In the 20th century before the 1980s, in major cities in the US, did anyone except the very rich own their residence?
For example, in New York, did upper middle class people generally rent? Or were brownstones more affordable than they are now? Whatever the answer, how did this change over various decades from the teens through the 1970s?
The predominant form of apartment ownership in NYC is the co-op. In a co-op, you own a share of the building, not your apartment. You have the right to use an apartment as part of your ownership. You usually can’t rent it without the permission of the co-op board. You also can’t sell your share unless the co-op board approves the sale.
Co-op shareholders pay monthly maintence, which goes to capital expenses and paying the super to take care of the building/operate the boiler. (heat and water are not metered in such buildings, but usually included with the maintenance).
However, yes, brownstones used to be considerably cheaper in the 70s because NYC in general was an undesirable place to live. as recently as 1981, you could buy a 4-story brownstone in Park Slope Brooklyn for 50k. Only problem, you were sharing the block with crackhouses. If you were effete enough to want a crackhouse-free block, it might have cost as much as 75k.
You’re mixing together a lot of things in your question. Of course, many, many thousands of middle- and lower-middle-class families owned homes that were located in major cities, from the very beginning of the nation. These ranged from small townhouses up to large mansions.
After the development of apartment houses in the 19th century, the co-op form of ownership was the primary way to “own” an apartment and still pay a portion of the maintenance for the building as a whole. This was widespread in New York City, and examples could also be found in other large cities. But the invention of the condominium made the process much, much simpler beginning in the 1960s. This coincided with changes in tax laws and attitudes about homeownership as a way to build wealth rather than as a wasting asset. At least in Chicago, the conversion of large rental communities like Sandburg Village to condominiums was largely accomplished by 1982—not just beginning.
I hadn’t realized that co-op ownership started so early and was so widespread in the early to mid 20th century. Thanks for the info! Are there any web sites that explain this? (I’m not asking for “cite!”, I would just like to read more about it.)
There’s a whole magazine about it.
Co-ops in New York City go back at least until the mid 19th-century. And despite New York enacting a condominium law in the 1960s, co-op conversions still happen regularly. New construction tends to be condos, though.
I grew up in Philadelphia and private home ownership there was very much a thing from lower middle class on up and also many lower class people managed to own their homes. My parents bought their first house in 1945 for $5000. It was a 3 BR, one bath, “airlight” style row house. This meant a living room in front and then side by side a narrow dining room and even narrower kitchen, all rooms with windows. Upstairs was similar with the two rear BRs side by side and the bathroom having a skylight. Before that we had a rental house that I barely remember. Before that they lived in apartments. We knew NY as the place where everyone lived in apartments. for us apartments were for the very poor or the newlyweds.
Don’t forget Levittown. The place where anyone with a job could afford to live. Actually, when I met someone from Minnesota he looked down his nose at anyone living in a row house, or even semi-detached. For us in Philly, semi-detached was really a move up in the world, but I gather that was a pretty much an eastern seaboard thing.
The largest residential development in the US, Co-op City, started construction in the mid-60’s.
Sounds a LOT like the row house I grew up in in Philly. Except no skylight, and the 2 bedrooms were in the front.
Question about pre-condo Co-ops:
I didn’t run into this form of ownership until the 80’s (CA).
The big problem with a co-op at that time was financing - you couldn’t get a traditional mortgage, because you did not own the building - all you owned was, essentially, permission to use a portion of the building, and the lender had no ability to foreclose.
How were pre-condo co-ops financed? Did everyone pay full cash at move-in, or were there specialty lenders? some form of traditional mortgage? Any security put up as collateral/equity?
Also, still wondering about web site with early historical information about co-ops. Is there one?
This article in Wiki has some info (scroll down to New York) but still does not describe the early era, how prevalent it was, etc. Wiki on Housing_cooperative
In areas where coops are common, the local banks know how to handle the financing. The lien is placed on the coop shares themselves and they can foreclose on the shares of needed.
Some snootier buildings require all-cash purchases. These are pretty rare, though.
Yes. Some of New York’s pricier co-ops not only do not permit mortgages, but require a buyer to demonstrate that he/she has sufficient income independent of a job to cover the maintenance and costs.
Keeps the riffraff out.
There doesn’t seem to be much difference between coop and “condominium” and “strata title”.
Scholars have traced the concept of selling part of a building , as a share of the whole, to a first century Babylonian first century record …
Strata title and condominium are very similar ideas, but both are pretty different from co-ops in practice.
I’ve heard that New York’s preference for the co-op structure is rooted in old Dutch legal traditions, the Dutch having been pioneers in shareholder corporations, whereas the condo system was rooted in the English concept of fee simple titles.