Class B. Maybe for DC, it's a Class A. I'd say somewhere in between. At just over 1,000 square feet (a two-bedroom unit), my roommate and I pay roughly $30 per square feet per year. And I think on average our rent is comparable to some of the other NW neighborhoods in pricing. I know of many, many units that would calculate at a much higher per square footage price than that downtown. That said, I am paying as much as the on average Class A pricing in NYC, SF, Boston and LA!
So how do you other Downtown DC Dwellers compare?
If you're curious...Central New Jersey; Philadelphia, PA; San Bernadino, CA; Baltimore, MD; Miami, FL; Chicago, IL and West Palm Beach, FL round out the top twenty most expensive rental markets in the United States.
Washington, DC ranks 13th on the list, which seemed far lower than I would have guessed, but let's take a look at the markets that are actually more expensive than Washington, DC:
1. New York City - duh. 9.2 million people, 60% of which are renters, clearly there is going to be a larger range of prices than in most other cities. Demand is high, supply is limited, it's expensive as hell. On average $27.84 per square foot for a Class A apartment and $18.31 per square foot for Class B apartments. Class A would be your doormanned buildings in nice neighborhoods whereas Class B apartments are where the rest of us would live. There was no five year data to show if those numbers are increasing or decreasing, but I'd say its safe to assume they are going up.
2. San Francisco, CA - This did not surprise me. SF has always been expensive, both to buy a home or to rent an apartment. Class A apartments come in just slightly behind NYC at $27.17 and Class B at $19.91. So for those of us slumming it, it would be just as expensive in SF as in NYC. One thing to note is that in the past five years, the on average prices for rentals in the SF metro area has decreased nearly 20% for Class A units and 14% for Class B.
3. Los Angeles, CA - This one actually did surprise me because I have a lot of friends who live in LA who all pay far less in rent than I do or most people I know in DC. Class A units are $25.12 psf and Class B are $18.39 psf. That would mean the Class B apartments cost more in LA than in NYC! Seems odd to me. Especially since "LA" is a broad term used for a much larger geographic area than NYC. One thing to note is that pricing is increasing at 17% for A and 23% for B units.
4. Boston, MA - One of my favorite cities in the US, Boston comes in 4th with Class A units at $25.08 psf and B at $17.49 psf. There was a slight increase for B over the last five years, but both A and B unit pricing has remained relatively flat.
5. Honolulu, HI - I have nothing to say here. I'd prefer to stick with continental United States. Clearly HI is an expensive place to live. Limited land, limited supply, high-priced goods and services. It's a unique market for sure.
6. Northern NJ - Here is where I start to have my issue with the rankings. Clearly Northern NJ is NOT NYC, but I would still consider most of it suburban NYC. In any case, Class A units go for $23.35 psf and B for $15.80 psf. Little change over the last five years there as well.
7. Stamford - South CT - Again, this is another suburb of NYC. I know people who live there might argue that point, but whatever. It's a 'burb. An expensive one for sure. Class A - $23.22 psf. Class B - $14.30 psf.
8. Nassau-Suffolk, NY - Okay while I won't say this is a suburb, though it kind of is, I would point out that only 20% of the units there are even rentals. Class A - $22.40. Class B - $16.66. Pretty significant increases in rental pricing over the last five years, upwards of 15% in both categories of units.
9. Orange County, CA - While to me, a suburb of LA (though to me LA is basically a bunch of connected suburbs anyway), the OC comes in at 9th with Class A apartments at $21.71 psf and B at $17.94 psf, with large increases in rent over the last five years (15 - 20%). Maybe the popularity of shows like the OC or the Real Housewives of Orange County has made people flock there to live. Doubtful.
10. San Jose, CA - Part of the greater SF area if you ask me. Class A - $21.47. Class B - $17.51. Both classes have dropped nearly 30% in prices over the last five years.
11. San Diego, CA - Ahhh, the beautiful sunny city in the south of California. I knew it was expensive and was surprised it didn't outrank LA. Class A - $20.37. Class B - $14.96. Rental pricing has increased around 20% over the last five years.
12. Oakland - East Bay - Suburban San Francisco! Rental pricing has dropped nearly 20% over the last five years.
13. Washington, DC - The Nation's Capital, our home! DC ranks 13th with Class A units going at $18.85 psf and Class B at $15.15 psf. The Class B pricing would put DC higher than San Diego and some of the NY Suburbs for pricing for the same type apartment.
Here's my issue. The data for Washington, DC includes Northern VA, MD and even some parts of West Virginia! Okay so if DC pricing rankings includes three states and the District, clearly the pricing is going to be driven down. I would love to see how the data pulled would rank DC if we only included rental pricing in DC and the immediate surrounding counties (PG, Montgomery, Alexandria and Arlington). Or even just DC alone. It's not an even comparison to the other markets if you ask me, as they have rolled Northern Virginia and Suburban Maryland into the numbers. They didn't do that with NYC or San Francisco. Clearly you can never compare apples to apples when ranking the cities. But if we look at the data, essentially you have NYC (and surrounding areas), Los Angeles (and surrounding areas), San Diego, San Francisco, Boston and Honolulu ranking higher than DC, with DC ranking higher than San Diego for B Class units.
To put some perspective on this, I decided to calculate my psf for my rental unit. I am not sure if my apartment would be considered a Class A or Class B. Maybe for DC, it's a Class A. I'd say somewhere in between. At just over 1,000 square feet (a two-bedroom unit), my roommate and I pay roughly $30 per square feet per year. And I think on average our rent is comparable to some of the other NW neighborhoods in pricing. I know of many, many units that would calculate at a much higher per square footage price than that downtown. That said, I am paying as much as the on average Class A pricing in NYC, SF, Boston and LA!
So how do you other Downtown DC Dwellers compare?
If you're curious...Central New Jersey; Philadelphia, PA; San Bernadino, CA; Baltimore, MD; Miami, FL; Chicago, IL and West Palm Beach, FL round out the top twenty most expensive rental markets in the United States.
posted by Carrie Broadshoulders at Friday, August 18, 2006
8 Comments:
Those rankings don't totally surprise me, though you're right, I do think it's unfair to split up the SF an NYC suburbs and not the DC ones.
I think more in terms of tiers of who's the most expensive:
1. NYC/SF
2. DC/LA/Boston
3. SD/Miami/Chicago
4. Seattle/Philly
5. Atlanta/Dallas/Houston/Denver
Sure, you can always find someone who's paying more or less in a higher or lower tier, but by-and-large that's how I tend to think of rental expenses in various cities.
Now, it's just time for wages to catch up with each market ...
Agreed, though I think what is interesting to note is that NYC and SF pricing has not increased dramatically over the last five years in comparison to DC. I wonder how long it will take before DC is in that number one grouping you've listed. Boston has also not increased dramatically over the last five years, whereas the DC rental market (including suburbs) has increased over 15%. I know my company hasn't increased wages to match that increase in rent.
I don't really have anything that would contribute the dialogue here.
But I will say, having just moved from DC to Chicago a few months ago, I'm super happy with what $350K will get me here than what it got me in DC.
I never could get over how much my monthly mortgage was compared to how bad my neighborhood was. There are no bargains in DC, that's for sure.
Yeah, adding in West VA prices seems a little weird. Even Maryland is a lot cheaper, right?
Clearly you know nothing about geography if consider Stamford a suburb of NY but not Suffolk/Nassau, which is actually MUCH closer to NY than Stamford is (roughly 21 miles vs. over 30 miles away).
Well, the only reason I can see anyone including WV (and this is a long shot) is because quite a few people commute into our faire city from WV, but the rental prices there? As compared to here?? HahA. They DON't compare...I think DC is very expensive.
However, since I can't imagine living in any of the 'burbs around here, I opted to live w/roomies to get my PSF costs to go down. Where are you looking to move??
Okay maybe the word "suburb" isn't correct, though just because a city is self sustaining doesn't mean it isn't a suburb of a larger city. Arlington, VA and Alexandria are self sustained cities, but no one would argue they are not suburbs of DC. In any case, I'll give you San Jose and Oakland aren't necessarily suburbs - maybe they don't depend on San Francisco - but I still argue those two cities do feed of San Fran to some degree. I know people who live in both who work in San Fran. So maybe suburb is a bad word to make my point, but I do think the general bay area is one area and not three different markets. It's not like there woudl be a dramatic increase/decrease in the rental market to three cities that sit so near to one another. If they separated Arlington or Alexandria out, I would argue that that is still metro DC, even though Alexandria city has been around longer than DC has.
I think you're also doing your calculation incorrect. That would mean for a 400 square foot apartment, you're paying $150K/year in rent. Which is roughly $12K per month in rent. I'm hoping you're not paying that much and that your apartment is bigger than 400 square feet. Take what you pay in rent per year and divide by square footage of your apartment.
Oh and to ctcommuter - I said suffolk/nassau kinda is. I didn't say it wasn't. Clearly you don't know jack about geography since Suffolk County is pretty much all of Long Island and the eastern part of LI is a helluva lot farther than 21 miles from NYC. And since most eastern residents of Suffolk County don't consider themselves part of suburban NYC, then I hesitated to lump them all as suburbanites.
But thanks for your input.
Post a Comment
<< Home