Then & Now: Pre vs. Post Recession Suburban Values (Chicago: condominium, mortgage)

[JJski]

Why would anyone want to move to oak brook - its great for shopping... i am not surprised by the drop there...

[damba]

Originally Posted by JJski

Why would anyone want to move to oak brook - its great for shopping... i am not surprised by the drop there...

Why would anyone move to x, y or z(?)

Plenty of reasons if you think hard enough LOL

[fusillirob1983]

Originally Posted by JJski

Why would anyone want to move to oak brook - its great for shopping... i am not surprised by the drop there...

1. Good schools
2. Great for shopping
3. They work nearby
4. Close to highways
5. They can afford a large house on a good sized piece of property
6. Relatively low property taxes
7. Centrally located within the Chicago area

[Chicago60614]

Originally Posted by mwj119

https://www.chicagomag.com/images/20...e07_Charts.pdf

The numbers are almost hard to comprehend. It's amazing to see the jump in values between 1994 & 2007. It must have been a darn good time to be a homeowner in Chicagoland and beyond.

Equally amazing is just how hard the area has struggled post recession. I'll take Northbrook as an example: The average sale price in 2007 was $760k. Now? The median sold price is $450k. Barrington went from $722k to $455. Lake Forest from $1.4M to $802k. Evanston from $601k to $301k. Naperville $511k to $347k. Hinsdale $1.1M to $790k.

So, did this area's home values simply inflate well beyond it's ceiling between 1994 and 2007? Or is the State, as the naysayers have been telling us, really on a steep decline? Are folks better off renting as another recession looms in the next few years?

Other areas of the country, as mentioned in many other posts, saw the same increases between 1994 and 2007. Yet, they've seen another jump of 50-60-70-100+% since 2007/pre-recession highs.

That begs the question- Has any area of the country declined like this in recent memory? Is there any other area struggling like this?

It's not as much a struggle as the fact we're looking at the peak prices of a bubble compared to after the bubble burst and things got back to a normal curve. This happened nationwide, although different places increased at different rates after the bubble burst was past and things got back to normal.

[holl1ngsworth]

Originally Posted by mwj119

https://www.chicagomag.com/images/20...e07_Charts.pdf

The numbers are almost hard to comprehend. It's amazing to see the jump in values between 1994 & 2007. It must have been a darn good time to be a homeowner in Chicagoland and beyond.

Equally amazing is just how hard the area has struggled post recession. I'll take Northbrook as an example: The average sale price in 2007 was $760k. Now? The median sold price is $450k. Barrington went from $722k to $455. Lake Forest from $1.4M to $802k. Evanston from $601k to $301k. Naperville $511k to $347k. Hinsdale $1.1M to $790k.

So, did this area's home values simply inflate well beyond it's ceiling between 1994 and 2007? Or is the State, as the naysayers have been telling us, really on a steep decline? Are folks better off renting as another recession looms in the next few years?

Other areas of the country, as mentioned in many other posts, saw the same increases between 1994 and 2007. Yet, they've seen another jump of 50-60-70-100+% since 2007/pre-recession highs.

That begs the question- Has any area of the country declined like this in recent memory? Is there any other area struggling like this?

Averages and medians are not comparable. I can't tell if you're serious or trolling.

[damba]

Originally Posted by holl1ngsworth

Averages and medians are not comparable. I can't tell if you're serious or trolling.

But wasn’t that nuance already addressed by the person who cited it?

[mwj119]

Originally Posted by Chicago60614

It's not as much a struggle as the fact we're looking at the peak prices of a bubble compared to after the bubble burst and things got back to a normal curve. This happened nationwide, although different places increased at different rates after the bubble burst was past and things got back to normal.

So it sounds like you believe, on a macro level, that housing has simply corrected itself from 2007. You'd have to ignore the other major markets in the US to believe that is true. They are well beyond "peak bubble" prices from '07. Not equal, and certainly not well below as some of this data is suggesting it is around here.

So, either:

A. Prices were extremely inflated here pre '08, beyond the norms of any other MSA.. Which is entirely possible.

B. It is a very real indicator that something is materially wrong, and that even when all of these other markets around the country have since rebounded and surprassed pre-recession highs, Chicago's suburbs have stagnated and plateaud this cycle at far lower values than before.

Those are really the only two options when looking at the rest of the major areas of this country and their current home values vs. 2007.

[mwj119]

Originally Posted by damba

But wasn’t that nuance already addressed by the person who cited it?

It was, and then was backed up with median vs. median sales prices.

Thanks Damba!

[Justabystander]

Originally Posted by mwj119

Median sales prices every year starting in 2000. And, it does show that the decrease in values between now and peak 07/08 are still major, but vary more in certain markets.

Median sale price July 2007 vs. Today:
Northbrook circa Jul '07 was $611k, and now sits at $445k.
Barrington was $675k, and now sits at $455k.
Oak Brook was $835k, and now sits at $433k.

There is a lot of variation by season/month, but the end results are still rough.

I don't know what you can buy in Oak Brook for $433k, not much, nor in Barrington or Northbrook. I think this must be skewed because there may be fewer high end homes that are selling, or more condominiums. In neighboring Hinsdale, where I live, 433K is, for all practical purposes, the very ground floor for a ranch on the fringes of town. It is just the very high end that is having some trouble selling, and yet the high end teardowns in the SE and NW parts of town continue, and in fact may have accelerated.

[mwj119]

Originally Posted by Justabystander

I don't know what you can buy in Oak Brook for $433k, not much, nor in Barrington or Northbrook. I think this must be skewed because there may be fewer high end homes that are selling, or more condominiums. In neighboring Hinsdale, where I live, 433K is, for all practical purposes, the very ground floor for a ranch on the fringes of town. It is just the very high end that is having some trouble selling, and yet the high end teardowns in the SE and NW parts of town continue, and in fact may have accelerated.

The average listing price is ~$700k, so I don't really understand the large discrepancies in data, except that maybe the length to sell causes massive variances by quarter.

I'm not sure I have seen listing prices so much higher than sales prices, which bleeds into this discussion. I think folks are listing homes expecting an ROI based on purchase price, but data suggests based on length of listing before sale in these luxuries markets, that sellers/realtors don't have a good grasp of current market value. There have been so many houses in Glenview that have been on and off the market for more than a year. Each time, the price is reduced, yet it doesn't sell.

Listing price vs. sale price is >$100k delta in almost every suburb around here.