Trying To Get 65% More Just 2 Years Later In Lincoln Park: 955 W. Webster
This 3-bedroom single floor unit at 955 W. Webster in Lincoln Park came on the market in August 2012.
It had previously been rehabbed in 2006 by developer Melrose Partners.
The 4 unit building was updated with upscale finishes. This unit has extensive millwork, including crown molding, and exposed brick.
There are Waterwork baths and the kitchen has white cabinets, granite counter tops and Wolf, SubZero and Miele appliances.
The unit has central air, washer/dryer in the unit and covered parking.
It sold in January 2010 for $500,000.
It has come back on the market at a 65% premium- at $828,850.
At 2000 square feet, that is $414 per square foot.
Will the seller get the premium on this property?
Chaz Walters at Coldwell Banker has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #2: 3 bedrooms, 3 baths, 2000 square feet
- Sold in January 2010 for $500,000
- Originally listed in August 2012 for $829,000
- Reduced
- Currently listed at $828,850
- Assessments of $165 a month
- Taxes of $8806
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Covered parking included
- Bedroom #1: 15×13
- Bedroom #2: 12×10
- Bedroom #3: 15×10
wth? 829k and you get that small of a living/dinning combo?
who cares about this property its blah and small
we should be chatting about this one instead;
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/411-W-Ontario-St-60654/unit-710/home/14103057
or chat about this one and muimiu walking to water tower in 5 minutes from here
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1211-S-Prairie-Ave-60605/unit-1101/home/39571064
Price reduction of less than one month’s assessment.
Will the next reduction be “One Month Assessment Credit at Close”?
I don’t think that 2010 sale is accurate. Redfin has the wrong PIN. Don’t want to dig into the details on this one but it might still be owned by a developed. #3 sold for $720k a few months ago. The list price seems laughable regardless.
Groove, that place is already sold. I tried putting in a bid for it but it was off the market very fast.
Prior “sale” appears to have been in connection with wind-down/BK of Melrose.
829K condo with bedrooms overlooking the el (or the neighbors brick wall can’t tell) and across the street from the extremely loud DePaul bars McGees and State? Maybe I’m missing something.
$650k – $725k or so should make it happen. I sure wouldn’t, but someone will.
For that price, I’d rather have bought this place: http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/2717-N-Lehmann-Ct-60614/unit-4D/home/13368113
” Inquisitive (October 2, 2012, 11:44 am)
Groove, that place is already sold. I tried putting in a bid for it but it was off the market very fast.”
Sorry i need to start paying attention to the sale pending wording on that site. Details are not my bag baby.
not as good as the sold one but still better than this property on webster
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/520-W-Huron-St-60654/unit-319/home/12767578
more sq ft and USEABLE sqft here in this LP place
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1300-W-Altgeld-St-60614/unit-132/home/13360961
Groove, are you trying to fill in for HD who is no longer constantly posting suburban listings? At least yours are more interesting. 😉
“I don’t think that 2010 sale is accurate. Redfin has the wrong PIN.”
I looked up the correct PIN. The prior sales price in the post is the correct price (as far as the public records go.) Remember, Redfin is only accurate about 80% of the time.
“who cares about this property its blah and small
we should be chatting about this one instead;”
Properties that overlook expressways? (notice how all the curtains are closed in all the pictures).
Sure. I’ll post on it on Thursday.
The living room/dining room/kitchen combo is pitifully small. I don’t like having these rooms together in the first place, but if they have to be, at least make it roomy. The price for this unit is a joke. I’d say it’s worth less than half the asking price.
I think that this is actually unit #1, but it’s just listed incorrectly as unit #2, which would presumably be a mistake based on the assumption that since it’s on the 2nd floor above the retail space, the unit is #2.
What justifies my reasoning on this is that ALL previous listings for unit #2 have listed it as a 2 bed, 2 bath unit. The only previous listing for a 3 bed 3 bath unit in this building was for unit #1 which sold back in 2007 for 829k. Also, it says this unit is on the 2nd floor, which is the floor level that unit #1 was listed to be on back when it sold in 2007. Unit #2, in past listings has always been listed as being on the 3rd floor.
