≡ Menu

264 Sq. Ft. Tiny House in Los Angeles (For Sale!) Near UCLA and Beverly Hills

This is a 264 sq. ft. tiny house on a foundation (with land) that’s listed for sale on Estately in Los Angeles, California. It’s offered at $550,000 and was built in 1924. Big price for a tiny house but according to the listing, it’s the least expensive property in the Beverly Canyon area. What do you think?



Listing Summary

Zen-like retreat, perfect for a UCLA student or young professional. Secluded and private hideaway in nature. It is a 264 square foot studio with skylights and sliders leading out to the deck and backyard. Carport has storage cabinets and a washer and dryer. It is located near UCLA and Beverly Hills, it is the least expensive property in the highly desirable Beverly Canyon area.1

Highlights

  • 264 sq. ft.
  • 3,698sf lot
  • Built in 1924
  • Los Angeles, California
  • Beverly Canyon Area
  • Available at $550,000

Resources

  1. Estately

Our big thanks to Candace Ramirez for sharing!

Share this with your friends and family using the e-mail and social media re-share buttons below. Thanks!

If you liked this you’ll LOVE our Free Daily Tiny House Newsletter with more! You get all of our best small and tiny houses in your email plus access to FREE tiny house plans!

Join our Small House Newsletter featuring homes 500 sq. ft. and up!

More Like This: Explore our Real Estate Section

See The Latest: Go Back Home to See Our Latest Small and Tiny Houses

The following two tabs change content below.

Alex

Alex is a contributor and editor for TinyHouseTalk.com and the always free Tiny House Newsletter. He has a passion for exploring and sharing tiny homes (from yurts and RVs to tiny cabins and cottages) and inspiring simple living stories. We invite you to send in your story and tiny home photos too so we can re-share and inspire others towards a simple life too. Thank you!




{ 31 comments… add one }
  • Linton October 28, 2017, 4:26 pm

    Wonder if it’s the smallest, too?

  • Derek up North October 28, 2017, 5:21 pm

    $550k for a student? I wonder if he/she will be moaning about their immense student debt after graduation?

    • Alex October 28, 2017, 10:41 pm

      Yeah I also wondered how a student can afford to buy that. I guess a student loan wouldn’t be so bad if you used it to buy a home! Lol!

  • Dominick Bundy October 28, 2017, 5:30 pm

    Cute little house but asking over half a million dollars that’s only 264 sq. ft. are they nuts? I don’t care where it’s located . For that price i could buy 3 or 4 standard size houses. (yes they are out there if you look for them and no they aren’t all fixer uppers either, that’s if your not too fussy)

  • Alison October 28, 2017, 6:23 pm

    The price is for the land. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone buys it, tears down the tiny house, and builds something bigger.

  • Chuck October 28, 2017, 7:59 pm

    This is why people are leaving Cal. in droves for places where for that much money or less you could buy a mansion.

  • Silver Gypsy October 28, 2017, 10:03 pm

    In 1951, my father bought a compact 3 bedroom house for $18.5. The prices today are insane and are indicative of a massively manipulated market; we have the real estate industry to thank for this. As for California, the only reason for driving people out is so the Right-wing can smash up a liberal state, just like they intentionally did with Massachusetts, and NYC. This is disaster by design. The rich want all of the best places to live exclusively for themselves and they are driving everybody else out. They need to be put down like the rabid dogs that they are.

    • Cynthia October 29, 2017, 1:29 am

      Silver Gypsy, you picked the wrong place to spew your false political information. You have not a clue! I am far from rich, and struggle like all the other “Right-wing” people I know. Take a look around. Those who are truly rich are generally liberals….especially in CA.

    • redfish October 29, 2017, 5:58 am

      People and their funny conspiracy theories…

      • Silver Gypsy October 29, 2017, 7:49 am

        Which have a funny way of having a lot of truth to them. Where there’s smoke…

        • redfish October 29, 2017, 9:24 am

          Okay, I am not saying there is not some truth in what you said. 🙂

    • Denise October 29, 2017, 9:32 am

      Interestingly, all these high priced places inhabited by “the rich” all happen to be liberal/progressive. Very few so called “Right-wing” as you call them live there. Politics aside, I think the home is cute, has potential, but I would feel cramped here and life itself would be too expensive. Plus potential wildfires and earthquakes would also keep me out. But to each his own, and some want to rub shoulders with the Hollywood liberal elite.

      • Evening Iris October 29, 2017, 3:30 pm

        #Denise: And you know this how? You have copies of the political affiliations for all “rich” people? If that’s the case, you are amazingly well informed.

        • James D. October 29, 2017, 5:38 pm

          Evening Iris, many of the “rich” don’t really make it a big secret what their political affiliations are and besides, their names usually show up on the donor lists during fund raising events and is part of the public record for tax purposes.

          Like that’s how we know Harvey Weinstein was a long time contributor to the democratic party. Along with how we know he contributed money to Hillary Clinton, both directly and through her foundation, and she apparently decided to keep it despite the present scandal over him by stating she already spent the money.

          Other examples include Penny Pritkzer, part of the family that owns the Hyatt hotel chain, not only contributed to democratic causes but became President Obama’s Commerce Secretary in June 2013… Similarly, Mark Dayton, an heir to the Dayton family fortune (his ancestors built the company that became Target is a Democrat and the current governor of Minnesota.

          Some like George Soros have shown themselves to be champions of the left and contribute to a wide spectrum of left wing causes.

          So much of this is publicly available information and you can just as easily find out who generally contributes to the Republicans as well… But according to Forbes and other business news outlets, just like regular people, they don’t all contribute to the same party and many sometimes flip sides depending on which candidate they prefer.

          Generally, though, for states like California, the majority are liberal/progressive as can be clearly shown by their voting record and which party manages to fund raise the most in that state…

          Really, examples like most of the rich Hollywood elites would hardly be considered a stronghold for the right…

    • Silver Gypsy October 29, 2017, 3:27 pm

      Then how about quit busting my chops?

    • James D. October 29, 2017, 4:25 pm

      Uh, no… That’s just playing the blame game and won’t solve anything because it’s really everyone’s fault. Blaming any one group ignores the part everyone else had in contributing to the mess and that it’s only a mess because everyone contributed to it.

      Besides, the rich represent a pretty small percentage of the population and couldn’t take up all the choice real estate by themselves. You’re actually talking about nearly 80% of the population that are actively in the real estate market.

      Over 2/3 of all homeowners owe a mortgage, which wouldn’t be the case if there were a lot of rich people being the only ones buying up all the high priced properties. A lot of people just live in areas that they have little to no other choice but to go into debt in order to own their own home.

      Diminishing resources is also not a result of conspiracy but the simple fact there is more demand than available resources… The population has grown substantially but the amount of land available has remained the same and the growth of big homes hasn’t helped this trend.

      In 1951 the population was only 153,970,000, with the average house size being around 900 sq ft, but now the population has grown to over 326,625,791, with the average house over 2600 sq ft.

      Add the effect of inflation, changes in the economy as we stopped being a country that produced products and became more a consumer of world goods, with diminishing resources, are what are actually causing such high rises in pricing.

      Even in high priced areas like New York City where a Tiny apartment can easily go for over $2500, there’s literally tens of thousand of people applying for each and every one of those apartments… It doesn’t take rich people to cause such high rises in prices, just high levels of competition.

      Add a large percentage of the population has moved into coastal states and especially cities and thus there are far higher population densities in those areas that’s disproportional to the total population increase but that’s were most of the high paying jobs are located.

      This is not to say there isn’t a lot of special interests and general corruption of the system but that covers a wide swath of people in all walks of life and of all political affiliation.

      Besides, everyone is an individual and responsible only for their own deeds… So let’s not fall into the trap of lumping groups of people together based solely on a stereotype or make the mistake of ignoring the other factors that have contributed to causing the issues we now face.

      • Silver Gypsy October 29, 2017, 6:20 pm

        #James D. : This is your perspective, but it’s not mine. Were you private school educated? Were both of your parents doctorates in education? Did you go to school with people whose last names were Sears (& Roebuck), Peabody (Energy), Danforth (pewter and banking), Scott (paper towel and other paper products)? Well, I did, and I know how the rich think and they do not think like you think they think. Believe me. I know first hand having sat at their dinner tables.

        • Silver Gypsy October 29, 2017, 6:21 pm

          PS I’m done with this conversation.

        • James D. October 29, 2017, 7:12 pm

          Silver Gypsy, I understand that this appears to be a firmly held belief by you but being rich doesn’t really turn you into another species. People are people regardless of where they come from.

          Again, who the rich give their money to is hardly a secret. You may want to believe those you met represent all but that’s clearly not the case for everyone.

          Besides, not all rich people grew up rich and not all use their wealth for only selfish things.

          There are even people who gave up their wealth to live a simpler life.

          Really, if a poor person were to win the lotto and suddenly find themselves one of the rich are you going to automatically assume they’re suddenly one of them? How about philanthropists?

          Are all the rich people who don’t spend their fortune on themselves and live just like everyone else also all the same elitists you envision them to be?

          Is your belief truly that everyone with money is automatically evil? That no matter their background the moment they become rich that they all think the same?

          Sure, there is some disconnect for those who have never known another way of life, and there are those who fit the stereotype of spoiled rotten, but till the day we become mindless zombies we’re all individuals and capable of independent thought and action.

          So it makes no sense to lump everyone based on a broad category that ignores our individuality, especially when you want to blame all of them for everything regardless of whether they all had anything to do with it or not simply because you knew a few bad ones…

      • Silver Gypsy October 30, 2017, 12:31 am

        #James D: I understand you are one of these people who always has to have the last word and always be right, but your lack of knowledge on this subject is totally profound. Like I said, you think they think like you think they think and they don’t think like that at all. Their zeitgeist is 180 from your very provincial thinking. Now, let’s have an end to this. Please.

        • James D. October 30, 2017, 1:44 am

          Silver Gypsy, no, it’s not about having the last word but rather just pointing out the facts and the obviousness that you’re basically discriminating against an entire group of people, let’s just ignore the over the top call to violence, based solely on only the few you say you have met.

          Really, what do you think they call it when you lump an entire group of people as being all the same and always in the negative?

          I’ve pointed out the fact we can actually check to see what many of the rich do with their money politically and the reality is that they don’t all support the same things.

          This is not what I think but what are the actual verifiable facts! You can feel whatever you want about them but the facts are the facts regardless.

          This is because like it or not people are people, rich, poor, or whatever you want to categorize them as we’re all people. We can all be devils and angels, we can all think everyone else is different and it’s always us vs them regardless of the actual reality.

          We can all hate, we can all be biased, we can all be selfish and spoiled, we can all be indifferent but we can also be caring, we can be empathetic and kind, etc.

          Some people can end up exactly like their parents but others end up their polar opposites and variations in between. Being poor or rich doesn’t doom you to think in a particular way your whole life.

          If you think any one group has a monopoly on any characteristic then you clearly don’t understand the complexity of human nature or the simple fact that we’re all individuals.

          Even people who describe themselves with the same political leanings don’t all agree on every single thing.

          Really, try looking up examples like Chuck Collins, who is the great-grandson of Oscar Mayer. He not only decided to give away his fortune but spends his life championing the fight again financial inequality. Then tell me again they’re all the same just because they came from a rich family… and there are plenty of other examples.

          While this doesn’t change the point that playing the blame game doesn’t really ever solve anything as it just ignores the actual underlining reasons we have the messed up system we’re stuck with now.

          If all the rich people vanished from the Earth tomorrow we will still have the same problems we do now! We’ll just be stuck blaming the next richest people in the world for our problems and step and repeat it until no one is left… Well, that’s one way to solve it…

  • Laura October 28, 2017, 10:36 pm

    Yikes! That’s a lot of money! There must be a lot of land in this offering to cost so much because the house sure isn’t worth that much.

    • James D. October 30, 2017, 5:06 pm

      Laura, it’s the location… Most properties in the area are over a million.

      Unfortunately, land prices aren’t based on just size but location and how high demand properties in that area are for what to expect the going rate to be.

      This is one of the reasons why those concerned about property values are resistant to change and any non-conformity because everything in the area can contribute both positively or negatively to the present value of the properties in the area.

      So you have to be very aware of location when considering real estate and what price ranges are to be expected for any given area… Among a host of other cost concerns that can effect what you can end up paying when it’s all said and done…

  • redfish October 29, 2017, 5:41 am

    I don’t see why it is worth to buy a tiny house for THAT PRICE. This is the second tiny house they want 500k for… I know it is the location and bla bla, but it is just NOT worth it!

    • James D. October 29, 2017, 4:52 pm

      It just depends how badly you want to live in that area… Factors that effect whether it’s worth it are things like proximity to a good paying job, if it’s a job that pays you hundreds of thousands every year vs a low paying job anywhere else then that’s a consideration, access to things like highly rated schools for your kids, low crime area vs high crime area, amenities like gated communities that provide added security, access to things like the beach that for people who like to spend a lot of time at the beach can be worth a high premium to make that convenient vs needing to have long commute times…

      For some it can be a status symbol, to show that they made it financially… Beverly Hills does have that reputation…

      While California in general has high real estate prices. So you pretty much have to consider moving to another state to really expect to find significantly lower prices, but again that generally means making choices like what job you will get and whether the high paying job in the state is worth it versus a lower paying job in another state.

      Mind, to many people in California this probably doesn’t seem that high because they are used to it and it pairs with what their average income tends to be… It’s just disproportional to what people in other states with lower average incomes can conceive of paying for a property when compared to what they’re used to paying.

      While there are properties that go into the millions, so this isn’t quite the top of the extreme and homes of the rich can even go into the hundreds of millions range… Just to give some idea of the scale we’re talking about…

      But that gives some sense of why there can be such a disconnect from people that are in these high cost states vs the rest of the population.

      • redfish October 30, 2017, 6:47 am

        Yeah, thanks for stating the obvious!

        • James D. October 30, 2017, 8:42 am

          Sometimes the answers are obvious, people can just have different perspectives on the same thing and it can simply come down to a matter of acceptance of that difference.

          Just goes to show, don’t underestimate what people can get used to…

  • Alison October 29, 2017, 10:53 pm

    The properties next door to this, with larger lots and more substantial homes, are valued at about $1.25 million. This is a very narrow lot, but someone will find the location desirable. Land prices are why tiny homes are unlikely to take off in many parts of coastal California. The cost of the dwelling itself is almost irrelevant (almost); it’s the cost of land that is the problem.

    • James D. October 30, 2017, 12:42 am

      It’ll probably depend how hard people end up pushing for it but there are a few options…

      -Those with land can get a Tiny House ADU and rent out the big house to help pay off the debt for the land.

      -Multiple people can choose to share a lot and thus not have to pay the full price alone and basically just create an intentional micro-community.

      -People can optimize their Tiny Houses for Off-grid and settle in any number of presently unpopulated areas.

  • Anthonie October 30, 2017, 10:55 pm

    One of my favorite things about this WS, aside from the cool (mostly) THOW’s-is that politics rarely, if ever, rears it’s ugly head. Hopefully we can return to that peaceful place tomorrow? Please?

  • Debz October 31, 2017, 1:33 am

    3,698 sq. ft?

    Not much land.

Leave a Comment

Next post:

Previous post: