What’s That House REALLY Worth Anyway? 3931 N. Hermitage
What would you pay to live in a single family home in North Center?
Now that the housing market has stalled, that question is getting asked by more and more homebuyers.
Take this home at 3931 N. Hermitage that is under a short sale. The price has been cut by $90,000 and still there are no takers.
Is it still overpriced?
3931 N. Hermitage: 3 bedrooms, 3 baths, 2000 square feet, 2 car garage
- Sold in June 2006 for $543,000
- Sold in September 2006 for $750,000
- Was listed for $689,000 – short sale
- Now listed for $599,000– still a short sale
- Exit Realty has the listing
The house has its own website.
3931 N. Hermitage [website]
I really think that the housing market is so goofy right now, it is very difficult to answer that question. Right now, I only want to buy if it is cheaper than rent.
The crazy thing is, that in June ’06, $543k was pretty much the tear down value.
It looks tiny, tiny–I can’t figure out the layout at all. And having the living room entirely used as an office doesn’t help anything.
It must have been a rehab in 2006 for it to go up $210K in 3 months, unless there was some good old fashion mortgage fraud. In 2006 couldn’t you have gotten new construction homes (4000sq ft) in this area for around 700k? Why would someone buy 2000sq feet for 750k ($375/sq ft). Looks strange to me. Mabey “G” can do some investiagtive work and let us know about the mortgages and possible 100% financing that was probably used.
anon, you are correct. The $543K sale in 6/06 was an ‘as is’ REO purchased from Chase. The flipper was rescued by the current seller on 8/30/06 for $750K. That transaction was not in the mls as a listing or sale. The timeframe between sales might indicate the amount of work done to warrant the new sale price. The current owner borrowed $712,500 at the time of purchase, refi’d the same amount on 1/26/07, and locked in a bagholder known as WAMU with a refi for $728,200 on 7/16/07.
I have a feeling that WAMU might not be too keen on a short sale anywhere near the current “asking” price considering the loan amount from not-so-long ago, especially with the (albeit small) cash-out. It sure does underscore their inability to accurately assess risk, doesn’t it?
G, you are the man, cracks me up.
Now listed for $599,000- still a short sale
—
Yes, still over priced. I wrote on my blog that Freddie Mac now wants 97%+ LTV to conform. My friend that is a mortgage brkr cannot find anything greater than 95% LTV. That house (like many others) is not sellable. At 5% down, whoever wants to buy this need to have $30,000 CASH. There are not to many people that do not have a house already that can pee away 30g’s AND make that mortgage note.
Besides, why live in Chicago? Why put up with Daley , the CTA, Stroger, the crime, the bad public schools, etc etc etc ad nauseam if you really don’t have to.
For $600,000 you can have a mansion in a good burb with top ranked schools that you don’t have to have clout to get into. You pay for it with your tax money. Imagine that!
I’m not the biggest fan of new construction (too big, ugly, no character, ruinous to the urban fabric, etc etc), but old houses like this are why new construction is so appealing. blecch.
“For $600,000 you can have a mansion in a good burb with top ranked schools”
Please show me one–even name the suburb–that comes with a 15 minute evening drive home from the loop. I’ll even allow 30 minutes, but central loop to garage, not just expressway time.
If you buy a mansion in the suburbs, you have to live in the suburbs. Comparing the cost of land in St. Charles to that of land in North Center is a futile exercise.
And it’s also really tiresome and is not the purpose of this website.
“Comparing the cost of land in St. Charles to that of land in North Center is a futile exercise.”
Well, SITC appears to think that buildable lots in the most desireable suburban school districts (i.e., Naper, Hinsdale, New Trier, Deerfield/HP, Northbrook, Libertyville) are FREE (after considering the replacement cost of the mansion built on it). While pointing that out may not be the point of this site, I sure want to know about it if it’s true.
Good point – that would be an interesting topic if it were indeed true. Incidentally, the value of that land to me IS free.
In any case, we can probably all agree that suburban real estate is a totally different beast. And Sabrina, I didn’t mean to define your blog for you but the lack of suburban properties is one of the things I enjoy.
North Center seems absurdly overpriced. What does that area have going for it that West Rogers Park does not?
I wouldn’t live in this house, period. Rather than drop 200,000 clams or more on rehabbing, I’d have bought it only as a teardown, and would have gotten a demo permit the day I closed.
