We Still Love This Terrace, Especially After a $456K Reduction: 444 W. Belmont in Lakeview
We first chattered about this 2-bedroom penthouse unit with a large roof top terrace at 444 W. Belmont in Lakeview in August 2008.
See our prior chatter and pictures here.
It’s worth checking out the prior chatter.
At the time, everyone who posted thought it was overpriced at $825,000. Some of you thought it wouldn’t sell for more than $600k.
One of you thought it would be back on Crib Chatter months later for much less. Bob thought it would go back to the bank (and was going to short the stock of the bank with the loans).
Homedelete mused that it would ultimately sell below the 2000 price of $383,000 (which was then disputed by others.)
Just over two years later, it is indeed bank owned (gold star to Bob) and it is also listed for under the 2000 purchase price (double gold star to Homedelete.)
The building was constructed in 1928 and the unit has vintage features from that era including a barrel vaulted ceiling.
The rooftop terrace measures 23×29 and has lake and city views. The outdoor grill will stay with the unit.
The kitchen and baths are intact but as you can see in this picture, compared with the August 2008 listing, the shiny Viking stove has been replaced with a white model. There is a family room attached to the kitchen.
I’ve been informed that there are some light fixtures missing and some cosmetic touchups to a wall will need to be done due to recent tuck pointing. The roof was also, apparently, checked recently.
I’ve also been informed by the agent that all assessments are paid and there are no back taxes, liens or assessments outstanding. Unlike a short sale, the closing can be done quickly- like a “normal” closing.
There is a washer/dryer in the unit and central air but no parking.
In 2008, no one believed (except Homedelete) thought it would sell below the 2000 purchase price.
Now that it will, does that mean this is now a deal?
Parker Pearson at Pearson Realty Group has the listing. See more pictures here.
Or see it in person at the Open House this Saturday, November 6 at 12-2 PM.
Unit #7B: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1800 square feet
- Sold in July 2000 for $383,000
- Was listed in August 2008 for $825,000 (leased parking nearby)
- Reduced several times
- Delisted in April 2009
- Lis pendens foreclosure filed in June 2009
- Currently bank owned and listed for $369,000
- Assessments of $509 a month
- Taxes of $6,378
- Central air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- No parking
- Deck: 23×29
- Bedroom #1: 11×19
- Bedroom #2: 16×12
“Was listed in August 2008 for $825,000 (leased parking nearby)”
Bwahahahahahahahahah!!!….let me catch my breath…
Bwhahahahahahaha!!
I still don’t like this for 370k + 1k a month in T&A
wtf is up with that kitchen layout
rip out that ugly ass fireplace
is the rooftop shared or private?
also you will desperately need a damn parking space in this location
Thanks for the shout-out Sabrina.
“t is also listed for under the 2000 purchase price (double gold star to Homedelete.)”
He also said it would sell below 2000 price “at the bottom”, so … is this the bottom?
I think the two biggest negatives about this property are the lack of parking and busy street. If it had one or the other, it would be well priced. Without either one, however, I don’t know if it will sell much above 300k
If the so-called nearby rental parking is reasonably likely to remain available, and the deck is private, this strikes me as a pretty sweet deal.
Just me or do those assessments seem pretty high?
It’s might be the bottom…then again, it might not be. This as a comp in the CS will set a new low; and time will tell when this double dip bottoms out; and I’m still up in the air whether or not there will be a triple dip after that. I’m allow to change my mind if the original facts leading to my original conclusion have changed, right?
“#anon (tfo) on November 5th, 2010 at 10:12 am
“t is also listed for under the 2000 purchase price (double gold star to Homedelete.)”
He also said it would sell below 2000 price “at the bottom”, so … is this the bottom?”
The funny thing is the Fed and our government assumed if they could stabilize house prices and get them to rise confidence would all be restored and people would rush back in to re-inflate the RE asset bubble and you’d have a lot of the effects of the boom (extra consumer spending from asset price appreciation). LMAO! How naive and stupid of our policy makers.
HD: “I’m allow to change my mind if the original facts leading to my original conclusion have changed, right?”
Only if you don’t mind being compared unfavorably to John Kerry.
B: “Just me or do those assessments seem pretty high?”
Based on prior thread and the brick/roof work mentioned in this post, some of it may be quasi-special/reserve building.
