Back to the 1998 Price for this Lincoln Park 2/2? 1024 W. Armitage
As someone recently pointed out on the 2011 N. Kenmore thread, this 2-bedroom at 1024 W. Armitage in Lincoln Park (which is in the same association as the Kenmore coach house) came back on the market.
The bank has finally gotten its act together on this property, since it has owned it since July 2011.
It has finally been reduced to $389,000 from the $549,900 that it was listed for in September 2011.
In our September chatter, most of you complained about the color of the walls, the furniture and the draperies- all which can easily be changed. If you look at the pictures now- most of that has been wiped out of the unit.
Big difference, huh?
See our prior chatter here.
You can see the original photos of the interior here.
If you recall, the building was built in 1890.
The unit has 19 windows, including those in the turret.
The kitchen has white cabinets, black appliances and some kind of stone counters.
It has all the amenities that buyers look for including central air, washer/dryer in the unit and garage parking.
Back in September, anonny thought this would sell for between $425-$445k, but unless there is a bidding war, it appears it will sell well under that with the current list being $389,000.
With it now listed at basically the 1998 price, is this now a deal?
Linda O’Donnell at Re/Max Signature now has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #2: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, den, now 1760 square feet
- Sold in June 1998 for $377,500
- Sold in November 1999 for $368,000
- Sold in April 2003 for $467,000
- Lis pendens filed in February 2009
- Originally listed in September 2010 for $599,000
- Reduced in March 2011 to $549,900
- Appears to be bank owned as of July 2011
- Was still listed in September 2011 at $549,900
- Withdrawn in late September
- Re-listed from the bank for $389,000 (includes the parking)
- Assessments of $266 a month
- Taxes of $8481
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 13×14
- Bedroom #2: 15×13
- Office: 8×8
With the same caveats that I expressed before (too far west, right on Armitage, and above retail), the new list (let alone a potentially lower closing price) is obviously a good deal (assuming that the bank will actually close for that). This unit should have been spruced up as it’s now been (and are the kitchen and at least one bath new?), not to mention staged and photographed properly, and priced appropirately.
It was not. And now it’s been in the hands of the bank for some time (which, despite the place now actually looking much better, has caused the quality of the listing to grow even worse). I suppose that new caveats would include the association (assessment is too low, there’s retail, there’s a goofy coach house, etc.) and all the “sold as is” red flags in the shabby listing.
With the previous listing, the unit looked goofy, and people probably couldn’t see past the unique decor. But now, without that decor, the place looks kind of old and sad, and it’s not an improvement over the last photos, in my opinion. Before, the listing said “crazy”, now it says “desperate”. Needs a lot of love. $389 is still too high.
Those taxes aren’t helping matters either.
“With the same caveats that I expressed before (too far west, right on Armitage, and above retail), the new list (let alone a potentially lower closing price) is obviously a good deal (assuming that the bank will actually close for that).”
It’s not a short sale. The bank owns it outright. Why wouldn’t the bank be willing to actually close for the list? I’ve not heard of that happening on a bank owned unit. The bank wants to dump the thing ASAP.
Also- the banks rarely “stage” anything. Why should they? They’re selling based on price. And since they’re so much lower than the rest of the market- it usually sells. Heck, there was a listing across/down the street from this one that was bank owned for months but there were NO pictures in the listing. Ever. It stayed on the market for like 6 to 8 months with some price reductions before someone finally went to see it in person and put in a bid. So even properties with no pictures in the listing sell eventually. I think it was listed for like 40% under the prior selling price as well.
So you are saying Madame Bovary is not in the market for a 2/2? ; )
“and people probably couldn’t see past the unique decor”
@JPS – no homeowner exemption on the taxes
“not to mention staged and photographed properly, and priced appropirately.”
Photographed properly? The picture of the exterior looks like the realtor took it without stopping her car. I vote that we start a realtor hall of shame. Let’s give a warm welcome to Linda O’Donnell, our first member!!! When inducted, each realtor should get a digital camera and some photography classes. Lazy Linda.
$8481 in taxes??? So there’s no homeowners exemption claimed, okay, but still…. $8481? Then add monthly assessments?