I mean, I can’t help but compare this little crudbox with the gorgeous classical home in West Ridge you featured yesterday. West Rogers Park is also a much, much prettier neighborhood than North Center.
This is a fugly house. Nice rehab, though lacking in character-just an ugly, non-architectural old frame house that has been very modernized.
So I can’t really estimate it’s worth, since I don’t see why anyone would really want it.
It’s a great neighborhood, much more ‘livable’ than West Rogers Park for a variety of reasons (namely, accessibility to anything other than your own home and a variety of great Indian food). This house, while comfortable, is still overpriced at $600K, but getting closer to an appropriate value. The value will also depend on the lot size and zoning, which isn’t given, since it’s a potential teardown if the zoning would allow 3+ units.
Looks like I stirred up a nest here with the burb v. shcity argument. I know this blog is focused on the trendy urban condo market. I promise not to derail that other than defending myself.
There is a big wide world outside the corrupt crime ridden borders of this city. They have these things that are called “trains”. There are infact lots of them and they are more than willing to exchange your $$ for passage to the city so you can get to work (bec everyone knows that there are no jobs outside of Chicago). Anyone that can (or should) drop $600,000 on a house can afford to pay Metra to haul them around.
The question that was raised was whether or not that Hermitage house was now affordable. You cannot look at only Chicago real estate when choosing the best home for your family. What we are arguing about is the lifestyle of someone that can afford a $1/2 Million+ SFR. I am not talking about boomers or trust fund kiddies, I’m talking about well off families. Many people that can foot that bill really don’t care about being urban and or trendy anymore. They are settling down to raise kids in safe, like-minded, areas that cater to them. Sorry, to have to be the one to tell you, but Chicago is not that.
Ask yourself honestly, would you rather drop 600g’s for Hermitage’s 25’x108′ lot …….. or this:
http://www.realtor.com/search/listingdetail.aspx?ctid=41033&ml=3&mnp=31&mxp=31&typ=1&pfbm=122004&sid=c6e1b079b3a14715be2de7104e5acfb1&sdir=0&sby=2&lid=1094345363&lsn=10&srcnt=167#Detail
Oh, BTW, on 22 Mar at 10pm at 1800 W. Berteau (3-4 blks away from the Hermitage house in question) there was a robbery with a hand gun.
I’m sure the other house will be too far away for “anon”, but many people would sacrifice more commute time to ensure the highest possible quality of life and education for their family. There is more to life than getting to work quickly, anon. Besides, anon, the soothing motion of the train might make you less hostile. 😉
Stuckinthecity:
You make some valid points about how far your money will go in the suburbs. And yes- trains make many suburban areas accessible.
But I don’t think comparing the North Center house to a house in far-out Naperville (as that one looks like) is really comparable (it takes about 50 minutes on the express train to get downtown from the Aurora/Naperville stop- which is probably the closest to the house you posted.)
Why not compare it to something in Oak Park? There are plenty of lovely $600,000 homes in Oak Park right now. That’s about 10 minutes on the El or the Metra to the loop. It’s probably closer than living in North Center- to the loop.
There are some foreclosures popping up in Oak Park now- which means you can get at least a bungalow probably for under $400,000.
anon asked a fair question. I believe that anon and Dave are being honest with themselves about their city preference.
I don’t see how “getting to work quickly” is anything but an important element in ensuring “the highest possible quality of life” for my family. I guess not everyone agrees.
This is the second Naperville home that SITC has assumed holds wide appeal. The second located on nearly barren former farmland in an ‘inconvient to anything but strip malls and even those you must drive to’ location. Another home whose taxes ($12,400/yr.) and HOA dues (“one of Naperville’s most exclusive pool & tennis club communities!”) probably result in a much higher cost than a similarly priced Chicago home (taxes $9,000/yr.) This one was sold new on 6/3/05 for $579K, so resale value isn’t a plus either. Count me among those who “honestly” prefers a $600K home in the city (although not the Hermitage prop since there are much better deals to be had, and getting better by the day.)
Oak Park homes are much less affordable than like-priced Chicago homes because the local tax rate will mean a tax bill that is approx 75% higher. For Evanston, figure a 50% difference. For LaGrange it is 40%.
Yeah lets all move to the Suburbs, I love the lack of culture, strip malls, and having to drive everywhere.
If you think Daley is corrupt, then live in a suburb that doesn’t have a competent newspaper to report on the corruption. How long did Betty Loren Maltese scam Cicero before she was exposed?
Ignorance is bliss, I guess.
