The Logan Square Brick Cottage: 2124 N. Stave Street
This 2-bedroom brick cottage at 2124 N. Stave Street in Logan Square recently came back on the market after first being listed last August.
It has the bells and whistles that buyers are looking for in a single family home including a two car garage, central air and a second bathroom.
The kitchen has maple cabinets and white appliances and is open to the dining area.
Both bedrooms are upstairs.
There is also a full unfinished basement.
The listing says there is a “sound proofed recording studio” but there is no accounting of the square footage, that I can tell, in the actual listing.
The house is currently listed under $400,000.
Is this a good condo alternative?
Tina Wallace at Wallace Properties has the listing. See the virtual tour here. See the listing here.
2124 N. Stave Street: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, no square footage listed, 2 car garage
- Sold in September 1987 for $10,500
- Sold in November 1993 for $80,000
- Sold in April 2001 for $180,000
- Originally listed in August 2009
- Withdrawn
- Re-listed in February 2010 at $380,000
- Taxes of $3903
- Central Air
- Bedroom #1: 12×12
- Bedroom #2: 18×9
- Office: 12×9 (main floor)
It is good to see a realtor actually putting up more than two or three bad photo’s and expecting to sell the property. Great online presentation for a house in this price range. Kudos to the real estate company and listing agent on this added information! Hopefully this will become the standard.
Does anyone else look at those diagonal wood floors in this house and want to rip them up and relay the floor straight? I think that this was a trendy design idea that should be put to rest. I had a small boxy condo in Wriglety that I put new wood floors into in 1999. I chose a diagonal layout and thought that it looked cool at the time. Now I think that it just looks odd. Am I alone on this opinion?
No, you aren’t alone, I hate them too. I think it was sometimes done in the 19th century, especially if the floor would have been under a carpet, but I think it usually looks awkward otherwise.
I really don’t like the dormers much here, adding a second floor is always tricky make attractive. Can’t really say if its a good condo alternative though.
23 years ago this home cost $10,500.
Today it’s $380,000.
In a traditionally working class, now a hipster working class area.
This is the Californization of Chicago housing prices.
No bubble to see here folks, move along.
I think the neighborhood is not exactly bad, but definitely a little more questionable than closer to the Boulevard. I don’t walk around there that much but am always reading about miscellaneous activity in the CAPS minutes. The Congress Pizzeria, which is not right there, is apparently a source of trouble. The Congress Theater has the usual disturbance issues you’d expect, although this place isn’t right in the flow of that I would assume.
It is close to the Blue Line, both the California stop and the tracks themselves. It is convenient to Revolution Brewing.
Maybe REB should buy this instead of renting.
Where’d REB go? Isn’t this her place?
jp3 I know (first hand) what you mean re: the diagonal floors, and usually I don’t like them. Where I think they can help are very cramped layouts like here– they help with flow and make narrow rooms look bigger.
Re: “sound proofed recording studio” on-site
1)you’re killin me w/no pics of that, Mr. Realtor. . . thinking it must be the basement, but that could be valuable too and
2)does this mean we get to watch actual, bona fide, gentrification in action if this sells? I.e. artist buys cheap, sells a few years later to young couple who pay twice as much? Makes me nostalgic for Wicker in the mid 90s.
HD: You are hilarious. 23 years ago!
Factoring in inflation, what cost $10,500 in 1987 would cost $195,68.64 in 2009.
“Wicker on March 5th, 2010 at 8:57 am
HD: You are hilarious. 23 years ago!”
What’s hilarious Wicker is a hipster neighborhood where owners drink PBR and buy and sell homes for $380,000.
Now that’s comedy gold.
“23 years ago this home cost $10,500.
Today it’s $380,000.
In a traditionally working class, now a hipster working class area.
This is the Californization of Chicago housing prices.
No bubble to see here folks, move along.”
Somebody has to fund the baby boomer’s retirement. Maybe a Logan Square power couple will purchase this. I’m sure anon(tfo) knows millions of such couples.
Whats hilarious is even Wicker themself feels the need to interject their neighborhood name into their online handle. It certainly does say something about you Wicker, not only what part of town you’re from but also that you’re a tool.
