Heated Sidewalks Still Available: 2820 N. Paulina in West Lakeview
With the kind of weather we’ve been having, it might be nice to have heated sidewalks. You can still buy it- and now also rent it- at 2820 N. Paulina in West Lakeview.
Not only are there heated sidewalks in this modern new construction home, but you can control the home from its automated panels and watch everything going on with the 16 hidden cameras.
See our last post here.
It’s been reduced $275,010 since we last chattered about it in June 2008.
Here’s its history again:
2820 N. Paulina: 5 bedrooms, 5.5 baths, 5000 square feet, 2 car garage
- It was built in 2006-2007
- Was listed in June 2008 at $2.275 million
- Reduced
- Currently listed at $1,999,990
- Also available for rent. Was recently listed at $6500 a month
- Reduced
- Currently available to rent for $5900 a month
- Taxes are listed at $1,697
- Lencorp Realty Inc. has the listing. See the listing and pictures here.
I’ve always wondered about the long-term durability of the snobbiness factor of the hartland park/wellington park/columbia park/2800-3000 paulina corridor.
Carlos Zambrano and lots of money moved into that area, it’s quiet and low-density but it doesn’t have the same ring as East LP/Gold Coast etc.
PS, if anyone is looking to rent here or at any other new construction make sure the landlord is solvent and will be for the duration of your lease.
Oh yeah, this monstrosity. No thanks, I have the rest of eternity to reside in a cement tomb.
Hey I walk my dogs past this house all the time, It looks so out of place next to all the dark red brick McMansions. The exterior looks like GARBAGE and is even more out of place in person, but the interior is just great. (except that ipod dock thing… lol)
There are a LOT of newly built McMansions on Paulina from pretty much Wrightwood to Wellington. I don’t know how many have sold, but as of last summer, they were still building a LOT of them, and almost all of them had FOR SALE signs outside. I suspect the lack of curb appeal will doom this property and will be one of the last to sell.
And it’s just around the corner from 1801 Diversey from earlier today.
Speaking of giant, weird houses, the monstrosity at Leavitt and Fletcher (3124?) no longer had a for sale sign last time I drove past. Did it sell?
So, this is probably a crazy idea, but… would it be possible to completely change the facade? Because that seems to be the *main* problem with the house. The inside is otherwise trying a little too hard, but is also kind of craptastic-fun in a WallStreet “Greed is Good” kind of way.
I love how the iPod dock is probably already out of date. I bought an iHome radio/dock for my nano 1.5 yrs ago and now that i’ve upgraded to the iPhone, it says the dock isn’t compatitable with the iPhone. how sweet to buy a 2million house and your prized iPhone won’t charge in the custom dock.
“would it be possible to completely change the facade?”
How difficult it would be depends mostly on the construction. I haven’t been up close, but it looks like it’s stone over something–probably block. You could pretty easily (but not so cheaply) peel it off and put something else on. Changing the doors, windows, etc. would be more challenging.
#1. People buying 2M homes don’t give a shit about replacing an ipod dock.
#2. $5900 for rent is totally legit imo.
Let’s see…..Lakeview 60657 has a median HOUSEHOLD (not per capita) income of $55,000 + change, according to http://zipskinny.com. Only 6.5% of that zipcode’s population makes $200,000 a year or more. The site doesn’t break down the $200K-plus bracket into finer divisions than that, but it’s a good bet that no more than 1% of 60657 has the income or downstroke necessary to buy this home with today’s more sensible, risk-averse lending standards.
Yet the developers continue to build these things. Where they get the financing, I can’t figure, but I suppose the bailout money is helping some people get financing for new development. And as long as the builders can get the financing, they will build. Because that’s what builders DO.
And the builders are still so beguiled by greed and the presumed big profit margins in the luxe market that they won’t meet the current market demand for affordable homes, which in this context would mean places that a Lakeview family with a combined income of, say, $80K or $90K a year could conceivably afford with a down payment of 10% and a loan of no more than 3X income.
Well-heeled buyers who can aspire to a house in this bracket should wait it out some more, because the top end has a looooong way to drop to the point where demand will meet with supply.
