Seeking a First Time Buyer in Southport: 3515 N. Lakewood
This 2-bedroom unit at 3515 N. Lakewood in the Southport neighborhood of Lakeview has been on the market since August 2009.
It has been reduced by $6075 in that time period.
The vintage unit has oak floors throughout and a kitchen with white cabinets and white and black appliances.
There is central air but no in-unit washer/dryer or parking (there is coin laundry in the basement.)
It is priced for a first time buyer but is the lack of an updated kitchen hurting the resale of this unit?
Guy Lemenec at Coldwell Banker has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #2: 2 bedrooms, 1 bath, no square footage listed
- Sold in March 1994 for $129,500
- Sold in February 1995 for $136,000
- Sold in September 2001 for $252,000
- Sold in July 2003 for $281,000
- Originally listed in August 2009 for $306,000
- Reduced several times
- Currently listed for $299,925
- Assessments of $257 a month
- Taxes of $3217
- Central Air
- No in-unit washer/dryer
- No parking
- Bedroom #1: 12×12
- Bedroom #2: 12×7
That’s a lot of money for a 1 + Den in SoPo. Especially one with 1994 apartment conversion finishes.
Apply the 94->95 increase to the next 15 years, you get to $282k, which the seller *might* be able to make work. Use 3.5% instead, you get $227k, which is probably what a buyer should pay.
Not happening. Why would you pay that much for a place with outdated appliances, no parking, and a coin laundry? That is called renting an apartment, not being a homeowner imho.
A typical FHA buyer is going to paying about $2118/mo for this place. Seems a bit pricey for the lack of amenities within the unit. Southport is nice, but it ain’t that nice to pay that much to live in a glorified rental.
I like the location a lot.
I don’t know how hard zoned street parking is there (Wrigley and all).
I am with other cc:ers that I don’t mind that it doesn’t have SS appliances and I can do my own custom work.
I don’t know about the price since I am not as familiar with comps in that area.
I like the vintage look. A lot of times, vintage ends up translating to old and crappy, but from the pictures, the floor and molding etc. look nice.
Personally, I would budget for windows though just in case.
Can this even be called a 2Br? 12×7?
Is the second bedroom a enclosed back porch? (i rented one of those when i was 19)
I am usually wrong but cant you rent a 1br+den for like $1300 a tad west towards ashland?
Really 12×7 is that legal?
Oh my someone tell this seller 2006 called, they want their outrageous pricing back!
Small and bland and not the prettiest vintage I ever saw for the price. Looks like this is what the Southport nabe is all about now. It seems to be getting higher prices per sq ft than East Lakeview on LSD and streets adjacent.
Yeah it doesn’t look like true true vintage…more like faux vintage.
But I still think it looks nice.
I think this place is heading back to pre-2001. Gonna go out on a limb and say it wouldn’t surprise me if it sold for around $199k.
“Is the second bedroom a enclosed back porch?”
Looks like it *should* be part of the living room–it’s at the front and the door is to the balcony on the front. It would make a fine office.
The 2001 & 2003 buyers were idiots. Luckily for the 2001 buyer, only the last idiot left holding the bag is in a financial pickle from this whole RE downturn. Kudos to the 1995 buyer for finding that 2001 buyer!
$300K for a 1/1 + den = no thanks! I agree with Russ on $199K. I do like the cheesy agent pose with the glasses, though.
I’m concerned that 300k is considered “first-time buyer” pricing. To give yourself a little cushion in case of special assessments or other emergency, you would need to make 90-100k to have this plus a car payment or student loans.
(And yes – before you flame me – I know you think anyone who makes less than $100k should have been put to death in the crib)
“Looks like it *should* be part of the living room–it’s at the front and the door is to the balcony on the front. It would make a fine office”
Good call on the layout, that would make a sweet OFFICE.
This must be a joke.
FAIL
I always try to guess what the comments will be on a place before I read what everyone has posted. On this one, I am little surprised. I thought the consensus would be $300k is a little high but it should go for about $280k.
I have been looking at this segment (sub-$300k in Lakeview) for quite some time and this doesn’t seem that rediculous. One of the “big three,” decent layout, halfway decent looking exterior, interior looks in pretty good shape, deck space, fp. You should see what some of the places are at the $250k level. Ugh.
And to the poster talking about rental prices in the area. You could easily get a 2 bd all over Lakeview for $1300. And maybe that’s the bigger problem here. Why would someone want to tie up all of their cash in a down payment for the privilege of spending $1,000 more per month in housing costs?
“You could easily get a 2 bd all over Lakeview for $1300.”
