Would You Buy a Maisonette? A 2-Bedroom at 270 E. Pearson in Streeterville
This 2-bedroom in the Belvedere at 270 E. Pearson in Streeterville came on the market in May 2018.
270 E. Pearson is a luxury boutique building with 40 units and a parking garage that was built in 2004.
It’s a rare newer construction building that doesn’t have a massive parking garage as it’s base.
Instead, it actually has condo units all the way down to the first floor on the street facing portion of the building.
These first floor units are called maisonettes.
This unit is one of the maisonettes. It’s windows overlook the sidewalk and park across the street.
It has a foyer which opens up to a living and dining room with 13 foot ceilings.
There are custom moldings and millwork along with dark walnut flooring.
The kitchen is described as “gourmet” in the listing and has white cabinets along with stainless steel and custom appliances.
There’s a separate breakfast room.
Both bedrooms are en suite.
The unit also has a half bath, a large utility room, a fireplace and a wine refrigerator.
It has one parking space included with a second one available for $50,000.
The property also has central air and washer/dryer in the unit.
It’s being marketed as single family home living with all the amenities of a luxury boutique building including a doorman and exercise room.
Who’s the buyer for a maisonette?
Caroline Druker at Baird & Warner has the listing. See the pictures here (no floor plan).
Unit #101: 2 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, no square footage listed
- Sold in July 2005 for $1.11 million
- Listed in May 2018 for $1.799 million
- Still listed for $1.799 million
- Includes one car parking with a second space for $50,000
- Assessments of $1,902 a month (includes a/c, gas, doorman, exercise room, exterior maintenance, lawn care, scavenger, snow removal)
- Taxes of $15,494
- Central Air
- Washer/dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 17×18
- Bedroom #2: 13×10
- Breakfast room: 10×12
- Living room: 18×21
- Dining room: 11×20
- Foyer: 5×11
“Who’s the buyer for a maisonette?”
In this case someone with more money than taste or brains. $1.8MM and you have to keep your blinds closed 24X7.
Wish you would have called this laziest realtor week
jeez its not that bad but pretty damn expensive
why would you have to keep your blinds closed 24/7?
I find it baffling when agents market a condo as “living like a single family home.” In what way is this like a single family home other than it lacking a view? Is there a private entrance? If there is a private entrance, why do you have to pay for a doorman? Why not actually buy a single family home and not have to pay such large assessments or deal with a board?
LovE. LOVE. LOVE!!!!
this is def a 1+M $ home.
OPPULENCE at its FINEST FO SHO!!!
UGH
Maybe because of lots of people walking around on the sidewalk? I rarely go to Streeterville, so can’t speak to Pearson specifically, but it always seems busy in general.
On the other hand, people walk past my house’s living room window some (on the sidewalk, there’s a small lawn in-between) and I don’t feel like I can’t open the blinds. But after being used to a 4th floor condo it felt a little weird at first.
As for the question, I don’t know who would spend that much and the assessments for this kind of building and still go with a first floor. I’m sure there are benefits — obviously it’s much cheaper than higher up in the building — but it would seem so sad to me, since to me views would be the main reason I’d pick such a building.
14 photos and no floor plan are definitely not enough to convince me the place is worth it, either, so I’m signing on to lazy realtor week.
“people walk past my house’s living room window”
A typical Chicago SFH has the living room picture window about 7 feet up and 25 feet away from the sidewalk. That’s enough that it doesn’t feel too creepy to have someone looking in from the sidewalk at night. If you’re inside the home and seated, you are not visible from the sidewalk. Also, most Chicago SFH’s are not an open concept, so the back of the home is not visible at all from the sidewalk.
This unit is eye-to-eye with the sidewalk and it’s probably an open concept too. Which means that sidewalk people passing by have a view straight in and all the way through this home. That would be very-very creepy. Which means that the blinds would always be closed – 24/7.
Yeah, looking at the sidewalk and windows again, you are right, that is a much closer proximity and would be freaky.
(The house vs. higher floor condo bothered me a bit initially when some local investment firm guy dropped by to promote being in the neighborhood and I realized he could see me, since I was sitting by my front bay window with the blinds open, and from the porch you can see right in that window. It’s different and not bothersome when people are just walking by on the sidewalk, although still a change I had to get used to. I don’t keep my blinds down now, but I would if it were as close as in the subject place.)
vb,
I don’t know what you consider a typical Chicago SFH, but 25 feet away from the sidewalk? That would be nice but that’s not quite right. I grew up in a classic Chicago bungalow on the SW side on a 30 x 125 ft. lot. Our front window was at most 12-15 feet from the sidewalk
Hard to judge this place with so few photos, but seems really overpriced for what you’re getting. The kitchen is also quite small. Maybe some people wouldn’t mind living at ground level in this location, but I’m not one of them. If I’m paying this much, I’d like a view. Either that or some vintage feel. This has neither.
Maybe the realtor has some comps to support it, but the price seems nuts to me. You could go slightly north in East Lincoln Park and get a true SFH (though on an undersized lot) for the asking price here. Note also that the taxes on this place are low compared to its asking price (or even its value in 2005); if someone pays the asking price, taxes should more than double. I’d guess it sells at close to its 2005 price.
so anyone else enjoying their nice tax hike?