Stephen,
I doubt there is much more ‘culture’ where this house is vs. similar looking houses and blocks in any suburb. Even if you technically live in the city’s borders but your area looks like a suburb, then its about as “cultured” as a suburb.
Belonging to a certain zip code or residing in a city boundarn doesn’t automatically confer ‘culture’.
This is the midwest at the end of the day not Manhattan so you’ll likely be in the minority with that pretension.
Bob get rid of the netflix. Explore Chicago.
Culture vs netflix aside, if you work downtown and live in Naperville you will have much less time for any pursuit.
By the way, Stephen, what if one only rents art films from netflix?
G that is very true and it’s fine with me if someone has netflix. I am surprised by Bob’s comparison of Chicago to Manhattan, maybe he should consider the large amount of similarities between both cities.
See, this is the point I was (sacastically) making. That Naperville house is perfectly pleasant for what it is, but it hardly constitutes a “mansion”. And I don’t think that the “quality of life” for my family would be dramatically improved in Naperville–quite the opposite, in fact, as we both work–thus commuting times are very important to us. And we both have jobs that ARE unavailable in the suburbs, so that’s not a real option.
Would I drop $600k on this crap shack? No. But it’s still worth 2x the Naper house TO ME.
OP/RF houses in the $600k range are generally nicer than this one, too, and I would certainly prefer OP to either this particular house or really anything in Naper. But OP taxes are higher than the City and you still don’t get away from Cook County (which I would LOVE to do) AND you don’t have an opportunity (thru connections or otherwise) to send your kids to the BEST schools in Illinois, which are in Chicago.
Give SITC credit for honesty – he does seem to feel stuck here.
Don’t forget obesity as a quality of life issue – I moved to Chicago to walk to work – a nice 1/2 hour commute each way & I can skip the treadmill when I get home. Studies have shown that urban dwellers live longer, healthier lives.
Is there a way to factor the cost of a cardiologist and Lipitor into cost comparisons?
Stephen,
I used Manhattan as a metaphor as it is where the uber-classists tend to congregate and talk disparagingly about the “bridge and tunnel” crowd. They are willing to spend inordinate amounts of their disposable income on rent to remain on that island and would never think of living instead close by as it would ruin their feeling of the “in-crowd”. Ditto on SF.
Chicago, on the other hand, has no similar natural dileneations other than to the east. If you want to be classist the midwest generally, isn’t a great place to be.
I live in the city and walk around a bit, too, but can’t relate to your paradigm of urban snobbery simply because I am from the suburbs, have friends in the suburbs, frequently travel to the suburbs for work and have coworkers in the suburbs. Its a lifestyle choice they made and they seem to be generally happy with it. They don’t appear any more or less cultured than people that live in the city, to be honest.
Chicago has no monopoly on ineffective and/or corrupt municipal government. Come to Oak Park or River Forest, and see 1) extremely high taxes; 2) high-priced housing; 3) certainly inept, if not even corrupted (as it seems in River Forest as of recent) municipal government. We pay sky-high real estate taxes, and then even more for water, sewer, and trash pick-up. Our schools are crowded; the buildings older and the library small. Oak Park has a significant issue with street crime and petty burglary. The entire Chicagoland/Cook County area is facing a livability/affordability problem.
Sabrina, you are correct. Oak Park would be just fine, same with Park Ridge, Niles, River Forest; however, they are still in Cook Cnty. If you don’t think that is a bad thing, ask Palatine.
Everyone else, I choose Naperville for the extreme opposite example of Chicago. Bigger houses, bigger lots, lower crime, and better schools. Don’t take it to heart, it is just an example.
Remember we are talking about a SFR. I am assuming that a Single Family will Reside in it. Not a 20-something post-grad flop house for Cubbie fans (altho that does sound like a good time…). At the price bracket of 600g’s, in today market, that person will be extremely discriminating. We are no longer talking about Joe Six Pack that makes 50 grand and buys a 1/2 Mill house. J6P is going into foreclosure and is not going to buy an other house for a long time. The new buyer willl not want to get robbed walking little Jonny around the block. They will not settle for Blaine School.
This goes to the tax question. Some here decry the higher taxes in the burbs. Yes, no one wants to pay higher taxes. However, what “G” misses is the VALUE of the taxes paid. Property taxes are different from income taxes. YOU get to choose who will receive your hard earned money by choosing what town to live in. The VALUE of your property tax dollars are MUCH higher outside Chicago / Cook Cnty. “G” also does not recognise the extra tax that is tacked on many Chicago residences buy the sub-par CPS system in the form of private school tuition. That is thousands more a family has to pay because they chose to live in Chicago.
