Most expensive and cheapest zip codes in the U.S. for renters

[YSL]

# ZIP Code City State Average Rent


Most expensive

1. 10282 Manhattan NY $5,924
2. 10065 Manhattan NY $4,898
3. 10023 Manhattan NY $4,892
4. 94129 San Francisco CA $4,762
5. 10025 Manhattan NY $4,535
6. 10024 Manhattan NY $4,525
7. 10002 Manhattan NY $4,441
8. 10013 Manhattan NY $4,422
9. 94105 San Francisco CA $4,380
10. 10036 Manhattan NY $4,375
11. 10001 Manhattan NY $4,373
12. 02199 Boston MA $4,227
13. 10003 Manhattan NY $4,178
14. 10010 Manhattan NY $4,166
15. 10022 Manhattan NY $4,097
16. 94158 San Francisco CA $4,070
17. 10028 Manhattan NY $4,014
18. 10014 Manhattan NY $4,010
19. 10011 Manhattan NY $4,006
20. 10128 Manhattan NY $3,977


Cheapest

1. 67213 Wichita KS $407
2. 67211 Wichita KS $454
3. 35601 Decatur AL $458
4. 38106 Memphis TN $464
5. 67204 Wichita KS $475
6. 31903 Columbus GA $482
7. 38127 Memphis TN $487
8. 67218 Wichita KS $490
9. 38114 Memphis TN $494
10. 46809 Fort Wayne IN $495
11. 35810 Huntsville AL $503
12. 37777 Louisville TN $507
13. 72076 Gravel Ridge AR $508
14. 67210 Wichita KS $508
15. 72301 West Memphis AR $509
16. 35611 Athens AL $510
17. 43611 Toledo OH $518
18. 67217 Wichita KS $522
19. 43616 Oregon OH $522
20. 43609 Toledo OH $524

https://www.rentcafe.com/blog/rental...zip-codes-u-s/

[Shawn]

"This study uses the actual rent charged in apartment buildings with 50 or more rental units, located in 125 U.S. markets, totaling approximately 15 million apartment units."

I wonder what a 50 unit floor did to the data. 50 unit buildings aren't small.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

That's a rather odd (and high) min number to select. I think 5 or more units would have been a better cutoff.. How many min 50 unit buildings are there in most cities?

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

That's a rather odd (and high) min number to select. I think 5 or more units would have been a better cutoff.. How many min 50 unit buildings are there in most cities?

Exactly, that's what I was getting at.

The Boston zip in the top 20 is for the Prudential Center, which is basically the only area in central Boston with multiple 50+ unit rental properties.

The rest of Back Bay, all of the North End and Beacon Hill have exactly 0 properties with 50+ units. These are the three (along with the nascent Seaport District) actual wealthiest neighborhoods in the city, and they're mostly rental. You can't make a 1880s brownstone into a 50+ unit property.

[LMich]

I think it serves the purpose of giving you an idea of probably the high and low end at the higher-end of things, as I'd think it overrepresent large high-rises. Though, in cities where large apartment buildings are more likely to be public/subsidized housing it'd be the opposite. I imagine you lower the limit you'd get wider swings with smaller buildings since they are probably more likely to be geographically dispersed.

[Crawford]

The most expensive zip code is actually not particularly expensive for prime Manhattan standards (it's in Lower Manhattan).

Rents would be much higher to the north, in Tribeca, Soho, Village, Flatiron, etc. But those areas have tons of rent controlled properties, which undoutedly lowers means and medians.

[montréaliste]

Originally Posted by Shawn

Exactly, that's what I was getting at.

The Boston zip in the top 20 is for the Prudential Center, which is basically the only area in central Boston with multiple 50+ unit rental properties.

The rest of Back Bay, all of the North End and Beacon Hill have exactly 0 properties with 50+ units. These are the three (along with the nascent Seaport District) actual wealthiest neighborhoods in the city, and they're mostly rental. You can't make a 1880s brownstone into a 50+ unit property.

There aren't a lot, but there are a number of 50.+ units buildings in Back Bay. We stayed in a short rental unit in a rather large one next to Prudential Center in March. Most of the apartments in there were long rentals.

[AviationGuy]

Seems that what would be really important is the cost of rent relative to income levels, where there's some way to normalize the data.