I have never understood the way the county taxes property. I realize I’m a longtime homeowner, but my SFH in LP, approximately 2000ish taxable square footage, has a yearly property tax bill in the teens. That’s the thing about living in the *city* of Chicago, the purchase price maybe lower compared with other major cities, but the ‘hidden’ costs (taxes, parking, insurances, car, electricity, gas, on and on) are so much more here, and they do add up… one dollar at a time.
On the other hand, I was talking with a family member the other night who lives in the Ft. Lauderdale area, and he has a nice but mass produced single family home there, almost 3000 sq ft, valued at $400K (good luck finding a buyer on that one). $7K in mandatory hurricane/homeowners insurance (the house is just common cinder block/stucco… no mahogany library to replace in a storm), $11K in property taxes (the state freezes your tax level after something like 10 years of living in the same house…. so the new owners get killed), auto insurance is doubled compared to suburban Chicago prices (he moved from Dupage county), and 2 1/2 times more for his 17 year old daughter who needs to drive… everyone does, $600 a month gas bill to heat the pool to 78 in the fall/winter, on and on. I say this as a note to HD who thinks that the price of living in FL is less expensive than the Chicago suburbs… sure, if you want to live in a trailer.
“the purchase price maybe lower compared with other major cities, but the ‘hidden’ costs (taxes, parking, insurances, car, electricity, gas, on and on) are so much more here,”
Serious question–what’s your list of “other major cities”? iirc, it’s pretty short.
“I say this as a note to HD who thinks that the price of living in FL is less expensive than the Chicago suburbs… sure, if you want to live in a trailer.”
uhhh – there is no state income tax in florida. That, right there is a HUGE savings!!
‘Serious question–what’s your list of “other major cities”? iirc, it’s pretty short.’
Boston, NY, Philly, LA, DC, SF. I suppose it’s a matter of personal opinion anon, but I look for infrastructure/architecture/public transit/respected cultural & educational institutions/history/walkability…. damn, did I just delete LA?
‘uhhh – there is no state income tax in florida. That, right there is a HUGE savings!!’
True, and a reason why property taxes are so high… the money has to come from somewhere, and I’m guessing it’s all a matter of how much money you make. Does anyone make big money in FL, or is it made elsewhere but spent there? I’d rather pay 3% on say $70K of yearly family income to the state, than a rock solid property tax bill that will go nowhere but up… while the home value goes down.
“I suppose it’s a matter of personal opinion anon”
No doubt; I don’t disagree with your list (ok, maybe Philly, which is not my fave, but does have a convenient location bt NYC and DC), but wanted to be sure before I made the following statement:
Which one of those cities doesn’t have high “hidden costs”?
Sure, the property tax rates are lower for the most part, but then (even still, after the Quinn tax hike) Illinois income taxews are lower. Utilities, no matter how expensive you find them, are no higher than Cali, and cheaper than the East Coast. Sure, you likely use more heating here than the East and certainly than the West, but that’s not “hidden” to me.
“I’d rather pay 3% on say $70K of yearly family income to the state, than a rock solid property tax bill that will go nowhere but up… while the home value goes down.”
A family that makes 70k is NOT going to be able to afford a 400-500k house (that has a large real estate tax bill )- they are more likely to be renters or buyers of a small house.
Philly sucks big time.
‘A family that makes 70k is NOT going to be able to afford a 400-500k house (that has a large real estate tax bill )- they are more likely to be renters or buyers of a small house.’
EXACTLY! But, we all know that wasn’t the case over the last decade. These people are stuck with the high cost of FL home ownership *regardless* of a cut in salary. That $11K example in property taxes isn’t going to decrease just because his yearly income has. The same can be said for any state, I understand, but a similar size house in the common burbs of Chicago (and his place is in a common burb of FTL… isn’t all of FTL a burb), wouldn’t be near the yearly property tax as it is in FL… and wasn’t when he live in Dupage county.
