While you’re sitting in your condominium, can you can hear your neighbors’ conversations, footsteps, baby crying or stereo? Joe Drago of New England Soundproofing says he can solve that. In the past, the only thing that separated sounds between floors was the ceiling and a wood floor. More recently, contractors constructing quality condo homes installed fiberglass insulation in between the floor joists. That helped a little. However, this method is not very effective against anything that vibrates. Although, some developers may have gone an extra mile in managing sound transfer, Joe Drago suggests that when anyone tells you a place is soundproof, ask for a list of materials that made it “so-called sound-proof.” Bates Real Estate Report suggestion: G ive the list to Joe for his feedback.
When I was a victim to the sounds of my neighbor, it felt pretty much like this.
State of the art soundproofing involves tearing down the ceiling or walls and installing products with high sound transmission classes (STC’s), like isolation clips. According to Joe, the cost of soundproofing may run $25 – $50 a square foot. According to his customers, the quiet is “priceless.” Just ask Joe’s customer who owns a Hawthorne Place condominium in Beacon Hill. Her ceiling was re-done and as a result, not only has it greatly reduced the amount of sound that her condominium gets, it has changed the sound, so that it is much more palatable and innocuous.
If the offending sounds coming into your home aren’t from your neighbors, but from outside, it’s likely because your windows aren’t soundproof. Richard Mann of EZ soundproof says that “Glass magnifies and projects sounds.” According to their website EZ’s windows provide up to 95% soundproofing and stops traffic noise… as well as the noise of sirens, garbage trucks, music and drunkards from entering your home. Maybe you hesitated buying on a busy street because you feared the disruptive sounds, but there are numerous video testimonials on EZ’s website attesting to their products ability to stop outside sounds from becoming unwanted visitors in you condominium, including one from a Berklee School of Music recording engineer who operates a studio on busy Massachusetts Avenue in Boston. Other videos feature South End homeowners glowing about the impact the windows have had in the quality of their home life, while trucks and buses race silently by the window behind them.
The sound of silence, arguably the best sound in your home.
In my last post, I discussed what a Back Bay median condo fee was when a specific amenity was found to be included in the fee. In this post, I’ll touch upon how prolific specific amenities are in Back Bay condo fees.
In brief:
Condominium fees at 295-297 Beacon include heat, hot water, master insurance, laundry and an elevator. How does that stack up?
The fee almost always includes master insurance, water and sewer.
About two out of three 2011 Back Bay condo sales included heat, hot water and an elevator in the fee.
About half included landscaping.
Only about one out of every five Back Bay condo sales had an exercise room and/or valet parking in the condo fee. As well, one out of five funded laundry facilities in the fee.
One out of eight had extra storage.
One out of nine had air conditioning.
One out of a little more than ten had a club room.
One out of 20 Back Bay condo fees funded the operation and maintenance of a pool.
Buyers at 186 Beacon Street in the Back Bay hit the condo fee JACKPOT! That building has no condo fees. Apparently, the income from two rental studios owned by the association pay the building’s expenses. Out of more than 400 MLS Back Bay condominium sales that I reviewed which occurred in 2011, the two units at 186 Beacon were the only ones I could find that had no condo fee. The rest had a condo fee that cost owners between $85 and $10,246 a month (see my previous post on Boston’s highest condo fee). The median condo fee for Back Bay, Boston’s most established condominium market, was $565 a month.
This Back Bay condominium association has no condo fees.
While high condo fees always seem to provoke concern with buyers it’s not the size of the fee that counts, it’s what you get for the money. So, I did a breakdown of the median fee based on the specific feature the condo fee covered. I have attached below a list of features, and what the median fee was for a condominium whose association included that specific feature in the fee.
When a specific feature is included in the condo fee, how does it affect the fee? Well, when Back Bay condominium fees included heat in the condo fee, the median condo fee went from $565 to $578 a month. That’s a nominal increase. Not all amenities, however, provoke such modest movement in the median fee. For example, Back Bay condominium associations with exercise rooms have median fees that are more than double the median for all of Back Bay condominium sales. And when valet parking is involved, the fee on average is 2 1/2 times the median.