Laura:
This one was (according to my recollection of a Crain’s article) *not* built for sale, but rather to be the home of the developer. Then they “changed their mind” about something or other and decided to sell. So this isn’t the best one to use to rant about that issue.
Also, on the median income, what percent of 60657 rents? And note that 38% of the ’57 is 20-29–while they certainly do buy property, not as much as slightly older folks, so they hugely influence the median income, but aren’t really in the buyer’s pool, yet.
Wow is that one huge rent vs. own spread.
I wonder how much the builder was able to do this for per square foot.
that’s not a half-bad rental price
This would kill for 5 guys with their first job.
Until one of them moves out. Then it would just kill their finances.
I doubt they would rent it to 5 young guys. If they did, that is just asking for problems. On a side note, if I lived there with 5 of my buddies when i was 22-25… I would probably have some great stories.
anon, it doesn’t matter if it was not originally built for resale, because it is competing for buyers in a market overcrowded with upper-bracket houses.
And, yeah, you are right- Lakeview is Renter Majority neighborhood.
Of course, people close to the median income there can’t afford to buy, which is exactly my point- only 1% of the population there can afford a house like this on any terms, which means the price will have to drop substantially, for there are a lot more expensive homes on the market there than there are buyers who can afford them. Less than half the population there can afford anything there at all.
Developers haven’t built affordable SFH’s in the city in years. The problem is that land is expensive. Usually land is 1/3 to 1/4 the cost of the final sales price so if the developer paid $300 for a lot it became a million dollar house. One of the reasons land got so expensive was the rampant change in zoning by alderman. Look on Damen for an example. Plenty of SFH’s (albeit an older housing stock) were torn down to make way for three flats and six flats. The land became more valuable because of the zoning changes. For example, let’s say the developer paid $400 for a lot (low I know b/c the lot for my previous rental sold for $550 at the height of the boom!); the develper builds his triple stacked brick double-wide – the duplex down would sell for $450, the middle unit would be 350, and the penthouse is $500, for a total of 1.3 million which is in between 1/3 and 1/4 the price of the lot. Of course a lot of greedy developers instead built 1.5 and 2.0 houses because on paper the profit margin was so much larger. nevermind that there were few buyers in that demographic. they’re builders not marketers for god’s sake! The greediest of the developers I think built townhomes. My god, there are so many townhome developments in the city where the developer literally packs as many homes as he could on the smallest parcel of property, barely leaving any room at all to manuever vehicles in and out of garages, and everyone is literally cramped into the smallest space possible. Then they charge $500+ for it, maybe add in a few sfh’s for $1.0 and profit away!
Going back to my example of townhomes, look at the structure on the corner of Irving and Christiana. It looks like a courtyard U shaped building, but it’s not. They’re townhomes. 10 or 12 of them packed on to the smallest parcel of land, and IIRC they sold for $500k+ each. You pull into the middle of the ‘courtyard’ and park your car in the garage. No grass, not even a little tiny front yard. Profit away!
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=qzs0mz7pqmdj&style=b&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=11369866&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1
I retract some of my comment above…there is tiny tiny bit of grass around the structure…but just a little
Someone on this site once recommended a good website to search listing… it was something like chicago____.com? does anyone have any reco’s? I’m looking to search on my own and don’t want to deal with realtors. craigslist is okay, trulia is okay, but this other one that someone mentioned was really good.
thanks in advance.
Hi – what cost per sq ft can we use to calculate the cost of a residential structure like you describe (3 flats or SFH) on a lot. You gave us the price of an empty/teardown lot (say 400$), I would like to calculate the break even for a builder with zero % margin. What are they shooting for ? 20 to 30% margin all in (when it used to work ?). Some of them should be losing money on empty or boarded lots that they will not build on, and I was wondering whether this could be thought as an investment for an individual for the long term. THks
I don’t know the ppsf number I just know the general figures. G or anon(tfo) might be more familiar with those figures.
The builder and the agent are a husband wife team. guess both incomes are down
Sonies.. What type of dogs?
pit bull mixes
I like them. generally bad owners=bad rep. Was just interested my kids are Goldens.
Yeah its a shame gang bangers enjoy fighting them, they are such sweet dogs. I like goldens too, but a little too big for my tastes. My dogs are 35 and 48 lbs each so they are pretty medium sized.