Forget the Loft Condo, Buy the Loft Townhouse Instead: 1235 W. George in Lakeview
Perhaps you like the look of a loft but you crave more structure (and space).
This loft style townhouse at 1235 W. George in Lakeview could be for you.
It has exposed brick and timber ceilings on the top floor. But you get three levels and a family room along with a private entrance.
This townhouse was recently reduced by $47,500.
Jill Peet Saponaro at Coldwell Banker has the listing. See more pictures here.
Unit #101: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 1 car parking, 2200 square feet
- Sold in February 1998 for $354,000
- Sold in November 2002 for $500,000 (included the parking)
- Originally listed in February 2009 for $597,500
- Reduced
- Currently listed for $550,000 (garage parking $25,000)
- Assessments of $317 a month
- Taxes of $5300
- Central Air
I think we’re in the ballpark here, at least. I think this could sell at about the 2002 price, with the parking included.
Is that in the ballpark?
I’d say it’s only been reduced by $22,000 (unless the February listing at $597k didn’t include parking).
Still, this one has me thinking. $500k (including parking) would be the max. I’m not familiar enough with that particular street/location to say whether I’d pay that max.
$261 a sq ft seems really reasonable to me for this space and location. And thats including the parking and at full asking price. Parking, central air, doesnt look to need much work at all. Its about 100k to rich for my blood right now but maybe I can get a 0% down loan……
Unfortunately for this seller they’ve got some competition going on. Yesterdays 500+k 3/2 condo is today’s 310-325k 3/2 condo. (856 W Sheridan #2 – 325k, 2943 N Sheffield 1N – 315k [w/pkg]).
Will today’s 575k townhouse become tomorrow’s 450k townhouse?
“Assessments of $317 a month ”
What’s that buy you in this “townhouse”? It’s a condo, layed out like a fee-simple townhouse, isn’t it?
And where’s the entrance from the parking to the unit?
Bob,
The Sheridan place isn’t really a comp. It’s MUCH smaller and not in as good location. I know people like to stretch Lakeview all the way up to Irving Park, but I don’t – to me that’s Uptown or the amorphous Wrigleyville if you’re being generous.
The Sheffield place is in a comparable location, but it’s also much smaller, and if I’m not mistaken, it’s a 1st floor unit with the master bedroom in the basement. That’s going to chop off $50,000 right there.
And those places are at around $215/sqft. Pricing that to this place’s size, and you get $473K. Given the location and the fact that you aren’t living in the basement, I think bumping it up to $500K is appropriate.
“What’s that buy you in this “townhouse”? It’s a condo, layed out like a fee-simple townhouse, isn’t it?”
Yes, it is. Not all that uncommon. As for what it gets you, the listing says:
# Includes Water
# Includes Parking
# Includes Common Insurance
# Includes Exterior Maintenance
# Includes Lawn Care
# Includes Scavenger
# Includes Snow Removal
Color me confused on the parking.
This property looks unique and buyers crave non-cookie cutter ‘cool’ properties
Cannot compare to these:
(856 W Sheridan #2 – 325k, 2943 N Sheffield 1N – 315k [w/pkg]).
2943 N Sheff. is right on the el.
856 W Sheridan is a condo without parking.
As an aside, a neighbor at 627 Buckingham is under contract selling his duplex down listed at 799k and it was a FSBO
I love the location and the price per sqft seems pretty decent. Still a townhouse though… someone will pick this up quickly slightly below what they’re askin now.
Looks like a home under construction. Is “raw space” waiting for finishes worth 250 per square foot?
“Color me confused on the parking.”
From streetview, it looks like there are 3 THs west of a small condo building, with the parking entrance. Parking is prob. all under the condos, with a shared hallway to the THs?
Anyone have a better thought, or actually seen it?
this is pretty fair, IMO. I believe the building is one of the old meatpacking plants, completely gutted and rebuilt in the mid-late 90s, so you get some good bricks for your shell at the very least, nice proximity to the little park on Wolfram & Lakewood, and a fairly short walk to the Diversey or Wellington (Belmont’s not even that far) L stops.
and I like more light than many of the buildings in LV offer, but this one seems to do OK.
those taxes seem awfully low, though. what are they going to shoot up to next cycle?
“those taxes seem awfully low, though.”
Homestead discount, maybe?
Bob, please stick to “comparable” properties as the others stated, just because a crap box on the El that is a 3/2 sells for $400k doesn’t mean that is the new price for a 3/2. I would bet 85% of home buyers wouldn’t touch a unit near the El for any price (at least not as an owner occupied unit). I believe it was you who was comping 3/2s last week in Lincoln Park and talking about units at 1500 W Diversey (an area where most people who buy in LP wouldn’t even consider living)…not trying to hate but lets keep some “credibility” on the figures being thrown out as comps.
