6 ms·

Here in Los Angeles we have some of the most overvalued real estate in America. a bungalow in the city can go for millions, and is often torn down and replaced

Here in Los Angeles we have some of the most overvalued real estate in America. a bungalow in the city can go for millions, and is often torn down and replaced by a gleaming white McMansion because renovation is slower and costlier than filing new papers with the city. We cant just build more housing because traditional neighborhoods will fight to the death in courts to prevent multi family housing from devaluing their property or worse, competing for their rental income. The large apartment complexes that do get built are divided between anyone who can affort 10k a month in rent and fees, and "lower income" applicants who pay a fraction of this but are also held to strict terms and conditions. You wind up with millionaires and single moms living in beachfront Santa Monica communities, while anyone with a regular office job often commutes 40-70 miles in from the valley. Its often said you dont quit your job in LA, you quit your commute. new apartments built are not priced affordably because banks and investors want their interest back quickly and have promised surrounding neighborhoods they will price accordingly to keep out the riff raff. in turn, dilapidated apartment complexes from the 60's go for about the same rates because these property owners know there is no "better offer" in town. this doesnt even cover the 73,000 homeless people in Los Angeles county we cant seem to find a place for because no beach city wants to house their own unsustainable numbers of homeless, and no desert community is within a radius of health and welfare services required by many transients. Then there are the haters. people like the Aids Healthcare Foundation who ran a 6 month campaign to defeat city legislation for new affordable housing. Why? Mike Weinstein doesnt want any development to obstruct the view from his penthouse. http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-aids-foundation-political-spending-20170221-story.html http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-aids-foundation-... My husband and I live in LA and love it. but honestly, its bittersweet. We will never truly own anything more than a latte here.

