This post on the housing market is in continuation to posts here and here. Emily Hamilton has an article in the latest Works in Progress that examines the success of Washington DC in increasing housing supply by promoting buildings around transit corridors. The post illustrates how urban planning decisions, while apparently not seeming to have much effect in the short term, can have decisive long-term consequences.
Having lived in the Boston area for more than 3 years and in DC area for about 5 months, I can definitely feel the difference. DC area is better both in terms of housing supply and quality. In Boston, rents are high, but the apartments and houses are very poorly maintained while it is the exact opposite in the DC area. The metro (both bus and trains) is much poorer in Boston as well. Boston also has very few buildings which are taller than 5-6 floors.
Having lived in the Boston area for more than 3 years and in DC area for about 5 months, I can definitely feel the difference. DC area is better both in terms of housing supply and quality. In Boston, rents are high, but the apartments and houses are very poorly maintained while it is the exact opposite in the DC area. The metro (both bus and trains) is much poorer in Boston as well. Boston also has very few buildings which are taller than 5-6 floors.