Where do tree hugging, vegetarian liberals belong in north Chicago? (Evanston: mortgage, loans)

[Anthera]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

You are absolutely wrong about this. Having teardown potential actually RAISES your selling price. It increases the pool of buyers, and teardown developers will almost always give you a better price for your house than you would get on the market. This is commonly known in my line of work.

Here's a good NY Times article about the phenomenon (note that in this article "teardown" refers to the existing house, while "rebuild" refers to the new house built in place of the teardown.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/re...ref=realestate

Two quotes:

“Teardowns are doing a little better than overall markets, because most teardowns are located in highly desirable neighborhoods that command a premium price and are somewhat easier to sell,” said Walter Molony, a spokesman for the National Association of Realtors in Washington.

“To get the most value out of the lot,” Mr. Ireifej said, “we decided to take the money and run, and let builders do it.” (Mr. Ireifej moved to a larger house, also in Greenwich, that he plans to expand, but he is also hoping to buy another teardown as an investment.)

Absolutely right Lookout, and also when you rehab and live in a teardown, it ceases to be a teardown.

[Anthera]

Originally Posted by jaynetarzana

The Jumbo Bungalow on Burton? What should that mean to me?

It means some developer looked at it as a business deal and it didn't make sense to buy and tear it down (otherwise it would be gone). It has nothing to do with you as a homebuyer who will live in the property.

[jaynetarzana]

Originally Posted by cohdane

Alright, as long as everyone is throwing suggestions in the hat, I finally found the property I remembered-- although it's a stretch.

1954 by Edward Dart. Some &^%$!! speculator bought it and left it vacant/unheated. It would need a LOT of work inside. (There used to be pictures of the interior.) But it's a big lot (so expandable) and it's priced at 350k, so maybe doable? I don't know enough about that stuff:

434 Sumac MLS 06792882

If not, here are two others, not classic mid century, but at least kindred:

315 Russett Lane MLS 06944190

??? MLS 06907875

If you can rent for a while, prices will be going down (IMO) and a good house might come on. I know that's hard with kids, though.

Thanks Codane, We'll check out Sumac. We've already looked at Russett and it needs to be completely redone and at that price, we wouldn't have money to do anything. I personally think that house belongs in the low 400's.

How much further do you think prices can go? It is hard with kids, but we also need to be smart about not paying too much in a declining market.

[Paige65]

Originally Posted by Anthera

Really? Whats all that hammering and sawing I hear all the time. The Percy mansion just went under contract this week for just under $10M, its going to be rehabbed, My friends are redoing the Clement Stone mansion, and I know tons of other people who have rehabbed, myself and most of my neighbors included(with our far more modest homes and budgets).

My DH would die if they ripped down the Clement Stone mansion. He loves that place! I'm glad your friends are rehabbing it, I'll bet it's going to be spectactular.

[Paige65]

Originally Posted by jaynetarzana

Do you think this is true? Our agent seems to think not. She says most houses are getting about 94-96% of asking price. The house we are looking at in Lake Bluff is $180K higher than Zillow's estimate. I know Zillow can be off, but by this far? The graph on city data shows homes sales in LB falling dramatically. I am trying to figure out why.

I don't know about the accuracy of Zillow in Lake Bluff, but I just looked up my own home, and Zillow's estimate is about $175,000 - $200,000 (hard to know exactly) below what I think is its FMV. The estimates for most of my neighbor's homes were pretty far off as well.

Good luck today.

[Paige65]

Originally Posted by Calidreemer

Paige my sister moved from Ravinia to Evanston because of a divorce. She wanted out quickly so she let her ex buy her out of the house rather than spend time fighting over it. As a single person she is happy being in Evanston. She is with the young hipsters and is a quick drive to her friends in Lincoln Park and DePaul.

Next subject - I love that cute bungalow - I would rip out the kitchen and bath and start over there and paint and I think it would be all good. I love that kind of architecture. We have a 1920's house and I love it although my husband hates how much it costs to maintain and rehab. Oh well - it has good energy and it is cute IMO.

Hope your sister is doing well. I love Evanston. We attempted to stay there when we were looking for our first home back in the early 90's but ended up in HP. I love 1920's architecture too. We have a completely rehabbed and added onto 1920's bungalow (not a bungalow anymore... we went from 1,050 sq. feet to 2100 sq. ft.). Nice and livable. Although I'm sure we could have made our original 2bed/1bath with two kids work...

[Nysee53]

A new house always beats an older home in this market, even if the older home is in a better location and offers more space. If someone is dieing for an old home, then they will buy an old home. Anthera, you have named a few cases, there is an article from Crains featuring Sharon Friedman of Coldwell Banker Winnetka South. She tells how old homes have become increasingly hard to sell even if the old home is in a great location. I will try to find the article for everyone here. You should also read the posts by MiddleAgedMom, she can tell you that this is absolutely true. That $450,000 house can be had for $300,000, which then means it makes sense for a developer in Ravinia. Architects have become more creative, because it is increasingly difficult to find affordable lots with a 50' or more width. An article about Greenwich, CT is very irrelevant to Chicago. In Fairfield County and NYC Metro, people are more appreciative of older homes, there are far more new homes being built here and demand is much higher. Construction costs there are also considerably higher than our already high midwest construction costs.

[Paige65]

Originally Posted by Nysee53

That $450,000 house can be had for $300,000, which then means it makes sense for a developer in Ravinia.

I'm curious as to why it hasn't sold at that price then. It's been on the market for awhile. In fact, there are a few homes in Ravinia around the $300,000 mark, all on 40 x 130 lots. No developers are buying those. The only new construction going on right now is in the 400-500 block of Broadview on a piece of land that was vacant until recently because the owner of the adjacent lot sold it. In fact, over the last ten years, only eleven spec homes have been built in Ravinia (in the neighborhood between St. Johns and Green Bay Road).

Your post should say, "IF that $450,000 can be had for $300,000...

I think what you are saying may generally be true (rehab v. new construction) in the $1.5 million and up part of the market, but not in the lower part.

[Calidreemer]

Paige she's doing great and loves life a lot more now. I love our little house although we could use a bit more space, but then it's just us and the dog and our low mortgage and utilities make life easier to enjoy. We have rehabbed our kitchen, baths, floors, new garage, central air, flood control, basement and now we are working on the landscaping. It takes time, but sometimes I just don't think the new homes have the character or spirit an older home has. Just my opinion and while Nysee says new construction wins out I know a few people on the NS who prefer the charm of an older house and find the McMansions vulgar. So to each his own and good luck heating and cooling those 4000sf monsters w/out solar.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by Nysee53

That $450,000 house can be had for $300,000, which then means it makes sense for a developer in Ravinia.

I don't know where you are getting these crazy ideas. That type of price drop isn't occuring anyhwere in the Chicago area.

You're arguing against yourself here. Yes, older homes do have lower prices than newer homes in some markets, and they tend to be slower sales. This is precisely why a teardown candidate will fetch a higher price than a similar home that isn't a teardown candidate! If you are comparing similar homes, teardowns are worth more money on the market than non-teardowns, and they sell faster to a larger pool of buyers. Sure, you could just buy a fancy new house. But you won't get that in Highland Park for $450,000!