600,000€ for 87m² in Leganés: The 'Affordable Luxury' That Doesn't Add Up

520,000€ for 87m² in Leganés: Building more, but for whom?

The development sells itself: ‘affordable luxury’ homes in Leganés’ fastest-growing area, 87 square meters, garage, pool, paddle court, and a price tag exceeding 520,000 euros. Within the same municipality, listings offer flats for 150,000 euros or less. The gap between these prices reflects not just bricks and mortar, but two distinct markets that barely intersect.

This is not an isolated case. New flats under 90 square meters in Madrid’s southern belt range between 520,000 and 600,000 euros, while the secondary market in the same area remains significantly lower. The question driving this debate for months is not whether the product is expensive—it is—but who it is built for.

Who buys an 87m² flat for over 500,000 euros?

Not someone who plans to live there. Several forum users argue that the natural target for these developments is an investor buying off-plan to flip the property into the rental market, or someone with purchasing power far above average. The average buyer, earning about 27,000 euros gross annually, does not compete in this league: based on income, a salary of 1,350 euros per month barely covers a shared room, let alone a half-million-euro mortgage.

The circulating figures leave little room for doubt. Someone earning 3,600 euros per month in 14 installments—well above the median—reports being offered just over 200,000 euros in financing. In other words: this development is not aimed at that buyer. Those who qualify have a different profile, and several do not even intend to visit the neighborhood.

Affordable luxury is, in practice, a commercial label for mid-to-high-end products placed where land is cheaper than in the city center.

The rental math: 3,000 euros per month to make the numbers work

A calculation repeated in the thread attributes monthly rent to 1% of the property’s value. Applied to a 600,000-euro flat, this yields 6,000 euros per month. Reducing the requirement to 1/200th, and being generous, the rent should stand at 3,000 euros. In San Cristóbal de los Ángeles, a working-class neighborhood from the 1960s, listings range from 1,000 to 1,050 euros per month and are already considered excessive.

This leads to the comparison that best highlights the anomaly: in Geneva, a 2,000-euro rent coexists with salaries of 8,000 euros. In Leganés, half the Swiss rent is demanded with a fraction of the Swiss salary. To profit from the purchase, two lifetimes of occasional tenants would be needed.

Why doesn’t supply rise even as prices skyrocket?

This question splits the analysis in two. With rising prices, one would expect a flood of new developments. There is none. Factors cited include the shortage and retention of developable land, material costs, technical regulations, and administrative delays. Some recall that in the previous cycle, construction was cheap because rules were minimal, walls were paper-thin, and homes lacked heating: looking back with nostalgia is tricky.

The opposing suspicion is no less valid: between Coslada and Madrid lie kilometers of already urbanized land, with sidewalks, streetlights, and trash bins, yet not a single crane. If the land is ready but not built upon, prices do not rise by chance. This is compounded by the region’s demographic surge, which strains demand beyond what is being constructed.

Is Leganés a dormitory city?

The municipality carries a stigma that bothers some residents and annoys others. The data does not support the epic: Alcalá de Henares had about 15,000 inhabitants in 1950 and now approaches 200,000, making it Madrid’s dormitory city in practice, with or without Cervantes’ birthplace and a 15th-century university. It is not a shame, but it explains why prices have skyrocketed across the entire belt.

The comparison with other provinces clarifies the map. In metropolitan belts of mid-sized capitals, penthouses sell for 200,000 euros, townhouses for 220,000, and flats for under 240,000. In southern Madrid, that amount is merely the down payment for a new flat overlooking an industrial estate.

Future construction will not solve the problem

Part of the analysis calls for rapid construction using public land, competitions, and protected housing as in the 1960s. The other side argues that the problem is not a lack of cranes, but that housing has ceased to be a product and become a financial asset: if capital buys to profit, any new supply will be absorbed at the price set by that capital.

Here lies the deadlock. Those demanding more supply note that no administration builds public housing at the necessary pace. Those calling for regulation counter that years of capital seeking refuge cannot be fixed with more bricks, but with fewer financial buyers. At the center of the disagreement remains the same figure: 87 square meters, 520,000 euros, a pool, and a garage.