Another Empty McMansion: 6238 N. Neva in Old Norwood
Yet another million dollar new construction home that is under stress. This time it’s at 6238 N. Neva in Old Norwood.
The listing says it’s in short sale. It’s been on the market since June of 2006.
Here’s the listing:
Short sale! Outstanding new construction home in historical Old Norwood. This 5 bed/4 bathroom home has it all – state-of-the-art kitchen includes stainless steel Viking appliances, long granite countertops, big island, wine refrigerator and lots of high-quality cabinets.
Enjoy master suite with double walk-in closets, private master bath with whirlpool tub and separate steam shower. First floor family room leads to deck and landscaped yard. Full high unfinished basement.
Lisa Sanders at Koenig & Strey has the listing. See more pictures and a virtual tour here.
6238 N. Neva: 5 bedrooms, 4 baths, 2.5 garage, 4000 square feet
- Originally listed for $1.175 million in June 2006
- Reduced several times
- Currently listed for $929,000
- Listing says “short sale”
- Taxes are “new”
Well, its obvious they didn’t hire an architect
“historical”? Is that the same as historic-ish? Or did they mean “hysterical,” which paying this much for a million-dollar home in “Old Norwood” (where??) clearly is?
Brilliant idea! Let’s build an unremarkable McMansion next to a bunch of bungalows. I’d be happy to offer my demolition services to the owner of record.
If its been on the market since June of 2006 I don’t see why the taxes are still considered “new”. Is it becuase this home never had a living “inhabitant” to pay these “new” taxes?
Seriously this new tax gimmick gets old quick when the properties are > 2 years old.
This is a great illustration of the insanity. Old Norwood Park is a good neighborhood, with some really nice large old houses especially around the circle area that might have sold in the $500K-750K range pre bubble (I’m guessing a little here). Norwood Park in general is a fairly undistinguished mix of houses ranging from $250K to $500K. Schools are ok to very good. This particular house is at least a few blocks from the desirable part of Old Norwood. I don’t know whether it meets any technical definition of Old Norwood but it is certainly not desirable.
But with the bubble, someone obviously decided that the all of a sudden there wouldn’t be enough big houses in Old Norwood to satisfy all the throngs who were dying to move there. And if you’re building a house, why not make it really expensive and ugly to boot.
The assessed value is 89,999. With no exemptions this translates to a tax bill of $12,782 per year.
That list price is probably 3X what any other house on the block has sold for, bubble prices or not.
The teardown alone almost set a record on the block. Here’s the last sales on the block I could locate:
6237 N NEVA AVE 6/12/1997 $153,000 1 STORY 1000-1800 SF
6223 N NEVA AVE 6/16/2008 $292,500 1 STORY 1000-1800 SF
6215 N NEVA AVE 8/4/1993 $160,000 1 STORY 1000-1800 SF
6254 N NEVA AVE 8/25/2005 $340,000 1 STORY 1000-1800 SF
6246 N NEVA AVE 12/8/1993 $189,000 1 STORY 1000-1800 SF
6238 N NEVA AVE 5/19/2005 $406,000 2 STORY 62+ YRS OLD 0-2200 SF
6234 N NEVA AVE 2/21/1985 $73,500 1 STORY 1000-1800 SF
6226 N NEVA AVE 11/2/1998 $227,000 1 STORY 1000-1800 SF
6218 N NEVA AVE 12/30/2003$407,500 2 STORY 62+ YRS OLD 0-2200 SF
6208 N NEVA AVE 12/9/1982 $78,500 1 STORY 1000-1800 SF
6202 N NEVA AVE 10/25/2006$497,000 1 STORY 1000-1800 SF
6247 N NEVA AVE 8/13/1991 $181,000 2-6 APARTMENTS 62+ YRS OLD
6231 N NEVA AVE 2/16/2000 $510,000 2-6 APARTMENTS 62+ YRS OLD
“That list price is probably 3X what any other house on the block has sold for, bubble prices or not.”
Only if the house on the south end of the block (Neva & Myrtle, westside of Neva) hasn’t sold recently. That’s more than a $300k house. The rest of the block, you’re probably right.
“I don’t know whether it meets any technical definition of Old Norwood but it is certainly not desirable.”
Old Norwood is, I think, Harlem to Nagle, Bryn Mawr/Kennedy to the railroad. Thus it is, technically, Old Norwood, but as you point out not the desireable part. My biggest problem with the location is the proximity to Harlem.
wow – some people just made some really bad decisions during the hysteria. This is one of them.
that thing is taste-free. yuck!
Yeah bubbleboi, like almost every large bank in our financial system. I’ve got stock options about to vest and EPS quarterly targets to hit!
Fantastic how that quarterly earnings mentality has worked for US capitalism isn’t it? The CEOs expropriated billions while the shareholders had zero capital gains the past 15 years. Congratulations shareholders, via your astute adherence to best in class corporate governance you’ve earned it. Board members how did that old maxim about “paying for top talent” work out for ya? Oh out a few hundred million but nothing to show? 😀
RIP American capitalism. Only a schmoe would buy equities here for long-term appreciation after this fiasco. American shares are for trading only.