jayd16 9y ago
The last paragraph is interesting. If we get more multi-family homes in LA, that's still not something to own. I guess single family homes could all turn into condominiums, as long as that counts as true ownership.
- 1stcity3rdcoast 9y ago
  Curious, why does a condo not count as true ownership in your opinion?
  - pm90 9y ago
    I'm guessing you're not American? ;) The American idea of a perfect life is to have a nice house with a huge yard that the kids can frolic/play in. A big house with a big garage. And of course in a nice school district. Basically its supposed to be an ideal environment for raising kids. Which is weird because me and all my friends grew up in heavily urbanized areas living in apartments (outside the US) and all turned out OK (well almost all). It probably also has to do with the independence of not having others live across the wall.
    - Camillo 9y ago
      Americans are really noisy and unruly. I grew up in a city and I hate the suburbs, but I kind of understand not wanting to live next to others in America.
    - 1stcity3rdcoast 9y ago
      I am American and own a condo in the dense downtown core of Chicago among a sea of high-rises. I do, though, understand the desire for many other people to want a single family home. That is not my desire, but I get it. My question was why the above poster doesn’t consider condo ownership “true” ownership? The condos on my block run between $500,000 and $3m, and the single family homes on the same block start at $3m and go to $7m. If I don’t buy one of those single-family homes, why does the poster not consider me a true homeowner? That was my specific concern with their remark.
    - davidw 9y ago
      "Kids don't need huge yards to play, kids need other kids to play with". I don't recall who said that, but it really rings true to me. In the place we rent now, there's a huge yard, but the kids mostly ignore it. They're always happy to see friends though, and with friends, a yard 1/4 the size would more than suffice. In Italy, we essentially had no yard at all, and they were mostly ok - often we'd take them to the park where all the other local kids went, and they loved it, because almost always they saw someone they knew.
branchless 9y ago
In prime locations it doesn't matter if it's a bungalow or 2 floors, the main component of the cost is the land. Which is why we should tax land, not the improved value of land (property tax). And not labour.
pm90 9y ago
Hmmm... If I may ask you: I'm considering moving to LA for a job in Venice/Culver city. Wondering if I can live somewhat closeby for a reasonable rent. I definitely don't want to commute more than 30 min each way :/. Edit: The offer is "developer salary" so I assumed it would be OK for a rundown but safe rental somewhere closeby.
- smogcutter 9y ago
  The housing crunch is real, but on "developer salary" you shouldn't have any problems finding a rental. Mar Vista and Palms are the closest relatively affordable neighborhoods to Culver. You can probably find something in Venice too, but (this is purely personal prejudice) I can't understand why anyone would do that to themselves.
  - pm90 9y ago
    Ha my view of Venice is colored by Californication, but yeah I’ve heard it’s not the best place to live in
    - harmmonica 9y ago
      Just a different point of view on Venice (respect to SC and their opinion)... It can be a fantastic place to live and a lot of people love it (and though the streets are not gilded like other West LA neighborhoods it is every bit as expensive and desirable). If you do decide to live there, though, stick to the area between the Santa Monica border and Abbot Kinney and, oddly, steer clear of the blocks right next to the beach (you might find some killer deal on a place close to the beach, but if it seems too good to be true it usually is because of summer crowds, homeless issues, quality of apartments/houses, etc).
- harmmonica 9y ago
  Even though Venice and Culver City are technically right next to each other the office jobs in Culver City, for the most part, are a few miles from where the Venice office jobs are (see here: https://goo.gl/maps/963isPRWKmL2; https://goo.gl/maps/963isPRWKmL2; short distance, but traffic from/to the 405 can be pretty brutal at rush hour even over short distances). Getting a 30-minute commute to Venice is going to be materially more expensive, but on a dev salary (assuming $100k-$150k) you should have no trouble affording a place. If you're working in downtown Culver City you'll have way more choices at all price points because you can live almost anywhere between downtown LA and the beach and still get there in under 30.
dogruck 9y ago
“Overvalued” compared to your own opinion.
- MBlume 9y ago
  "Overvalued" compared to what its price would be if it were not subject to government interference.
JBlue42 9y ago
>this doesnt even cover the 73,000 homeless people in Los Angeles county we cant seem to find a place for because no beach city wants to house their own unsustainable numbers of homeless, and no desert community is within a radius of health and welfare services required by many transients. Wasn't there a pledge to spend over $100 million on this issue last year? Not to mention a new tax w/ HHH. But yeah, LA is bittersweet. Great weather and lots to do but the lack of a true center, unaffordable housing, and the slow, expensive build out of public transit leaves a lot to be desired. At my age, I don't care so much about housing in my current situation (to be honest, given the schools here, I would go elsewhere), I would just like half my income not to go to rent (this is in a rent stabilized building - my recent bout of unemployment would've seen me joining the other flood of folks leaving since it wouldn't have covered market rate rent).
- pfarnsworth 9y ago
  San Francisco spend over $300Million/yr on 7500 homeless people per year, and there's still human feces all over Market Street.
  - stuartaxelowen 9y ago
    I'm no where near an expert here, but at that expense, why not just give them the money?
    - AnthonyMouse 9y ago
      > I'm no where near an expert here, but at that expense, why not just give them the money? If you give them the money then all the money goes to the people it's supposed to help and there is no cut for the middle men. But the middle men are the ones with the ability to successfully lobby for programs to exist. It's the same sort of thing as low income housing subsidies. Landlords lobby for them because they pretend to address high rents when their actual result is to keep rents high. Or even increase rents by stimulating demand without increasing supply.
      - 9y ago

jayd16 9y ago

The last paragraph is interesting. If we get more multi-family homes in LA, that's still not something to own. I guess single family homes could all turn into condominiums, as long as that counts as true ownership.

1stcity3rdcoast 9y ago
Curious, why does a condo not count as true ownership in your opinion?
- pm90 9y ago
  I'm guessing you're not American? ;) The American idea of a perfect life is to have a nice house with a huge yard that the kids can frolic/play in. A big house with a big garage. And of course in a nice school district. Basically its supposed to be an ideal environment for raising kids. Which is weird because me and all my friends grew up in heavily urbanized areas living in apartments (outside the US) and all turned out OK (well almost all). It probably also has to do with the independence of not having others live across the wall.
  - Camillo 9y ago
    Americans are really noisy and unruly. I grew up in a city and I hate the suburbs, but I kind of understand not wanting to live next to others in America.
  - 1stcity3rdcoast 9y ago
    I am American and own a condo in the dense downtown core of Chicago among a sea of high-rises. I do, though, understand the desire for many other people to want a single family home. That is not my desire, but I get it. My question was why the above poster doesn’t consider condo ownership “true” ownership? The condos on my block run between $500,000 and $3m, and the single family homes on the same block start at $3m and go to $7m. If I don’t buy one of those single-family homes, why does the poster not consider me a true homeowner? That was my specific concern with their remark.
  - davidw 9y ago
    "Kids don't need huge yards to play, kids need other kids to play with". I don't recall who said that, but it really rings true to me. In the place we rent now, there's a huge yard, but the kids mostly ignore it. They're always happy to see friends though, and with friends, a yard 1/4 the size would more than suffice. In Italy, we essentially had no yard at all, and they were mostly ok - often we'd take them to the park where all the other local kids went, and they loved it, because almost always they saw someone they knew.

