apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

I'll stick to the mid-west.

When your guests have a choice between sitting in a line on the sofa, perching on a dining chair, or going to bed with you -- and when there's no living-room space for any form of entertainment, be it bookshelves, a TV, or something requiring a desk -- that may be "luxury," but it sure isn't "comfort."

I must be very, very tired or permanently scarred from 5 years of NYC living, cause this is not striking me as so, so bad. Is this any worse than 1500 for one bedroom in a 2br shared with a stranger?

BTW, I didn't pay that, but I see places going for that per usual right now...

Um, is that the MODEL? Yikes, fire the decorator.

But I don't think they are rented furnished, Wende. All the issues you describe are fixed with furniture. And/or are pretty universal to small-space studio living, regardless of cost or luxury/comfort labels.

Am I missing something? The floor plan shown does not match the photos.

PS: That floorplan is not from those photos.

if downtown LA came with the same perks as, say the West Village in New York, then the cost would be worth it. but it's cheaper and you get a whole lot more neighborhood for your money if you live even 5 minutes west of downtown. I don't know who is going to rent these.

I don't think that downtown LA is livable enough to justify these kind of prices. It lacks the basic infrastructure for living (ie. local grocery stores and eateries within walking distance) $1500 is absurd for a studio here. For that kind of price one could get a one or two bedroom in Silver Lake!

I agree these photographs seem to be very misleading. I wonder if this blogger works for Metro 417. This seems to be more of an advertisement then anything else. BTW, I hardly call cheap laminate faux wood floors and ikea cabinetry luxury.

My apartment in the east village is smaller than that and of a similar layout except that the bathroom is behind the kitchen not the bedroom. I don't have a dining area, but I live very comfortably in the space.

Stuff like this makes me scared we won't be able to afford to stay in LA (and we make good money and have no problem with paying $1500ish for two bedrooms...).

But aside from that, this apartment looks terrible. The fixtures and fitting look cheap and surely they could have staged it better than this! I used to have those Ikea dining chairs in white when I was a student, and they sucked!

p(too), I was assuming that the decorator's efforts were the best that could be done with the space, that being what decorators are usually paid to do.

I also tried mentally rearranging it and didn't get very far, but perhaps you could enlighten us on how you'd get a better array of furniture in there.

Who are they trying to kid? LA is getting more expensive, but not that expensive that fast.

psssst! I'll bet they're aiming at transplanted New Yorkers, who won't be shocked at the prices -- same as there are downtown condos here in Phoenix that are blatantly priced for expatriate San Franciscans.

I don't think it's that bad either. I think maybe because the layout is pretty good and it comes with a washer/dryer which is a HUGE plus. I think it's a rip off as far as rent goes, but if I didn't have a dining room table (and a live in boyfriend) I would live there. Honestly, how much do we really need?

Is LA that much cheaper? I pay more than that for less space in NYC. And the arrangement I would do is shift the couch to the opposite wall so you see it when you walk in. Place 2 small sitting chairs opposite it with a low, slim, small credenza or media stand between them. Place a plasma on the wall between the 2 chairs, but put it behind a gorgeous two way mirror (ok, maybe the mirror is over the top, but if I could afford it I sooo would, hell, if I could even afford the plasma) Plus this will bounce back the light from the window making the space super bright and airy (ugh, I wish I had windows in my living room!). Get a cute rug, get a small transparent coffee table so it doesn't take up visual space (peekaboo from CB2 would be perfect). Done done done. The picture makes it look like you could even fit a bar height table and 2 bar stools in the kitchen, but I doubt that. The pictures don't seem to match the floor plan, but maybe it's very inprecise.

That was a lot of typing, here's the point though: the stylist could have done better especially if they're asking an unreasonable amount that suggests a degree of luxury not present in the feel of the rooms as they are.

Then again, maybe they don't care, that dining set is ghheetttooooo.

What's pearwood-style cabinetry?

Comicgeek: just wanted to clarify that I do not work for that building in any way. I didn't want to editorialize since I've yet to visit the building itself yet and wanted people to make up their minds for themselves about whether this was a sign of things to come or incorrect speculation about what reasonable going rates are in Downtown. For gosh sake, I live in a studio apartment in Silver Lake with a rent fraction of that price with a whole more to offer in my opinion. But I have a feeling I'm not the demographic they're aiming for.

That's a Forest City Enterprises property - adaptive reuse, I think, of a former office building - the 1925 Subway Terminal Building. (yes folks, LA used to have a real subway system called the Red Car system until the mid-50s).

I assume like most Forest City buildings, it comes with all the "luxury" amenities - roof deck, 24 hour doorman, onsite fitness center, movie room, lounge, business center, wifi, etc. - all the assortment of stupid amenities developers throw into the buildings in order to justify the price.