Check out the median Back Bay fee by the feature included in the fee.
| Feature Included: | Median Fee +/- |
| Back Bay | $565 |
| Heat | $578 |
| Extra Storage | $722 |
| Elevator | $732 |
| Pool | $933 |
| Air Conditioning | $1,016 |
| Exercise Room | $1,264 |
| Valet Parking | $1,419 |
(Numbers are based on a BatesRealEstateReport analysis of MLS Back Bay condominium sales settled between 1/1/11 and 12/31/11.)
In South Boston, the median condo fee is a around a hundred dollars a month. But in midtown, the median condo fee is around a thousand dollars a month. What’s the deal?
This Southie condo had a condo fee of $125 a month.
In reviewing median condo fees for different Greater Boston neighborhoods, I quickly came to the conclusion that when it comes to condo fees, it’s not the neighborhood, but the building size that apparently matters most. Small buildings tend to have small condo fees. Big buildings tend to have big condo fees. My quick survey of South Boston MLS condo sales for 2011 supported that belief and shows that more than 70% of the sales occurred in buildings where fewer than six units made up the association. Compare this to midtown, Boston’s full-service building Mecca, where 100% of the condominium sales occurred in buildings which housed more than six units.
How neighborhoods impact a high or low condo fees is more along the lines of whether the market the condo development is in is emerging or established. In newer geographic markets that are hot for development, developers know that the “condo fee” is one of the three payments that make up affordability (the other two are price–mortgage principal + interest — and real estate taxes). By keeping condo fees as low as possible, developers can attract the widest buying audience to their development price. So the more recently developed and developing condominium markets like South Boston, Somerville, Jamaica Plain and Dorchester have the lowest median condo fees, while many of the oldest and most established Greater Boston markets, like Back Bay, Beacon Hill and Brookline tend to have the highest median condo fees.
While big/small building and new/old market may be a tell-tale sign of whether a condo fee is low or high, in no way am I suggesting that these are the only characteristics that lead to low or high condo fees. There are many factors that may cause a fee to be low or high, including whether the condo fee includes heat or the pay off of a previous building assessment. As a BatesRealEstateReport buying rule, buyers, their agents, and their attorneys should scrutinize the condo fee in whichever building they are thinking of buying.
| Neighborhood | Median Fee (+/-) |
| South Boston | $164 |
| Somerville | $186 |
| Charlestown | $192 |
| Jamaica Plain | $199 |
| Dorchester | $207 |
| North End | $213 |
| Cambridge | $259 |
| South End | $291 |
| Brighton | $325 |
| Natick | $336 |
| Beacon Hill | $389 |
| Brookline | $424 |
| Back Bay | $565 |
| Waterfront | $769 |
| Midtown | $957 |
(Numbers based on a BatesRealEstateReport survey of MLS closed condo sales between 1/1/11-12/31/11. These numbers are meant to be representative and not precise. Back Bay is the only fee that has been scrutinized and in all likelihood is more accurate than the numbers for other neighborhoods.)
For the condo seminar I did, I spoke with David Zussman who developed one of Greater Boston’s first condominium complexes in Chestnut Hill in 1968.
The thought to put condominiums at 209 Commonwealth Ave., Chestnut Hill came about when a local bank told David that they wouldn’t finance his acquisition and rehabilitation of the fire damaged property as an apartment building. But they would finance the project as condominiums if David, a successful home builder at the time who knew little about condominium development, took a trip to Florida where it was becoming popular.
209 Commonwealth Ave, Chestnut Hill was developed into condominiums in the late 1960's.
Shortly afterwards, 209 Commonwealth came to market. I couldn’t help but chuckle as David recalled that consumers in the era of free love called the sales office and mistakenly referred to the condominiums as “condoms.” Nonetheless, it seems that real estate buyers in 1968 had the same concerns as they do now. To persuade buyers, David’s sales staff showed them a comparison between buying a condominium and renting an apartment. The comparison demonstrated that when you took into account all the tax benefits, condominiums were a better investment than renting. His project sold out and it wasn’t long before David became a leader in local condominium conversions and construction. In the early 1970s, as president of Condominiums, Inc., he at times predicted that as much as 50% of new residential construction would be for condominiums.