“Homestead discount, maybe?”
would have to be, right? ’cause that’s gotta be based on the 02 sales price.
out of curiosity, is there a standard for how much more the taxes would be for this place if it got converted to a 2-flat or 3-flat? (is it possible this gets assessed significantly lower as it isn’t income-generating?)
“units at 1500 W Diversey”
Think it was 1800 W.
“is there a standard for how much more the taxes would be for this place if it got converted to a 2-flat or 3-flat?”
It’s supposed to be based on market price, and 2-flats have been dropping faster than anything else, so it’s likely it would be assessed for less as a 2-flat (not that you could, b/c it’s a condo).
It has a homestead exemption. Without it, the taxes would be $6500.
Skeptic, in addition to what anon said, the ‘ownership premium’ that many here feel is necessary would result in higher prices/assessments for owner-occupied properties.
“Bob, please stick to “comparable” properties as the others stated”
No I’ll post as I see fit, actually. And my point wasn’t to compare this townhome to those properties, but rather to show that the 3/2 condo segment is finally seeing capitulation and PPSF values far below what was previously the case and I don’t see any reason that the same couldn’t happen to townhouses.
anon,
Where can I find information on your statement that “two flats are dropping faster than anything else.” Im not questioning your claim, I am just interested in that niche market. Thanks.
“It’s supposed to be based on market price, and 2-flats have been dropping faster than anything else, so it’s likely it would be assessed for less as a 2-flat (not that you could, b/c it’s a condo).”
thanks. I asked as I’ve wondered if a lower tax liability has been a factor driving people to convert 2 flats to SFHs.
“I don’t see any reason that the same couldn’t happen to townhouses.”
big difference IMO between sharing walls and sharing floors/ceilings/roof/basement.
a townhouse often feels like a SFH (just a skinny one with less windows), a condo will always be just a condo.
“Where can I find information on your statement that “two flats are dropping faster than anything else.” Im not questioning your claim, I am just interested in that niche market. Thanks.”
Purely anecdotal. Sorry. Maybe G can help.
But a townhouse can be condo ownership or fee simple (and probably a bunch of variations in between).
What we usually refer to as “condos” are really just an apartment that is owned.
This one townhouse is interesting. I like the presence on the sidewalk (no useless front yard) and the scale is nice. I would worry about the amount of light into the rear of the unit since the courtyard for the whole complex appears quite tight.
Nice location and I hope someone gets a good price on it.
“Where can I find information on your statement that “two flats are dropping faster than anything else.” Im not questioning your claim, I am just interested in that niche market. Thanks.”
If you have followed the 2/3 flat market for the last few months you will see that outlying areas, like Rogers Park, Edgewater, Logan Square, and Humbolt park have pretty much collapsed. Areas like North Center / Lincoln Square are down, but not by enough yet. Lakeview is slowly starting to come down, but will probably be hit hardest in the long run, since people severly overpaid over the last 5 years for buildings there. I dont know how anyone recovers from paying 700K for a 2 flat
“I dont know how anyone recovers from paying 700K for a 2 flat”
Their banker runs to the US government for a handout.
“I dont know how anyone recovers from paying 700K for a 2 flat”
Put another $200k into it and sell it as a single-family? That, or live in a duplex-down you paid way too much for.
How do you guys feel about the state of rent levels in those areas? Are they dropping as drastically as property values or are they slower to drop but will crash soon?
“Are they dropping as drastically as property values or are they slower to drop”
Definitely slower to drop. The proeprty values had de-cupled from rent and were based on land speculation. Values for rental properties are again mostly based on rental income, so there’s a lot of room for valuation to fall even if rents were going up a few percent (they aren’t, as far as I can tell).
They are slower to drop. Prices dropped dramatically in marginal areas due to rents never coming close to covering expenses. That speculation was the first to go from the bubble.
Now it will likely get stickier from here to the bottom as “investors” chase the rental market down and die by a thousand cuts.
Keep in mind that the market is currently dominated by first time buyers and investors. A disproportionate share of investor purchases is a near certainty to increase the number of available rental units.
Combine that with unemployment figures and other less than stellar economic signs and it is not difficult to see that the “investment” market is a long way from stabilization.
touche bob
What type of feedback are you getting on the entire George Ct. complex?
interesting comments on the 2-flat market. my experience is that many people my age (mid/late 30s) who grew up in the City view 2-flats as basically a SFH with extra income, and thus have been willing to pay a premium for them.
are there tax write-off issues or other reasons why a 2-flat would be less expensive/desirable than a SFH? are they equal on a per sq ft basis, just not worth the premium they were getting during the height of the boom?
“are there tax write-off issues or other reasons why a 2-flat would be less expensive/desirable than a SFH? are they equal on a per sq ft basis, just not worth the premium they were getting during the height of the boom?”
