Get a 3-Bedroom Duplex Penthouse With 2 Terraces for Just $565,000: 1111 S. Wabash in the South Loop

1111 s wabash approved

This 3-bedroom duplex penthouse at 1111 S. Wabash in the South Loop has been on the market since January 2013.

It is bank owned.

It has 2 large terraces and some lake and city views.

There’s work to be done however. While the kitchen has cabinets and counters, there are no floors and the baths have be finished.

It has central air, washer/dryer hook-up in the unit but it doesn’t come with parking (the building DOES have parking however.)

I couldn’t find any original sale of the unit from the developer.

It was listed in March 2005 for $1.554 million.

The unit was re-listed by the bank in January 2013 for $675,000. It has been reduced $90,000 in that time.

With 3,113 square feet, that’s just $181 per square foot.

Is this a deal for someone with the vision to finish the space?

Melissa Somone at Re/Mex 1st has the listing. See the pictures here.

Unit #3302: 3 bedrooms, 3.5 baths, 3113 square feet

  • I couldn’t find a prior sale
  • Originally listed in March 2005 for $1.554 million
  • Lis pendens foreclosure filed in December 2009
  • Bank owned
  • Re-listed in January 2013 as “as-is” for $675,000
  • Reduced several times
  • Currently listed at $565,000
  • Assessments of $2199 a month (includes heat, a/c, gas, cable, doorman, pool)
  • Taxes of $17673
  • No parking- but there is a parking garage in the building
  • 2 terraces
  • Bedroom #1: 14×18 (second floor)
  • Bedroom #2: 16×18 (main level)
  • Bedroom #3: 13×17 (second floor)

 

47 Responses to “Get a 3-Bedroom Duplex Penthouse With 2 Terraces for Just $565,000: 1111 S. Wabash in the South Loop”

  1. My first thought was why so cheap? Not my favorite building, but huge & decent location with lots of outdoor space. However, two BIG problems: most obvious-who wants a 3 BR, 3.5 bath 3000+ sq ‘ condo with NO parking? “there is a parking garage in the building”-comforting to know all the neighbors have parking spaces. Second problem, while they cut it off in the photos, this condo looks right into the window of the condo to the east. There is not even a street to separate them. You look right into the other unit. We looked at this building in 2010 and that was the main reason it wasn’t even considered.

    0
    0
  2. What a fricking disaster, holy cow

    How can a penthouse not have parking, or did the previous owner just sell it to raise cash in troubled times?

    Also sucks that the views are of the building right next door for the most part and the terraces are pretty blah

    0
    0
  3. It is probably a cash only building too (too many rentals). It would be hard to rent this without parking.

    0
    0
  4. I wouldn’t pay the taxes/assessments ($3,671/month) to live here. Not to mention any mortgage payment and the costs to get this place into some sort of livable condition… That’s the problem.

    0
    0
  5. No CS discussion?

    0
    0
  6. https://www.spice-indices.com/idpfiles/spice-assets/resources/public/documents/19529_cshomeprice-release-0730.pdf?force_download=true

    0
    0
  7. This is not anything anyone here hasn’t said in the past, but I am always stunned at how cruddy the marketing efforts are for bank owned properties. Terrible pictures, no sense of the layout – it’s a new building, somebody somewhere must have a floorplan from the original marketing that they could scan in.

    0
    0
  8. Regarding CS…condo prices in Chicago surged ahead by the most ever on both a one month and year over year basis.

    0
    0
  9. The terrible marketing efforts of a bank allowed me to get a great deal on my condo. The bank had fixed up my unit between the time the agent took the pictures and my showing…plus the pictures that the agent took were terrible to start with. If the marketing had been better, they would have had more showings and most likely have gotten a higher price.

    How much do the selling agents in these cases make?

    0
    0
  10. $44K a year, every year, for taxes and assessments on a $565K C-O-N-D-O? Seriously? I realize taxes and assessments are just a part of life, but is this place really going to appreciate some 8% a year just to keep up with that lost money (not to mention the interest on your note or making a bit of a profit on the actual unit itself) when you decide to sell? Maybe in lower Manhattan, but until NY is finally eaten by the sea and there’s a massive migration to higher ground, I just don’t get it. I thought owning an entire house along with the land it sits on was expensive, but when did fractional ownership of the whole become more expensive than the whole itself? Damn.

    0
    0
  11. “How much do the selling agents in these cases make?”

    Too much. I never understand who hires these agents and why they do. “Relationships”. It’s like hiring an agent because they’re your friend or relative.

    0
    0
  12. “No CS discussion?”