Over the years, David estimates he developed 2,000 condominiums. He is in the process of marketing one of the last he has on market, on Hammond Street in Chestnut Hill. Today, at 80, he is looking for apartment buildings he can buy. I’m sorry to say that his foray back into buying apartments instead of developing condominiums may be a sign of the complete 180 that the real estate financing market has done since his first project on Com Ave.
I have listed below some of the biggest losers in Q1. Losses were based only the sale price and a previous sale price. In all likelihood, these sellers lost even more money maintaining or upgrading their property.
Even owners luxury condos at the Ritz Carlton Condominiums on Avery Street fell victim to the real estate turnaround.
While we have learned that real estate is no longer a sure thing, I think most of the sellers in our market who successfully sold in Q1 actually made money on their home. Others lost a little. I wondered why these homeowners lost so much? Real estate stories can be as individual as snow flakes, but I looked at a few of the property histories and speculated as to what happened.
10 Atkinson, Sudbury might have just picked a bad month to close: August 2008. I wondered if that buyer had the typical buyer mental chatter, “I’m buying at the top of the market and the market will crash as soon as we close.” If they did, they were right, as the economic world changed in September that year.
Why did this home seller lose so much? Was it a bad buy? A bad market? Both?
On the other hand, 36 Plantation, Sudbury, might have been just a bad buy. This home was bought in 2001 for $1.705 million and after a huge run up in the median sale prices of area single family homes, it was listed at a loss for $1.675 million in 2006. It didn’t sell in 2006 and after 500+ days on market the owners took $1.2 million for the home in Q1 this year.
You can make bad buys in a recession too I guess as the buyers of 5 Main, Wenham found out in 2009 when they spent only $1.525 million for a home that was listed for $1.95 million. They probably felt pretty good about that purchase until recently when after more than 300 days on market, this home only sold for $1.075 million in Q1.
In this age of layoffs, short sales and foreclosures, discounts abound when banks are involved in the negotiation as they were for 1 Avery 14E, Boston; 173 Brookline St., Newton; and the biggest loser 1431 Brush Hill, Milton
On the sale side, I couldn’t help but wonder if any of the financial damage could have been mitigated? If these sellers were less greedy or more realistic about market conditions, could they have sold earlier for more? If they were more financially able or socially or professionally stable, could they ride out the bad market? We’ll never find out and that’s what makes these homes among the biggest financial losers for Q1.
Address Yr/Price Purchased 2012 Price Loss
1 Avery 14E, Boston 2006: $630K $537K -$93K*
62 Leighton, Wellesley 2007: $1.2 Mil $1.1 Mil -$100K
16 Upton #1, South End 2007: $1.155 Mil $1.050 Mil -$105K
10 Atkinson Lane, Sudbury 2008: 1.15 $980K -$135K
220 Boylston 1118, Back Bay 2007: $1.895 $1.74 Mil -$155K
173 Brookline St, Newton 2005: $970K $800K -$170K*
27 Boyden, Medfield 2005: $1.275 $1.1 Mil -$175K
36 Hampshire, Sudbury 2006: $1.25 $1.03 Mil -$220K
221 Columbus 703, Boston 2002: $1.875 $1.625 Mil -$250K
175 Commonwealth D 2004: $2.116 $1.725 Mil -$391K
5 Main Drive, Wenham 2008: $1.525 $1.075 Mil -$450K
36 Plantation, Sudbury 2001: $1.705 $1.2 Mil -$505K
1431 Brush Hill, Milton 1999: $1.827 $1.21 Mil -$617K*
*Denotes short sale or foreclosed property.
This Boston home comes with a roof top infinity lap pool.
I had a listing with a two and a half car garage. Who bought it? A couple with two cars and two motorcycles who hadn’t been able to find a home that adequately housed their mobile lifestyle. Hard to find or unique features are sometimes the precise reason specific buyers buy. What are some of the most exceptional features among today’s listings that buyers might want for their dream home?