I saw a survey a few years ago that said something along the lines that most owner occupied mulit-unit rental buildings lose money or just break even, which would make sense given the premium all the mini-land barons paid for multi-unit rentals during the mania. In my opinion sharing my building with strangers for rental income would be more of a pain in the ass, and definitely not worth the premium that the Owner-occupied land barons think it’s worth.
“sharing my building with strangers for rental income would be more of a pain in the ass, and definitely not worth the premium that the Owner-occupied land barons think it’s worth”
I agree. It needs to be priced such that the rental unit(s) “cashflow” and make the owner’s unit less expensive than a comparable rental unit. Otherwise, you’re just land speculating.
We have a three flat and the renters allow us to live in a huge, beautiful 3 bedroom for the price of renting a one bedroom. On paper we ‘losing money’ because we do not collect ‘rent’ on ourselves.
Also, in my experience, two and three flats are not valued on rental income, but by neighborhood. For example a huge 10 bedroom/7 bath brick three flat in West Rogers park bringing in $4,500 might be valued at 450k this year, while a crappy frame three flat on a narrow lot near the train tracks in Lakeview, bringing in less income, will be valued at 650k.
“In my opinion sharing my building with strangers for rental income would be more of a pain in the ass, and definitely not worth the premium that the Owner-occupied land barons think it’s worth.”
You’re forgetting when you’re a small business owner it all of a sudden becomes infinitely easier to fudge on your taxes and lower your effective tax rate. One of the few benefits that owning a two-flat might provide.
“We have a three flat and the renters allow us to live in a huge, beautiful 3 bedroom for the price of renting a one bedroom.”
This is the way to do it. If you pay a premium price such that your rental income makes your 3-BR unit effectively cost the same as renting an SFH, you paid too much.
dahliachi, I agree with you, 2/3 flats can cash flow but you have to buy the building at the right price and manage the property effectively.
As far as the 3 flat in West Rogers for $450k – I have a file on my shelf that contains a 2 flat in West Rogers bought for $500k in 2006. It is cash flow negative to the tune of $1,400 a month just on the mortgage! Don’t ask why someone would do that to himself; that’s why the file is on my shelf.
HD,
Right, and that two flat in WR you mentioned is now a short sale for 350k.
So someone buying it now could make it work.
Something else to consider about owning a two/three flat is that if you have a reasonable plan, even if it does not cash flow in the first few years, rents do tend to go up and the mortgage does not. My tenants are helping me build equity in the long term.
dahliachi, as far as I know this $500k two-flat isn’t a short sale. However, I don’t think it will work at $350k either because rents are only $800 per unit. And as far as the mortgage not going up – don’t underestimate the savvy investor and his ARMs…..Like I said, you made the situation work; however, most OO multi-units since 1999 haven’t been quite as lucky or fortunate as you.
HD,
We rented our apt. in our bldg for a year, before buying it from the long-term landlady.
Our rent in 2003 was $895!!!!. after painting, redoing the floors, new baths, updated kitchens and putting free laundry in the basement and a parking pad in back, we are getting approx. $1375 per unit monthly.
So I bet the new buyer of your hapless client’s two flat could do far better than $800 for a two or three bedroom apartment.
“I agree. It needs to be priced such that the rental unit(s) “cashflow” and make the owner’s unit less expensive than a comparable rental unit. Otherwise, you’re just land speculating.”
Actually, I’d say you’re speculating that rents will rise as your mortgage payment stays the same, it’s the exact opposite of land speculating, it’s based on the rental market.
The other perk for 2 flats is you can write off expenses on shared areas, which can be a big deal for roof repairs, boilers, tuckpointing/siding, etc.
It is definitely a lot more hassle, I think this is why most of my friends who went this route were natives, as they had a pool of people they knew that were potential renters (it doesn’t always work out, but it helps take some edge off, at least to start).
I’m thinking long-term here, 10, 15 20 years. Even if rents just keep pace with inflation-which they historically have, and I have a decent fixed rate mortgage, I’m doing fine now and will be doing better in the future.
right. folks have a point about these buildings getting overpriced recently, but looking at the long term big picture there’s a reason why we have so many of them.
Unfortunately we stopped building owner occupied two/three flats many years ago. Every three/four flat I’ve seen built in my lifetime has been luxury condos that sell well north of a million for all the units. There’s absolutely no way you can cash flow a three-flat luxury condo building in Roscoe Village or Lakeview.
“skeptic on April 29th, 2009 at 11:23 am
right. folks have a point about these buildings getting overpriced recently, but looking at the long term big picture there’s a reason why we have so many of them.”
I agree 100%, it’s the biggest reason why Matlak ended up out on his ass. Nothing but greed…
“Unfortunately we stopped building owner occupied two/three flats many years ago. Every three/four flat I’ve seen built in my lifetime has been luxury condos that sell well north of a million for all the units. There’s absolutely no way you can cash flow a three-flat luxury condo building in Roscoe Village or Lakeview.”