    Now that we have y-o-y increases, Bob can’t drive the discussion about how there’s no prospect of there ever being y-o-y increases.

    0
    0
  13. If the museum park west units are goiong at $425 a foot then I’d probably rather live in this unit with the outside space.

    I’d guess you could do a fairly good job finishing the unit for 400k including outside terrace.

    Gets you into the unit at $1 million for 3k sq ft plus 1k in terrace.

    In river north a3k sq ft unit with 1k sq ft terrace runs about $2 million.

    So I think a $1 million price for all new and this size is reasonable if not cheap. I’d guess if you finish it you could have a shot at flipping it for 1.3

    And if you wanted to live in the unit with mortgage I’m guessing it would run about $6500-$7k/month. Which is a reasonable price. Plus tax benefits.

    0
    0
  14. Sorry. I meant to “thumbs up” jay’s comment.

    0
    0
  15. “Now that we have y-o-y increases, Bob can’t drive the discussion about how there’s no prospect of there ever being y-o-y increases.”

    Lol!

    0
    0
  16. That’s crazy that markets like SF are up 24% in one year – they barely even dropped. I suppose the SF market probably includes portions of lancaster, palmdale, antelope valley, fremont, etc; those areas took beatings in the bust and now that the foreclosures have been stemmed and many have turned rentals in those exurban communities, prices were bound to rise; same with phoenix, etc.

    0
    0
  17. sort of off topic but at the same time on topic, has anybody here ever busted up a terrazzo shower base and installed a new shower base?

    0
    0
  18. “I suppose the SF market probably includes portions of lancaster, palmdale, antelope valley, fremont, etc”

    Don’t know much Cali geogrpahy, I guess.

    0
    0
  19. Jay, the taxes and assessment are so high for a “$565K C-O-N-D-O” because this will not be a $565K condo again. Once it is bought and finished, it will be most likely an over $1M condo, with taxes and assessments that match.

    Most “$565K C-O-N-D-O”s don’t have this much space, outdoor space nor are penthouses.

    Also, my guess is you can buy some of the parking in the building, the bank probably just doesn’t own any of the parking to sell with the unit….

    0
    0
  20. it might not sound like it, but this is a serious question – How does the City of Chicago justify $17k in taxes.

    what exactly are you subsidizing for that kind of money?

    0
    0
  21. SF is not in the vicinity of the other Cal cities mentioned.

    0
    0
  22. ‘Once it is bought and finished, it will be most likely an over $1M condo, with taxes and assessments that match.’

    Great. Then someone, maybe that’s you, should jump on this immediately. For the most part I’ve always been bullish about Chicago real estate, within reason naturally, even when the masses were running to their bomb shelters (ie suburbs), but I don’t think this place *especially* in this location, regardless of its deck and ‘PH’ status, justifies $44K a year and that’s before touching your nut. Maybe I’m wrong, but *forty-four thousand dollars* a year is more like GC/LP co-op territory, you know, where the board does their best to weed out the kinds of riff raff that buys a unit but ditches it unfinished for the bank and building to clean up, and where you don’t have to share an elevator with the lower floor folks who want nothing more than to tell you about their recent Carnival cruise to Cancun. It’s like buying a premium pimped out Kia… I’m sure your plated 22’s are nice, but it’s still a Kia.

    0
    0
  23. Pimped out Kia with plated 22’s

    That was money Jay!

    0
    0
  24. “That’s crazy that markets like SF are up 24% in one year – they barely even dropped. I suppose the SF market probably includes portions of lancaster, palmdale, antelope valley, fremont, etc; those areas took beatings in the bust and now that the foreclosures have been stemmed and many have turned rentals in those exurban communities, prices were bound to rise; same with phoenix, etc.”

    HD: What you’re saying about the SF housing market is completely false. (Someone had to say it- so I will.)

    The SF Case-Shiller index includes San Francisco, San Mateo, Marin, Contra Costa and Alameda counties. It does NOT include Silicon Valley’s Santa Clara county, San Jose, wine country and other nearby areas. The counties in the index are NOT the exurban communities- although some parts of Contra Costa county are pretty far from SF (but the BART goes out there, at least.)

    The cities you list, with the exception of Fremont, aren’t even in the Bay Area.

    San Francisco actually DID see quite a drop in the index. It wasn’t like Las Vegas or Phoenix but it did drop significantly. Yes, it was up 24.5% year over year in May but it is still 24.5% below the May 2006 peak.

    0
    0
  25. Robert Shiller called the SF housing market “nuts” on TV this morning, however.

