HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 4:12 PM
3rd&Brown 3rd&Brown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camelback View Post
I'm surprised that there are any number of homes listed under $100,000 in New York City! They must be absolutely awful places.
They're not. You'd be surprised.

They're HDFC units with income caps. Some of the income caps are very very low (like $30K). And you're limited as to who you can sell to in perpetuity.

Hence the low prices. I've known a few people who've kicked around the idea of buying one when their income dropped for a year or two (to go back to grad school or when they were unemployed) but ultimately decided against it because of the future limitations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 4:27 PM
twister244 twister244 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
Keep in mind that the vast majority of those sub-$100K homes in Chicago are located in areas that most people in Austin or Denver would not ever dare to live in <Bang! Bang! Bang!>

A tale of two cities through and through.
I'm not even talking about properties that cheap.....

I'm talking about the $100-$350k range. There's a TON of stock... In the nice parts of Chicago, and they are nice properties. From my Denver lenses, that's insane considering the median house price there is now >$600k and inventory is basement levels.

Yes, taxes are higher, but still.... it continues to blow my mind. I really feel like at some point, the tide is going to swing back towards places in the rust belt just because the economics will justify it for people. These "hot" cities are increasingly expensive, and not worth the price of admission for many people.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 4:34 PM
kool maudit's Avatar
kool maudit kool maudit is offline
video et taceo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 13,846
$300,000 in Stockholm will buy you an apartment in a lovely, central pre-war building.

Provided there is no bidding war.

Which there will be.

Did I note that the apartment is a whole 245 sq. ft.?

https://www.hemnet.se/bostad/lagenhe...n-25a-17495740
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 4:58 PM
jmecklenborg jmecklenborg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Yeah, something very weird is going on. I recently saw a house on sale in Detroit that's asking for $350k, but last sold for $40k just a couple years ago. It was gut renovated, but it's not located in an area where any reasonable person would pay that much to buy a house to live. It might make sense as a rental property, but prices in Detroit are too unstable to make a long term gamble at that price, IMO.
We had a lot of livable houses sell for $20-40k in Cincinnati from 2010 to about 2016. Prices started ticking upwards in 2017 and now you rarely see a move-in ready house, even in a bad part of town, for less than $100k.

On one hand it's a good thing because dozens of vacant homes were being torn down every month from about 1985 until about 2015. But now it's not the dirt-cheap city I grew up in anymore, and that was always part of its identity since it was always a place where a pizza delivery guy could own a house. I rented a room in a shared house for $200/mo in the early 2000s, then for $250/mo from 2007 until 2012. Now rooms in shared homes anywhere in that area are like $650 if not over $700/mo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 5:17 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by twister244 View Post
I'm not even talking about properties that cheap.....

I'm talking about the $100-$350k range. There's a TON of stock... In the nice parts of Chicago, and they are nice properties. From my Denver lenses, that's insane considering the median house price there is now >$600k and inventory is basement levels.
Chicago has reasonable prices, but I'm highly skeptical you're seeing 100k (or even 350k, for that matter) SFH in nice, centrally located Chicago neighborhoods. $1 million is probably the absolute bottom for move-in ready SFH in prime areas.

You can't compare multifamily for-sale units to SFH. You could (theoretically) have a nearly "free" co-op in Manhattan, if you purchased an income-restricted co-op (which also has strict limits on future sales). But it can't really be compared to "normal" for sale housing because it functions more like a rental. And even "market rate" condos aren't comparable, because the monthlies can be crazy for older units. A 400k condo can be "more expensive" than a 600k SFH.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 6:03 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
$1 million is probably the absolute bottom for move-in ready SFH in prime areas.
"prime area" is open to LOTS of interpretation.

the main deal with chicago is that there are lots "unprime areas" that are still very decent and stable and affordable for raising a middle class family in.

my good friend who's a plumber just a bought a 4-bed/2 bath bungalow (with a small city yard) for his family of 4 over in jeff park for $325K back in feb.



normal middle class housing.

in normal middle class neighborhoods.

for normal middle class families.

AT NORMAL MIDDLE CLASS PRICES.

welcome to chicago!
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.

Last edited by Steely Dan; May 14, 2021 at 6:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 7:08 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppet View Post
There are approximately ZERO homes in London under $100,000, no matter the deprivation, murder links or poltergeist activity.
I don't know about "homes" but there's property in San Francisco under $100K.

Quote:
'Land is underwater': Bizarre SF real estate lot lists for $75k
Andrew Chamings
May 14, 2021
Updated: May 14, 2021 11:54 a.m.

Just over an acre of San Francisco land has hit the market, but there's a catch: it's several feet underwater.

The vacant lot, technically three city blocks east of Candlestick Point, was purchased by real estate agent Trent Zhu at auction from the City of San Francisco for $5,000 around six years ago, reports ABC7.

While extremely speculative, Zhu saw the possibility of a pier or sports stadium going up on the water. The average depth of the Bay is only 14 feet, and the eastern shore has moved several times over the city's history, so construction on the land is not entirely out of the question . . . .
https://www.sfgate.com/local/article...y-16177740.php
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 7:28 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Chicago has reasonable prices, but I'm highly skeptical you're seeing 100k (or even 350k, for that matter) SFH in nice, centrally located Chicago neighborhoods. $1 million is probably the absolute bottom for move-in ready SFH in prime areas.

You can't compare multifamily for-sale units to SFH. You could (theoretically) have a nearly "free" co-op in Manhattan, if you purchased an income-restricted co-op (which also has strict limits on future sales). But it can't really be compared to "normal" for sale housing because it functions more like a rental. And even "market rate" condos aren't comparable, because the monthlies can be crazy for older units. A 400k condo can be "more expensive" than a 600k SFH.
My boss bought a not-really-movein-ready 150-year old 3-story almost SFH (duplex) in Lincoln Park this fall for under 1 million, although the work required to make it move-in-ready probably pushed it to 1 million.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 7:46 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I'll never get the idea that RE is a "bargain" based on its price. RE is a "bargain" based on its relative appreciation. The price is a function of market expectations of long-term appreciation.