Only in Chicago have I seen these cottages with those roof additions and they are absolutely hideous. The cheapest way to get extra space, perhaps, but certainly not what 400k homes should look like.
This cottage, like so many others, unfortunately, has been bastardized with this fugly addition.
Ugh. I owned a rental property on Stave in the 1990’s. This was the nastiest street in Wicker. White trash, MEAN white trash, no respect for neighbors, wary of outsiders. I’ve been down the block recently, and not much has changed. Wait till a hipster buys it and Billy Bob next door tells him he’s got a purty mouth….
“I really don’t like the dormers much here, adding a second floor is always tricky make attractive”
It wold have been 100x better if they didnt go with cheap white vinyl siding on it.
just think how if they went with cedar and did a hunter or dark green paint job. then it would look nice and people would go “well those dormers were need to make space we can except the structural ugliness for more room.”
but with the plastic white we go “WTF that is some ugly shyt there”
This is a weird ‘tween neighborhood. Too far from Bucktown and not really in the heart of Logan Square. I’d be willing to move from Bucktown to a little edgier neighborhood to have a single family home, but not this one. To the extent this is a “condo alternative,” I’ll take the condo every time.
And for $380K, I’d expect it to be taken care of. Looks like it’s in disrepair (decks/yard at least). This is not a power couple place, p.s.
“Factoring in inflation, what cost $10,500 in 1987 would cost $195,68.64 in 2009.”
either I’m missing the sarcasm or you moved your decimal pt over a digit.
cant you do brick on the side of dormers, or is that difficult?
this hood seems ok. kind of a gray area btwn bucktown and logan. Have a friend who fixes bikes that lives on this street, that’s a nice amenity the realtor should mention.
It’s really not that bad of a neighborhood. I did enjoy this excerpt from a recent CAPS summary:
“It has been another exceptionally quiet month in this section. No shots were reportedly fired.”
“This is not a power couple place, p.s.”
Bob thinks that “power couple” means two ~$65k jobs.
That, or he’s got the day off and started drinking already.
“what cost $10,500 in 1987 would cost $195,68.64 in 2009”
And we can all tell–obviously–that this place was in *exactly* the same condition in 1987. No improvements since then, whatsoever, just required maintenance.
Decimal point. Sorry, doing 4 thing at once. It’s appreciated at twice the rate of inflation, regardless of gentrification.
“moved your decimal pt over a digit”
Comma in the wrong place. And, the 2010 number is available–$20,028.29.
“cant you do brick on the side of dormers, or is that difficult?”
I think you’d want to use a brick laminate type of product–could be real brick, trimmed down or something–I’m not suggesting Z-Brick. I think that setting the based for full-sized brick would be tricky-ish (or expensive–nothing much is tricky for the guy who will charge for the expertise).
Baristas make $65,000 a year?
“Bob thinks that “power couple” means two ~$65k jobs.”
“It’s appreciated at twice the rate of inflation”
Dude, it’s “appreciated” at 19x inflation. But that’s not the *house* that was there in 1987, tho the structure is the same. The structure was (almost w/o doubt) basically a liability in 1987–that $10k was the land value.
That said, yes, this place “should” be $275k or something, but then 1-br apartments in Sandburg Village also “should” still be about $100k, but that ain’t reality. If 2br condos near-ish to here are trading over $300k (which they are) how can this not be “worth” more?
must have looked at that number 3x and I still didnt catch the problem. that comma is quite an illusionist.
Eventually every improved home in gentrifying neighborhoods will be worth a million! West town is going to be worth more than Lincoln Park!
“must have looked at that number 3x and I still didnt catch the problem.”
I only caught it bc of your question.
Hey, look at that house in St Chux–the vacant lot sold for $20k in 1987, now they want $800k for the house! WTF! It’s the Pets.com of Chicago Real Estate!!
While I’d rent something this size, I wouldn’t buy it. No room to grow. Just too small.
Yes, we’re still looking.
What do y’all think about this house?
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/5220-N-Latrobe-Ave-60630/home/26778772
Not my preferred location, but looks to be a much better buy at the price than this teeny Stave house. Also, for resale, I’m thinking it must be a desirable location because it’s so close to the El, Metra, and highways.