Bills are out… mine went up a whopping $800 over last year.. a 6% increase
basically its now just a tad over 2.05% of AV
“a 6% increase”
up 5.835% for me.
I live in Lake County and we paid our taxes last December so we could still take advantage of the old tax system that gave a tax break for property taxes of more than $10,000 a year (this got canceled as part of the new federal tax bill). I think ours were about the same as last year, near $13,000. We have a 5 BR home in Highland Park. Taxes have nearly doubled since we moved here 16 years ago, but we did put an addition on so that could factor in.
Only an idiot would pay $1.7MM for this first floor condo unit. In my opinion, the only reason to buy a condo is for the views. This has no views and no outdoor space. If you are spending $1.5+ million on a condo with no view, you should just buy a SFH. Some of the older non-updated SFH’s are going for between $1.8 to $2.4M are available in the Gold Coast/lincoln park area.
As for property taxes, mine increased 6.8% …almost $2k/year increase. 🙁
@Bluestreak – You must have had a big back yard. In my area, with the same size lots, the homes that were only 12-15 feet from the sidewalk had 10 feet deep front porches on the front of the house. Houses without a front porch were more like 25″ from the sidewalk. That’s where the living room picture window would be.
The math is approx: 25′ front yard, 32′ house, plus 70′ backyard = 125′ lot
It depends on the maisonette. This one on Pearson, no, being right by the sidewalk would be awful. Plus I think the 157 goes down Pearson so you have bus fumes to deal with. But, I would have bought Ann Laurie’s maisonette on East Lake Shore Drive. The building is set back from the sidewalk, not that much pedestrian traffic anyway. http://www.chicagonow.com/getting-real/2014/07/ann-luries-gold-coast-condo-hits-market
I’m not into this building or especially this maisonette, but it is right on the park, so it gets a lot of sun. Would be a very area to be outside your front door. I walk past these all the time and never noticed them. People looking in windows might be a small issue. Plenty of highrise owner have to deal with privacy issues tool.
“25? front yard, 32? house, plus 70? backyard = 125? lot”
32′ deep house? That’s ~20′ wide? So, 1200 sf on two floors.
Yeah, some of the cottages are that size, but it’s more typical around Chicago to be:
125′ = 15′ front yard, 50′-60′ house, 30′-40′ yard, 20′ garage.
Houses 25′ back from the sidewalk are noticeably unusual, at least in the greater GZ.
“25? front yard, 32? house, plus 70? backyard = 125? lot”
32′ deep house? That’s ~20′ wide? So, 1200 sf on two floors.
Yeah, some of the cottages are that size, but it’s more typical around Chicago to be:
125′ = 15′ front yard, 50′-60′ house, 30′-40′ yard, 20′ garage.
Houses 25′ back from the sidewalk are noticeably unusual, at least in the greater GZ.
@anon (tfo) – Bluestreak and I were talking about 30′ wide lots on the SW and NW sides. Those homes are closer to 24-25′ wide. 25′ x 32′ = 800, 1600 sf on two floors.
I agree that the GZ has more classic Chicago 25′ wide lots, which means more 20′ wide homes, Which means narrow-deep homes. I agree with your math for the GZ.
“Bluestreak and I were talking about 30? wide lots on the SW and NW sides.”
Anyone was supposed to get that from:
“A typical Chicago SFH has the living room picture window about 7 feet up and 25 feet away from the sidewalk.”
??
And, anyway, I still dispute that a typical SFH in Chicago is only ~32′ deep. 40′ (often with a 10′ enclosed porch/addition) is far more typical.
But yeah, there are huge swaths of the bungalow belts with stupid big setbacks, leaving tiny tiny backyards.
Who’d want to live on the first floor?
Oh…maybe…a family with a member who uses a wheelchair or other assistance?
And there IS a way around the open-window-versus-privacy issue. I knew a family with a first-floor unit that was right off the street. Their living room had one-way mirror/window panes that allowed them to look at the street, while passers-by saw only their own reflections.
Sabrina, could you post some listings/discussions concerning high-rise condo buildings with reputations for bad management decisions and/or dysfunctional condo boards? I’m disappointed by how difficult it is to assess condo buildings’ management and board issues prior to purchase. Seems it’s a crap-shoot at best, unless your realtor is a personal friend willing to quietly disclose which buildings should be avoided because of management problems, fiscal malfeasance issues, and/or dysfunctional boards. I’m aware of several buildings with tumultuous board-caused problems: 1440 N State Parkway, 111 E Chestnut, River City, Kennelly Square (recent sale based on faulty build-wide curtain-wall repair estimates). Those are the buildings featured in recent newspaper articles. There are probably other buildings that have thus far avoided public scrutiny, but are as dysfunctional and mismanaged as these.
I’m looking for a mid-priced high-rise 1-bedrm condo in a well-managed building in Near North/Streeterville ASAP.