Actually I think I’d like that kitchen layout. The fridge isn’t next to the oven / stove (+), plenty of counterspace on either side of sink for prep & staging (+), and an island for display/resting/catch all. Only issue is standing in front of the range you are in a doorway, but not sure if that’s much of an issue w/o toddlers flying around.
“How naive and stupid of our policy makers”
would you expect anything less?
open your oven, watch your dog/toddler/wife trip and fall into the oven! Oh noes!
nice call, hd.
impressive.
Clio,
Slight change in topic … but your thoughts on your neighbor’s selling price.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/CHICAGO/159-E-WALTON-St-60611/unit-25A/home/25672353
This place probably would have sold had it been listed at a reasonable price to begin with. The thing many sellers don’t get is you can’t “test” the market and hope someone is going to over pay. Asking too much and lowering the price gradually never seems to work. Price it right and aggressively the first time and the place sells.
The property looks like nice space, but seems a little “crusty” around the edges and could probably use a little TLC imho.
Looks like a decent deal imho space wise compared to newer units in the area.
This is an INCREDIBLY GOOD DEAL at this price. I love this place. And a huge rooftop terrace as well?
How I wish I could afford over $300K but I am one person, one income.
For this price, a person ought to be way happy to replace that ugly white gas stove with a nice induction cooktop and convection oven. I
Sure,it might not be the bottom because I sense this ECONOMY has not yet bottomed. But it is still a very good deal relative to rents in that area.
“But it is still a very good deal relative to rents in that area.”
Do we think a comp rents for $2500? I find it hard to imagine more than that.
If 2500, with the taxes and assessments, it’s not even a 5 cap at the ask, so I question whether this is a “very good” deal. It’s okay, but hardly a steal, unless I’m underestimating rent comp.
“Bob thought it would go back to the bank”
Thank you, thank you. But I must admit that I am no David Einhorn–this one was an easy call. Shorting the bank stocks did not work out so well for me however because our government intervened and decided they liked bankers better than speculators (and everyone else).
Its like the Vetro non-top floor “penthouse” unit currently for sale, unit 3001, listed for 698.5k. Last sale was 546k on 8/26/2009. And it appears obvious they need to sell because they’re listing it within two years of owning it = no capital gains tax exemption from sale.
Assuming the deck really belongs to the unit, not the building (did we ever get confirmation?), it’s possible you could rent it for more, 2700-2800.
Without getting into the ‘is this the bottom?’ debate that pervades every thread……..
Fairly obvious comp is 5a.
Closed in January for $404.5k (with a year’s parking paid), it’s in much better condition than this and a decent example of what this could be when rehab’ed properly (although 5a is not perfect).
I like the building and although I would not want to be looking for a space around here to park, I could see a non car owner being fine with the 800 yard walk to the purple line.
My guess is someone with an appetite for self-rehab pays $330k to live in it. As a re-developer I’d probably only pay $275k and be looking at a budget of $30-40k to get it in tip-top shape.
“Assuming the deck really belongs to the unit, not the building (did we ever get confirmation?), it’s possible you could rent it for more, 2700-2800.”
Okay, so nudging into a decent deal. I’d still call it, at best, well priced, and that assumes no deferred maintenance in the association and decent reserves. Plus the work needed on the unit being well under $5k.
Oh and the terrace is communal, it was listed as part of the 5a sale
“I like the building and although I would not want to be looking for a space around here to park, I could see a non car owner being fine with the 800 yard walk to the purple line.”
If you’re looking to get downtown from here, just take the 135 bus, which is about a block away and goes express to Wacker/Columbus.
Good call for Bob & HD. But HD’s prediction hasn’t come true yet. It’s listed below the 2000 price, but I bet this goes for more than ask (again, assuming the deck isn’t shared). 3A & 5A both went for over 400 (same listing agent) in the last year and a half. If there are really only cosmetic touch-ups, gotta see this one with the deck around there, too.
“Oh and the terrace is communal, it was listed as part of the 5a sale”
I take that back, then.
Shame the fireplace isn’t functional. Also whats up with the white cabinets in the bulter’s and the cherry in the kitchen? And that white stove sticks out like a sore thumb! But… I think it’s beautiful and in a great location. No parking sucks, but if the rental isn’t far it’s not a problem. This hood has a lot of rental parkers, no big deal IMHO. What kills it though is that the deck is shared… if it were private it would be a great deal.
