Foreclosures Appearing in 474 N. Lake Shore Drive
474 N. Lake Shore Drive is a 550-unit building in Streeterville right on Lake Shore Drive with stunning views of the lake and the skyline.
Built in 1991 as an apartment building, it was converted into condos in the last several years. In fact, the developer is still selling units.
The building offers deeded parking (for larger units) and washer/dryers are allowed in the units.
Current stats on the building (out of 550 units):
- 31 for sale
- 17 for rent
Some units may be both for sale AND for rent.
This two bedroom unit is going to foreclosure auction. Here’s the current listing:
BEST VALUE IN 474 N. LAKESHORE, ADJACENT TO THE SPIRE ‘GREAT INVESTMENT’ – PHENOMENAL NE 2BR, 2BA W/UNOBSTRUCTED BREATHTAKING VIEWS OF LAKE MICHIGAN/NAVY PIER/LAKE SHORE DR FULLY UPGRADED CABINETS, GRANITE, WOOD FLRS, IN-UNIT FULL LAUNDRY. FULL AMENITY W/DOORMAN, POOL, GYM, CLEANERS, VALET GARAGE PARKING – 2 SPACES AVAIL @$45KEA. TENANTS REQUIRE 48HOUR NOTICE.
Unit #3105: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1257 square feet
- I can’t find a prior sales price- probably in the low $400,000s
- Currently on the market for $449,900 plus $45k for parking
- Under contract since May 2008
- Lis pendens filed by Wells Fargo on June 24, 2008
- Foreclosure auction price of $348,363
- Assessments of $665 a month
- Taxes are $6313
- @Properties has the listing
474 N. Lake Shore Drive Condominiums [developer’s website]
Per CCRD, unit plus two parking spaces bought for $491K on 11/08/2005.
First mortgage of $359,650 from Wells Fargo on 11/08/2005.
Second mortgage of $82,160 from Wells Fargo on 11/08/2005.
That second was replaced with another for $83,935 from Wells Fargo on 11/09/2006.
“Under contract” may mean that there is a short sale that Wells is considering — that should hold off the auction until they make up their minds.
If it sells at auction, the owner loses their entire 10% downpayment (and their credit rating) and Wells loses almost the entire second mortgage. The $348K is roughly the outstanding principal on the first, so Wells loses only the foreclosure costs on the first.
Re-reading this I realize that the listing price ($449K plus 2 parking at $45K) would not be a short sale. The recorded debts against the property total only $462K and the listing price is $539K. Even at 90% of list, the seller should avoid bringing much cash to closing.
I asked my realtor about this building in 2005 and she said not to look at it because clients would come to closing and the price would be higher than what was agreed upon with the developer. Anyone have this experience with the developer?
It seems odd to me that the developer is not out of this building because it should have been a slam dunk when they started to market it back in early 2005. The location and views should have sold this building out. Must have been pricing?
Check out this link: http://www.avenueeastcondo.com/pdfs/news_041105.pdf
It lists some presale information from back in April of 2005. Avenue East had deposits on 95 of 132 units before ground breaking. Aside from price, anyone have any thoughts on why resales have not moved there?
One reason 474 N LSD is not selling is that it is the ugliest building in Chicago!
More important question — Why would people want to buy units in the south side of the Spire and have views of this thing?
My mother-in-law rented in this building for 12 years but she did not buy when they converted. One of her main complaints was that the elevators were constantly breaking down and she feared the associated costs/assessments for maintenance.
Could those ceilings be any lower.
Bleh…what a boring, featureless, claustrophobic little shoebox.
i had not HEARD that about the elevators — that’s SUPER interesting. when was it that your mother-in-law lived there? have you/has anyone heard anything about elevator troubles SINCE the conversion?
per the information from the sales reps at the building and via independent research (a few months ago), . . . the building was not ALL re-done when the conversion was done, thus the higher assessments – in anticipation of likely/inevitable building maintenance. the elevators were “done” when they converted – i THINK. however, as we know, the building was built in 1991 – that was 17 yrs ago. the developer did NOT gut (didn’t re-do all electric/plumbing/roof/windows). so, this is all stuff that will EVENTUALLY have to be done – as with any building with some age on it.
i really do not like this building either. but, somehow, i feel bad saying that. ha! 😉 some of that is probably personal taste . . .
it IS a great, great location — and the views are PHENOMENAL (if you’re into lake and sky), but i think that the SPIRE is going to be a huge annoyance for the next several years (construction).
the building amenities are nice too – the pool/sauna/doorman/etc.
the building could use a wash – AND, for GOD’s SAKE! A NEW SIGN!!!!!! their sales signs on the exterior are old and dirty as heck!
30-some units left out of 550 – not really that bad, is it?
rough for re-sales, though – to STILL be competing against the developer.