Walked past this unit this morning. Absolutely gorgeous tree shaded wide sidewalk in front and directly across from park. One building off lake and very quiet on a sunday morning. Entrance is not on street.
Windows are about 4ft off street. They’re tinted and wide louvers, which were fully open. You couldn’t see in at all. Still would never want it, but much better than chatterotti imagined.
Architect, can confirm 111 E Chestnut is a total disaster with ongoing problems that will continue as board and owner interests are very divided.
Across the street 777 N Michigan has a great board and is as well run as any building I’ve seen. In the last 10 years it’s totally transformed.
“I’m aware of several buildings with tumultuous board-caused problems: 1440 N State Parkway, 111 E Chestnut, River City, Kennelly Square (recent sale based on faulty build-wide curtain-wall repair estimates). Those are the buildings featured in recent newspaper articles.”
I haven’t heard or seen any newspaper articles about the boards at 1440 N State Parkway, 111 E Chestnut or River City. Kennelly Square is the only one which is selling because they deferred maintenance for too many years and now have a huge special assessment and repairs of millions.
River City is trying to sell to developers because the building should never have been converted into condos in the first place. The last time it was in the paper for any meaningful issue was when the parking garage flooded years ago. Otherwise, it was a foreclosure mess during the housing bust. It’s in a prime location next to the River Line development to the north and then the new big development that will be built to the south. I haven’t heard it’s board “problem” in that building.
What’s going on with the other two buildings? They haven’t been in the newspaper either. Both were built in the early 1970s. They’re nearly 50 years old.
Any older building in a harsh climate is going to need repairs and maintenance. Things break down. Heck, there can be real issues even within the first 10 years of a building.
There’s no way to know if a building is “well” managed other than the few buildings that we know about that have never had a special assessment. That still doesn’t guarantee anything. Boards are voted out. Owners change. The younger owners might not have the same goals as the prior owners.
If you make an offer on a condo, you certainly have the right to look at the financials and the board minutes. In fact, it’s my experience, that in the last few years, if you’re also getting a mortgage, the bank will ask for that info as well. They are leery of lending in a building that has issues that could impact value. They look at lawsuits etc.
And what does “well-managed” mean?
Keeping assessments low? Making sure that the reserves are healthy? Keeping up with maintenance? Doing the big projects when they need to be done- like roof, A/C, garage, windows? Getting a cheap cable package? Re-doing the lobby? Ordering fresh flowers for the lobby? Re-doing the exercise room?
There are plenty of owners who say “yay- they only raised my assessment $10 this year” and think that is “well-managed.”
“Architect, can confirm 111 E Chestnut is a total disaster with ongoing problems that will continue as board and owner interests are very divided.”
What are they divided about?
It’s a big building with nearly 500 units.
It’s also been my experience that a changing of the guard in many Streeterville, Gold Coast buildings as the older generation passes on is causing some growing pains in many buildings. There’s a clash of generations. Lots of older owners on fixed income and that plays into their decision making.
Architect: If you want a building that has never had a special, look at 535 N Michigan. It hasn’t ever had one.
By the way, anyone know what’s going on in the Bristol?
I saw a listing that said something like, “full building renovation” going on. What does that mean? New hallways? Lobby? Or something else?
It was built in 2000 so it’s closing in on the 20-year mark. That’s when things start to look out of date like hallways and lobbies.
The divide I spoke of at 111 e chestnut is not between generations of owners, but between the differing interests of residing owners and investors. Also, are incredible litigation issues due to a extreme nuisance resident (this has been widely covered in the press).
Crap Mgmt at 1030 n. State, Newberry Plaza. Sudler who suck ass on their best day, manages this nightmare.
“The divide I spoke of at 111 e chestnut is not between generations of owners, but between the differing interests of residing owners and investors.”
Over what?
Like I said, it’s a big building. Aren’t there a couple of sizes of studios in there too? Bound to be a good number of investors because of that.
A “disaster” of a board is when they defer maintenance and then suddenly the $10 million bill arrives like what happened at Kennelly Square.
Fighting among owners is common but I would want them to do their job.
If you think you can live in a building with 200+ units and there won’t be issues with the board, then don’t live in a big condo building. Don’t live in a condo at all, frankly, because even in a 3-unit building there can be issues.
Maybe disaster was too strong. Dysfunctional is more accurate.
Many residents strongly oppose board and there is a website cataloging their gripes. Click the archives tab and there 10’s of articles detailing the minutiae.
http://www.111eastchestnut.org/about/
http://www.111eastchestnut.org/archives/
If you google “111 E Chestnut lawsuit”, there are dozens of articles from the Sun Times and Tribune covering them as well going back years.
I know all about life in a large condo building and served on boards of several. My parents sold a unit at 111 about 2 years ago because of all the friction in the building. In response to Architect’s comment, I was just sharing my two cents.
A few years ago there was some talk about a web site that would give Realtors (don’t think it was available to others) the inside scoop about condo associations, so that before helping a client buy or sell a unit, they would be aware of what’s going on.
I haven’t heard much about it lately. Maybe it never got off the ground due to confidentiality issues.
Closed for 1.650