“Must Have 20% Down”: A 2-Bedroom Loft At 1000 W. Diversey In Lakeview

This 2-bedroom loft at 1000 W. Diversey in Lakeview just came on the market.

We’ve chattered about a loft in this building before but that one had a rooftop deck.

This is the building that includes the Starbucks at Sheffield and Diversey and is across the street from the Lincoln Park Athletic Club

It has many of the features loft lovers crave including 18 foot ceilings, exposed brick (including in one of the bathrooms) and a lofted bathroom.

The listing says there is a “brand new” kitchen with maple cabinets, granite counter tops and stainless steel appliances.

The loft has central air, washer/dryer in the unit and a garage parking space.

But the listing also says that the buyer “must have 20% down.”

Will that downpayment requirement keep this loft on the market?

How many buyers have 20% down in this price range?

Andrea Farley at Baird & Warner has the listing. See the pictures here.

Unit #3F: 2 bedrooms, 1.5 baths, 1800 square feet, 1 car garage

  • Sold in May 1991 for $212,000
  • Sold in August 1997 for $225,000
  • Sold in March 1999 for $291,000
  • Currently listed for $399,000
  • Assessments of $369 a month
  • Taxes of $6061
  • Central Air
  • Washer/Dryer in the unit
  • Bedroom #1: 17×12
  • Bedroom #2: 14×13

30 Responses to ““Must Have 20% Down”: A 2-Bedroom Loft At 1000 W. Diversey In Lakeview”

  1. That 20% down requirement might drive the price down a bit further on what would seem to be a fair-priced unit. High down payment requirements and tight underwriting standards are anti-inflationary and will keep the bubble from re-inflating. The 20% down requirement once upon a time applied to almost all properties except the handful that were underwritten by the FHA, which also had much tighter underwriting standards though it permitted low down payments. I believe we are returning to normalcy as we knew it before 1980.

    Beautiful loft in a fine location, though it looks like it is a bear to heat, a major drawback of lofts.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)
  2. A possible buyer has to have about $90,000 sitting around to buy this. Wow. I wonder how many 20-somethings have that? (I’m allowing for a little over the 20% for moving costs, attorney/inspector fees etc.)

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)
  3. Certainly can’t buy this place with your tax return!

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  4. I like that this place is right by the Lincoln Park Athletic Club. That would be pretty convenient, especially since I am trying to work out more. My wife recently got me a pair of Skechers Shape Ups to help improve my core strength and I think they might be working. Now on the other hand, I think I would prefer to have a gym IN the building given those HOA fees. However, the thing I like most about the gym is the steam room, and I doubt a small, in building gym would have a steam room.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +3 (from 15 votes)
  5. I don’t understand how a buyer has the right to tell a seller how to pay. I can understand maybe a developer having the authority but how does a regular seller even get the right to see the buyers finances. I can see where 20% down will weed out a lot of people but it also weeds out investors who walk away form properties bc they have no skin in the game.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -2 (from 10 votes)
  6. Certainly can’t buy this place with your tax return!

    Can one buy anything with one’s tax return?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
  7. ‘I don’t understand how a buyer has the right to tell a seller how to pay.” I think you mean seller tell the buyer.

    The only situation I can think of is if it is a co-op instead of a condo association because IIRC co-ops have to approve sales.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)
  8. @Lauren, I don’t think the sellers are trying to dictate the terms of the sale, I think they’re just warning buyers that for some reason, banks aren’t going to finance the space for less than 20% down. Not sure why — % of commercial, too many renters, other foreclosures in the building — but I would guess that they’re just trying to limit expectations from potential buyers.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +6 (from 8 votes)
  9. Never mind — just saw that “preferred lender” language. That does seem strange.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)
  10. “I don’t understand how a buyer [sic] has the right to tell a seller [sic] how to pay.”

    I’m guessing that the building is ‘trouble’ for financing with less than 20% down, so they don’t want to mess around with offers that don’t come with a commitment for 20% down financing.

    Do you also object to the listing that say “cash only”? The seller/agent is basically saying “you can’t get a mortgage on this property, so don’t bug us if you don’t have cash”. Same thing, really.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +5 (from 5 votes)
  11. I would have made some different choices in a “brand new” kitchen. This one already looks dated.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +5 (from 5 votes)
  12. The whole thing looks very 1990s. Great location, two biglaw associates could swing the downpayment and would probably appreciate the ability to roll out of bed, grab a coffee and jump on the el.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)
  13. I’m not bothered by the 20% down requirement. In fact, I would prefer to live in a building that doesn’t allow rentals and requires 20% down. My thought always was that you shouldn’t buy a place where you can’t afford to put 20% down. If you’re a diligent saver, $90k isn’t that much. It took a lot of effort, but I put 20% down (on a place costing less than this one). My BigLaw ex-boyfriend put well over $100k down on his place since he lived in cheap places while saving to buy a house.

    I am bothered by the lack of a second full bathroom for supposedly 1800 square feet.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
  14. Is there a link to the previous chatter? And was that about the unit with the ‘top of the building’ room?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  15. “I don’t understand how a buyer [sic] has the right to tell a seller [sic] how to pay.”