What I can’t tell from the pictures is whether the rehab was done well. And, I have no idea what they were thinking with the candy cane pergola. I’m of course suspicious of any remodeling done just to sell, especially in this declining market. But, it does meet every one of our requirements. Gonna go check it out Sunday.
REB, how about this one. Short sale.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/2922-W-Belden-Ave-60647/home/13420763
“DZ on March 5th, 2010 at 10:23 am
REB, how about this one. Short sale.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/2922-W-Belden-Ave-60647/home/13420763”
I’ve been wondering about that one. 100% new construction also concerns me. Guess I should check it out. Has anyone seen the interior or know what’s up with this one? If there isn’t anything wrong with it, you’d think it would’ve sold at some point in the last two years, no?
“23 years ago this home cost $10,500.
Today it’s $380,000.
In a traditionally working class, now a hipster working class area.
This is the Californization of Chicago housing prices.”
This is a nonsensical comment. It’s like saying “The tree in the front yard used to be 6 feet tall. Now it’s 20.” May be true, but on its own has very little bearing on the value of the house.
Who cares if it’s a traditionally working class neighborhood? Half of lakeview is “traditionally in the lake.” And “traditionally” we all ride horses to work. So what.
Gentrification in Chicago that follows the El stops makes perfect sense. Bucktown is mostly there, this is the next stop past Western on the Blue Line. So there’s nothing odd about it gentrifying next.
The price does seem a bit steep. Who needs a sound proof recording studio? Logan Square will improve overtime. Here’s a gut rehab in a much more desirable section of Logan Square that just hit the market. It’s at a much higher price point, but it looks well done. Thoughts?
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/2639-N-Fairfield-Ave-60647/home/13450333
Supporting real brick would need a big steel lintel or beam. They could have just put the brick on top of the existing gable and done a full two story (assuming it was sound enough to do so).
The house on Latrobe looks OK, but doesn’t have much ‘bungalow’ character inside (assuming it wasn’t ripped out years before).
“Sheridan B on March 5th, 2010 at 10:37 am
The house on Latrobe looks OK, but doesn’t have much ‘bungalow’ character inside (assuming it wasn’t ripped out years before).”
True, and I’d prefer some vintage details. But, I’m learning that in this price range, I unfortunately can’t have everything I want.
“REB, how about this one. Short sale.”
2922 Belden–
Redfin sale history appears incorrect–the ccrd shows no change in ownership after 2003, and that had a couple on both ends of a QC taking out their co-tenant, and no for consideration transfer since 2000, when they paid $165k.
Outstanding loans are a $417k first (wamu–lp filed by JPM) and a $200k 2d (RBS Citizens–>prob thru Charter One). Looks like they used 4 mortgages to get enough cash to complete construction (all from ’03, with releases of acq. loans, and all 4 released in 07 w/ the $417 mtg).
““cant you do brick on the side of dormers, or is that difficult?””
You could do faux brick, its just a sliver of face brick thats about a half inch brick, but its cheaper to do vinyl or wood siding. plus real brick = structural issues (read harder more intensive labor).
IMO a good color siding and trim would help mask the protrusion.
“Who cares if it’s a traditionally working class neighborhood? Half of lakeview is “traditionally in the lake.” And “traditionally” we all ride horses to work. So what.”
Traditionally, the NW burbs were farms. Why would you pay so much to live where corn used to?
I am the only one who finds it odd that this sold for $10,500, or $80,000 in 1993, and today it’s listed for $380,000?
Yes the neighborhood has changed a bit but come on. Nobody thinks this feels even the least bit bubbly?
It’s already been listed once and then withdrawn. Time will tell if $380k for a dormered orker’s cottage in a hipster neighborhood is priced sustainably.
“You could do faux brick, its just a sliver of face brick thats about a half inch brick”
also that stuff doesnt weather well and vinyl will have virtually no maintenance
“Yes the neighborhood has changed a bit but come on. Nobody thinks this feels even the least bit bubbly?”
You’re conflating things again. I think many of us would say yes the price may be a bit bubbly. That’s very different from saying it should sell for the 1987 price plus inflation.
Looking at CAPS minutes, even in 2004 it was very different from what it is now. It’s by no means perfect now but it was in my opinion unlivable then for someone with alternatives.