Can you find a roommate willing to pay $650/mo to live in that den? This isn’t really a 2 BR, unless that 7×12 room has a (almost) 5×12 walk-in closet.
“And maybe that’s the bigger problem here.”
It totally is.
Anybody who pays $650/mo to live in a 7×12 room in an apartment with a roommate is a total fool. Instead they could just get a studio 3x the size for $700.
I’m sooo tired of people here on cribchatter trying to postulate impossible or unfeasible rental solutions to justify the CF outlay of an overpriced property. Although kudos it hasn’t happened on this thread yet! 🙂
“postulate impossible or unfeasible rental solutions”
Using Stevo’s BotE calculator and an absurd rent of $1500, you only get to $262k as the value. Remember, that essentially treats a 20% dp as a zero return investment, traded for tax bene (or something). Take that out, and it’s sub-$210k–which I think people might find reasonable.
My beef is that that this really isn’t a 2 bedroom as the 2nd bedroom isn’t that functional. Second, it lacks the amenities that make owning over renting worth the premium paid.
If you can rent a place with similar finishes for $1300 (no parking, no laundry, and crappy interior) why would you buy this place for $300k?
Southport is a nice area and I really like it, however, I don’t see the point of owning a unit like this particular one. Either buy a real place like a decent sized 2/2 with modern amenities or just keep renting. This is one of the places that absolutely should be at par with rent as you aren’t getting anything above and beyond a typical rental unit.
I know this sounds crazy, but I guess it’s a good 2 bd if you aren’t planning on using the 2nd bedroom as a bedroom, rather an office or baby’s room.
If this place doesn’t pan out in some rough calculation than I’d hate to see how a lot of other properties would do. Do you at least agree with me that this proprty stacks up well against the rest of the inventory in the sub-$300k Lakeview inventory? (Which is a separate question than what is this place worth.)
“This is one of the places that absolutely should be at par with rent”
This is one of the places that absolutely should be at a discount with rent to compensate for the fact that:
1) rents are declining
2) renting affords the owner more flexibility with regards to moving, 3) renting affords the owner zero risk with regards to capital depreciation.
The only way one would consider this to be fair at par with regard to renting is if you believe owning a piece of real estate should always be a premium to renting a similar unit. I disagree with this outlook.
“to compensate for the fact”
You left off #4, #5 and #6:
4) Renters need no reserve fund for replacing appliance, etc.
5) Renters need not do their own maintenance.
6) Renters bear no risk for special assessments.
“Anybody who pays $650/mo to live in a 7×12 room in an apartment with a roommate is a total fool. Instead they could just get a studio 3x the size for $700.”
Can’t split your bills in half (unless your cat is chipping in) in a studio though…
To play devil’s advocate, how about…
1) Renters build no equity.
2) Renters have no mortgage interest to deduct.
3) Renters have no long-term hold on the property.
4) Renters can’t (or maybe not can’t but shouldn’t) make any remodeling decisions to improve their place of residence.
I’ve seen variations on #4 listed here a few times, and I’m curious about others’ reactions/experiences (actually, someone raised this issue on a different thread, but I can’t find it):
You wouldn’t want to undertake any major remodeling as a renter, but you can (and I have repeatedly) ask for landlord approval to make minor/cosmetic improvements and simply asked for my expenses to be taken off my rent, since it increased the future value of the place as a rental. I’ve done this in multiple apts in diff’t cities, and though you obviously need to have a certain kind of landlord to approve (e.g. not management companies), I’ve always done this and been happy with the arrangement. I can’t be the only one…
Drama to ensue . . .
“4) Renters can’t (or maybe not can’t but shouldn’t) make any remodeling decisions to improve their place of residence.”
Renters can accomplish this by moving.
Note, please, that I’m an owner, and have no desire to return to being a renter, so it’s not that. It’s that I (like groove and others) think that you rent an apartment–esp. if you are young–and buy something that you can reasonably expect to have a 10+ year life in (whether or not that’s how it actually works out).
Who, legitimately, wants to live in a dated, 1 + den, w/o parking or laundry, in SoPo, for a decade? And, of that small-ish group, how many have a steady household income of near $100k?
“1) Renters build no equity.”
In this case, they build no negative equity, so that’s actually a point for Bob.
“2) Renters have no mortgage interest to deduct.”
Taxes + mortgage interest is $20k, tops (using 6% on a 97% mtg). Standard deduction is $5700, so ~$14k in marginal deduction; using $100k earning single, that’s (not quite–marginal rate drops to 25% at $82k & change) $3920 in tax savings–or about what it will cost to replace your 15 yo appliance as they break down. For the privilege of paying ~$10k more per year, and undertaking a bunch of risks.
