The Reality Behind a $200,000 House in San Francisco vs. Los Angeles
When it comes to the real estate market in the United States, cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles stand out for their high cost of living and limited available housing. This article delves into the stark differences between a $200,000 house in these two major urban centers, highlighting the reasons why the concept of a $200,000 house is practically non-existent in San Francisco, and slightly less unrealistic in Los Angeles but still highly improbable.
San Francisco: A Dream Unattainable
San Francisco, the birthplace of the technology industry and a hub of cultural and artistic innovation, is one of the most expensive cities in the United States. The idea of a mere $200,000 house there is a dream that does not come close to reality. Let's explore why:
Zillow Valuation: A 2,150 square foot, three-bedroom, two-bathroom house in Mountain View, located just 50 miles south of San Francisco, is valued at $2.4 million by Zillow. This home, nestled in the heart of Silicon Valley, one of the most sought-after areas, has seen a drop of more than $200,000 in value within just one month.
Absence of Affordable Housing: In San Francisco proper, there are no standalone, $200,000 housing units available. Very rarely, there are units that qualify for below-market-rate pricing, which still require intense competition with dozens or even hundreds of applicants. According to the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) as of May 15, 2020, there is only one such unit available, and it is noteworthy that it is a highly competitive process to secure such a rare opportunity.
Suburban Counties and Remote Areas: Looking at the broader San Francisco metropolitan area, the situation doesn't improve much. In the inner Bay Area counties of SF, San Mateo, northern Santa Clara, Marin, Alameda, and western Contra Costa, there are exactly two $200,000 units available, and both are 1-bedroom condos. One is located in a suboptimal part of Richmond, and the other is a retirement unit in Marin with associated monthly services costing $3,600.
Los Angeles: A Softer Reality
Los Angeles, while still an expensive market, presents a slightly more lenient scenario for finding a $200,000 house. Here's how the picture looks:
Market Comparison: In some areas of Los Angeles, a $200,000 house might go for less, but these areas are often associated with a less desirable environment, such as crowded neighborhoods, pollution, or long commutes. Thus, the concept of a $200,000 house in Los Angeles, particularly within the city limits, is less unrealistic but still very challenging.
Condos and Rentals: Given the high cost of housing, it often makes more sense to go for a small condo or a lease instead of a traditional house. Indeed, a $200,000 house in Los Angeles will be smaller and located in a less desirable neighborhood. In contrast to San Francisco, the housing there might still offer a small yard, which is nearly impossible to find in the urban dense environment of San Francisco.
Conclusion: Real Estate in Major US Cities
While the concept of a $200,000 house exists in Los Angeles, it is certainly not something to expect in San Francisco. The reality in both cities makes it clear that smaller, cheaper options are predominantly focused on condominiums or lease agreements. As you navigate the housing market in these cities, consider the alternatives that provide better value and comfort.
In both San Francisco and Los Angeles, prioritize your living space based on your budget and preferences. For now, it might be prudent to go for a decent lease while you have the opportunity to earn more, or to invest in a small, affordable condominium. Ultimately, the right choice will depend on your financial stability and long-term goals.
Keywords: real estate, San Francisco, Los Angeles