    0
    0
  26. Getting to our market- Chicago condo prices are still 33% under peak prices (according to Case-Shiller.)

    0
    0
  27. Jay, I wasn’t saying $44k a year in assessments and taxes are insignificant, I just had an issue with your claim that it was obscene for a $516k condo, which this is not truly.

    “but I don’t think this place *especially* in this location, regardless of its deck and ‘PH’ status, justifies $44K a year and that’s before touching your nut.”

    Believe me, touching my nuts is worth far more than $44k, burt unfortunately you won’t ever be able to. 😉

    0
    0
  28. “The counties in the index are NOT the exurban communities- although some parts of Contra Costa county are pretty far from SF (but the BART goes out there, at least.)”

    Livermore–in Alameda County–ain’t on Bart, and is officially over halfway from SF to Modesto. It’s pretty darn exurban–sure, you can pick up Bart in Pleasanton, but it’s basically the same as living in Plainfield or something, and driving to Metra for a 45 minute train ride into the city.

    Not that there is an iota of defense for placing three LA County communities in the SF metro.

    0
    0
  29. I was joking guys, joking about Palmdale, Lancaster, etc. I know they’re suburbs of San Diego not San Francisco.

    0
    0
  30. 1. regarding foreclosure listing agents – it seems like most of the time the AGENT has never seen the unit. Some flunky took bad pics and changed the locks. Checking out foreclosures is DEFINITELY an opportunity to get a great deal. Not all of them, but some. I believe this unit was owned by the developer and never sold which explains no parking and unfinished. Originally listed in 2005 for $1.59m.

    2. This building will appreciate quickly as soon as some lender-financed deals close. It’s been all cash due to not only high # of rentals but also a looming special and litigation. As those issues are cleared out by strict new NO RENTAL rules and the facade work begins (95+% o the special has been collected) this location with the size and views will be a winner. Contrary to most listing agent remarks the building is finance-able with 20% down. Been there done that. Almost.

    3. The ’02 Unit Tier, however, has its issues. The building to the east isn’t a condo it’s apartments. While my expectation of privacy living in a downtown high rise is low, I don’t want to look out my huge window into someone else’s unit – condo or apartment, don’t care. Obviously they look back into mine. Keeping blinds closed all the time sort of ruins the whole “I live in the penthouse” vibe. Rather than king of the jungle it’s more like you’re on display in the zoo. I do love the terraces, though!

    Here is the listing for 2602 complete with pics showing the apartment building views from your Master Bedroom. Assuming that would be the view from the living room on the first floor, but that’s a guess.

    http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1111-S-Wabash-Ave-60605/unit-2602/home/12646921.

    Same tier, 7 floors down, not a duplex, same big terrace. One less bath and 750 less s/f but finished and ready to go. Listed for $725k (originally $875k). On the market for 149 days and counting.

    For what it’s worth, the ’03 tier, also a 3 bed 2 bath, has MORE apartment views and LESS city views plus the added bonus of no dining room space which seems very odd to me in a 3/2.

    Also, you have to be a cash buyer to pay these prices because recent sales in the building (all cash so far) won’t support them for a mortgage. I had one of the $400k+ units under contract with a mortgage buyer and when the appraisal came in more than $100k below the list price, Seller wouldn’t come down to meet our offer (which had us bringing a sizeable chunk of cash to the table) so we had to cancel our contract.

    I’m with Sean and Benjamon9 – if you like the area, and it has a lot to offer, you can’t beat this on price per square foot. I’m sure there’s some way to address that apartment building outside your bedroom window.

    0
    0
  31. Foreclosures generally sell themselves so the agents don’t really care. Most of them are working for peanuts anyways which is why they have these no name agencies listing the properties – there simply isn’t enough money to share 50% (or more) of the agent’s cut of commission with the ‘name’ brokerage. A lot of these relationships go pretty far back, the REOMAC world is pretty small and there are barriers to entry. I know people involved the REO world and most of them were selling REO’s in one way or another before REO’s were REO’s,if you know what I mean, and if you don’t, it means they were in the bank owned property business many years before bank owned properties were all the rage for agents to sell. Maybe that’s not the case everywhere, but the major REO agents I know – who quite frankly don’t give a Flying F*** about the properties, have been around for some time, and their relationships run deep.

    0
    0
  32. Gary, how was July for housing? In the areas I keep an eye on, things are still flying off the shelf.

    0
    0
  33. Sabrina seriously, why are you comparing prices to the peak, over and over and over… who gives a shit about what homes cost when anyone with a pulse could get a loan with no money down! Today buyers are very qualified, which is an extremely important factor you fail to mention during this “recovery”

    0
    0
  34. I agree with sonies.