“Supporting real brick would need a big steel lintel or beam. They could have just put the brick on top of the existing gable and done a full two story (assuming it was sound enough to do so).”
Even if it was sound, would someone really want to pay the cost for that addition on a 300k house in a iffy area? your talking some serious $$$ to build up with relatively not much ROI for the extra sqft.
The difference anon(tfo) is that the last time the NW suburbs was $10,500 was the 1940’s not 1987.
“Outstanding loans are a $417k first (wamu–lp filed by JPM) and a $200k 2d (RBS Citizens–>prob thru Charter One). Looks like they used 4 mortgages to get enough cash to complete construction (all from ‘03, with releases of acq. loans, and all 4 released in 07 w/ the $417 mtg).”
So there’s something like $600K owed, am I interpreting that correctly? So problem may be that they can’t get bank approval, rather than lack of buying interest at the $400K list price?
HD, neighborhoods change and the demand/desirability side of the equation can have a SIGNIFICANT impact on home values. I have seen this in nearly every major city. Areas that once were sh*tholes have been rediscovered and it is usually neighborhoods on the peripheral of downtown. Decent housing stock with good character and proximity to public transportation/and or easy commuting.
Not saying this place is worth $380k, but all real estate does not appreciate at last sale price plus inflation. It is a lot more complicated than that and the intangibles add real value to a place.
I saw this in Atlanta where some shotgun shacks all of a sudden were discovered by enterprising gay white men in a rough part of town. Over 15 years the area when from being able to buy a house for less than $100k to most selling well above $400k easily due to the improvements in teh neighborhood and desire to live closer in to downtown Atlanta.
Sure, it’s probably listed a bit high. But isn’t it the sale price, not the list price that you can draw conclusions from as far as it’s bubbliness goes? And where does “better neighborhood, new 2nd floor” end and “bubbly” begin?
I think the price is driven by the price of Bucktown cottages, though. There just aren’t that many, and they’re pretty much all over 500k. So what should the discount be to be one el stop further north? Regardless of whether I want one, or would buy one, there is a market for them.
“Yes the neighborhood has changed a bit but come on. Nobody thinks this feels even the least bit bubbly?”
And you really think that when it sold for $10,500, it was in substantially similar condition to what it is now? You really think that the *only* change is in the neighborhood? Come on.
Yes, $380k is probably too much, but a 3br frame, with brick facade, cottage a block over, backing on the el, sold for $350k in July. And there is a frame 3/2, as-is, around the corner listed for $349k. And, there are 2/2 condos nearby listing and selling for $300k+, So, it’s a non-absurd initial ask.
They owe $225,500 (max) on the place, so they aren’t “stuck”.
I never said they’re stuck. I’m just skeptical of a $380k priced cottage west of Western in an area where thing were significantly rougher not too long ago where the land value was $10,500. And today, the area is flush with hipsters who mainly rent $1,000 a month apartments. There’s nothing wrong with a healthy does of skepticism and I think that my skepticism is justified. I know neighborhoods improve and this house has had some work (but not quite sure when the dormer was added), but again, if it sounds too good to be true ($10k to $380k in 23 years) then it usually is. In LP or LV or even uptown I can see that, but Logan?
“So there’s something like $600K owed, am I interpreting that correctly? So problem may be that they can’t get bank approval, rather than lack of buying interest at the $400K list price?”
The 2d lien lender has (likely) already written off their loan–the 1st lender (wamu/jpm) has already filed f/c, so RBS can either (1) pay JPM in full and hope to sell for enough over $417 (+ delinquency + costs) to make it worthwhile, (2) forget about it, or (3) try for a side deal with an off-HUD payment from seller for shortsale approval (which is illegal(-ish), but has been happening). If instant-appraisals peg the place as worth less than JPM’s f/c claim (v.,v. likely), then RBS really has only 2 & 3 as options, and most lenders aren’t messing w/ 3 since it got publicized–just isn’t worth the marginal gain to get the AG scrutiny. So, the 2d lien is pretty much out, and it’s just a question of whether JPM thinks it can get more than $400k – closing expenses + f/c expenses for it after f/c (and, also, whether they want to realize the loss this quarter or next or in 2011).