Guess I’m comparing starting points anon (home selling prices that is), with family and friends who live in my list of ‘major’ cities. My nephew, his wife, and child live in Bunker Hill… $700K for a two-br condo, not that much different than this Armitage place, and they don’t make that much more in yearly income than similar jobs in Chicago. My sister lives on the UES, and I won’t even go there with the selling price of that one, but it’s similar to the Walton property chatted here the other day. I’m renting in Hancock Park for the winter… seriously, any idea what a vintage Disney looking cottage costs here? My point is that to these people and others looking in, Chicago is a *deal* at purchase, and it is to live in a ‘major’ city, but that quickly escalates when you add the extras: property taxes are a wild card here (caps in CA), nice to have a car here (sure you can take the 22 from LP to Anteprima on a snowy January night, but a car is rather warm), freeze thaw, freeze thaw… my house won’t tuck point itself. Kinda like having kids… looks good up front…
” I’m renting in Hancock Park for the winter… seriously, any idea what a vintage Disney looking cottage costs here?”
Yes, I do, and applaud your choice on where to hole up in El-Ay. Westside/SM is overrated, in most ways.
“quickly escalates when you add the extras”
Yeah, but there are extras trade-offs in all the others, too. Just depends what hurts you most (which is usually whatever one is most familiar with).
In Boston, there is a yearly tax on your car (excise tax). I remember the first time I was hit with it (it was something like 2k) and I couldn’t understand what it was – and when I found out, I couldn’t believe that states actually could do this.
The price of this unit makes the coach house seem too high.
I love the over the top tackiness! I’ve been in a major 60s decor kick, and this place rings all the right bells for me. Not for everyone, and to be perfectly honest I would probably feel like I’d be living in an H&M advertisement, but I think some credit needs to be given to whoever decorated it. Even if this isn’t your thing, it looks like a decent amount of time and planning went into it.
For that kind of money I want an attached garage with at least two spaces. Sorry, this is a no-go unless the buyers are hard-core bike or CTA enthusiasts.
Philly hahaha! DC used to be LOLable on that list too until highly compensated federal jobs exploded in number over the past decade. Article in usatoday today on that.
Looks like it sold for $441k, not much lower than what the person originally paid in 2003… too bad they didn’t price it as such before the bank took over!
Shouldn’t the fact that this unit sold for well over the listing price be a topic of discussion on this board?
Of course LB, but it doesn’t fit the CC meme.
KNIFE CATCHER!!
Executed Recorded Document Type Amount
02/10/2012 02/24/2012 MORTGAGE $396,900.00
$396,900 / $441,000 = 10% down on a nearly half a million dollar house. It’s 2005 ALL OVER AGAIN! PARTY ON FOLKSSSSSS!!!!
“Shouldn’t the fact that this unit sold for well over the listing price be a topic of discussion on this board?”
Has anyone e-mailed me and said “hey- Sabrina this sold”- because I can’t see every sale or every property that comes on the market (I don’t have access to the MLS as I’m not a realtor.)
Sure- I can do a follow-up on this. I get SO TIRED of people complaining about certain properties not being featured when all you have to do is e-mail me.
Sorry Sabrina, I will reach out in the future. Your blog is great. Maybe all of the complaining from other posters is rubbing off on me :-).
“Back in September, anonny thought this would sell for between $425-$445k”
Me: “With the same caveats that I expressed before (too far west, right on Armitage, and above retail), the new list (let alone a potentially lower closing price) is obviously a good deal (assuming that the bank will actually close for that).”
To which 3 of 3 of you gave the “thumbs down” rating, and to which Sabrina replied “It’s not a short sale. The bank owns it outright. Why wouldn’t the bank be willing to actually close for the list? I’ve not heard of that happening on a bank owned unit. The bank wants to dump the thing ASAP.”
$441k.
Congrats to the buyer.
Still waiting for the 3 thumbs-downers to reconsider their vote…
I have a theory re: who took the time to (i) add a fourth thumbs down up top, (ii) add one thumbs down to yesterday’s post (but thanks to the magnanimous and/or honest and/or charitable soul who gave it a thumbs up! (sorry to use the Clio exclamation)), and (iii) give two (as of now) thumbs down to the post immediately above.