The lower sales taxes int he burbs will off set the cost of Metra. Your car insurance will be lower. If you work in the city by taking the train in, you save gas, wear and tear on your car, and cut down on air polution. Besides, if you are on the train it is not wasted time. You can read a book, call your mother, and even hook up with wi-fi and ‘Crib Chat’. 🙂 It’s a win-win-win-win-win!
Stephen, Metra can take Napervillians (is that a word?) right to all the fun cultural attactions that the Chicagoans paid for!
My mention of RE taxes was only as a caution in comparing what a certain price will get in different areas. I certainly welcome a detailed analysis by SITC of relative “values” of the taxes paid. Heck, regular readers here will not be surprised to find that I might even have an opinoin of it to share upon review.
I consider any time spent commuting that could instead be spent with my family to be a waste. Obviously, SITC disagrees.
I am left to wonder what makes you “stuck,” SITC? I don’t take you for an upside-down homeowner awaiting the salvation of bubble re-inflation to release you from your financial nightmare, so why not just pack up and move to the glorious collar counties?
Good debate guys, and I appreciate SITC’s well-reasoned debate of his point. I think we can all agree that a property’s “value” on the market is a very fickle thing, and wholly dependent on the buyer. SITC may get more value and utility from his $600K spent in Napeville, while most of the rest of us would get more from a smaller place in the city; the city’s negatives easily outweighed by what we perceive as positive benefits (and SITC doesn’t care about).
For my 2 cents, I want my kids to grow up in a neighborhood where they can walk or bike to and from school, soccer practice, their friends houses, after school activies, whatever. I want my kids to grow up in a neighborhood where they experience “life” and everything that entails, good and bad, inequality, unfairness, etc. To me, much of suburbia represents simply another form of utopianism, an attempt to create a perfect life and environment. At a core philosophical level, I think it’s an illusory goal that either creates or exacerbates the same sort of problems it pretends don’t exist. In short, I want my kids to grow up in an urban neighborhood (Oak Park and Evanston would surely fit the bill as well), and North Center isn’t an awful choice; there are many other family-friendly urban hoods depending on income level…Old Town Triangle being the awesome granddaddy.
In short, housing choice, in the long run, is a very self-selecting and self-perpetuating process :-}
David:
Not to continue this debate- but I guess I am- but do you really think your child would bike and walk around his city neighborhood?
I know of a family raising kids in Ukranian Village in their quite expensive house and don’t let their kids go past the end of the block. They say it’s too dangerous.
Ditto for a family with kids in Lakeview. The kids are now teenagers (14 and 17) and attend Latin. My friend drives the kids to every single event (as you would in suburbia), including to and from school.
I’ve asked her- can’t your kids take the El or a bus to get home?
Nope!
If she can’t drive them- they take cabs. ha!
She said the public transportation was too “scary.”
These are just two antecdotes- but it doesn’t seem to me that the kids are “experiencing” the good and the bad (and certainly not by going to Latin School where my friend says some of the students show up by chauffeured car every day.)
What’s the difference between what they’re doing and the suburbs again?
Neither of these families put their kids in the public schools- by the way. One is only upper middle class and the private tuition is killing them.
Sabrina,
That’s really sad to hear about your friends with families in UK Village and Lakeview, seeing as I grew up in a city neighborhood. There were certainly areas I wasn’t allowed to go (2 blocks west, for example), but I took the bus or walked the 3/4 mile to school, walked to the fields for soccer practice etc. I started getting myself around the neighborhood and city unsupervised around age 11 (e.g. walk to/from school, take the bus/train downtown for doctors appointments or meeting my father at work, etc.). And I grew up on the South Side, coming of age in the 1980s, a whole heck of lot “iffier” than UK Village and Lakeview are now.
I got mugged at knifepoint once. Took my wallet with $5 in it. They got the perp. Guess what? Here I am, doing just fine.
Private tuition at schools like Latin, Parker, UHigh etc is generally around $20K/year, for you readers out there. Is it worth it? Well most of the kids I know who went to those wound up at Ivy’s, so maybe it is.
