Two Car Parking Versus a Rooftop Deck: 708 W. Barry
708 W. Barry in East Lakeview was built in 2005 and appears to have eight units.
Two are currently on the market. One is on the first floor but it has two car parking included. Who gets that in East Lakeview?
The second is on the top floor and has not only a balcony but also a private rooftop deck.
Both are trying to sell in the hard-to-sell price range around $500,000.
Unit #1R: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1200 square feet
- Sold in November 2005 for $454,500
- Currently listed for $489,900 which includes two parking spaces that are NOT tandem
- Assessments of $149 a month
- Select Properties, Inc. GMAC Re has the listing
Unit #4F: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths
- Sold in September 2005 for $494,000
- Currently listed at $499,900 (parking included)
- Assessments of $190 a month
- @Properties has the listing
Unit #3F is one of the few re-sales so far in the building.
- Sold in July 2005 for $473,000
- Sold in August 2007 for $429,000
Just curious….why is $500,000 a hard-to-sell price range?
There are several reasons it’s a hard price point to move right now:
1. It’s above the $417,000 conforming loan limit so you will have to pay more for your mortgage.
2. It’s expensive! With banks/mortgage companies actually requiring a downpayment, if they even require 10% down, that would be $50,000- which is, in my experience, a lot of money for a 20 or 30-something condo buyer to come up with.
3. The inventory is rising quickly. There are just too many units in this price range so competition is fierce.
We throw out numbers a lot on here, but we’re talking about a half a million dollar property. That used to mean something (but not so much anymore as prices rose during the housing boom.)
The top floor unit would be exactly what I’m looking for, if only it had (i) a small third bedroom/den/office and (ii) a semi-separate dining area/alcove.
I’d say the price is tuff because it’s a two bed: Single professionals or young couples (i.e., not planning on having kids for at least a few years) have endless great options for big, luxury one-bedrooms in mid to upper $300’s (especially in River North, South and West Loop, etc. where such people might be more inclined to live). Couples who plan to have (or already have) a child need a three bedroom; such people (like me) are inclined to live in Lincoln Park or Lakeview East and will pay upwards of $500k. Accordingly, two bedrooms for $500k in Lakeview East, no matter how nice, are neither here nor there.
I live right near this unit and its sad to say but I think three of the units are indeed vacant. There are many units like this in the 500-700 blocks of Briar & Barry.
The location is great but there are ample rentals to choose from as well. Most probably not done as nice as these but you have to question the priorities of these 20 or 30-somethings who aren’t flippers who want to live there and absolutely need to own and have granite counntertops and those cabinets.
2br/ba rentals go for $1500 around here..luxury ones $2k. What is a mortgage+HOA+PMI+property tax+insurance on a 500k property such as this one? I don’t know but I’d bet its a bit higher than 2k/month.
To me, the most telling stat is the sales prices of the one that sold in 2007 — almost 10% below the 2005 sales price.
I’m looking at a condo right now where the owners are desparately trying to recoup their 2005 sales price ($297,000 — lower price range, but that principle is the same). They started marketing it almost a year ago for $349k, and it’s now down to $319k). I still think it’s overpriced. I told my agent that I thought it was worth about $270-280k. The history on this unit tells me I might be right. And it was in an “improving” area of West Town — not quite the same as East Lakeview.
Which all just proves to me that 2005 prices are no guide for resales.
I agree with Michael that 2005 prices cannot be the benchmark. 2003 prices is break-even value with 20% down, agency conforming mortgage. Unless rents go up significantly in the near future, its hard to buy at 2005 prices. Waiting for more blood out on the streets before I get in.
I personally think that 2 parking spaces might be better sell point then a rooftop deck that sees 4 months of usage during the year.
Speaking of the rooftop deck thats a stupid picture of it, it basically reminds people that its non-usable most of the year.
Instead you’d think they’d have the sense to have a picture of it with patio furniture from any season but winter. Or at least if they’re totally against staging to at least have a non-winter picture. To have a picture of a barren deck with snow on it doesn’t do wonders to sell that feature.