This could rent for $2,500 in the West Village. LA is still a bargain.

southender: here's an example of what genuine pearwood is supposed to look like. Pearwood-style? In the spirit of? Kinda sorta? Not sure.

Hrm. My loft in downtown LA is much nicer and much bigger and not much more expensive. How does that equate?

Well, wende, for starters, to address your TV watching issue, I'd add a TV. :)

And as far as "that's what decorators are paid to do" model apartment decor is very often held hostage by the budget of the builder.

And, um, the rent I'm paying in NY for my 485 square feet does not include a walk-in closet or an in-unit washer/dryer.

Here's a floorplan that matches the pictures above:

www.metro417.com/templates/template_metro417/unitH2_1br.asp?w=metro417

Forest City Enterprises must be smoking crack if they think they can get that kind of rent. The rental market downtown has gone soft.

http://www.downtownnews.com/articles/2008/02/25/news/news04.txt

Gregory, who do you think are the demographic they're aiming for? It's unclear to me. It's a pretty stinky apartment, but unsharable and not cheap, so younger, poorer people wouldn't want it. Not glamorous or pretty enough for a wealthier person, not to mention that the neighborhood is no Santa Monica. Maybe the developers/owners are expecting it to go unrented so they can take a loss?

I would also doubt the majority of units are this small, so probably not representative of either the building or the demographic they are targeting. They typically shoehorn in tiny spaces like this into new construction to give themselves a legally marketable "Prices Startting From" price.

And, um, where are the greenies, saying how great it is to live closer to the working center?

I live in Orlando and and non-sensical as it sounds rents are alarmingly close to this. A 500 sq. ft one bedroom with W/D in a dull, tatty apartment complex goes for 800, in town 900-1100...WTF!? It's ORLANDO!

I lived in LA for several years, and that rent does seem pretty unreasonable for that size and location of this apartment. As Comicgeek mentioned, downtown LA isn't a center of activity like other cities' downtowns.

SFGail: from my personal observations of the Downtown gentrification movement, the demographic aimed for would be very similar to the type that moved into SOMA in the early 2000's in San Francisco that were willing to pay a premium to be in the center of urban resurgence. Like I said, I don't fall into that demographic, but it seems like there is indeed a market for it.

Patrick: you're completely correct. I was hoping people would understand these units scale up in price and size with the mention of "upwards of $6700". I think people also missed a little bit of my opinion revealed in the title. But if it makes someone happy, whom am I to judge really? I've lived in 375 sq. ft. in San Francisco while paying $1250 (subsidized by my employer at the time), so this doesn't seem so far out.

I don't think these are meant as primary homes. I'll bet a lot of the buyers are companies that want to keep a pied a terre for an out-of-town executive. Another demographic that buys this kind of thing is wealthy older suburban couples who like the excitement/convenience of being in town a couple of nights a week. In NYC, some suburbanites basically keep an apartment simply to avoid the shlepp back to Greenwich after the theater.

I lived three blocks away from this building and also know someone (with more money than she knows what to do with) who lives there. I had a much larger (and much nicer) loft and paid much less. But I moved out last year because living in downtown LA was hellish.

And I say that as I diehard downtown urban girl, NYC born and raised.

I agree: these little overpriced things are for out-of-towners who want a pied-à-terre near the LA Phil, etc.

My walk in closet is larger and more stylish.

it's narrow, but workable.

bland.

I pay $900 for a 1000 sqft 2 bedroom main floor of a bungalow on a quiet street 2 minutes from downtown.
The catch is that I'm in Edmonton AB.
I'd rather live here and be able to save money for travel than pay twice the price for 1/3rd the space. Yikes.

I remember a few years ago looking at a similar apartment in DC for $1350 (they advertised it as a "NY style" studio) and thinking "people, this is NOT NYC." I mean, Manhattan, sure. You have the city on your doorstep, but for this particular apartment, you'd have to probably take a bus to the metro and then maybe you could access the wonders DC has to offer.

On the other hand, working in development economics, I can completely understand that sometimes those rents are what it costs to make new development--or redevelopment "pencil." whether they'll get it--that's another question and something I'd hope they would have considered before construction!

Actually, now that I look at it again, the one I looked at for 1350 was smaller. Basically a slightly larger version of the first room, and the layout was slightly different, but I think the sf was the same.

I love the "Distinctive gallery-style hallways" amenity. They must truly be awesome in a 345 sq ft space.

Sorry. I don't see the luxury in this offering.

It's amenities are simply that, amenities. There is nothing luxurious about laminate flooring. The appliances, fixtures and cabinets are not luxurious.

If this apartment were in Manhattan I would see it as a great deal. It may even be considered a luxury apartment due to the fact that it's brand new.