I went to a Chicago Public School, and without getting into specifics of my “credentials” I turned out just fine and I feel better rounded and educated than 90+% of my age-group peers living in any location, city or suburb
You’re right, there’s not much difference between what your friends are doing and suburbia, and that depresses me because it validates my fear of the ‘suburbanization’ of the city, which is also evident in the off-street parking and low-density fetish the new DOWNTOWN residents seem to have. If someone’s gonna live their life behind the wheel, terrified of anything outside the home, they might as well just live in Naperville rather than coming to the city and ruining one of the few bastions of “life” folks like me have. I’d really rather not pay the New York City price premium.
… I can’t believe she drives a 14 and 17 year old to school every day or puts them in cabs. Those poor children.
I mis-grammatized “Ivy’s”, I think. Sigh, long week. Not a sign of my public school education 🙂
….another thought, I suppose the difference is that my hypothetical kids would likely attend one of the public magnet schools. Worth pointing out that Northside Prep, Whitney Young, Payton, and Jones (I think it was those 4) are ranked in the top 100 public high schools nationwide. Enough for a good education in more ways than one (i.e. including the things that those poor Lakeview kids aren’t learning, that is, “life lessons”)
David,
I think it largely depends on the gender of your children. What was a mugging to you could’ve easily been a rape if you were a female. I think the parents are totally justified in not wanting their daughters out at night by themselves. When I used to live in Hyde Park this was common sense for the female students. Rape, unfortunately, does happen even in yuppie neighborhoods like LP and LV. Of course the suspect is never from these areas. Dual standards? Absolutely. But mother nature did not make us equal–we’ve just constructed this artificial thing called society to make it appear so.
PS I was mugged in the city myself a few yers ago. In Lakeview no less. Although fine lost a tooth to show for it…crime happens in the city.
Crime happens in the suburbs too.
Re: Does everyone drive their city kids to school? Has no one been on the brown line with kids from North Center/Lincoln Square riding the train to LPHS for the IB program or Payton? Plenty of (wealthy-ish) people let their (high school age) kids take the train to/from school and activities. A lot of them, esp. the girls, are with other kids, but it’s totally normal. I see lots of under-10 year old kids in my North Center neighborhood walking two or three blocks to school by themselves or with one other kid–every day.
This isn’t that I don’t understand the concerns that cause a parent to be quite so (I would say) overprotective, but I think the live-in-the-city and drive-the-kids-everywhere parents are misguided in their concerns and doing the kids a major disservice (unless the kids give them cause by geting into trouble often). But that’s not just a symptom of living in the city–they’d be the same overprotective, not let the kids fend for themselves, parents if they lived in Naperville (or Winnetka or Lake Forest or whereever).
Let’s talk “single-family house for a family with school-aged kids”, and quickly the entire “financial vs. desireability” balance is revealed. We’ve been there.
First of all, we suburbanites in those “desireable” suburbs of Oak Park, Evanston, Wilmette, Winnetka, and yes, River Forest, pay a very high price for “ambient streetscape and walkable neighborhoods”. In River Forest and the North Shore, $600,000 will buy you a small house, renovation projects forever, and a $15,000+ tax bill. And the schools aren’t as fantastic as promoted by other parents who’re obsessed w/property values and school ratings in your community.
Secondly, to stay in the city, you quickly face astronomical home prices for nicer neighborhoods with short commutes to downtown. (An hour-long el ride isn’t “short”.) Extremely expensive homes are available in these desireable neighbohoods, with some more affordable but seriously flawed homes too (busy street, no parking, desparately needs renovation, very ugly, etc.) Plus, you quickly discover that your kids didn’t get into any magnet school, the local school has “issues”, the pricy preppy private school, and you scramble. And remember, those elite public schools accept less than 3% of their applicants, so you’re usually looking at 13 years of private school tuition!
To settle the initial debate (whether it was overpriced, not the city vs suburbs), apparently was this house was still overpriced, but only by a little. Sold for 580k.
Knifecatchers paid way too much thinking they got a ‘deal’. Paid $580k but they used mostly other people’s money. $417k first and $134 second = $551k financing with $29k downpayment. 5% percent down. This seller will be underwater early next year. How’s your great deal now?? Hahahhaha! I thought the banks were supposed to stop this SHIT? (Sorry for the language). I can’t believe the banks still let any YAHOO with 5% down buy a $580k house. Didn’t they learn their lesson the first time around with this home??? Our society’s culture has to change – we have to give up the notion of paying as much as you can afford for as big as house as possible using as much leverage as the banks will allow. Crap like this shows we still have a long way to go.