3-Bedroom SFH With a Picket Fence in Southport Sells For $35K Above the 2008 Price: 1320 W. Grace
We last chattered about this vintage 3-bedroom single family home at 1320 W. Grace in the Southport neighborhood of Lakeview in March 2011.
See our prior chatter here.
Back then, the house was listed at $759,000 when it last sold in 2008 for $636,000.
Most of you thought it was way overpriced given that it didn’t have a garage (parking pad only) and it had no back yard (looming condo building behind the house instead).
But the house was just a few doors down from the Dairy Queen and within shouting distance of the coveted Blaine school.
For those of you who guessed the ultimate sales price in our prior chatter, it ranged from $625k to $675k.
After a price reduction in May to $719,000 the house recently sold for $35,000 above the 2008 price at $671,000.
If you recall, the house was built in 1892.
The listing said it had been “gutted to perfection.”
It had a custom designed kitchen with white cabinets, granite counter tops and stainless steel appliances along with an eat-in breakfast area and wine fridge.
All 3 bedrooms were on the second floor.
The basement was finished with a family room and storage.
Built on an irregular 41.5×47.3 lot, it had 2 car parking (but no garage) on the driveway and central air.
Jena Radnay at @Properties had the listing. You can still see the interior pictures here.
Want to see what it looked like before being “gutted to perfection”? Check out the 2008 listing here.
1320 W. Grace: 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, no square footage listed
- Sold in September 1992 for $178,000
- Sold in September 1995 for $244,000
- Sold in February 1999 for $257,000
- Sold in March 2002 for $522,500
- Sold in May 2008 for $636,000
- Originally listed in February 2011 for $759,000
- Was still listed for $759,000 in March 2011
- Reduced in May 2011 to $719,000
- Sold in August 2011 for $671,000
- Taxes of $9516
- Central Air
- 2-car parking on the driveway
- Bedroom #1: 14×12 (second floor)
- Bedroom #2: 12×11 (second floor)
- Bedroom #3: 13×11 (second floor)
- Recreation room: 16×14 (lower level)
Everywhere I look all I can see is a bottom.
Try a new position.
Seems like a smart job. Cheap cosmetic changes and great staging.
Now if the seller had only recovered $1 of the reno costs…
I like the pre gut home better than the rehab.
Not sure he was trying to make a profit, but sell and minimize the losses given the market condition.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/3826-N-Lakewood-Ave-60613/home/13385462#agent_insight
I would have gone after this, and spent some cash to upgrade. Back yard, garage.
A huge ugly wall facing you instead of a backyard? No garage? Whoever bought this obviously was buying for neighborhood location only.
Wait a minute: It has a wine fridge. Guess it’s worth $670,000.
“I would have gone after this, and spent some cash to upgrade.”
Issue is if there’s space to reconfigure for 3 upstairs BRs or not.
Other than that, couldn’t agree more.
The Lakewood one looks like the better deal – agreed. But the Grace one seems nicer inside. They’ve done a good job keeping the old-fashioned touches. I like that front hall.
Blaine, no?
A block from Blaine albeit a busy street. A good townhouse alternative. This was strictly a B/E proposition as I doubt the reno cost substantially more or less than the increment from 2008. That’s the new up!
It’s steps from Music Box and all that, so it was an “easy sell”, I think.
wow. very suprised at the sale price. I would have thought 600k.
Called this one. In come the changemakers.
http://www.roscoeviewjournal.com/news/meet-lake-view-high-schools-new-principal
Before the gut, the house had character. Now it looks like many SFH ‘gut jobs’ in the GZ, ‘Disney-fied’.
“This was strictly a B/E proposition as I doubt the reno cost substantially more or less than the increment from 2008. That’s the new up!”
That $35K “increment” likely didn’t even cover the transaction costs. They lost the reno costs, too.
Who cares about transaction costs? Should the CS index include a 5% broker fee in every PP pair now? Stupid comment.
Your claim was it was a “B/E proposition.” To not consider transaction costs made it a stupid comment, indeed.
what does b/e mean?
break even.
thanks.