3 ms·

I think comparing to the median SFH price is a bit apples to oranges. Keep in mind that (as far as I know?) the city isn't building actual houses. Most of these

I think comparing to the median SFH price is a bit apples to oranges. Keep in mind that (as far as I know?) the city isn't building actual houses. Most of these developments are more like college dorms or fancy campgrounds (e.g. a parking lot with a bunch of one room 8x8 shelters and a communal bathroom- granted those "tiny homes" are probably not the ones costing over $700k).

slg 5y ago
The sentence before that quote I pulled was "Most [emphasis mine] of the units are studios or one-bedroom apartments." That seems to imply that the 14% above $700k are probably 2 or more bedrooms and are designed for families. The article has no details on the costs per unit for the other 86% that likely include those dorm room style units.
thebradbain 5y ago
You’re right that SFHs definitely skew the median average up, but as someone who lives in Los Angeles — you would be hard pressed to find a brand new apartment unit in the city for less than $800k. Anecdotally, almost all new-build condos I’ve seen (and I saw a lot, when I was home shopping across many different neighborhoods) are just as expensive, if not more expensive, than old/partially-renovated SFHs (which is what I ended up getting). This is pretty universal real estate rule across all LA neighborhoods, per my realtor: new sfh > new condo >= old sfh > old condo (old meaning it’s in need of at least some non-cosmetic renovation or structural retrofit) Part of the issue is the zoning code as it is really only makes it possible for developers to build larger/luxury developments. You don’t see many 4plexes getting built because all of the red tape makes it less profitable than building a new SFH on a multi-unit lot (which I’ve unfortunately seen happen when a charming but old 4plex got demolished in place of a new build McMansion). Hopefully sb9 and sb10 change that. I’m short, I think that at least among new build condos, Los Angeles social housing is still at or below median price per unit. It’s a shame it’s that expensive, but that’s the hole CA dug itself into by not allowing more housing to be built organically.

slg 5y ago

The sentence before that quote I pulled was "Most [emphasis mine] of the units are studios or one-bedroom apartments." That seems to imply that the 14% above $700k are probably 2 or more bedrooms and are designed for families. The article has no details on the costs per unit for the other 86% that likely include those dorm room style units.

thebradbain 5y ago

You’re right that SFHs definitely skew the median average up, but as someone who lives in Los Angeles — you would be hard pressed to find a brand new apartment unit in the city for less than $800k. Anecdotally, almost all new-build condos I’ve seen (and I saw a lot, when I was home shopping across many different neighborhoods) are just as expensive, if not more expensive, than old/partially-renovated SFHs (which is what I ended up getting). This is pretty universal real estate rule across all LA neighborhoods, per my realtor: new sfh > new condo >= old sfh > old condo (old meaning it’s in need of at least some non-cosmetic renovation or structural retrofit) Part of the issue is the zoning code as it is really only makes it possible for developers to build larger/luxury developments. You don’t see many 4plexes getting built because all of the red tape makes it less profitable than building a new SFH on a multi-unit lot (which I’ve unfortunately seen happen when a charming but old 4plex got demolished in place of a new build McMansion). Hopefully sb9 and sb10 change that. I’m short, I think that at least among new build condos, Los Angeles social housing is still at or below median price per unit. It’s a shame it’s that expensive, but that’s the hole CA dug itself into by not allowing more housing to be built organically.