Interesting — just got an e-mail from my agent telling me that the CMA she did on the unit I’m looking at priced it at about $280-285k. Regardless of the fact that I said that when we first looked at it, I’m heartened by her willingness to substantially undercut the asking price ($319k). There are good agents out there. Of course, that’s not to say that the sellers will be willing to take that offer…
Michael,
Offer whatever you feel comfortable with. I offered 23% off the listing price on my last purchase (2007) and ended up buying the unit for 20% off the asking price and well below what the seller paid in 2005.
I got this link from yochicago today. I don’t believe that Lincoln Park and surrounding areas are “recession proof”.
http://www.insideonline.com/site/epage/60924_162.htm
Any comments?
God, that’s a terrible headline and a terrible article. The only person who says “recession-proof” is the author and that only in the context of Lincoln Park (supposedly) appealing to “‘recession-proof’ buyers”. The only mention of the market being “recession-proof” is the headline. Nothing in the article supports either naked assertion.
On the plus-side, the quoted realtors are not entirely demented (as many are)–see the realtor who admitted he would be “terrified” if he had to sell right now and the other that said (1) merely good properties are not going to sell as well and (2) builders aren’t buying for teardowns.
You are too kind, anon.
What other conclusion could be drawn from that fine piece of journalism when the “reporter” only asked used home salespeople for their opinions?
Oh yes, about some of those opinions:
Quentin Green of Lincoln Park Homes is quoted about a 1 BR unit at 2144 Lincoln Park West which has been on the market for 60 days with “A year ago it would have sold in two weeks.” It is Mr. Green’s listing (#10D, $215,000) and it has been on the market for 84 days (I doubt the quote is as stale as his memory.) Also, here are the sale dates, unit #s, sale price and market time (days) for all 6 of the 1BR sales in the mls for this building:
6/1/2005 7A $240,000 – 56
6/2/2006 23D $240,000 – 35
7/21/2006 26A $382,000 – 30
11/11/2006 16C $315,000 – 89
10/20/2006 22A $260,000 – 42
5/11/2007 8D $206,000 – 20
Do “two weeks” still contain 14 days?
“Lincoln Square and Lakeview are doing well, according to Don Tomaska, a realtor with Baird and Warner, who specializes in Lincoln Square.” “Its a very strong area…all of the older North Side areas are strong.” He goes on to mention condo sales, so let’s take a look at those:
area 8004 Lincoln Square
year condo sales
2006 491
2007 574 +17%
ytd thru condo sales
1/1 – 3/26/06 75
1/1 – 3/26/07 88 +17%
1/1 – 3/26/08 62 -30%
area 8006 Lake View
year condo sales
2006 2,533
2007 2,331 -8%
ytd thru condo sales
1/1 – 3/26/06 415
1/1 – 3/26/07 359 -13%
1/1 – 3/26/08 287 -20%
2007 indeed had more sales than 2006 in Lincoln Square. However, the YOY totals show that it is down 30% so far this year. The Lake View numbers speak for themselves. I leave it to others to decide on the veracity of his “strong areas” claim.
“As for the state of the Lincoln Park real estate market?…”It’s fine,” said Alex Zupancic, a realtor in Lake View from @properties of the Lincoln Park market. Zupancic bought a house in Lincoln Park in February.” Well, then, let’s take a look at the public records:
A warranty deed (#0803618084) was recorded 2/5/08 granting Alex Zupancic PIN 14-30-404-019 (a two-flat at 2724 N. Marshfield) for $590,000. However, both the mls and deed show the sale date as 8/3/07. There were two mortgages issued 8/3/07 to Mr. Zupancic from Bank of America totaling $531,000 ($472000+59000) which were refinanced on 11/27/07 with the same lender totaling $741,600 ($533850+207750). I wonder if he did extensive work here since only that could possibly account for the increase in value for a property that was originally listed for $679,000 on 2/28/06 and reduced to $624,900 and $599,000 before going under contract to Mr. Zupancic on 2/2/07? I don’t know if he lives here, but this property would bleed red ink as a rental property with that mortgage.