In short (ha), the real short-sale $$-owed comparison number is somewhere b/t $400k and $450k for that house.
That said, it looks like the owners may have acted as the gc, so that cuts both ways on the construction quality. I’d want to get a *very* thorough insepction.
“In LP or LV or even uptown I can see that, but Logan?”
The bias that comes from living in a studio in Uptown is showing thru. I’d live here 10 days a week before almost anywhere in uptown.
It was at least as extreme in Roscoe Village–we looked at a house 10 years ago that was on the market for $575 (or so) that had sold in 1987 for $26k. And it wasn’t as nice as this place, albeit somewhat larger (still only a 2/2, as far as usable rooms–lots of no walls).
And, it’s not about the $10,500 to $380,000, as a percentage, it’s about the absolute change and the change relative to comparable places. Your ire is better placed on the new condos nearby where the land sold for the same amount in the 80s and now there are 3 $300k condos there, ie $900k of real estate.
I have ire there too but since they’re not the topic of the thread I’ll address that another day. ;0
“And, it’s not about the $10,500 to $380,000, as a percentage, it’s about the absolute change and the change relative to comparable places. Your ire is better placed on the new condos nearby where the land sold for the same amount in the 80s and now there are 3 $300k condos there, ie $900k of real estate.”
“So, the 2d lien is pretty much out,”
I really don’t know anything about this and this is very informative, thank you. Doesn’t the 2nd lien holder have any veto power over a sale? Or is it that to exercise its veto power it would have to buy out the first lender? Otherwise I’d think the 2nd would hold out and argue for a pro-rata share.
“since they’re not the topic of the thread ”
1) When has that ever stopped anyone?
2) If those 2/2s were seling for $200k, do you really think they’d still ask for $380k for this? I bet not, if they actually want to sell (which, based on facts I’ve found, it would appear they are serious about).
“Doesn’t the 2nd lien holder have any veto power over a sale?”
Yes, they do have to agree to cooperate in a short sale, b/c the lien is valid until released, paid off or foreclosed out.
“Otherwise I’d think the 2nd would hold out and argue for a pro-rata share.”
They’ll never get pro rata. The most they should (if everyone is acting completely rationally, not that they ever do) be able to extract from the 1st lender the cost of pursuing the foreclosure + time-value of the short sale proceed (less the cost of the f/c) minus something (to make the 1st lien holder better off for giving the junior something).
This is b/c (using this one as an example), if JPM goes thru w/ the f/c, then RBS gets exactly $0 (unless they payoff JPM, then they’d get the property, which I’m *sure* they don’t want). So, for RBS to get $1 from a short sale, they have to make JPM believe JPM’ll net more $$ from the short sale after buying off RBS than they would by getting the REO and wiping out RBS. How that transpires will depend on the asset managers for both banks and how they get along and how they are doing on the other distressed props under their control. If one (or both) of them is a prick, then it’ll never get done, and RBS will get wiped out.
I may be wrong, but I bet most of the really drawn out short sale approvals involve a 2d lien holder and a bad relationship b/t asset managers.
I see. The 2nd lien holder loses all rights in foreclosure unless it is willing to buy the place. That’s the part I wasn’t getting. Maybe that’s obvious but it wasn’t to me. Thanks.
The 2nd lien holder can still sue on the note, just like any other unsecured debt.
Short sales take a long time for any number of reasons and there are a lot of people trying to do short sale fraud so there a lot of eyes looking over the deals.
Right now second lien holders are releasing their mortgages in short sales but they’re requiring to be paid off a couple of grand, usually from the buyer’s pocket and outside of HUD. yet it’s blatantly in violation of RESPA but nobody seems to care. My buddy closed on a place last month and he had to pay the 2nd lien holder $3,000 outside of closing to get the release of lien.
“I see. The 2nd lien holder loses all rights in foreclosure unless it is willing to buy the place. That’s the part I wasn’t getting. Maybe that’s obvious but it wasn’t to me. Thanks.”
“My buddy closed on a place last month and he had to pay the 2nd lien holder $3,000 outside of closing to get the release of lien.”
Did the lender has the sense to draft the release (and discuss everything) as a covenant not to sue on the note, or did they create a paper/email trail of the RESPA violation so there’s evidence for a class action?