    The Seller can accept or decline any offers. There are two considerations always: 1) Price and 2) Terms

    Would you rather have an Contingent offer at $390K, or all-cash and close in 30 days at $385K?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +7 (from 11 votes)
  16. “two biglaw associates could swing the downpayment and would probably appreciate the ability to roll out of bed”

    big-law types don’t live in “lofts”, it’s too artsy-fartsy for their very conservative sensibilities.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -2 (from 16 votes)
  17. Bright and conservatively unusual. Look past the cabinet color–the kitchen floor, tile backsplash, wavy counter all look nicely updated.
    Does this have an elevator, as it is on the third floor? If not, then obviously there is no need for the health club.
    The patio view seems grim, though it would be quieter than overlooking Diversey.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)
  18. I don’t see the development on any of the declined project lists. However, there is something wrong with the building that is preventing conventional financing otherwise the 20% down wouldn’t be required. Most non-Fannie/Freddie portfolio lenders require at least 20% down although 10% down is still feasible.

    However, it doesn’t mean a buyer can’t get conventional financing on the place. The problem is most of these associations and agents don’t proactively try to resolve any of the issues that are preventing financing, some of which are often minor. Consumers don’t know enough to know the big banks may not lend in a certain building, but there are still plenty of independent lenders and brokers who will. I’d bet this place or other units went under contract and fell out over something related to the HOA and the agent was told 20% down was needed.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
  19. Restrictions (on renter v owner ratios, percent down, etc.) are all fine and dandy on the way in. Who wouldn’t want to ensure that the place you’re buying into will be stable, conservatively run, civilized occupants, etc. But on the way out, i.e., when you’re looking to rent or sell the unit, restrictions only make it harder (this is a 2/1.5 on Diversey; such restrictions might be more attractive to some buyers of, say, a 4 or 5 bed place in a super upscale building).

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  20. ” But on the way out, i.e., when you’re looking to sell the unit, restrictions only make it harder ”

    but correct pricing always will trump any hurdles or flaws

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)
  21. “big-law types don’t live in “lofts”, it’s too artsy-fartsy for their very conservative sensibilities”

    Big law for 8 years. Have lived in a loft for past 5, with kids. Big loft, 3000 square foot (3 real bedrooms), concrete loft, and not too artsy for my taste. We “big law” types just don’t want to screw around with tiny, no room to grow, half-wall, noisy duct showing, lofts which make up most of the Chicago inventory. Big law attorneys, including capital partners, regularly live in lofts in NYC and other markets. Its just the really great lofts with lots of light, open, concrete (not timber b/c of noise) are few and far between in Chicago.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +6 (from 12 votes)
  22. 20% down requirement means in a roundabout way, “too many renters” NO FHA FINANCING

    Thats whats going on in the building I currently live in, you can get some screaming deals because of it

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +5 (from 5 votes)
  23. And I sorta like the potential of this place except for the poorly done Kitchen, whats up with the menards special tiles, cabinets, and that wiggly island thing… UGH! So terrible!

    And I’m surprised nobody has mentioned its across the street from being right on the El Tracks?

    I bet you can hear the BING BONG and rumbling from the train all day long

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  24. @ urban mommy

    Wondering what loft building you live in? I have kids and would love to a kid-friendly loft building. Thanks!

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  25. ” I have kids and would love to a kid-friendly loft building”

    i second the notion.

    i just assume kid+loft=angry evil neighbors

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)
  26. “i just assume kid+loft=angry evil neighbors”

    My son’s newly acquired ezy roller would work great in a loft! And it’s whisper quiet.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)
  27. There are many good lofts in Chicago. You just have to look harder. Great for the kiddies. I love our 2300 sq ft “ranch home” in the city. Awesome when they just learn to walk!

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  28. This building has a Starbucks in it which makes up more than 50% of the total square footage of the building thereby making it nearly impossible to get FHA financing and one would only be able to get conventional financing with an exception from HUD (note: the fannie/freddie limit on commercial sqftge is 20% and FHA is/used to be 25% so this building is WAY over the limit. I am going to be listing a unit in this building later this spring and I have an FHA approval specialist working on it – the association is going to have a new condo survey/appraisal done to see if the commercial sqftge can be reduced to underneath 50% (new FHA regulations will allow 50% commercial if rest of the building is solid, i.e., low renter concentration, solid reserves, no owners in arrears on their monthly assessments – and it is a solid building. If the commercial percentage can’t get below 50%, the FHA approval guy will still submit it to HUD for an exception. If granted, then 20% down is no longer necessary. If not, then the only route is with 20% down – and not every bank will touch it. The lender that will lend in this building is a commercial bank.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  29. “This building has a Starbucks in it which makes up more than 50% of the total square footage of the building thereby making it nearly impossible to get FHA financing…”

    Thank you for filling us in on the details of this building Mario. Yeah- I thought the financing requirements had to do with all the commercial entities in the building.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  30. I toured this unit last week. The common areas alone were a deal-breaker before even stepping into the unit. Odd vaulted ceilings with sky murals and corinthian columns. No unit numbers on the doors. Keys required for the elevator The entire complex and the unit have a definite rental feel. The interior has a lot of cheap finishes and poor upkeep (i.e. paint from sills spilling over onto glass, odd wiring jobs relating to lighting, etc). And I agree with the above comments that the supposedly new kitchen was not done in the most appropriate manner for this loft. Only the master room looks onto the street while the rest of the unit stares at the adjacent building. Great space, however, if you wanted to gut it, but the asking price doesn’t reflect that. And great location. Couldn’t hear the train despite being very close to it.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Reply


1 + = six