Tuesday, January 04, 2011

Which one?

Tia and I watch a lot of house hunter type shows (they are fairly ubiquitous and, honestly, not a lot of other compelling options present themselves). Anyway, though the locations and budgets vary widely, the end of every episode is exactly the same: 3 options, one of which they have to decide on. The hook is trying to guess which one. In that vein we have chosen three possible rentals, each with pros and cons. Which will we select?

1. A large historic house (built in 1908) that has been divided into 3 properties. 2 townhouse style places and a 'condo' on the lower level. Is only a 1 bedroom vs. 2 at the other locations (although it had 1.5 bathrooms). It 'quirky' but in a usable way with a capacious kitchen and the sole bedroom is an 'L' shape allowing for a sitting area. Also has a huge private deck and a shared backyard (that is cared for by a landscaper) Cons: the place is updated, but definitely not new like the other places, smallest of the 3 @ 950 sq feet, a bit 'quirky' in less usable ways too like the odd angles in the bathroom, no garage. It is the cheapest at $1150/mo and includes internet and w/s/g.

2. A new build townhouse close to my job. All brand spanking new with no prior tenants. The largest of the 3 places at 1300 sq feet with 2 bedrooms and 2.5 bathrooms. Has a garage to boot. Great storage everywhere. No yard to care for. Good location close to work. Cons: run by a management company which isn't ideal, is nondescript looking, nothing whatsoever to see from the windows except a parking lot. Cost is $1450/month.


3. A 2 bedroom/1 bath bungalow in the Hollywood district. It is about 1200 sq feet with a spacious unfinished basement. All new appliances and it has been completely redone inside. Still being worked on actually. And, it is a stand alone house (no shared walls). Owner is the landlord, which seems preferable to a management company in our experience. Cons: further away from our workplaces (and we only have one car), yard work will be our responsibility, and the price, while cheaper than where we live presently, is the highest @ $1600/mo.

Which should we go for? Which will we go for?

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well two (2) of them, you didn't say where they were, but I vote for #1 or #2. #3 - while sounding awesome is more expensive and further from work with one car. Hollywood is a pretty good area - and has a MAX station, but you could have a decent house for the same price.

TTFN!
~J

Tia said...

Good point Josh. 1 and 2 are within 3 blocks of each other on roughly MLK and Fremont. Not the best part of town, but certainly getting better, and we could both walk to work.

We need to try out a new burger place soon! I'd love to try Slow Bar.