House rent fees in 1967.

[halocentury]

I've searched through Google with several search strings, with variations on the terms. Rentals, renting, house, Los Angeles - and I do find results. However, when I type in '1967' or 'year 1967', it talks about houses built in '67 and today's rental fees, or as is the case with the latter term, it gives me no results

Comments

[slashfairy]

see if you can grab LA times back issues, real estate stories, etc, for those years.

it'll vary considerably by area in LA, since it's really something like 81 separate communities all under the umbrella of LA. so it'll matter if they're white, black, japanese, etc., and what part of LA.

might consider googling real estate agencies down there, too, see who's bragging they've got "40 years in the business" or whatever? also, Sunset magazine maybe. I dunno, they used to have house and vacation rental ads in the back.

[halocentury]

Haven't looked up Sunset Magazine yet, but I've tried checking the LA Times back issues with some success. Thank you for the suggestions.

[joereaves]

Since none of your readers are likely to know if you're a little bit off you could try one of those 'what would X amount be worth now' conversion things and use it to convert from what a reasonable rent for a similar property ina similar standard loacation would be worth now and to what that would be now. That should at least give you a reasonable ball park figure that no one's going to be able to argue with.

[joereaves]

http://projects.exeter.ac.uk/RDavies/arian/current/howmuch.html The first one he links to, based on purchasing power, would likely give you a reasonable estimate I think.

[halocentury]

This converter will help for this purpose, but I'll be using it for other needs as they come up. Very handy. Thank you!

[joereaves]

I found it when I was writing a steampunk type of AU. I had my consulting detective tossing his errand boy a coin which further research showed was about a month's wages lol.

[zinnea]

You know how real estate agents say everything's about location, location, location? This is especially true in LA where rents in 1967 would have varied massively from area to area. (This is still true of LA.) The main difference, I suppose, is that back in 1967 much of Los Angeles was still affordable.

For what it's worth, in the mid 1960s one of my relative rented a house on the west side (I think it was Santa Monica but I can't remember for sure) for something like $75 a month; that would be just under $500 in today's money but you'd be lucky if you could rent a parking space in Santa Monica for $500 now and they've got rent control, unlike other communities in the area.

The average rent nationwide in 1967 was $125.00, you could use that as a starting point, knocking off or adding on as much money as you think would be fitting.

Also, the LA Times has excellent archives that go back all the way to the 1800s, including images of ads. Their fees are pretty reasonable if you're doing to do a lot of research.

[halocentury]

I'm taking that $75 rent, and working it around to get something that might fit a bit better. I'm not working with Santa Monica, but Topanga. Might be a bit of a difference between the two. Thank you!

[alessandriana]

I asked my mother, and she said she rented a 2 bed 1 bath apartment in LA in 1970 for $180 a month. Not quite what you're looking for, but might give you a general ballpark idea. She guesses that you could probably get a fairly large house for about $200 a month.

I suggest you look in the LA Times archives, as others have said; if you have a university library nearby, chances are they'll have back issues available on microfilm.

[halocentury]

I'm not looking for a large house or an apartment, but those are both good things to keep in mind. Thank you!