I would like to go on, but I feel so dirty.
But we love it when you talk dirty to us, G…
That article made me laugh out loud several times. Seriously, who do they think they’re kidding?
Well, it is their job to be not-unrelentingly negative. And some exageration (sold in two weeks) is not-unreasonable and to be expected.
And one would hope that Mr. Zupancic’s new 2d mtg is a construction LOC to convert that two flat to a single family (or condos, if he’s completely, rather than partly, nuts). If it isn’t, there is a rebuttable presumption that it’s fraudulent.
We don’t know Mr.Zupancic’s situation- so we can’t say what is going on at the property.
But great info, as usual, G. The article was a lovefest to begin with- so it’s nice to see some actual data for those areas.
I just gotta say that you guys are awesome. Real estate market is not much different from the stock market. People say what they want to believe instead of admitting to the reality that may be vastly different from their wishful thinking. Wishful thinking never made anyone rich… if it did, I’d be retired already.
This unit is ALMOST beautiful.
If the ceilings were exactly 1′ higher, this unit would be absolutely beautiful.
But because they’re not, they seem oppressively low, and completely ruin the place. If I lived there, all I would be able to think about is, Jeez, one more foot.
It really, really bothers me, especially since the place is so attractive otherwise.
Sabrina:
You’re right that we don’t know his situation, but when one refi’s for almost 40% more less than 4 months after closing (and before recording the deed), if it isn’t a construction line, then something is funky.
If it is a construction line, and he can actually get that converted/updated for $210k (likely optimistic, but with the slowdown, who knows), then he’s probably going to do okay, especially if he’s going single family with it. Even tho I wouldn’t pay $1mm+ for a frame house in that exact neighborhood, there are people who would. But hey, no risk, no reward.
Laura, how many feet high do you think the ceiling is? Looks like 9 feet to me, but then again, I don’t have your party-trick talents for these things. 🙂 (Aren’t you the one who can suss the size by looking at pics?)
K:
This one is all about looking at the refrigerator and the cabinet above. I think the cabinet looks like a 24″ cabinet–so an 8’+2 or 3″ ceiling height. I’m sure it isn’t a 36″ cabinet, b/c it isn’t 1/2 as tall as the fridge–could be 30″, tho that still isn’t 9′.
cool! I’ll have to try that in a bar bet sometime. 🙂
Kenworthy, the ceiling feels like 8′ to me. The mantle top is about 5′ from the floor, and there looks like about 3′, maybe 3.5′, from the mantletop to the ceiling.
Even 6″ would have helped.
Coving would definately have helped, and you need more space for that. The ceiling perhaps feels low because the juncture of wall and ceiling seems so abrupt, and because there is no space between the ceiling and the windows. You wouldn’t want to reduce those windows, which are beautiful.
What’s more, the traditional architecture of this place really wants coving for the ceiling.
I live in one of the units that is *not* for sale in this building – I’m honestly unsure of the ceiling height but I’ll measure it tonight and report back.
I will say I’ve never looked up and said “geez, I wish the ceilings were a foot higher…” 🙂
Also, just to fact-check – this building is 100% full – there are no vacant units.
I wonder if the developer still owns a couple units in this building? maybe just an unfortunate flipper.
The floor heights look fairly similar to the vintage greystone next door, which would indicate something in the 9′ range, but maybe they drop the ceiling in new construction to hide the ductwork etc.
With the amount of housing gloom i consume on a daily basis, i’m amazed that anything at all is selling. On the other hand, the people i know who are house-hunting right now seem to have difficulty finding anything they like at a price they’re willing to pay (with many units already priced at a loss based on 2004+ purchase)
Ok – the ceilings are 8.5′ – I just measured – so you guys just about nailed it.
Regarding the building – its a great place – 100% sold – we bought the last unit from the developer coming up on two years ago.
There are no flippers involved in the two current listings – just two different resident/owners who have reasons to move on.