3-Bedroom East Lincoln Park Penthouse with 2-Car Parking for $2.25 Million: 445 W. Arlington
This 3-bedroom penthouse at 445 W. Arlington in East Lincoln Park came on the market in March 2024.
Built in 2019, 445 W. Arlington was designed by Booth Hansen Architects to mimic the look of row houses when, in reality, it’s an 8-unit elevator building with garage parking.
It is one of only 2 penthouse units and has private elevator access which opens directly into the unit.
All of the living space is apparently on one floor with a private 1000 square foot rooftop deck complete with a pergola and natural gas fire table.
The kitchen is open to the living and dining rooms. It has white cabinets, top-of-the-line appliances, an island with wood cabinets, a beverage refrigerator, and an under-the-stairs pantry.
There are multiple French doors in the living room which open onto a 600 square foot terrace with built-in gas grills, large scale planters and an automatic irrigation system.
The listing calls it a “tranquil sanctuary.”
2 of the 3 bedrooms have skyline views.
The primary suite has a spa-quality bathroom with a freestanding soaking tub, steam shower and heated floors.
This home has Nest Home devices and automatic blinds in every room.
It comes with the features that buyers look for including central air, washer/dryer in the unit and 2-car garage parking.
This building is in the “highly coveted” East Lincoln Park neighborhood which is just steps from Lincoln Park, the Zoo, and the shops and restaurants on Clark Street. The listing says it’s in the Lincoln Elementary school district.
This unit sold in 2019 for $2 million and has come on the market 5 years later for $2.25 million.
This property seems to have it all, including rare 2-car garage parking.
Will this sell quickly?
Stefanos Karavolos at Avenue Realty has the listing. See the pictures here (sorry, no floor plan).
Unit #4E: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 2146 square feet, penthouse
- Sold in July 2019 for $2 million
- Listed in March 2024 for $2.25 million
- Currently still listed at $2.25 million
- Assessments of $1132 a month (includes lawn care, scavenger, snow removal)
- Taxes of $39,602
- Central Air
- Washer/dryer in the unit
- 2-car garage parking included
- Bedroom #1: 15×12
- Bedroom #2: 15×12
- Bedroom #3: 14×11
- Living room: 24×13
- Kitchen: 14×11
- Dining room: 13×10
- Laundry: 6×4
- Terrace: 34×18
- Rooftop deck: 34×30 (second floor)
At this commission level there should probably be a few more pics and a floorplan.
At this price level the enjoyment of the outdoor space directly off the living areas should probably be less dependent on either really liking one’s fellow PH occupants or them not being home most of the year.
I imagine there are a few would-be buyers out there who’d give up one of the garage spaces (and maybe the roof deck?) in exchange for additional sq ft in the unit.
So is there one or 2 outdoor spaces (W/ & W/0 pergola)? Having the second would change the calculus on the pricing
Calling complete bullshit on 2150sf
I love outdoor space but would trade the SF on the main level for enclosed space
Think there’s better options for $20k/mo
In the property info in the listing, it sez:
“General Information: School Bus Service”
which is one of the weirder things I’ve ever seen in a Chicago listing.
Seller’s carry on the place is ~$9k, with ~80% loan.
Buyer’s carry at 80% ltv of ask would be ~$13,500.
It’s really pretty nuts that there are buyers in this price range.
“So is there one or 2 outdoor spaces”
PRivate rooftop and also the ‘front porch’ off the eat-in kitchen.
“It’s really pretty nuts that there are buyers in this price range.”
I don’t understand what you are saying. Why are people buying homes when rates are higher? Because they need somewhere to live.
Why did people buy homes when rates were 10% or 15% or 18%? They did.
“Seller’s carry on the place is ~$9k, with ~80% loan.
Buyer’s carry at 80% ltv of ask would be ~$13,500.”
Who cares about the “seller’s carry”?
No one. I don’t know why some of you are obsessed with this. If the seller had paid all cash, are we supposed to care about that? If they had put down 50% and financed the rest, are we supposed to care?
Who cares about the seller unless it’s a short sale or foreclosure?
If you are implying that “look how much more the current buyer is spending per month” is an issue, why don’t we ask them how much their salary has gone up since 2019?
“Think there’s better options for $20k/mo”
If you want to live in East Lincoln Park, what are your 3 bedroom, 2 bath options with 2 parking spaces that have been built in the last 5 years and/or renovated and which have not just one but two outdoor spaces?
Seems like a unicorn to me. Many of the properties on these streets near Lincoln Park here don’t have any parking at all.
Love the location and deck but otherwise hard to justify the price. Really dull unit. Too bad.
All this rate talk is BS. My wife and I bought our first LP condo in 1997 and the rate was 7.5%. We thought it sounded pretty good, considering rates had been 10% just a few years earlier. People had it really good for rreally long but 3% wasn’t sustainable. Not sure if 7% is the long-term “normal” but it is reasonable historically. People will adjust.