So this appears to me as simply a mistake in listing the unit number.
So basically they’re asking the same price they paid for it in 2007, if my detective work here is correct.
And Sabrina, the $500k sale price does appear to have been for the “true” unit #2 in 2010. But this, now that I look into it more, HAS to be unit #1, listed incorrectly as unit #2. The true #2 was a smaller unit, however.
“The true #2 was a smaller unit, however.”
Nope. Building has 3 condo units. Each one is a full floor.
“But this, now that I look into it more, HAS to be unit #1, listed incorrectly as unit #2. ”
Seriously doubt it. The #2 unit was sold in 2010 by/on behalf of the developer to an investor llc. Developer entity was wound down and/or filed BK in ’09 thru ’11. Makes sense to try to cash out the investment now. Chaz doesn’t have a reputation for being sloppy like that, does he? It’s not like it was listed and forgotten–they lowered the price to get it to pop, if they had teh unit wrong, they’d have fixed it, no?
Yes, it’s a four story building…. the first floor is retail, and then there are three condo units above it. I’ll email Chad and find out for sure and let you all know!
Chaz, not Chad, sorry typo
ALSO, if you go to the Melrose Partners website (http://www.melrosepartners.com/webster/index.html), it says that “Equally beautiful residences with identical layouts and finishes to 955 W. Webster are now being created at 1015 W. Webster.” So then you click the link to view the floorplans at 1015 Webster and it looks like this: (http://melrosepartners.com/1015webster/floorplans.html)
Ground Floor – retail space
Second Floor – 3 bedroom 3 bath
Third Floor and Fourth Floor – idental layouts, 2 bedroom 2 bath. Yes they are a full floor, but are smaller because of the rear stairway area that takes up some space.
So yes, now I’m absolutely convinced that this is actually unit #1, or maybe it’s now CALLED unit #2, but it was originally sold as unit #1, on the 2nd floor above the retail space.
“Properties that overlook expressways? (notice how all the curtains are closed in all the pictures).”
yep IMO its still better than this shrinky dink of a place on webster which really is a slow moving main street
“Inquisitive (October 2, 2012, 11:44 am)
Groove, that place is already sold. I tried putting in a bid for it but it was off the market very fast.”
Are you talking about the place on Ontario? If so – when did you try and bid on it?
I heard back from Chaz. This definitely used to be unit #1. It was sold as unit #1, but then the building’s unit numbering system changed, so that the ground floor/retail became unit #1, then the three condo units above it were given numbers #2 – 4 consecutively. So that explains everything!
Eileen, that still doesn’t explain how the unit above is “smaller”. Does the building shrink as it goes up? It sure doesn’t look to. Seems the middle condo of the same size (although perhaps magically missing a bedroom and bath) sold for an entire $329k less. Still doesn’t help the value of this place!
Benjamon9…. I had posted a comment previous to yours that explains why the units above are smaller, but it was awaiting moderation because there was a link in the comment. Scroll up to the comment I posted on October 3, 2012, 9:48 am and you will understand that, yes, the top two units are smaller than the first unit.
Eileen, I did see that and now see the above units are smaller but is the little bit of extra space really worth $329k especially when you are closer to the retail portion? With the difference in price between this unit and the one above it you could pretty much buy a whole extra 2/2.
Benjamon – I’m not really sure where you’re coming up with 829k, because the top floor 2 bed/2 bath unit just sold this year for 720k. I’m not saying I think it’s worth the 829k that they’re asking, but I’m just saying I am not quite sure what numbers you’re pulling.
If you’re comparing it to the OLD #2 (now unit #3, a 2 bed 2 bath, same floorplan as the top floor that just sold for 720k) that sold for 500k in 2010, well, we don’t know anything about that scenario or what condition the property was in when it was purchased, was it even finished, etc. It didn’t sell off the MLS, it was a private transaction, so we can only make guesses as to what the final agreement included. It also transferred ownership by a special warranty deed, which differs from a warranty deed and may carry with it other risks/stipulations. Perhaps an attorney in the crowd can chime in with the possible explanation for that.