Near the “City of Champions,” not surprisingly, incredible sports amenities are popular.
A golf enthusiast might like 591 Stevens Street, Marlborough. It’s a home with a personal mini golf course complete with flags, driving range mats & signs. Golfers may also consider 50 Walker Road, Manchester which has a state of the art putting green, or 605 Elm Street, Walpole which has its own private golf hole.
If swinging a bat is more important than swinging a club, then 490 Waltham Street, Lexington might be a buyer’s home run as it comes with a complete batting/pitching cage in the back yard.
There are also homes available with Pilate studios (188 Old Connecticut Path, Wayland) and bowling alleys (109 Todd Pond, Lincoln).
151 Haggetts Pond Rd, Andover: Did the homeowner say the bowling alley was next to the basketball court or to take a right at the indoor pool? I forget.
For the more aerobic, there are listings with tennis courts that double as basketball courts in the summer (45 Waltham Road, Wayland) or are transformed to hockey rinks in the winter (65 Birchwood, Tewksbury). If inclement weather is a concern, 151 Haggetts Pond Road, Andover has a full-size indoor basketball court (not to mention a two-story partly covered slide into a pool, a massage area, a fish pond, gym bleachers and many other unique amenities).
For the all-around indoor sports enthusiast, 45 Mounce Farm Way, Marshfield is a home where you can play basketball, tennis, volleyball, soccer and baseball in “your private gymnasium.”
What are some unusual un-sportsmanlike features that are available in Greater Boston homes?
It’s always popular to advertise top of the line brands like Subzero refrigerators (61 listings) and Viking stoves (98 listings), but if buyers are more worried about clean-up than they are about food storage or preparation, they might look for homes that have two dishwashers (18 listings). As far as dishwashers are concerned, 891 Liberty St, Braintree apparently took the cake plate with three dishwashers and now that home is under agreement.
There are 45 homes in MLS with an elevator. The lower priced listings generally have an all-important handicapped lift, while the luxury homes have elevators that might make Mr. Otis himself proud.
If car storage is a buyer’s biggest concern, 120 Myrtle, Norfolk has 10 garage parking spaces. On the other hand, the buyer of 333 Perkins Row, Topsfield might not be concerned with car storage at all. Why? Because that home has the right to “land a helicopter” on the property.” The home at 61 Air Park Drive, Falmouth offers a novel way to beat Cape traffic. Its great room overlooks a runway and its hangar has room for two planes.
Need a dog kennel and a pistol range in the home? Check out 219C Ipswich Road, Boxford.
Are you nervous about the recent black out? More than 400 homes in MLS boast emergency generators. Are you anxious about the threat of Armageddon? 49 Nathaniel, Attleboro (now under agreement) has a bomb shelter.
60 Ocean Street Ext Unit 9, Brewster has an operational lighthouse on the third floor.
More than 22,000 single-family homes are currently listed in MLS. What’s the most unusual feature among them? While I really like the roof-top infinity lap pool at 74 Beacon Street, Boston and I am so impressed by the Monet-like Giverny Bridge at 88 Cliff Road, Weston, my vote has to go to the operational lighthouse on the third floor of 60 Ocean Street Extension Unit 9, Brewster. Supposedly, it’s visible from Provincetown. I can’t wait to present it to buyers who need their own lighthouse. If that’s you, CALL ME!
According to the National Association of Realtors, the national average of housing affordability in 2009 was 169, which basically means that the typical family had an income that was 169% of the qualifying income to buy the median priced home in the community in which they lived.
Residents of this town can only afford 65% of the typical home selling in their community
Boston.com published a list of the 20 Massachusetts towns with the highest median income and the 20 towns with the lowest median income, so I came up with the median home prices in those communities (circa: 2009) and plugged the numbers into NAR’s affordability index calculation to determine which towns on the list were the least and most affordable.