“Check out this link: http://www.avenueeastcondo.com/pdfs/news_041105.pdf
It lists some presale information from back in April of 2005. Avenue East had deposits on 95 of 132 units before ground breaking. Aside from price, anyone have any thoughts on why resales have not moved there?”
JL:
I will be doing an update on Avenue East shortly.
Investors swarmed this building and now pricing and the market mentality has changed so no one can flip. The location is outstanding if you want to be near the Mag Mile but the finishes are just so-so (and especially for the asking prices.)
If prices come down substantially- we’ll see some sales.
OH! i forgot!
the standard finishes, from the developer, were relatively low-end (when one starts comparing them with those in buildings in the price-range and in that area). pergO floors, popcorn ceilings, carpet – stuff like that. if one WANTs high-end finishes, one has to consider paying 50k in additional upgrade/rehab costs. THEN, one faces the risk of being “that guy” – the guy in that tier with the unit that is nicer, but “worth” 50k more when it comes to resale, competing with units that are 50k less that can be upgraded to suit if a buyer wants high-end finishes.
or tough for the developer — they can’t cut prices too much without angering early buyers. When this foreclosure hits the market as a REO it will be a bad comp for the developer — $150K below the initial price (the $491K I noted above).
“popcorn ceilings”
I was trying to figure out whether the ceiling in the first interior picture was a digital artifact or popcorn. At least it isn’t asbestos popcorn.
it’ll be a rough comp, but one out of 500 or so won’t kill ’em!
the building/developer WAS also offering 1% MORE than the “usual” co-op/buyer agent commission a month or 2 ago . . . tricky!!!!
I seriously doubt that developers care about offending earlier buyers who paid more. They just use that as an excuse as to why they can’t cut prices, and expect prospective buyers to fall for it. Pretty soon, ye olde invisible hand will give them no choice.
*Under contract since May 2008
*Lis pendens filed by Wells Fargo on June 24, 2008
———
Can anyone explain this? Buyer had a mortgage conting?
“Can anyone explain this? Buyer had a mortgage conting?”
Based on my calculations, the seller might need to bring cash to closing even if they were caught up on the mortgage. The lis pendens from the lender suggests that they owe a couple months of mortgage, which means that the seller probably needs to bring some $10-20K to closing. If they don’t have it (likely), they may be trying to negotiate a short sale.
It is even worse if the buyer doesn’t want both parking spots (and $45K is a bit steep) or if the negotiation was particularly aggressive.
The shift in market rates could be triggering a mortgage contingency — there was a 0.75% increase in conforming rates in early June. I’d need to re-read the standard contract, but I believe that the seller has an option of obtaining the specified mortgage rather than killing the contract. This could cause another increase in closing costs for the seller (as they buy down the interest for the buyer).
The building is not in good shape. Have had friends who have rented there since the conversion. The soundproofing is nonexistent. Also, the building has settled such that doors get jammed. One friend who lived on the 56th floor had to call maintenance to open her front door–she was trapped inside. (This was about a year ago.) Also not well insulated–you feel drafts when standing close to windows.
There’s a reason this place hasn’t sold out–this was an apartment building, with apartment-building quality, asking luxury condo prices.
Stunning, stunning views, though!
My friend lived in this building for 2 years, and up until they converted the building into condos. He had a 2 bedroom on the top floor and the views were absolutely amazing.
However, he definitely did not want to buy in this building. It was a great rental building for the price they charged in rent, especially when you are young and going through law school, but the building left much to be desired, especially for the prices they were trying to sell the units for.
The building is ugly from the outside, and from the inside as well. I remember they remodeled the lobby in preparation for the condo conversion. The remodeled lobby looked worse than the original lobby. It looked so very cheap and tacky!
I know they went through and renovated the units also, but from these pictures, it does not look like they did a very good job.
All this building really has going for it is the views.
Other than the views (which I’m sure are lovely) there is not one reason why anyone would want to live here (especially people who like unique spaces). This unit could be any other unit for sale in the city.
Does anybody know the average price of the parking spots in 474 ? Or how do I find out the past sales. I do know of someone that bought a unit as an intown and the former tenant ask to rent temporary. That was 2 years and steady rent increases to same ” temp ” tenant. He did say that he wouldn’t now use it as an intown but had good luck with it as an investment.
I think parking ranges from 40 to 60k, I will double check! – and that is not so weird for the area, as much as that high price sucks! 😉
I have a listing at 474 N. LSD. It has a north view, which from the way the shoreline curves there, offers amazing views north and east…. however it’s not the Spire but the The Peshtigo that is killing my listing.
I think the main problem with the resale market in 474 is that it’s competing with the unknown. The building is being surrounded by new construction. And since those buildings are either not complete or even started, the uncertainty of the effect they’ll have on views, sun light, traffic, etc., coupled with the fact that there are currently numerous other available options for buyers, keeps most from being able to commit to buy at 474.