[Pedestrian]

http://www.healthysf.org/bdi/outcomes/zipmap.htm

The zip codes listed for SF are alost not worth considering. 94129 is the Presidio (a national park where some old army housing is being rented) surrounding by some very expensive housing along streets that face the greenery (like living on the borders of Central Park): Total population under 4000. 94105 is a small slice of the Financial District with very little housing. 94158 is a mystery.

But let's look at the top-renked zip codes in the city (#s 4 and 9 nationally) and take the average of them see what we can get:

Curbed Comparisons: What $4,500 rents you in San Francisco
BY ADAM BRINKLOW SEP 13, 2016, 2:53PM PDT

This is Curbed Comparisons, a regular column exploring what you can rent for a set dollar amount in different neighborhoods. Is one person's studio another person's townhouse? Let's find out. Our price: $4,500/month.

1. (A) SoMa building on Lafeyette Street from 2001. The single-bed, single-bath home with the window-studded lookout rents for the pretty penny sum of $4,495/month—25-foot ceilings and track lighting included. There's even a mildly Frank Lloyd Wright-ish quality about the way the ceiling spirals. In a bizarre addition, they bothered to build a fireplace in the 15-year-old condo, even though it's entirely ornamental. The building is both cat and dog friendly.









2. (Another) competing loft in the Mission doesn't have quite the same flare or sense of style. But it's no slouch either, with 18 foot ceilings of its own, these ones vaulted with a smoothly curving arch. It's also pretty enormous, with two beds, two and a half baths, and three floors in all. The Harrison Street address sits immediately next door to Flour + Water, and right across the street from Trick Dog, and it's only five more dollars a month, for $4,500/month. Stiff competition. The catch: No dogs permitted (Trick Dog notwithstanding), although they're okay with cats.

3. (A) Cathedral Hill apartment claims that it is, in a word, "everything." That's a lot to promise. While the real thing falls a bit short of the advertised value of the entire universe, we do love the arches, the bay windows, and the climbing deco style of the circa 1931 building at 950 Franklin. Here you get two beds and one bath for $4,395/month, cats and dogs included as long as they're under 40 pounds. (Irish Wolfhound owners have it rough in this town.)








4. (A) one-bed, one-bath apartment in Pacific Heights also highlights the pedigree of its Art Deco building, but oddly neglects to actually show it from the outside. (We took the liberty.) The interiors certainly push that vibe on their own, and we particularly like the flanking sets of bay windows on adjacent walls. The deal is for our full $4,500/month. It's another no dog building (poor things), although cats are "negotiable."








5. (A) three bed, two and a half bath, 1,650 foot house in Glen Park. It's $4,500/month, and they just renovated the garden into a drought-friendly version of itself with a broad stone terrace. Even though it's the biggest of our five offerings today, there's apparently no room for pets at all.

https://sf.curbed.com/2016/9/13/1290...-san-francisco

[Shawn]

Man, you get even less space for the dollar in SF than you do in central Tokyo. $4500 a month gets you a lot better than what I see above...

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Shawn

Man, you get even less space for the dollar in SF than you do in central Tokyo. $4500 a month gets you a lot better than what I see above...

I don't think Tokyo is considered outrageously expensive these days.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I don't think Tokyo is considered outrageously expensive these days.

Right, it's actually moved down the list quite a bit since I moved here. I was more dismayed by the amount of space you get in SF for the price than the actual price itself. $4500 a month isn't uncommon in my neighborhood, but you get 2500+ sq feet for that. At a place with a concierge-manned front desk.

[ChargerCarl]

The real advantage Tokyo has over its peer cities is how cheap it is just outside the city center.

The biggest issue with LA, SF, London, etc is that everywhere is expensive.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

The real advantage Tokyo has over its peer cities is how cheap it is just outside the city center.

The biggest issue with LA, SF, London, etc is that everywhere is expensive.

Not so terribly long ago, Pacifica was surprisingly cheap. I mean it has lovely coastal views and decent city access so I was never sure why though I assumed the semi-perpetual fog bank had something to do with it (life without sun!). Now, though, I think even that is no longer "affordable". You have to go east, FAR east over the hills and deep into the Central Valley.

[ChargerCarl]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Not so terribly long ago, Pacifica was surprisingly cheap. I mean it has lovely coastal views and decent city access so I was never sure why though I assumed the semi-perpetual fog bank had something to do with it (life without sun!). Now, though, I think even that is no longer "affordable". You have to go east, FAR east over the hills and deep into the Central Valley.

Don't forget the world's most scenic Taco Bell!