Of the 34 towns I could obtain both median family income and median home sale prices, Weston, the Massachusetts town with the second highest median income, was by far the least affordable town to own a home. Weston had an affordability rating of just 65, meaning the median family income in Weston was only enough to qualify to buy 65% of the median priced home sale in Weston. So, it might be concluded that not only would the residents of Lawrence be more qualified to buy a home in their community than the residents of Weston, but Weston might be the least affordable town in all of Massachusetts. Surprising? I thought so. We don’t typically think that the citizens of our wealthiest communities are the most challenged to buy a home. Yet Weston wasn’t the only affluent community where residents appeared to be house rich and cash poor. The nine towns with the lowest affordability ratings in my analysis were among the state’s highest income communities. And perhaps, just as surprising, six of the state’s poorest communities were among the eight most affordable towns for residents to purchase a home.
Below I have listed the five least and five most affordable towns, with their affordability rating, from my analysis.
Least Affordable
1. Weston – 65
2. Dover – 83
3. Wellesley – 84
4. Cohasset – 97
5. Concord – 99
Most Affordable
1. Athol – 215
2. Southborough – 180
3. New Bedford – 176
4. Wenham – 171
5. Springfield – 165
Helpful links:
(http://www.boston.com/business/gallery/medianincomesinmass/)
I want to thank everyone who came to the condominium seminar last night as well as the professionals who discussed important topics. Yitz Magence, proved he’s not only an incredible real estate attorney, but an authoritative and informative speaker. Beverly Buker, from First Republic Bank, displayed insight and expertise about the market and really explained the benefits to buyers of using portfolio lender and having a shorter term mortgage loan. With loan officers like that, it’s no wonder First Republic has quickly become a player in local real estate lending. Cathy Marotta, as well, showed her expertise about the downtown market. Best of all was the enthusiasm and curiosity of the attendees. Thank you to everyone.
Posted below are a couple of the nifty charts from the condominium seminar.
The Median Price of a 1BR by Location
The Median Price of a 2BR by Location
The Median Price of a 3BR by Location
In preparing for my “seminar” about condominiums, I took to scouring articles about the birth of condominium living in Boston. This is what I learned….
It seems that condominiums had become popular in other parts of the country as early as 1966, but the concept had been slow to take hold in Boston. That is until about forty years ago, when 400 real estate professionals crowded a Newton Marriot ballroom to attend a seminar about this new type of housing (and living).
The Vendome was one of Boston's early condominium projects.
Not long after the Newton Condominium Seminar, condominium projects became a staple in local real estate headlines. Some notable early condominium projects included The Vendome at 160 Commonwealth Avenue, a former hotel which had been destroyed by a horrific fire, and the former Prince Macaroni Warehouse in the North End. Back Bay developers made news by asking in the neighborhood of $30 a square foot, meaning one of the 2600 square foot condominiums at 276 Marlborough, could be purchased for around $80,000 (note: a re-sale occurred in this building last year for $2.4 million).
By 1975, more than 6,000 condominiums had been developed in Boston. While developers were motivated by rent control laws and profits, condo buyers wanted to experience the benefits of home ownership and live in good locations where single family living was either not affordable or not available.
A mid-70’s HUD report concluded, “Bostonians like condominiums.” Yet, controversy and challenges still surrounded condo conversions. Boston Mayor, the honorable Ray Flynn, tried to protect tenants who would be displaced by conversions and lobbied for laws to slow apartment building owners from converting their apartments into condominiums. The public-at-large, on the other hand, was still getting used to this strange, new concept where the common areas were controlled by what one writer called “a shadowy organization known as ‘The Association,’” and where owners didn’t even really own the ground beneath their homes. After spending tens of thousands of dollars purchasing a condominium, one buyer opined that all he got in return for his money was the air and plasterboard in his unit. Somebody should have given him a lousy T-shirt too, don’t you think? LOL.
By 1977, it was apparent that condominium living –which early on been referred to as a “craze” — was here to stay. In fact, one industry observer noted that “condominium” was becoming “a very respectable word in the real estate lexicon.”
Contact Us
Dave Bates
Cell: 617-413-6345
DavidBatesSothebys@gmail.com