“1) Renters build no equity.”
Cashflow savings alone equals equity if renting is significantly cheaper (it is).
“2) Renters have no mortgage interest to deduct.”
The old adage about spending a dollar to save a quarter. Realistically though if we’re comparing the cashflows from renting vs. owning this is already covered and baked in. No I have no mortgage interest but renters to have a substantial standard deduction that owners forego.
“4) Renters can’t (or maybe not can’t but shouldn’t) make any remodeling decisions to improve their place of residence.”
You can do minor things in most rentals (not mgt property rentals). Although if you want to do something very drastic even a landlord wouldn’t allow, chances are that is going to diminish the resale value of a place. Yeah knocking out walls of your pad sounds cool and arty, but not good for resale. For those keen on high-end finishes there are rentals available with those too, but far less common admittedly.
“3) Renters have no long-term hold on the property.”
Can’t argue with this. For those seriously concerned about this owning is the only option. I don’t think about it that much tho.
When I hear things like “Seeking a First Time Buyer” and “Property Virgins”, it sure seems like I should go ahead and take the plunge. I mean everybody is doin’ it. What am I afraid of? The water is warm, right?
1) Renters build no equity.
But they dont loose it either 🙂
2) Renters have no mortgage interest to deduct.
Most dont meet the standard deduction anyways 😉
and like anon pointed out “For the privilege of paying ~$10k more per year, and undertaking a bunch of risks
3) Renters have no long-term hold on the property.
Please, the average person wont “hold” onto a 1br condo more than 5 years unless it breaks even or cash flows as a rental
4) Renters can’t (or maybe not can’t but shouldn’t) make any remodeling decisions to improve their place of residence.
Thats an iffy one there, but the best way to improve and keep ol’ landlord happy….Only paint, change pulls, facuets, and simple light fixture.
I think this place would have more of a shot if it had a legit second bedroom and more sqft.
I SAY 1br ARE FOR RENTING
I want to buy a 1 bedroom place because I don’t like children or guests who overstay their welcome.
“I want to buy a 1 bedroom place because I don’t like children or guests who overstay their welcome.”
Children routinely overstay their welcome in your place? Why are you hanging out with children?
I’m sure that was [children] and [guests-who-overstay-their-welcome] as 2 separate categories, Bob
Bro, I didn’t create the housing bubble, I’m just living through the after effects, the after effects being $300k one bedroom apartments.
“the after effects being $300k one bedroom apartments.”
What is interesting is this “Southport” area as the realtors have started calling it seems to indeed have the most egregiously overpriced 1/1’s anywhere in the city. Its as if all of the younger white yuppies who graduated from DePaul or lived in LP in their early 20s decided they had to act more mature and differentiate themselves from the younger crowd and they did so by moving to “Southport” and going from renters to owners. Even in LP most of the overpriced 1/1s are under 275k.
Also this location now sucks with the bus cuts as you don’t have 24hr public transit. Eat it yups.
Unlikely this unit will sell for more than $200,000, as a large one-bedroom plus den – unless broker finds an ill-informed deep pocket buyer. All it takes is one naive buyer to close the deal.
Current owner likely wants to avoid losing money on this deal, but economic indicators suggest it would be prudent to sell now at a loss rather than wait for the yet weaker 2011 market. Read up on disasterous commercial real estate market foreclosures that are coming for 2010 – 2014. Anyone read David Brooks’ NYT column on long-term high unemployment forecast – predictions are at least a decade of high unemployment. Many architects (25%+) are presently unemployed here, many more architects have had double-digit paycuts.
A friend of mine is dating an architect, and while my insight may not be scientific, things appear to be bad for him and he is one of the lucky ones who still has a job. He’s a decent guy too I feel bad for him.
Architect,
So does this mean Fire Sale on homes in Oak Park? I notice many architects live there and with what you stated they will be needing to “downgrade” their lifestyle.
“Many architects (25%+) are presently unemployed here, many more architects have had double-digit paycuts”
“So does this mean Fire Sale on homes in Oak Park? ”
Grave dancer Groove. You work for Zell?
Like they say, the wealth is still there, all that changes is the name on the mailbox.
“Grave dancer Groove. You work for Zell?”
Hey i am just looking out for #1…ME. (just kidding)
I am pointing out that there are many Oak Park 800k-1.5mil homes owned by architects that i ASSUME stretched income to get those places (i dream about). So pay cuts and job losses will hit hard if no reserves are in place.