Luxury = washer and drier in the apartment. I am a New Yorker, and this is my dream.

besimple: I'm currently living in Orlando, and I'm picking up what you're putting down. I hunted for months (a luxury in itself, I know) to find my non-amenity 900sf apt downtown for 825. An absolute bargain in this town. As you said...it's Orlando and 450 sf studios are going for a grand. If we had some decent public transportation, local arts scene, un-incorporated culture, and local wages that weren't determined according to what "the mouse" is currently forcing 'cast members' to toil for, then I may be able to justify the rent rates and mortgage hikes just a tad in my bitter, southern mind. ;)

This place could have been styled to scream swanky luxury but it just wasn't.

Walk-in closets, big bathroom and in-unit washer and dryer do indeed put this in the "luxury" category of new construction. As does "new" since "luxury" or "loft-style" seem to be the only two categories of construction these days.

Also, to reiterate what Gregory has tried to convey, the "luxury" is a term applied by the builder to the *building* not necessarily this particular unit, and the smaller units are typically stripped down of amenities afforded on the larger units.

And if you worked downtown (although, granted, I don't know the LA work/commute patterns), what would you save in time and gas by not sitting on a freeway every morning?

Let's face it, downtown revitalization needs a hip/sophisticated target to work. And this is how you market to those people.

This is obviously an apartment used for sleeping and not much else. when you live in downtown be it LA or NYC you're not planning on staying in most of time are you now?

but like others it does make me nervous that prices are getting higher. I'd stick to the valley, i have a 400sq single for less than $850 a month. Its is a lovely quite building with a huge pool and rec room. Why pay more just for a "downtown" spot?

Metro 417'er here. We have a one bedroom and like it (about 700sf and not too much more $ than the studio mentioned above).

Its not "luxury" (what place doesn't bill themselves as luxury), but when you want something a little newer, in-unit washer/dryer, walls (read, not a loft), downtown I don't think this price is that unreasonable (though definitely not for everyone).

You want expensive, go check out Glo. Those apartments are definitely nicer, but still surrounded by nothing.

What we thought were comparable 1-bedrooms at Mozaic, were not much cheaper than what we are paying here.

Demographic here is a good mix. Younger students, older couples, trendy artist types, and everything in between can be seen here.

Some of us prefer downtown and the 5-10 minute commute to work over our friends who commute 1 hour, whatever floats your boat. They prefer their commutes to get a large place for cheaper with everything that the burbs offers, while we prefer downtown and what it offers.

We can walk to Ralphs, all the restaurants on Main, movie theaters, etc. Its not that barren here.

When I first moved to LA from NYC 14 years ago, my LA friends insisted on accompanying me every time I went on an apartment search. The reason? They knew, coming from Manhattan, that I'd be dazzled by the first thing I saw, throw money at the landlord, and sign on the dotted line without a second thought...They were right, I would have.

I have a feeling some (not all) of these downtown landlords are banking on new arrivals from places like NYC and SF with no locals to guide them thinking they're getting a great deal on a tiny space downtown with a one-year lease that could go through the roof when it's time to re-up.

Maybe it's because I'm old, but no amount of jazzy audio, groovy graphics and pics of toned hipsters half my age on a complex' website makes up for tumescent rents and a tenancy that is sure to change annually.

I suspect that after the 5th & Park building goes in (The tallest building west of Chicago that will be across from Pershing Square and the Biltmore) and the Grand Avenue project is finished (The one connecting Disney Hall and Wendell Becket's DCP to City Hall) people will be saying, "you could have rented apartments down here for $1500 a month a couple of years ago!"

These will be seen as the good old days.

It won't rent for that unless they stumble upon someone really lazy or someone from a city like London or New York who didn't do their homework.

I like the floor plan(s) for such small spaces.
Smart, considering the size.
The photos of the decorated one show a classic example of using small scale furniture in the dining area to 'make the place look more spacious', and it back-firing.
Fewer pieces, but with reasonable size and presence, usually show a place much better.

So small!! But livable for one person only.
Love, Love the building and sales/management staff. Yes it is pricey for sure! But if you work in downtown, it a perfect and SAFE. However guest parking is LIMITED, 12 for the entire building. Andre the security supervisor, is rude and horrible to deal with. AVOID him at all costs. He will make your living experience Horrible, oh and he lives in the building! He's rude, vulgar, passive aggressive, and uses the little power he has to make life at Metro 417 difficult. Other than that, the building is fun and the tenants are professional and friendly.

Downtown or 'the burbs' are not the only options! I live in Hollywood/Los Feliz, pay $1475 for a gorgeous 1,000 sqft Two bedroom apartment, and if I commuted to Downtown (like most people in LA, I don't) it would take me 15-20 mins. Maybe I could do it on the Metro Red Line in about the same amount of time and save gas.

If you want to live Downtown that's cool, I'm not going to tell you you're an idiot, I sort of get the appeal - but it's far from the only non-suburban option in LA.