“RIP American capitalism. Only a schmoe would buy equities here for long-term appreciation after this fiasco. American shares are for trading only.”
Melodramatic much, Bob?
But seriously, the popular B-School theories of alignment of incentives b/t management and ownership (i.e. shareholders) have been disproved (as far as I’m concerned).
At least this isn’t as hilariously tacky as the houses (By Polo builders I think for, if I remember correctly, the Desi [Indian-American] market) at Devon and Longmeadow with white brick and painted horse bas relief brick panels.
anon (tfo),
I disagree. Look at every failed bank and financial institution and you can clearly see why: they acted aggressively to meet quarterly earnings targets.
In fact in a previous career I was a bean counter at a big nameless company and saw on more than one occasion of management making decisions that weren’t in the best economic interests of shareholders in order to massage earnings numbers.
Bob:
I thknk you missed the “dis” in disproved. I have thought for a long time that the concept of equity-based compensation for executives did NOT align interests with (most) shareholders and permanently damaged most stakeholders–it emphasizes the short term over the long term. It did benefit active traders and dramatically enriched management, so of course it was popular amongst the B-School set.
But if you disagree with that, I’m not sure what you were talking about. And if “RIP American capitalism” isn’t melodramatic, I don’t know what is.
anon,
I think we are in agreement. Yes melodramatic, but our treasury just announced another 800B spending plan today and I guess I wasn’t seeing enough of a reaction to it from people numb to the hundreds of billions unit. Pretty soon trillions won’t even alarm the sheeple. Afterall Paulson is the ‘expert’ and has main street’s best interests at heart. LOL.
Oh and one followup I had a course on corporate governance and incentive alignment in b-school and it basically blew holes in the stock options model for executive compensation.
There are far better ways to align incentives out there that never seemed to catch on, likely due to board of directors incompentence and management preference for the methods you mentioned.
“board of directors incompentence”
More like cronyism. They are all intertwined and take care of each other. And the board members often hold significant shares themselves, and so a short-term pop in the share price means more $$ in their pockets, too, and when you’re old (like most board members), you don’t care too much for the long term.
what do you suggest the government do about the situation? Let Citibank fail? Let AIG fail? They’re insolvent because of liquidity issues. The government is providing the liquidity. DO you want tens of thousands of unemployed workers in the streets? Where are they going to find jobs?
“They’re insolvent because of liquidity issues.”
AIG is insolvent b/c they let the gamblers take over and they put too much $$ on one side of similar bets. It isn’t b/c of liquidity, it’s because of stupidity.
“They’re insolvent because of liquidity issues.”
Wha?
Multi-tasking i.e. posting, talking on the phone and reading mail, isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
“They’re insolvent because of liquidity issues.”
The layoffs are going to happen anyway. All the bailouts do is give upper management one last chance to loot the company on the way out the door.
Layoff are different from a liquidation. AIG will continue to operate; so will Citibank. The difference is that they won’t freeze up, shut down the markets and generally f’ stuff up 20x worse. During the early days of the GD the government allowed companies to go BK and shut down. It wasn’t until later like 1935 or so that the government starting lending money to businesses. Yes these lending facilities creates giant corporate zombies saddled with unperforming loans (a/k/a Japan) but as compared to the alternative…I think the choice is quite clear. I’d rather see Citibank as a smaller zombielike corporate entity for a few years than to see it disappear entirely and leave a wave of layoffs and destruction in its wake.
“Pete on November 25th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
The layoffs are going to happen anyway. All the bailouts do is give upper management one last chance to loot the company on the way out the door.”
I had to come back for another chuckle. What the f*ck were they thinking? That’s the same thing I say every time I drive out toward the airport and see that behemoth of a house when travelling westbound. Perhaps one of the local radio stations can broadcast traffic reports outta there.
Fair value = $675,000
John S, fair value = $400k as two units, $200k per unit. All you need is some dry wall and some appliances.
wow, I am pretty forgiving when it comes to fake historic looks, brick veneers etc, but this gingerbread house is too much for me. I swear they stole this design directly from my aunts collection of Dickens’s Village memorabilia.
Wow! So much negativity – is the house really that bad??? Nobody seems to care or comment about houses/properties that are a mess (not because of the economy – just because the people who own them are pigs).
So we get a house that is not of someone’s “taste”. Oh, my so ugly -tsk, tsk, house snobs that you are. As one poster searched out- the house was bought in 2005 for $406,000 and then torn down or refurbished, I am not sure which. The housing market wasn’t in dire straights in 2005 when this venture was started.
Now, of course, this person(s) is stuck. Could have made a profit to buy another house, refurbish it – put engineers, carpenters, bricklayers, electricians, plumbers, cement people, painters,etc. to work – but not now.