Yeah the last thing I want to do after using the ghetto Jewel on Broadway & addison is to park two blocks away and haul 10 bags of groceries in 10 degree weather and wind and snow up to my place.
no on site parking SUCKS. Especially here since you probably can’t even put your flashers on for 10 mintues in front of this place because there probably is some jerk already in that spot!
Lots of sketchy rental buildings surround this property
“Lots of sketchy rental buildings surround this property”
“Sketchy” like how? …tolerant of drug dealing? …rat infested? …dens of prostitution? …most section 8? What does sketchy mean in lakefront lakeview?
Sonies, you don’t have to “haul 10 bags of groceries in 10 degree weather.”
Do what the car-less like me do, have the groceries delivered and carried to your door. Cost is about 10% of your order. I shop for the really heavy or big stuff, like cat litter & detergent & sacks of cat food & big quantities of non-perishables once a month, and have it carried to me, and pick up the light-weight stuff on my way home as I need it.
Give your back a break.
Sonies – I’m calling your bluff about the Addison/Broadway Jewel. Far from the “g” word (which is inaccurate as well as offensive), this is one of the better Jewels on the North Side thanks to its diverse lines of merchandise (including organic/health food if that’s your thing), large fresh produce/flowers section, deli, etc. Plus it has that fabulois rooftop garage!
Now granted, it’s not quite as upscale a Treasure Island. But anyone who actually shops there would hardly put it in the “slum” category.
Per the agent on this listing:
The terrace is NOT communal. It is private to the unit.
Units #7a and #7b share the roofdeck (it is split in half- as you can see the fence in one of the pictures.) The building maintains the roof. The two units maintain the deck.
There is a first floor deck that is communal to the entire building.
If you want to see for yourself, go to today’s open house.
Still laughable that anybody ever thought this was worth anything like $800K.
Even more laughable was a former rental in which I once lived, at 625 W Stratford, a five room 2-1 with a sun porch that somebody renovated and put on the market for $725K back in 2006 or thereabouts. I wonder what those places eventually sold for.
We’re headed back to normalcy, where you buy something with a mortgage no more than 2.5X your income, and a reasonable down payment. That makes things very different, especially for expensive properties for which there is a very small pool of buyers.
laura, not sure i agree with the ‘normalcy is a mortgage amount of 2.5x your income’ to me, it totally depends on interest rate…
if someone makes 150k a year. this means by your blanket rule they qualify for a mortage of 375k. If rates are at mortgage if rates are @ say, 7%. That would mean their payment would be about 2,500 a month right? Now if rates are @ 4%, then their monthly payment is about $1,750. (hopefully i did that math right) To me, that makes a big difference in affordability.
I just think mortgage rates need to be integrated into that statement. People making the same salary today as 2006 could actually be able to afford more house. That is, if they can get a good down payment coughed up 🙂 which is the wild card in all of this right now, especially they bought a place like this for 825k! yikes.
Isn’t that an interesting paradox? Low interest rates mean higher prices but that makes it more difficult to save a larger corresponding down payment, which keeps prices down.
homedelete, in an environment with meaningful lending standards, a down payment requirement will keep prices under control somewhat. The reason prices spiraled upwards so wildly in the noughties was because there were NO lending standards. NINJA, IO, DTI ratios of 6:1 or even worse, teaser rates of 1% on adjustables tied to the Libor rate or some other metric equally obscure to the average buyer, stated income, 80/20- anything, absolutely anything, went.
Now that you have to at least verify your income and the DTI must be reasonable, and you have to have a half-decent credit score even for FHA, the buyer pool has shrunk substantially, especially for upper-bracket homes that few qualify to buy.
The problem with the super low interest rates is that no one wants to lend at these rates. This is why you’re hearing of higher-income people with great FICOs and substantial down payments, who cannot get written. It’s not them, it’s the picture as a whole- no one wants to lend for 30 years at these rates.
That’s why I don’t believe we will see really major activity until mortgage rates are at least in the neighborhood of 6%, which, remember, is under the historic average- my mother thought she got a gift when she got 7.25 in 1971, with a 40% down payment and excellent credit rating. That was the prime rate then. At 6% or above, more money will be available, even though the prices will have to go lower, perhaps. Or maybe not, for right now the only buyers are cash buyers, or those buying outrageously overpriced new developments with FHA-backed “builder’s financing”.
This unit when sold will have to pay 20K in back dues at closing to the building association.