    0
    0
  35. I agree with Vlajos who agrees with Sonies.

    0
    0
  36. Sonies, you have a point on who can gain versus not gain a mortgage today but “who gives a shit about what homes cost…” is anyone who bought any time around then which is a huge number of people including many on here.

    Yes, we may know prices probably won’t return there for ages, but for many we care about what they cost because we paid it and we’d like to see it return to that value or at least part way/mostly there.

    0
    0
  37. How many people overall bought a property in 2006, i would wager its less than 10% of all homeowners, probably closer to 5%

    0
    0
  38. Again, I agree with sonies.

    0
    0
  39. So, only homeowners who bought in 2006 have lost money? I bet homeowners who bought in 2005 care how much prices are off the peak still even if they bought slightly before the peak. I bet the same with people who bought in 2007. I’m not saying everyone cares how far we are from peak prices, but there are far more people that do care than to be allowed to say “who gives a shit” as if no one does.

    0
    0
  40. What I’m saying is that comparing today’s prices where lending standards are far more normal, and saying we are so much below peak pricing, where lending standards were idiotic and insane, really has no bearing on what is going on today or going forward

    0
    0
  41. Another sign of a hot market: some friends of mine got a call from a realtor, the realtor had a client that wanted to buy their condo in Andersonville (was not on the market). The price was right and they sold it. Bought a SFH in North Center and they are happy as can be.

    0
    0
  42. “Another sign of a hot market: some friends of mine got a call from a realtor, the realtor had a client that wanted to buy their condo in Andersonville (was not on the market).”

    Would you truly consider this scenario a “hot” market Vlajos? Or is that simply bubblicious? Because it’s nowhere near normal for a person to overpay on what could be the biggest asset of their life (but calling someone up about a property that isn’t even on the market and offering them who knows what for it is the definition of overpaying.)

    I wonder what’s going on out there now though?

    Mortgage applications fell to 2 year lows last week. Sure- some of that is refis falling off a cliff. But purchase apps fell another 3% last week. Mortgage apps are now down 13% from May. This will all translate into fewer sales in the next 2 months unless all cash investors step in. The 10-year spiked to 2.7% again today- just about equal to the spike on July 5th that sent rates to 4.75%. It fell back to 2.59% by the end of the day however. But these higher rates could go higher still.

    What happened to all those “sideline” buyers? Oh yeah- they don’t exist. Hopefully that myth will finally go away with this purchase data.

    Something has to give. You can’t have rising prices, rising mortgage rates and higher sales on stagnant income.

    0
    0
  43. “What I’m saying is that comparing today’s prices where lending standards are far more normal, and saying we are so much below peak pricing, where lending standards were idiotic and insane, really has no bearing on what is going on today or going forward.”

    OMG! Lending standards are “normal” when the Fed now has $4 trillion on its balance sheet? You’re joking- right?

    What percentage of loans was the federal government backing in 2007 compared to right now Sonies? Without government backing (Fannie and Freddie) there would be NO mortgage market. The government is backing nearly ALL loans. FHA and other programs now make up something like 40% of the market. These are 3% down. Heck, those people who have been refied with the HAMP program are now defaulting again! The default rate is sky high.

    I don’t even know where to begin.

    Sure- you have to have a job to get a mortgage these days (compared to 2007.) But that doesn’t mean the government distortions in the system aren’t any less destabilizing than what was happening in 2007.

    Of COURSE I can compare today’s prices to peak prices. Everyone else is. They’re all salivating at the thought that we’ll “get back there soon.” And why wouldn’t they? 25% of Americans are still underwater. They have to hope and pray the Fed keeps buying bonds and inventory stays low so they can get out of their properties.

    0
    0
  44. “How many people overall bought a property in 2006, i would wager its less than 10% of all homeowners, probably closer to 5%.”

    Plenty of people who bought in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 who are currently under water as well. I think they all care.

    0
    0
  45. “Today buyers are very qualified, which is an extremely important factor you fail to mention during this “recovery””

    3% down is NOT qualified. Hell- most buyers still can’t even do 5% down.

    0
    0
  46. I bought in 2012. I’m not underwater and the rehabbing added value above cost due to the lack of rehabbed properties for sale in the market. How ever my flood remediation costs and personal touches aren’t recoverable.

    0
    0
  47. Sabrina, the price of the sale was not bubblicious. I said my friends were happy with the price, they didn’t really make money, but they didn’t lose either.

    0
    0

Leave a Reply