Did Lakeview Prices Double in Last 10 Years? 2944 N. Broadway

We’ve chattered a lot about Lincoln Park and Lakeview prices in recent weeks.

If you look at the price history on many properties, you see sharp increases in just the last few years.

Recent data showed Cook County properties tripled in price in the last ten years. That includes all forms of property- not just residential. From Crain’s:

During the decade in question, the value of real estate in Chicago tripled — up 195% — to $330 billion, while suburban property values slightly more than doubled, to $336 billion.

Do buyers expect this kind of appreciation to continue?

2944-n-broadway.jpg

This 2-bedroom condo at 2944 N. Broadway in Lakeview appears to have nearly doubled in the last decade (depending on what it sells for.)

2944-n-broadway-_2n-livingroom.jpg

2944-n-braodway-_2n-kitchen.jpg

Re/Max Signature has the listing. See more pictures here.

Unit #2N: 2 bedroom, 1 bath, no square footage given

  • Sold in May 1999 for $159,000
  • Sold in March 2002 for $255,000
  • Sold in June 2005 for $295,000
  • Currently listed for $308,800 (parking included)
  • Assessments of $163 a month
  • Taxes of $2724
  • Bedroom sizes are: 12×9 and 10×11
  • Central air
  • In-unit laundry

19 Responses to “Did Lakeview Prices Double in Last 10 Years? 2944 N. Broadway”

  1. Was the kitchen done before the ’99 sale?

    It almost doubled in six years, and hasn’t budged (up about 4.7%, if sold for asking) in 3 years since.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  2. Crazy. Look how small that living room is.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  3. i mean, seriously. Are they trying to sell this house or show you how college students live? I’d be nervous even if I was only looking to rent this place. They don’t even have a picture of the main bedroom so i’m guessing its ridic. small. I really just can’t believe how much crap is around in the pictures

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  4. It certainly is FAIL on the photos… One listing photo of the back porch sitting area includes a bag of trash to the right. And another photo taken down a hallway does nothing but emphasize how narrow the apartment is. Fireplace? Did you spot it? is that Scotch Tape on a crack on the living room window?

    The listing agent’s photographer stinks, and if they think they can get $300+k for it, they’ll need to dress, stage and photograph it a heck of a lot better. From the photos, without knowing the location (oh, wait, Clark is noisy and traffic filled day and night), I’d expect the listing to be in the low $200k range.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  5. Tight squeeze.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  6. From reading the Crain’s story it sounds like their conclusion from the data is incorrect. It’s not that prices tripled but rather the sum total of all property values tripled – and it’s based upon assessed values, which…. It could very well include the impact of new construction as well.

    The Case Shiller data indicates not even a doubling in that time frame.

    As for the photos. This is my pet peeve. The agent didn’t even do basic staging like removing the refrigerator magnets and must have shot the photos themself.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  7. Its the hipsters. The hipsters are responsible for the extra premium on the city itself vs the suburbs.

    Until we get these production studio/museum attendants/writers and other low income livin’ the dream people OUT of the real estate market by a return to SANE financing we won’t see prices moderate.

    This means that people fresh out of college making 30-50k with student loans with no downpayment should have no business even thinking about owning property in their 20s.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  8. “This means that people fresh out of college making 30-50k with student loans with no downpayment should have no business even thinking about owning property in their 20s.”

    Amen. Not all of them are hipsters though – many of them work in offices downtown i.e. our 26 year old paralegal who purchased a $350k condo in North Center.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  9. $245,000 would be a fair price. About a 20% decline.

    I guess these homeowners didnt get the memo that the real estate bubble has burst.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  10. “The Case Shiller data indicates not even a doubling in that time frame.”

    Gary–the Crain’s data was (almost) ALL property–including commercial and industrial. Still, because it’s based on assessed values rather than market values, it could be partially due to changes (official or unofficial) in the calculation of assessed values. And it *definitely* includes the impact of new construction–including all of the office buildings completed b/t ’96 and ’06.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  11. “I guess these homeowners didnt get the memo that the real estate bubble has burst.”

    Most of them didn’t. All they know is they’re determined to get their $100,000 appreciation when they sell. They think it’s their right as Americans.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  12. David (the first one) on September 10th, 2008 at 11:37 am

    Bit presumptuous to say the people in this unit are “production studio/museum attendants/writers and other low income livin’ the dream…fresh out of college making 30-50k with student loans with no downpayment”, no?

    This should probably be priced more like $270K, depending on square footage, but the room sizes certainly don’t look too generous/comfortable.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  13. David,

    I was referring to Lakeview in general. I have no idea about the owners of any particular unit. But my generalizations apply to groups and I stand by them.

    As far as correct price its tough to guesstimate with no square footage details. If its 1,200sf then 270k would seem about right.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  14. Does anybody know why the assessments are so high in condos on lake shore dr. or just lake view in general? Assessments range from $700 to over 1000 every month. Isn’t this ridiculous?

    Also, the taxes in lake view is a lot higher than anywhere else. Can somebody help me out? Thanks!

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  15. Victoria,

    I’m not expert but on the taxes it might be tax increment financing (TIF). Its basically the city’s way to sap more tax money out of the more wealthier neighborhoods. This is why taxes in south loop, for instance, are far higher for a similarly priced property in Bridgeport. Basically TIF is like a RE tax increase but only in certain neighborhoods. 30% of the land area of the city has substantially higher property taxes than the other 70% due to TIF.

    see http://www.ncbg.org/tifs/tifs.htm

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  16. Tax rates are nearly exactly the same across the entire city (small differences in a few “Special Service Areas.”) They are not higher in a TIF. A TIF takes any taxes due to the increase in assessed value in the district away from funding city-wide services. The money is used for improvements within the district itself for 23 years. If anything, this raises the city-wide tax rate because any city services that are needed by the new development are not funded by the increased assessment, so they must be made up elsewhere.

    The only real differences between neighborhood taxes are in the assessments, not the rate. It is actually my experience that the higher the value of the neighborhood (or property,) the lower the effective taxes. In other words, low value properties are assessed more accurately than high value properties.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  17. Great location though. I think it is on Broadway, not Clark. Crappy photos though. One thing the bursting of the bubble will do is get rid of the large amount of lazy realtors out there.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  18. The unit above this one just came on the market at 339k. It has c/a. w/d and parking. It shows very well, unlike the pictures of this unit we chattered about recently. I’m not sure what happened to this one.

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

Leave a Reply