I don’t know. I didn’t do the closing. My buddies don’t ask me to
“I don’t know. I didn’t do the closing. My buddies don’t ask me to”
You should find out. That’d be enough $$ to retire.
A day in the life of the neighborhood (borders of California, Milwaukee, Armitage), 6 years ago (to be fair, I picked a more exciting day, although there were a number of these):
Wednesday 3/24/2004
2pm Resident/property owner asked gang-bangers to disperse from his property and was punched in head.
8:00 pm residents note that commercial truck # 839660 chasing rival gang car down Bingham at high speed
8:30p six-gun shots fired on Bingham/Stave 2106 Bingham. By rival gangs
“A day in the life of the neighborhood (borders of California, Milwaukee, Armitage), 6 years ago (to be fair, I picked a more exciting day, although there were a number of these):”
Still better than ’87, when you would ahve had Groove around causing trouble.
Bob: I fail to see how using a location as a handle, on a real estate based site, immediately qualifies me as a tool. However consistently ragging on every single property, and never once acknowledging any salient points that could cause a property to appreciate, definitely helps lend credence to that label for you.
HD in this case took it to an extreme with this property, and is why I thought HD was being a bit disingenuous to be funny. I do think the area has significantly changed in over 20 years. The *entire* city has changed in those 20 years. I wouldn’t be living in Wicker Park 20 years ago – you may not have been living where you are at 20 years ago either. Specifically in cities prices change, and I do agree with most of the motivators that you & HD put forth (namely job creation / wage levels / inflation) – but you are out of it on this one. Would you now argue the opposite – that Detroit’s values are low because 20 years ago they were much higher?
You are exceedingly bearish, and point out all reasons why you are. However you sound shrill; you do not acknowledge any positive forces that could exist.
For listing at 380k, west of western, I doubt they’ll close there. But to someone who was considering paying 300-350k along Western for a condo, why not move two blocks west and get a house?
Yes this house at $350k is a ‘deal’ compared to the condos at $350k a few blocks to the east, but that’s all relative. I admit there are positive factors, I know the neighborhood has changed a great deal since 1987, and the house has been updated, with possibly an addition. Regardless of what I think, this house is on it’s second listing and time will tell what the market thinks this is worth tomorrow.
“Regardless of what I think, this house is on it’s second listing and time will tell what the market thinks this is worth tomorrow.”
And, regardless of what you think, someone will pay more for it than you would (or I would, for that mater–I have no use for a 2br house or a recording studio). And the sellers will come out with $$ for their next house, tho maybe not net of their total investment.
“However consistently ragging on every single property, and never once acknowledging any salient points that could cause a property to appreciate, ”
Exactly why you just don’t get it. Your reading comprehension, in addition to your opinions of RE valuations, is consistently off.
“Still better than ‘87, when you would ahve had Groove around causing trouble”
good times in that area 🙂
ordered my first pitcher of beer at congress pizza (under aged too).
Margies candies always the best
Many Graff war fights on milwaukee that spilled into the street all the way down to white castle.
they had a great salsa night club right next to osco (its now a cowboy mexican banda/ranchero club now)
Logan Square is in a really interesting place right now. I see a lot of people buying SFH shitholes, gutting them, putting dark hardwood floors and commericial applicances, listing them and having an offer done in week.
i.e.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/2200-N-Rockwell-St-60647/home/21870328
And there are more than a few examples. Easy money if you know what you are doing.
And this is going to keep bring in the new wave power couples looking to get a conforming loan ,a low interet rate who want low taxes and to be close to the loop. Add in the new trendy restaurants and bars and you really got something. This will increase property values in LS and get rid of all the eye sores as people suck them up and spit them rehabbed. You help fix a neighborhood and get rich. Capitalism at its finest (assuming you don’t cut corners and you rebab the places properly). Much better than all the evil shit people did to get rich off condos.
Has anyone mentioned interest rates at all in this 1987 example? At the end of the day 90% of people don’t really care what the house costs, they care what their monthly nut will be. Interest rates in 1987 were ~10% for a 30-year FRM.
