Don't let double-digit unemployment and a frozen credit market fool you - some LA neighborhoods are doing just fine, thank you. And you might be surprised by the areas that are doing particularly badly. How has the recession affected gentrifying neighborhoods and the up-and-comers? And are the super-rich truly still recession-proof? Los Angeles Magazine has just published a chart detailing homes sold, median selling price, and price per square foot for every imaginable LA area neighborhood between 2007 and 2008. The list can be quite daunting so herewith, a summary of the notables.
Most houses sold in 2008: Lancaster (93536) 1,458
Most houses sold in 2008: Lancaster (93536) 1,458
Least houses sold in 2008: Downtown (90021) 16
Highest median price in 2008: Beverly Hills (90210) $2,690,000
Highest median price in 2008: Beverly Hills (90210) $2,690,000
Lowest median price in 2008: Lancaster (93535) $155,000
Highest price/sf in 2008: Santa Monica (90402) $984
Highest price/sf in 2008: Santa Monica (90402) $984
Lowest price/sf in 2008: Lancaster (93535) $88
Biggest gainer from 2007: Westwood (90024) +17.9%
Biggest loser from 2007: Watts (90002) -49.0%
Wow. It is certainly an interesting time to be owning (or building) in Lancaster. Despite nearly halving in value from the year before, houses were still getting scooped up there last year thanks to drop-dead prices, which were lower even than Compton or Watts. But those inner city neighborhoods were by far the biggest losers from the year over. Their central location gives them artificially high prices during boom years. Beverly Hills and Malibu topped out the price index as can be expected. And Santa Monica's dense zoning and oceanfront location gave it the highest price per square foot. Despite sluggish movement in Downtown, the 90021 zip still managed a double digit increase from 2007. And the combination of density and stability stemming from proximity to UCLA, is the only explanation for Westwood's freakish mini-boom.
Biggest gainer from 2007: Westwood (90024) +17.9%
Biggest loser from 2007: Watts (90002) -49.0%
Wow. It is certainly an interesting time to be owning (or building) in Lancaster. Despite nearly halving in value from the year before, houses were still getting scooped up there last year thanks to drop-dead prices, which were lower even than Compton or Watts. But those inner city neighborhoods were by far the biggest losers from the year over. Their central location gives them artificially high prices during boom years. Beverly Hills and Malibu topped out the price index as can be expected. And Santa Monica's dense zoning and oceanfront location gave it the highest price per square foot. Despite sluggish movement in Downtown, the 90021 zip still managed a double digit increase from 2007. And the combination of density and stability stemming from proximity to UCLA, is the only explanation for Westwood's freakish mini-boom.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment