What Will a Newer 3-Bedroom Condo Cost You in Lincoln Park? 1307 W. Wrightwood
This 3-bedroom condo at 1307 W. Wrightwood in Lincoln Park just came on the market.
This complex of 19 units was built in 2010.
The building has an elevator and a heated garage.
This unit is a southeast corner unit.
It has dark hardwood floors with professionally outfitted closets.
The kitchen has white cabinets, stone counter tops and stainless steel appliances.
The master bedroom has a spa bath with marble tile and a steam shower with a rain shower head.
One heated indoor parking space is included but you can also purchase a coveted second space for $30,000.
The listing says its in the Oscar Meyer school district.
This unit has come on the market at $739,000, or $169,000 more than the 2011 purchase price if you include the second parking space.
If you want newer construction and 3-bedrooms, are you guaranteed to be over $700,000 in this neighborhood?
Jennifer Mills at Berkshire Hathaway KoenigRubloff has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #205: 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, no square footage listed
- Sold in January 2011 for $600,000 (included 2 parking spaces)
- Currently listed for $739,000 (includes one parking space but a second one is available for $30,000)
- Assessments of $355 a month (includes exterior maintenance)
- Taxes of $8230
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 12×14
- Bedroom #2: 11×13
- Bedroom #3: 10×13
Wow, the taxes are very, very reasonable, especially for such a new unit.
Very nice place. Extremely attractive building with nice architecture, and the kitchen actually has built in appliances, instead of a cheap free-standing stove shoved into a niche, like so many other “luxury” units. The bathrooms are ample and comfortable.
It’s also in a very popular location. I think it will probably sell quickly at this price.
“taxes are very, very reasonable”
I see an even more reasonable number for 2104 taxes: $7,248.68
That said, the re-assessment (which has been appealed, and got an initial denial) is up 31% (and HD thinks 6% is a lot), which means that next year the taxes will be over $10,000 (would be $9,495.77, with this year’s levy, but we all know it’s going up at least HD’s 6%).
This place is real nice and upgraded and I would imagine it sells fast, already a ‘hot home’ on redfin
I’d be looking at that place if I was in the market for sure, even has an elevator!
” but we all know it’s going up at least HD’s 6%).”
6% is still higher than the rate of inflation. And what is it paying for? It’s just giving money to away to people for free who no even work for the state!
Ah the crib. Everyone tells me that city condos are great living for upper middle class children, yet nearly every condo I see listed on CC has a crib in one of the bedrooms! Are they upgrading from the $600,000 condo to a $1,000,000 condo a few blocks away?
I just received my 3 year reassessment paper and they are estimating that my place is worth 50% more than I paid. The association is appealing, but the assessment is accurate/possibly undervalued, so who knows if the appeal will work. Does that mean my taxes will go up by 50% next year?
How can the city claim to be bankrupt when they are about to get a huge windfall?
“Does that mean my taxes will go up by 50% next year?”
No. Were I guessing, I’d say your tax bill will be somewhat more than 50% more, and here is why:
Unlike most other places, Cook County property taxes are determined by taking the requested amount of property tax from each taxing authority (the “levy”) and dividing it by the aggregate equalized assessed value (EAV) for all of the property subject to a given levy. The “equalization” is bc of the differing assessment levels for residential, commercial, industrial, and bc of differences in assessment practice bt Cook and other parts of the state
Say that this year your EAV was $10,000, and the total EAV was $10,000,000,000, so you’d pay $1 for every $1,000,000 in total levy applicable to you. So, if the total levies adds up to $2 billion, your bill would be $2,000–20% of your (and total) AV, which is 2% of your assessed “market value”.
CPS is ‘tax capped’ under state law, and thus cannot raise their levy more than CPI (subject to some adjustments), and that’s half of the total levy, so half of the $2 billion cannot go up more than like 2.5%. Some of the other tax authorities are similarly capped. The City and the County are “home rule” so *could* double their levies (hint: won’t happen), but they are only about 30% of the total levy.
So, next year, say your EAV is 15,000, the total EAV is 12,500,000,000, and the total levy is 2,500,000,000, the tax on everyone is still 2% of market value, and your tax went up exactly 50%, just like your AV.
BUT, lets say the levy goes up that 25%, but the total EAV stays flat (possible!), so it’s: your EAV is 15,000, the total EAV is 10,000,000,000, and the total levy is 2,500,000,000–so the effective tax rate is up from 2.0 to 2.5, your AV went up 50%, and your tax bill goes up *87.5%!!* to $3,750.
“How can the city claim to be bankrupt when they are about to get a huge windfall?”
It’s a reallocation, rather than a windfall. See above. If property values are rising, that softens the blow of an increased levy a bit. but whether you pay more, or much more depends on how much your AV changed compared to the change in total AV.
ps: Jenny, for planning purposes, I would expect your tax bill to be *at least* 50% more, and quite possibly 75% more, unless the association’s appeal is successful. My assessment was up ~12%, I’ll be pleased if my bill is up less than 25%.
Total levy is very likely to be up at least 10%–CPS half up ~2.5%, the other half over 15%.
“My assessment was up ~12%, I’ll be pleased if my bill is up less than 25%.
Total levy is very likely to be up at least 10%–CPS half up ~2.5%, the other half over 15%.”
Bc you think total is not up that much?
“Bc you think total is not up that much?”
Because I think total will be up slightly less, and I expect 10-15% levy increase.
I’m still having trouble understanding. Almost everyone’s property is worth more than it was worth 2 years ago. If you’re asking most property owners to pay more because their homes are worth more, how is it not a windfall for the taxing authorities?
Looking back to the 2010 figures, my house was worth about the same amount then as it is being valued at now and the tax was only 15% more than what I’m paying now. Did the levies go up that much in the past 5 years?
What will the home owner’s exemption look like next year I wonder…
“I’m still having trouble understanding. Almost everyone’s property is worth more than it was worth 2 years ago. If you’re asking most property owners to pay more because their homes are worth more, how is it not a windfall for the taxing authorities?”
Bc @fo explanation, while surely “accurate”, is a little mind numbing, no?
If everyone’s ass value go up 20 percent, and if the tax levy doesn’t change, then taxes are completely unchanged. There would be no windfall. Your taxes go up only if your ass value increases by more than the average and/or if the levy goes up. [okay, I don’t really know what the levy is, I’m just using the @fo lingo, it’s like being back in freshman english]
“If you’re asking most property owners to pay more because their homes are worth more”
But they aren’t. They ask for (and get) the same amount of total tax whether assessed values are the same, higher, or lower. It’s essentially zero sum–if you pay more, then someone else (likely many someones else) is paying less.
Yes, the total tax amount goes up every year, but it would go up even if everyone’s assessed value dropped 10%, and it goes up not at all in direct relation to assessed values (tho some changes in assessed values do affect how much tax capped agencies can raise their levies).
Total property tax paid for 2012 (after last reassessment) was higher than the total tax paid in 2011. Your taxes went down, and so did mine–that means someone else paid more.
“I don’t really know what the levy is”
It is the dollar amount of property tax requested by each taxing authority. For most of us in the City, that means the following 10 ‘governments’:
Cook County
Forest Preserve District
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District
City of Chicago
City of Chicago Library Fund
City of Chicago School Building & Improvement Fund
Chicago Board of Education
Community College District #508
Chicago Park District
Chicago Park District Aquarium & Museum Bonds
iirc, all but the City and the County are at least partly subject to PTELL, and thus capped at their prior year’s levy + an adjusted CPI %age.
From the County Clerk:
“How tax rates are calculated:
–The Cook County Assessor’s office establishes property valuations.
–Taxing districts file their levy requests with the Clerk’s Tax Extension Unit.
–To produce the revenue requested, the Tax Extension Unit uses the levy to determine the tax amount to be “extended” against all properties located within the boundaries of the taxing district.
–The Clerk’s Tax Extension Unit determines the rate needed per $100 of taxable value to generate the requested revenue, based on the value of all taxable property within the district boundaries.”
http://www.cookcountyclerk.com/tsd/extensionsandrates/Pages/default.aspx
Thanks anon and DZ!
I looked at a place in this property a little while back. The association seemed to be vastly underfunded given the number of units. If I recall correctly they only had $13 or $15k in reserves which is low for an elevator building. They also had a history of special assessments… The listing agent mentioned one in particular to replace some element of the exterior structure. Surprising given how new the building is. There have been a bunch of units in this complex listed recently… With a few deals that feel through. I wonder what is happening that is scaring people off from this complex. The units we saw were nice however.
“Lincoln Park.”
The building looks like it was taken right out of Naperthrill
Nice place. Big enough for a small family. The Lakeshore health club walking distance is family friendly. Who needs a tiny postage stamp yard the SFHs in this hood have? There is no real deck here though for $700K. But then again, decks are overrated in Chicago due to weather. They aren’t used as much as people think they’ll use them.
I wonder some people who invest heavily in decks should divide the cost by the # of times they actually use it. How about investing $25,000 in deck and furnishings, grills, etc and using it 10 times per year? I’m not talking about going out to cook 2 chicken breasts or smoke a cig, because you can do that on a cheap balcony, not a $25K deck.