branchless 9y ago

In prime locations it doesn't matter if it's a bungalow or 2 floors, the main component of the cost is the land. Which is why we should tax land, not the improved value of land (property tax). And not labour.

pm90 9y ago

Hmmm... If I may ask you: I'm considering moving to LA for a job in Venice/Culver city. Wondering if I can live somewhat closeby for a reasonable rent. I definitely don't want to commute more than 30 min each way :/. Edit: The offer is "developer salary" so I assumed it would be OK for a rundown but safe rental somewhere closeby.

smogcutter 9y ago
The housing crunch is real, but on "developer salary" you shouldn't have any problems finding a rental. Mar Vista and Palms are the closest relatively affordable neighborhoods to Culver. You can probably find something in Venice too, but (this is purely personal prejudice) I can't understand why anyone would do that to themselves.
- pm90 9y ago
  Ha my view of Venice is colored by Californication, but yeah I’ve heard it’s not the best place to live in
  - harmmonica 9y ago
    Just a different point of view on Venice (respect to SC and their opinion)... It can be a fantastic place to live and a lot of people love it (and though the streets are not gilded like other West LA neighborhoods it is every bit as expensive and desirable). If you do decide to live there, though, stick to the area between the Santa Monica border and Abbot Kinney and, oddly, steer clear of the blocks right next to the beach (you might find some killer deal on a place close to the beach, but if it seems too good to be true it usually is because of summer crowds, homeless issues, quality of apartments/houses, etc).
harmmonica 9y ago
Even though Venice and Culver City are technically right next to each other the office jobs in Culver City, for the most part, are a few miles from where the Venice office jobs are (see here: https://goo.gl/maps/963isPRWKmL2; https://goo.gl/maps/963isPRWKmL2; short distance, but traffic from/to the 405 can be pretty brutal at rush hour even over short distances). Getting a 30-minute commute to Venice is going to be materially more expensive, but on a dev salary (assuming $100k-$150k) you should have no trouble affording a place. If you're working in downtown Culver City you'll have way more choices at all price points because you can live almost anywhere between downtown LA and the beach and still get there in under 30.

dogruck 9y ago

“Overvalued” compared to your own opinion.

MBlume 9y ago
"Overvalued" compared to what its price would be if it were not subject to government interference.

JBlue42 9y ago

>this doesnt even cover the 73,000 homeless people in Los Angeles county we cant seem to find a place for because no beach city wants to house their own unsustainable numbers of homeless, and no desert community is within a radius of health and welfare services required by many transients. Wasn't there a pledge to spend over $100 million on this issue last year? Not to mention a new tax w/ HHH. But yeah, LA is bittersweet. Great weather and lots to do but the lack of a true center, unaffordable housing, and the slow, expensive build out of public transit leaves a lot to be desired. At my age, I don't care so much about housing in my current situation (to be honest, given the schools here, I would go elsewhere), I would just like half my income not to go to rent (this is in a rent stabilized building - my recent bout of unemployment would've seen me joining the other flood of folks leaving since it wouldn't have covered market rate rent).

pfarnsworth 9y ago
San Francisco spend over $300Million/yr on 7500 homeless people per year, and there's still human feces all over Market Street.
- stuartaxelowen 9y ago
  I'm no where near an expert here, but at that expense, why not just give them the money?
  - AnthonyMouse 9y ago
    > I'm no where near an expert here, but at that expense, why not just give them the money? If you give them the money then all the money goes to the people it's supposed to help and there is no cut for the middle men. But the middle men are the ones with the ability to successfully lobby for programs to exist. It's the same sort of thing as low income housing subsidies. Landlords lobby for them because they pretend to address high rents when their actual result is to keep rents high. Or even increase rents by stimulating demand without increasing supply.
    - 9y ago