“Yes this house at $350k is a ‘deal’ compared to the condos at $350k a few blocks to the east, but that’s all relative. I admit there are positive factors, I know the neighborhood has changed a great deal since 1987, and the house has been updated, with possibly an addition. Regardless of what I think, this house is on it’s second listing and time will tell what the market thinks this is worth tomorrow.”
“Has anyone mentioned interest rates at all in this 1987 example?”
Dude, it was $10k. an $8,000 mortgage is *nothing* at even credit card rates–at 29.9%, it would be under $200/month. At 10%, it’s $70. The interest rate difference had nothing to do with a house in Chicago selling for $10,500 in 1987.
However, looking at the record, something funny was going on, b/c there’s a 1989 deed (dated in ’87) from a Polish couple to two guys–one of whom QC’d his interest to the other in 1987, just before an agreement among all 4 was rec’d. And one of the guys got $90k in financing on it within 4 months of recording the ’89 deed. And he sold it in ’93 for less than the face amount of the 2 mortgages.
So, i think either the $10,500 was a non-market transaction, or it’s a CCRD typo, dropping a zero (happens A LOT), and it was actually $105,000. Either way, treat the 93 price as real, at $80k = $120k today.
Inventory is artificially low due to shadow inventory.
Shadow inventory properties of 18 months or more w/out a payment is unfortunately very common.
It’s not what you see, it’s what you don’t see that freaks me out.
Yes there’s demand, probably quite a few fence sitters. Low interest rates, ‘deals’ compared to ’06, stable jobs in some markets.
Yet, it’s the untold numbers of properties in mortgage purgatory that make buying one of these properties today dangerous.
1 in every 14 mortgages in the Chicago area is DQ. That’s like on house on every block in the entire Chicago area is 60 days or more late on their mortgage.
And I’m not talking about the south or west sides, which have already had their large dq’s; these are current non-foreclosed dq’s.
Don’t think that property won’t return to the market and affect prices everywhere in a downwards manner.
“Sharp increase in Illinois mortgage delinquencies
Published on February 16, 2010 10:45 AM
By Mary Ellen Podmolik | Homeowners in the Chicago area are falling delinquent on their mortgages at a faster rate than those for Illinois as a whole and for the nation, a trend that could dampen hope for a local housing recovery.
In the Chicago area, 7.71 percent of mortgages were 60 days or more delinquent in the last three months of 2009, compared with a delinquency rate of 4.57 percent in 2008’s final quarter, credit-reporting firm TransUnion said Tuesday. ”
http://www.chicagobreakingbusiness.com/2010/02/sharp-increase-in-illinois-mortgage-delinquencies.html
“#B on March 5th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
Has anyone mentioned interest rates at all in this 1987 example? At the end of the day 90% of people don’t really care what the house costs, they care what their monthly nut will be. Interest rates in 1987 were ~10% for a 30-year FRM.
“Yes this house at $350k is a ‘deal’ compared to the condos at $350k a few blocks to the east, but that’s all relative. I admit there are positive factors, I know the neighborhood has changed a great deal since 1987, and the house has been updated, with possibly an addition. Regardless of what I think, this house is on it’s second listing and time will tell what the market thinks this is worth tomorrow.””
Sorry, that’s like 1 out of 14 mortgages is DQ; it’s like one house on every other block or so being behind on their mortgage.
Sorry – I meant interest rates as a whole when looking at sales prior to when rates bottomed out. For instance if you were going to take 1987 sales as as a whole and compare them to 2010 sales and you’re only taking inflation into account you are missing a fairly significant variable in your comparison.
“Dude, it was $10k. an $8,000 mortgage is *nothing* at even credit card rates–at 29.9%, it would be under $200/month. At 10%, it’s $70. The interest rate difference had nothing to do with a house in Chicago selling for $10,500 in 1987.”
“B on March 5th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
Logan Square is in a really interesting place right now. I see a lot of people buying SFH shitholes, gutting them, putting dark hardwood floors and commericial applicances, listing them and having an offer done in week.
i.e.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/2200-N-Rockwell-St-60647/home/21870328
And there are more than a few examples. Easy money if you know what you are doing. ”
Whoever’s buying it (2200 N. Rockwell) really has no clue about that area. The huge apartment building on the corner, just across the street is all Section 8/subsidized housing. The grammar school just doors to the north is actually pretty darned good (Goethe) for a CPS, but there’s still trouble with gangbangers in the playground after hours and so on. That’s simply not a desirable block, lots of traffic shortcutting down to Milwaukee. It’s as laughable as the Lumeniferous Homes on 1800 N. California.
