Bank Owned Gold Coast 2-Bedroom Listed 44% Below the 2002 Price: 1155 N. Dearborn

We actually chattered about this 2-bedroom unit in Elm Tower, at 1155 N. Dearborn in the Gold Coast in October 2008.

Back then, it had been reduced $200,000 and was listed well under the 2002 purchase price.

See our prior chatter and pictures here.

But even with the big price cut, no one took the bait.

The unit is now bank owned and is even cheaper.

Originally listed in September 2010 at $399,900, it has been reduced another $50,000 and is now listed about 44% under the 2002 purchase price.

From the pictures, the kitchen and baths look intact.

The kitchen has the standard granite counter tops and stainless steel appliances. There are hardwood floors in the main living area.

It has central air, laundry hook-up in the unit, and parking is available. (I can’t tell if a deeded parking space is included in this sale or not.)

After 2 years on and off the market- is this finally a deal?

James Poulos at REO Plus Inc. has the listing. See the pictures here.

Unit #502: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1487 square feet

  • Sold in December 2002 for $621,000
  • Originally listed in September 2007 for $699,000
  • Reduced several times
  • Was listed in October 2008 for $499,000 (parking is $38,000 extra)
  • Lis pendens foreclosure filed in January 2009
  • Bank owned in August 2010
  • Originally listed in September 2010 for $399,900
  • Reduced twice
  • Currently listed for $349,900 (is parking included or extra???)
  • Assessments of $910 a month (includes heat, a/c, doorman)
  • Taxes of $8055
  • Central Air
  • Washer/Dryer hook-up in the unit
  • Bedroom #1: 17×16
  • Bedroom #2: 11×11

15 Responses to “Bank Owned Gold Coast 2-Bedroom Listed 44% Below the 2002 Price: 1155 N. Dearborn”

  1. Who the heck would pay 621k for this place (even at the height of the bubble!)!! The place looks like they carved out condos in yet another space that wasn’t initially meant for condos (just look at the windows and pillars) – very awkward. Even at this price, I wouldn’t buy it. Unfortunately, it would have to be in the 200s for it to peak my interest.

    0
    0
  2. Shame to see that sweet fridge just sitting there in a bank sale.

    0
    0
  3. The building has very few units, about 35, so that explains the high HOAs.

    0
    0
  4. 39 units, built in 2002. The units facing dearborn with the huge terraces are lovely. The units on low floors facing the back of the building like this one, stink

    0
    0
  5. This building reminds me of the Palmolive – condos carved out of spaces that weren’t meant to be condos. Also, like David said, the more expensive, larger units with terraces are probably worthwhile. The others (on lower floors and facing the back) are afterthoughts which would only appeal to someone who wanted the prestige(?) of living in this building.

    0
    0
  6. Well, this was new construction back in 2002, so some thought by an architect must have been put into the layouts. Palmolive of course was an office building built in 1929…..

    Looks like they tried to mimic the Limestone Art Deco look on the exterior!

    0
    0
  7. “Well, this was new construction back in 2002, so some thought by an architect must have been put into the layouts. Palmolive of course was an office building built in 1929”

    I can’t believe this was new construction in 2002. No architect/developer would/could make such idiotic layouts. This HAS to be a redevelopment project.

    0
    0
  8. nah clio. there used to be a big old mansion on this spot. hat a ranallis in it. when they got ready to develop it the hood protested some but the developer won out. it’s definitely new, and a mistake.

    0
    0
  9. But look at the view, look at the view!

    0
    0
  10. Holy crap, CH. I can’t believe it. Good God – when you have a blank slate and THIS is what you come up with?!!! Seriously, low ceilings, awkward layouts, window placement that doesn’t make sense?!!!! The developer/architect SHOULD be forced to buy and live here.

    0
    0
  11. Developer/architect walked away with a bundle, and the City trashed the history of a neighborhood for the promise of more property taxes (how much will a multi-unit condo pay in taxes as compared to a commercialized mansion?).

    The money entities win, the neighborhood looses.

    0
    0
  12. there are some awesome units in this building with terraces and great views…and then there are some units like this one.

    i live a few blocks away from here and i have to say that the neighborhood is great… (if you can ignore division street altogether.)

    i’d say this will probably still sell for no less than 300k, it’s a good size, nice building and great location. the views suck and the layout sucks but the pricepoint reflects that.

    0
    0
  13. LOL!!!

    “JDL’s first projects were smaller residential ones: custom homes and condominium redevelopment, each distinguished by their attention to detail, and their unique sense of materials, lighting and space. As JDL’s reputation grew, larger projects became possible: rowhomes, townhomes, and commercial properties. Now, with the recent completion of The Elm Tower, and the development of Maple Tower and Columbia Place, JDL has taken its projects to, literally, new heights: high rises that are redefining luxury gold coast living and a new neighborhood that is taking root in Lakeview.”

    0
    0
  14. This would be an extremely depressing place to live, unless you were a mouse

    0
    0

Leave a Reply