Quote:
Originally Posted by
mordecai 
I lived in a really raw, enormous loft across from Staples Center for a minute in 2005. Girlfriend lived in the Brewery Complex for years, and plenty of friends have lived or do live in lofts all over the Downtown area. Size wise, these older spaces are incredible. Between 1400-3500 square feet, 30 foot ceilings, sometimes higher. Many friends would partition their spaces into multiple floors and rooms. The guys who lived in mine before me had built a second story in two rooms with a staircase up to the skylight for roof access, where they had built a small deck. Those spaces were also much less polished than the newer ones, which to me at least was one of the appeals of a loft. Of course the amenities sucked, homeless guys would break into your car, you had to bring your own fixtures, never a good temperature, but they cost nothing.
The newer lofts I've seen end up looking more like unfinished apartments. They're usually less than a quarter of the size for twice the price. You get a nice stove and a/c perhaps, and maybe a shallow pool on the roof, but the lease would prevent you from doing anything interesting to them, and if you buy, they're too small or too polished to do anything anyways. Large spaces exist in the newer loft buildings, but the price is often insanity. Los Angeles's charm is in it's houses, especially the Modern, Craftsman and bungalow ones. Having lived all over the city I really think a house in an old neighborhood is the way to go. And you can probably get a pretty nice one for the price of a loft. Just my thoughts.
That's true. I think that as a long time New Yorker I was excited by the lofts I saw (like what you're describing... huge sq footages.) But I also realize that having a free standing house might be better.