Speaking of health clubs, they actually have LEGIT steam rooms, do these home bathroom steam units actually get that hot? All these obama/hillary voters aren’t very “green” when it comes to their “personal” lives. How green is the footprint of a magen david flag waving Penny Pritzker? Probably 100x higher carbon footprint than the confederate flag waving family in the South, so despised by the
global warming hypocrites.
anon(tfo): can you simplify the RE tax analysis? Using this example:
If the subject property’s AV goes up 25%, and the tax levy/rate goes up 6%…
Do you take the old taxes and multiply them by 1.25 and then by 1.06? Can you simply a formula in 2-3 lines or less? Tks.
Did they change the number of allowed words on listing descriptions recently? I’ve been noticing much longer descriptions lately — which I like personally. Or perhaps there was a change some time ago, but agents are now just starting to take advantage. These are definitely much longer than the few lines that I’d see in the past where agents would use as many abbreviations as they could think of.
Yes, the MLS increased the number of characters allowed in the Remarks so we shouldn’t be seeing abbreviations and gibberish.
Please do a write-up of 3012 S Emerald Ave, MLS#: 08993216.
Since CPS is broke, I just received my property bills on 4 properties I own. On two properties, there is a big chunk going to CPS. On two of the other properties I own, there is a small chunk going to CPS and a big chunk going to a TIF. I wonder how that all works.
“tax levy/rate goes up 6%”
Which one is going up 6%?
“the subject property’s AV goes up 25%”
How much did the aggregate AV in Chicago go up? How much did it go up in Cook County? In the MWRD area?
You can make it simple with a whole bunch of assumptions, but that’s just pushing the complexity into the assumptions.
anon(tfo): Let’s try it again. Can you please post your expectation of what will happen to a tax bill where the AV has just gone up 25%?
What do you think will happen to the final dollar amount? Thank you.
” Can you please post your expectation of what will happen to a tax bill where the AV has just gone up 25%?”
I think that the aggregate AV for the city is going to be up about 10%.
I think that the total tax levy is going to go up 10 to 15%.
2014 aggregate was $64,908,056,690; total levy (applicable to Chicago only) of $4,418,875,140, for a rate of 6.808.
So, at +15%, levy would be $5,081,706,411, at +10%, EAV would be $71,398,862,359, and that gives a rate of 7.11735 (not sure how they round).
So, for an “average” sort of place with an AV of 40,000 this year (EqAv of 109,012) and taxes of $7,421 (ignoring HO exemption), and assuming (not necessarily correctly) a basically same equalization factor, then taxes with a 50,000 AV next year would be just under $10,000–or up 32%.
Applying that to my ~12% increase in AV, I’d expect taxes up about 17%.
So, assuming this is correct, is it then true that we can expect (generally) that all GZ properties will see a RE tax increase of, say, 30%?
That many SFHs with $15,000 tax bills will be paying approx. $19,500? Tks.
Has the entire GZ been notified of this yet?
“many SFHs with $15,000 tax bills will be paying approx. $19,500?”
Depends. The biggest house on my block had it’s AV drop about 1.5%, so would have basically flat taxes under this assumed scenario–the 11.5% below average increase in AV largely offsetting the 15% increase in levy.
“On two of the other properties I own, there is a small chunk going to CPS and a big chunk going to a TIF. I wonder how that all works.”
Simple. Two of your properties are in TIF districts. Two of your properties are not in TIF districts.
“Two of your properties are in TIF districts. Two of your properties are not in TIF districts.”
And that means that the any increase in the AV since the TIF district was established gets ‘assigned’ to the TIF fund. So:
TIF established in 2000 when AV was 10,000
2015 re-assess raises AV to 20,000
then 50% of taxes paid go to the normal 10 ‘governments’ as if AV was only 10,000 and 50% goes to the TIF fund.
when TIF expires or is terminated, 100% of taxes would go the to the normal 10 ‘governments’.
I drove by this place today, and it’s literally slammed in. I drove by it twice looking for it, and on the third pass I found it. The picture doesn’t do it justice.
You’d really have to want, or be brainwashed, to pay $700K to live here, imho. The traffic is horrible. There is the Armitage bridge construction, but still, Fullerton is backed up going westbound to the Uhaul CPL place east of Racine. Escape down to North Ave and the eastbound rush hour traffic is backed up to Home Depot and almost Elston. Living in the GZ bubble is a nightmare.
I bet the people on Fullerton or North Ave are dealing with 20-30 minute drives to/from the Kennedy.
under contract