That little piece of Stave is still way too sketchy for my tastes as well. Check the ICAM and Everyblock pages, and you can see that generally, the area from Fullerton to Armitage, Western to Milwaukee, has a long way to go.
“…really has no clue about that area.”
I don’t think a lot of people understand Logan Square. All they see is a short commute to the city and places like Revolution Brewing featured in the Red Eye and Time-Out and that a single family home is “affordable”.
Here is another example.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/2639-N-Fairfield-Ave-60647/home/13450333
A little birdie told me this place has gotten at least 5 offers so far.
So there is a lot of pent-up demand but all these potential buyers are looking for something similiar which is somewhat specific.
Not nice to be so close to the highway, but that’s a much better location than the Rockwell or Stave places
Actually, the 2639 Fairfield place, if you do a walkaround with Google Streetview, has some funky stuff around it, similar to the Rockwell place. (ie, a grammar school and subsidized housing.) Brentano Math and Science Academy just across Schubert. The two small units at the corner are CHA Scattered site housing, although I don’t think they’ve been problematic. The big apartment building on the corner has always been kinda run-down.
I will give 2639 Fairfield a lot of credit for pricing that’s pretty realistic, compared to say this poor guy, who’s never gonna get $700k:
http://www.trulia.com/property/1058766571-2501-N-Fairfield-Ave-Chicago-IL-60647
It’s been on the market all winter.
And, oh, if I was younger and more time and energy than common sense, I’d snatch this up, gut and rehab it, and have an owner occupied rental:
http://www.trulia.com/property/3004158682-2164-N-Maplewood-Ave-Chicago-IL-60647
There’s a lack of turnkey SFH along the blue line at reasonable and affordable prices. There are a lot of people eager to buy a home so it’s no surprise that anything new (or rehabbed) for less than $500,000 is going to get ‘snapped’ up, especially considering the alternative is $350k condos and $500k townhomes that languish on the market. But if you think there are deals today there will be even better deals tomorrow.
“And, oh, if I was younger and more time and energy than common sense, I’d snatch this up, gut and rehab it, and have an owner occupied rental:”
For that price for that large of a lot I think that is really is a good deal. If I had more cash I would buy it, bulldoze it, and either build or sit on it to the next real estate boom 15 years from now.
“For that price for that large of a lot I think that is really is a good deal. ”
That will sell in a bidding war this week. $62k for a double lot in that area is a no-brainer for the land bankers–those nearby cottages selling for $450k+ are imputing a *current* value of $200k+ for 25×125 lots and that is 50×140. Were it on my block, I’d buy it, level it, build a fence and use it as a detached yard.
Re the two Fairfield places, there is a halfway home on the NW corner of Logan and California (may be part of what logansquarean is referring to). That would give me pause on the 2637 house, although I have not heard of any issues with the halfway home.
The 2501 area is decent (we talked about the house before), Fairfield as well as the other side streets around there. If you could sort out a school option (there is a walkable catholic school), it’s a viable place for a family. Many families with kids in that area and a pretty friendly neighborhood. There are some run down rentals, which isn’t a knock on the tenants in those buildings.
Both the Fairfield places are better than the Stave location.
I saw the Fairfield house yesterday. Already three offers. Realtor bought it himself and acted as his own general contractor. He did a decent job. Good choice of colors and finishes, with minor problems such as really scratched fridge and bath mirror hung so high that you’d need to be six feet tall to use it.
I spend a fair amount of time in the immediate vicinity. I’ve never had any safety problems. Other than a bit of a long walk to the El, I think it’s a great block and would happily live there.
“He did a decent job.”
Bit of an understatement (at least from his profit perspective) as 2639 Fairfield seems to be on track to go well over list.
my sister-in-law just moved out of her place on washtenaw, right behind this. looks like a nice area. until the gang bangers drove by and opened fire one night. not sure i’d live here, personally.