Chicago has relatively low housing prices for a major, first-tier city. However, Chicago has some of the worst housing appreciation of any major U.S. cities (I believe the absolute worst per the Case-Shiller index), so the reasonable prices make sense in this context.

If you buy a home for 400k, and sell it for 400k 15 years later, that isn't a "good deal" relative to buying a home for 600k and selling it for 1 million 15 years later. You also have to factor in taxes, maintenance and the like, and Chicagoland property taxes tend to be high..
Property taxes as a percentage are higher, but as value, not sure.

Anyway, assuming you had the extra $40k for a down payment and ~$600/month for a mortgage payment and you invest that with a 7% return, you end up with very roughly

40k*(1.07)^15 + (7.2k) * (1.07^14 + 1.07^13 + ...1) ~= $300k. Not too different a return and probably safer on average.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 8:45 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I'll never get the idea that RE is a "bargain" based on its price. RE is a "bargain" based on its relative appreciation. The price is a function of market expectations of long-term appreciation.
Not everyone sees their home as part of their investment portfolio. That's the problem with areas with skyhigh real estate costs, everything is based on rate of return.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 9:10 PM
Camelback Camelback is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 1,231
Chicago is probably the most urban bang for your buck(?). I'm willing to accept other urban alternatives, but off the top of my head it seems to check almost all of the boxes of an urban lifestyle, while offering reasonable housing options. One red flag is Illinois' budget problems and excessive taxation to fill the budget gaps.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 9:13 PM
Camelback Camelback is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown View Post
They're not. You'd be surprised.

They're HDFC units with income caps. Some of the income caps are very very low (like $30K). And you're limited as to who you can sell to in perpetuity.

Hence the low prices. I've known a few people who've kicked around the idea of buying one when their income dropped for a year or two (to go back to grad school or when they were unemployed) but ultimately decided against it because of the future limitations.
Ok, this is something I didn't know about. Can you provide a link to one of these properties, I'd like to check out some of the specs.

With that said, I'm still surprised that a city of New York's stature has 7 properties listed for under 100k.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 9:14 PM
muppet's Avatar
muppet muppet is offline
if I sang out of tune
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Posts: 6,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
I don't know about "homes" but there's property in San Francisco under $100K.


https://www.sfgate.com/local/article...y-16177740.php
I would love to see the realtor pics, the rental opportunity of the week! A patch of ocean.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 9:19 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camelback View Post
Chicago is probably the most urban bang for your buck(?). I'm willing to accept other urban alternatives, but off the top of my head it seems to check almost all of the boxes of an urban lifestyle, while offering reasonable housing options. One red flag is Illinois' budget problems and excessive taxation to fill the budget gaps.
I mean, Philly is probably not too different. It's smaller but closer to other cities.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 9:25 PM
muppet's Avatar
muppet muppet is offline
if I sang out of tune
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Posts: 6,184
London Rental Opportunity of the Week!

Yours for $500,000

A lovely studio flat (guitar not included). The ultimate batchelor pad!



All mod cons




Plenty of storage (ish)




Just one little thing - you and your date just have to CRAWL about upstairs. In and out of your coffin bedroom, through deep pile carpet.


Last edited by muppet; May 15, 2021 at 8:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 9:27 PM
Camelback Camelback is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
I mean, Philly is probably not too different. It's smaller but closer to other cities.
Oh yeah, I didn't even think of Philly. That might be on par with Chicago. Chicago has a larger urban footprint, the Loop is larger than Center City and the EL and Metra seem to be a more extensive network?

However, Chicago is geographically isolated compared to Philly with Philly being so close to New York and Wash/Balt.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 9:41 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,605
^ "urban core" philly also has a noticeably older and tighter urban form than "spacious and modern" chicago.

philly gets its density from very narrow streets and putting rowhouses on every other single square inch of the place.

chicago gets its density from stacking 2, 3, or 4 homes into the footprint of 1 with its ubiquitous flat buildings, leaving a lot more left over space for wider streets, alleys, parkways, lawns, etc.


but yeah, out of america's limited number of big old urban cities, chicago and philly are your two best bets for buying a family-sized home if you ain't rich.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.

Last edited by Steely Dan; May 14, 2021 at 9:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 9:50 PM
muppet's Avatar
muppet muppet is offline
if I sang out of tune
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Posts: 6,184
single room -bed, shower and sink. Everything you'll ever need at a convenient reach.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3z5...-for-sale-200k






^$280,000.





Another offering, in shitty Camden. $2,260 a month.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 10:18 PM
Camelback Camelback is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
but yeah, out of america's limited number of big old urban cities, chicago and philly are your two best bets for buying a family-sized home if you ain't rich.
They both seem like steals in today's insane RE world. Both cities could see some huge investments in the near term, while the existing infrastructure gets upgraded. The existing infrastructure is nice, compared to cities that are having to play catch up. If CHI and PHL were listed on the NYSE I'd be buying as a long hold (I'm not old and have time to watch the investment grow).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted May 14, 2021, 10:23 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camelback View Post
They both seem like steals in today's insane RE world. Both cities could see some huge investments in the near term, while the existing infrastructure gets upgraded. The existing infrastructure is nice, compared to cities that are having to play catch up. If CHI and PHL were listed on the NYSE I'd be buying as a long hold (I'm not old and have time to watch the investment grow).
well you can buy municipal bonds, but I don't think I'd recommend that for CHI.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:31 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.