Sorry if my last comment sounded a bit like “get off my lawn.”
I understand the difficulty people have when rates go up. Especially when it’s so sudden. It was a lot easier for my wife and me in 1997 because we never expected low rates to begin with and were used to rates like today’s.
However, ultra-low rates aren’t necessarily good. The era of easy money created a lot of trouble, including for older people trying to live on a fixed income and anyone trying to save money when rates on a CD were below 0.1%. It also hurt the value of the U.S. dollar, causing import prices to rise.
Also, to be brutally honest, not everyone can afford to be a homeowner and ultra-low rates probably cause some people to venture into home buying when renting would make more economic sense.
“Why did people buy homes when rates were 10% or 15% or 18%?”
They weren’t buying upper bracket type houses at meaningful (nominal) price increases over 5 year earlier sale prices.
“If you want to live in East Lincoln Park, what are your 3 bedroom, 2 bath options with 2 parking spaces that have been built in the last 5 years and/or renovated and which have not just one but two outdoor spaces?
Seems like a unicorn to me. Many of the properties on these streets near Lincoln Park here don’t have any parking at all.”
If this was > 2000sf actual I/S, yeah I’d agree. But this is a small 3Br with lots of outdoor space
As is, nah
“All this rate talk is BS.”
All the focus on *just the rates* is BS. It’s rates + prices.
Higher rates “should” equal lower valuations. This is evident in speculator (“investor”) driven markets, which Chicago (generally) has not been since the GFC.
I will note that the ask here is lagging real dollar value by quite a bit:
July 2019 for $2 million + CPI = $2.42m.
So the ask is 7% off in real money terms. Would probably be even more off if they weren’t paying ~$100k to the realtors.
“Higher rates “should” equal lower valuations. This is evident in speculator (“investor”) driven markets, which Chicago (generally) has not been since the GFC.”
We all thought this, right? And it is happening in some markets which just went too crazy during the pandemic like Florida and Texas. Buyers are priced out. Inventory is building and prices are beginning to come down.
But until inventory rises, prices are going to be pretty sticky. In some markets you may have a California situation where inventory remains low enough that prices will not drop at all. There are still enough buyers who can afford to buy even at the absurd higher prices. And Baby Boomers can pay all cash. They are still a big buying contingent and don’t care that rates are at 7%.
“They weren’t buying upper bracket type houses at meaningful (nominal) price increases over 5 year earlier sale prices.”
Sure they were. There was a housing boom in Texas in the early 1980s, for instance. Plenty buying at record high prices with 10%+ mortgage rates.
“Sure they were. There was a housing boom in Texas in the early 1980s, for instance. Plenty buying at record high prices with 10%+ mortgage rates.”
Cite, please.
In this rare occurrence Sabrina is correct
The spike in oil prices from the Mid 70’s thru the mid 80’s drove prices
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/ATNHPIUS26420Q
Know a few folks from the oil patch that went boom bust
“went boom bust”
88.9 in 1q80, peaked at 108.78 in 2Q83, back to 81.86 in 4q87
88.9 + cpi = 111.77 + cpi = 130.03
108.72 + cpi = 126.54
So, in a “boom” still lagging inflation, and followed by a hard bust–remarkable that ehose buying at the peak did better (in real terms) than those who held the whole time.
PS:
What are the N on those quarters? Allegation was “plenty buying”; C-S index doesn’t require “plenty”, just n=1.
“88.9 in 1q80, peaked at 108.78 in 2Q83, back to 81.86 in 4q87”
I went back further than 1Q80 in my comment
What are the N on those quarters? Allegation was “plenty buying”; C-S index doesn’t require “plenty”, just n=1.
If this is to me, probably 5 guys whining in the mid 90s in Houston
“I went back further than 1Q80 in my comment”
You did indeed.
I eyeballed a little chart for when rates tipped over 10. Was really q179, so:
80.65 in 1q80, peaked at 108.78 in 2Q83, back to 81.86 in 4q87
80.65 + cpi = 114.26 + cpi = 134.69
So it makes it all look WORSE, not better.
and the PS was just in general. The C-S data is what it is, but doens’t tell us *how many* people were buying at those prices, which is still a mere allegation of “plenty”
“80.65 in 1q80”
s/b
80.65 in 1q79
Back to the featured property:
No comments on “the ‘front porch’ off the eat-in kitchen”?
Thought that was a gem.
“Sure they were. There was a housing boom in Texas in the early 1980s, for instance. Plenty buying at record high prices with 10%+ mortgage rates.”
“Cite, please.”
https://www.dallasfed.org/~/media/documents/research/swe/1995/swe9503a.pdf
Wow. $100,000 houses (see chart 3). Very high end.
Also: no evidence of “plenty”.