Best place for landlord : SF, NYC or Boston? (live, cost, state)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hey folks. We are planing to buy a lot / land, building or house to house temporary people or eve long term resident in self containing studios.
We are undecided with SF, NYC and Boston. Which has the best potential of the three? Like student, newcomers, tourist and also not bad city administration for permit, taxes, construction permit ect. Our goal is to provide affordable housing in expensive global dynamic cities.
Thanks
my vote would be boston. although affluent students from harvard, mit, bu, bc, tufs, ... would probably take advantage (probably cheaper than room-and-board -- even a small studio apartment looks favorable to sharing a dorm room with 2 strangers).
else, visiting/adjunct professors that dont want to look for a new place to live every semester would probably be interested if it is close to their college and very affordable.
if it is subsidized affordable housing (section-8) i think the larger need would be nyc and boston (although i mite be mistaken about san francisco) ?
SF has become so expensive so fast that there is a gigantic need for this type of housing ("affordable"). To give an idea of how drastically average rents have gone up and in how quick of a span of time: When I moved to the SF bay area in 2010, average rent for a 1 bedroom was somewhere just above $1500-$1700.
Today that has gone up more than 2-fold, and as a city SF has surpassed NYC...you're lucky if you can even find a studio (yes, a studio!) for less than $3000 these days in SF. It is utterly ridiculous and a bit hard to believe how unaffordable SF has become in such a short amount of time (we're talking like ~5 years here).
These three cities (NYC, Boston, and SF) have all traditionally been very expensive places to live. But what we're seeing happen in SF has been incredibly fast and potentially historic (and not necessarily in a good way as the city has essentially been transforming overnight).
SF has become so expensive so fast that there is a gigantic need for this type of housing ("affordable"). To give an idea of how drastically average rents have gone up and in how quick of a span of time: When I moved to the SF bay area in 2010, average rent for a 1 bedroom was somewhere just above $1500-$1700.
Today that has gone up more than 2-fold, and as a city SF has surpassed NYC...you're lucky if you can even find a studio (yes, a studio!) for less than $3000 these days in SF. It is utterly ridiculous and a bit hard to believe how unaffordable SF has become in such a short amount of time (we're talking like ~5 years here).
These three cities (NYC, Boston, and SF) have all traditionally been very expensive places to live. But what we're seeing happen in SF has been incredibly fast and potentially historic (and not necessarily in a good way as the city has essentially been transforming overnight).
That's exactly why we put SF in the mix. Out of control rent.But the first poster does have a point with students in Boston.
I don't know how you're going to do this in any of the places you imagined. I'm from Cambridge and any shoebox size piece of land is nicked up in seconds around here and you'll be paying an arm and leg for it. That's before you even factor in the zoning regs, community oversight panels, property value assessments, etc.... I'm telling you, at least in the case of Boston, your plan to charge "affordable rents" won't work unless you're committed to losing a lot of money. It's that simple. You might be able to scoop up some land in Roxbury, East Boston, Dorchester, Everett, Revere, but even there it isn't cheap - and some of those places won't attract those "students, tourists, newcomers" that you're looking for.
If this is something you're committed to, I'd just say buy an existing property and condo-ize it and then charge the rents you'd like. You're still going to have to slog through the zoning regulations and probably fight some people in the community who'd rather it went to family use in that case, but at least you'll get it up and running faster than if you built it.
another consideration, i don't think there is much land to build on in any metro (particularly in the north east).
i think i heard that in many cities/states there is a regulation that a percentage of new housing units be dedicated to section-8 for obtaining permits and such.
That's exactly why we put SF in the mix. Out of control rent.But the first poster does have a point with students in Boston.
There is no way in hell you can just go in and build in SF or NYC, I don't know about Boston. If you are going to buy land in either of those two cities, you will be overpaying by a lot. What is your target price point per sq foot?
There is no way in hell you can just go in and build in SF or NYC, I don't know about Boston. If you are going to buy land in either of those two cities, you will be overpaying by a lot. What is your target price point per sq foot?
In Boston your best bet would probably be to buy a triple decker in Allston/Brighton (college kids) or Southie (22-35 crowd). They'll either be really expensive or need renovations.
There is no way in hell you can just go in and build in SF or NYC, I don't know about Boston. If you are going to buy land in either of those two cities, you will be overpaying by a lot. What is your target price point per sq foot?
I know for land, but one thing people start doing in cities like Paris and London is to buy property and rent the rooms.
SF has become so expensive so fast that there is a gigantic need for this type of housing ("affordable"). To give an idea of how drastically average rents have gone up and in how quick of a span of time: When I moved to the SF bay area in 2010, average rent for a 1 bedroom was somewhere just above $1500-$1700.
Today that has gone up more than 2-fold, and as a city SF has surpassed NYC...you're lucky if you can even find a studio (yes, a studio!) for less than $3000 these days in SF. It is utterly ridiculous and a bit hard to believe how unaffordable SF has become in such a short amount of time (we're talking like ~5 years here).
These three cities (NYC, Boston, and SF) have all traditionally been very expensive places to live. But what we're seeing happen in SF has been incredibly fast and potentially historic (and not necessarily in a good way as the city has essentially been transforming overnight).
Is San Fran really that expensive? On craigslist, I found if you are willing to share a house with a couple of roommates (but you private room), there are plenty of options for about 600$-800$, in the city itself. That's not too bad for a young single person.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.