Mayor Garcetti selling Echo Park house for $1.65 million

Garcetti House
ECHO PARK –– Mayor Eric Garcetti and family apparently have no plans to return to Echo Park. The Wall Street Journal reports that Garcetti and wife Amy Wakeland have put their approximately 1,900-square-foot home on Avon Street on the market for $1.65 million. That’s $1.3 million more than what Garcetti paid for the three-bedroom, Mid Century home in 2000.

The home, which was featured in Dwell magazine, was expanded and remodeled during the couple’s tenure. In addition, they also landscaped and terraced the nearly half-acre property in the Elysian Heights section of Echo Park.

Garcetti and family now reside in the mayor’s mansion in the Hancock Park area.  Wakeland, in an email to the Wall Street Journal, said the couple is selling the Elysian Heights house “because we have come to realize that we are unlikely to move back there over the next several years due to our family’s current professional obligations and where our daughter currently attends school.”

This is not the first time Garcetti and Wakeland have capitalized on rising Eastside home values. In 2014, they sold a Silver Lake home for $1. 9 million after purchasing the property three years earlier for $1.425 million.


  1. He never said he wasn’t a capitalist

  2. Hasn’t Garcetti said he wants more affordable housing? Selling at a more reasonable price would be one way to accomplish that rather than gouging at as extremely high as he can.

    It is no surprise Garcetti is selling, though – after years of a gougingly high rental price for the property (or was that simply the way to take legal bribery?). He was never anything but a carpetbagger here, moved into the district from the Wilshire area in preparation to run for a forthcoming vacant seat on the City Council.

    Now that he has ruined the area with his small lot subdivision law he pushed through, even he doesn’t want to live here in the aftermath of that.

    • A reasonable price is what a buyer will pay. This is supply and demand 101. If you owned a widget that someone was happy to pay $100 for would you really out of the goodness of your heart say no no I will only take $20 for this. So he got an incredible deal 15 years ago paying only $300k for this place, probably put a lot of money into fixing it up. How much is he allowed to sell it for? Who dictates that? You? The government?

      • some people sell things for less out of the goodness of their heart: http://sfist.com/2015/11/25/woman_sells_mission_apartment_for_2.php

        • Like you? How much have you given to charity lately? I’m sure he donates to a lot of good causes. If he sold the house for a million, instead of $ 1.6, would some worthy person really be helped? No. It would mean that some rich person was given money by another rich person. What is the point of that? If he wants to help the housing crisis in LA, he would sell the house for a market price and give the profit to a shelter or to a group that provides housing for the poor. Of course we have no idea if he plans to do that or not. Suggesting he sell his house for less to improve the housing crisis is an ignorant proposition.

    • @henry and @joe – don’t be ridiculous and naive. Supply and demand dictate our economy. Period. The example @joe mentions is not the norm – it never will be. What do you expect him to sell it at and why do you think someone would purposely sell it below what the market says it’s worth. Would you sell something for $500k that was worth over twice that — on purpose?

    • Henry please. You are against high home.prices and rent but you oppose small lot development? That makes no sense whatsoever. I’ve lived in echo park, silver lake and los Feliz the past 10years and was only recently able to afford my first home which is in a small lot development. I searched for 6 months for a place for my family to call home and it turned out a small lot dev home was the best option. Please think before you comment.

    • That’s just silly. He sells it cheap, the buyer can just flip it. Cheap housing doesn’t come from a one time sale of an expensive home at a below market rate.

  3. Here’s a link to the Dwell article – http://www.dwell.com/house-tours/article/echo-logical for some more photos of the place.

    That’s a huge up-tick in value if it sells at or near asking. I think it should sell around that though considering the place, the outdoor space, the look, the cachet of Dwell + the “hip” Mayor, and of course EP’s rising rising values.

  4. I think it’s a bargain! They put some ‘serious’ money into it….good for them!

  5. Apart from the entirely ridiculous idea that he should for some reason sell his house at below value just because he is mayor, if he were to do that he would be screwing over his neighbors by skewing the comps. The more he sells his house for the more value he creates for his neighbors. I can’t imagine any homeowner not welcoming increased property values.

  6. Henry you are angry and confused. Let me clear it up for you. The correct way to participate in capitalism as a liberal is to sell your goods and services at market rate and donate your excess wealth to charity. The term gouging doesn’t apply here; we’re not talking about selling water for $1000/bottle or Martin Shkreli selling hiv meds for $700/pill. A million dollar house is a luxury good that should be sold for market price. Nobody needs a million dollar house to survive; garcetti sold a luxury good for a luxury price. We can argue about whether he is a good liberal and will use that wealth to help the less fortunate, but making him out as a villain because he sold his house for what it’s worth is counterproductive. The other commenters are absolutely right that if he sold it for less than its worth all he would be doing is hooking up some other millionaire with a deal and throwing off the property values for his neighbors.

  7. In the meantime, Garcetti refuses to declare a state of emergency for the rising homeless problem in Los Angeles.
    Garcetti is as bad as Villaraigosa, traveling , going to hockey and basketball games , all on the city’s dime while real issues get placed in the back burner.
    He has to go , a and so does Mitch O Farrel.
    What a couple of clowns.

    • WORSE. Villaraigosa challenged the teacher’s union and during his tenure the city was never cleaner or safer, which emboldened the gentry to dare move in to our barrios in the first place. Since Garcetti took office the opposite is unfolding. He’s a grandstanding politician who fears making the wrong call on the difficult issues.The city has been virtually leaderless since this marshmallow assumed office.

  8. All you liberal sheep keep electing these puppets and complain when they reveal they’re all the same.

Post a Comment

Please keep your comments civil and on topic and refrain from personal attacks. The moderator reserves the right to edit or delete any comments. The Eastsider's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy apply to comments submitted by readers. Required fields are marked *