Foreclosures Popping Up in Metropolitan Tower: 310 S. Michigan in the Loop
This 3-bedroom in the Metropolitan Tower at 310 S. Michigan in the Loop came on the market in May 2011.
It is bank owned.
I’m not sure it actually IS a 3-bedroom however.
The unit above it, #1309, is also on the market as a 2 bedroom plus den and it is a short sale.
If anyone knows- please let me know.
Metropolitan Tower is still not sold out from the developer. Yet there are several short sales and bank owned units on the market in the building, including this 3-bedroom unit.
I don’t believe the unit has any lake or Millennium Park views- as you can see an office building out the wall of windows.
According to the pictures, it is also missing the kitchen and the cabinets in at least one bathroom (the toilet is all that remains in one of the bathrooms.)
It does, however, have 2 car parking, central air and a washer/dryer hook up.
Bought in April 2008, the lis pendens was filed just 8 months later.
The unit was recently reduced $40,000 and is currently listed $298,100 under the 2008 purchase price at $629,900.
But Unit #1309, one floor above, is currently listed as a short sale at $429,000 (including one parking spot).
Perhaps they are different floorplans. See the pictures of #1309 here.
What price will sell this unit?
Ira Mizell at Goldtree Realty has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #1209: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, no square footage listed
- Sold in April 2008 for $928,000
- Lis pendens filed in December 2008
- Lis pendens foreclosure in October 2009
- Bank owned in September 2010
- Originally listed in May 2011 for $669,500
- Reduced
- Currently listed for $629,900
- Assessments of $862 a month (includes heat, a/c, doorman)
- Taxes of $4800
- Central Air
- Washer/dryer hook-up
- 2 car parking included
- Bedroom #1: 12×11
- Bedroom #2: 11×13
- Bedroom #3: 13×22 (?)
I looked at the price, then looked at the pictures. I almost threw up in my mouth.
Knife-caught at $349k
Well under $300k if not a real 3BR
The layout is awful….looks narrow and very cheap. I am surprised anyone bought these. And…whats the story behind the immediate foreclosure??
“Sold in April 2008 for $928,000
Originally listed in May 2011 for $669,500
Currently listed for $629,900”
No, no and HELL no.
Thanks for the laugh.
I got this one through my MLS alerts and thought how can this be over 600K unless it is in rupees…lol
This building should have stayed an office building. Layout horrible…light quality even worse…the first looks like a dungeon. I don’t think its a 3 bedroom. I think the right corner of the living room (facing the windows) was supposed to be the den. Either way, the locatin “on the Avenue” is so not worth the price the original owner paid. I can’t believe what crappy conversion it is…I’ve seen much better corporate housing. Ugh..
“. . . 3 bedroom, 2.1 bath unit with Imagination Room . . . .” Is that where you go to pretend that you made a wise investment?
OK, I’ll bite… what is an “Imagination Room”?? Wow, is this a depressing listing, even more so than the highly depressing 55 E. Monroe office building conversion posted a while back.
Looks worse than a garden unit with that light and ceilings. Eeks.
“The layout is awful….looks narrow and very cheap. I am surprised anyone bought these.”
well our almost mayor (and IL school head) Mr Chico bought and lives here.
lol this could even be called a 1 bedroom if you don’t count those two soft lofted bedrooms
but yeah if you don’t have a view of the park this building sucks
This place has rental written all over it.
horrible. just horrible. the living/dining room combo pic in #1309 is just downright depressing.
just awful. how in God’s name did the ’08 prices happen here? did anyone ever walk in to that hell hole?
i mean, really…re: 1309…I’d feel like Hans Solo in the trash compactor if i was sitting on that couch.
Little over $800k in mortgages on 1209.
LP filed on the ($400k) 2d 7 months after closing.
LP filed on the (~$415k) 1st 10 months after that.
BofA was both the 1st and 2d.
Current REO owner–USA!! (fannie)
These people must have bought from a floorplan and did not walk through carefully to look for window placement….Still though the finishings are cheap…wonder if the contract said the developer could replace with different finishings than the marketing brochure listed…
I cannot believe someone paid nearly $1 million for this place. Wow.
(stunned silence)
Also, per redfin (so genuinely questionable), the last ask before the crazy purchase was mid-$400s.
G–can you confirm the actual last ask?
What a shame for everyone associate with a project like this. These units are so depressing that I’m queasy.
Been in this building a few times and seen multiple units..not a fan, the location is okay if you need access to the loop and mil. park – but it has a very apartmenty and closed off feel…the windows aren’t big enough for me.
i know we have to stick with apples to apples, but if i was in the 600k-700k arena and ‘needed’ a 3 bedroom in this location, there is a 40th floor unit at the heritage near millennium park for 700ish k i believe…much nicer building and units.
‘http://chitownpropertygroup.com/idx/mls-07827954-130_n_garland_court_unit_number_4002_chicago_il_60602’
thats the link i’m thinking of, i think..but to be fair 1700 sq feet may be a bit cramped for a 3 bed. pictures are deceiving.
* this is the link i meant to put up
http://www.estately.com/listings/info/130-north-garland-court–24
“Sold in April 2008 for $928,000.”
I can only hope some sort of mortgage fraud was involved if that number is correct. I’m a little more optimistic than SoPoCo Lurker, but my guess is in the same range: this sells for around $360-370k (I’m giving them $30k for the second parking spot, and assuming total square footage is at least 1800).
I can see why this building is having problems.
I’m very sad to see such a beautiful, stately old building given such a sad, botched rehab. What a lost opportunity to develop something that could compare with the beautiful Palmolive. These apartments are seriously botched and ugly. I couldn’t bring myself to pay any price over what I’d pay for totally raw space, because I’d want to gut the whole thing and start over.
“I can only hope some sort of mortgage fraud was involved if that number is correct. ”
Well, despite the appearance of having put ~$115k into the purchase, the timing of the first LP means that she probably *never* made a payment on the 2d mortgage.
Some of the other units that are for sale in this building are much nicer and brighter. But I don’t like the idea of the lofted bedrooms lacking windows.
http://www.urbanrealestate.com/property/310-S-Michigan-Unit-2700-CHICAGO-IL-60604-OLPFB54RB4YAO.html
This building looks nice from the outside, but I can’t imagine living in such a dark space. Maybe it would be good for vampires or for one of the few hundred people in the US with xeroderma pigmentosum.
lol at vampires. Good one Jenny : )
From the outside, one would think luxury residences. Truly a decay in the future. What a great disappointment for such a lovely building and ideal address.
This was a great office building back in the day.
What they turned it into is a bad joke
I’ve seen the 09 tier in this building and 1209 is a combo unit, much like a few others in that same tier. 1309 is the original layout and you can tell by the wall in the living area. In 1209 you have a vast amount of space. Granted you look at the Santa Fe building across the street and there are only 5 windows in the whole unit–all in the living/dining area. 2 of the bedrooms are open loft. The 09 combo unit I saw had a master in the back of the unit with absolutely no light. I’m not even sure how it was legal, unless the owners did something themselves b/c the walls go to the ceiling. In the combo, the space is very large for a $/s.f. basis. Maybe if you had a view of the lake and windows in at least 1 or 2 of the bedrooms, this would be worth it. Lacking any sort of outdoor space as well.
That being said, this building has some unique duplex units on the 2nd floor which pretty much hovers right over the trees on Michigan ave. Probably som noise, though.
“Also, per redfin (so genuinely questionable), the last ask before the crazy purchase was mid-$400s.
G–can you confirm the actual last ask?”
Here ya go:
1209/1210 sold 3/29/07 $927,774
Per sold listing: “Unit sold as a combo unit with 1210 mls#06457984 both units sold with 2 parking spaces @ 100,000 (50,000 ea.) 1 imagination room 51,000 and both units have 1774.00 in upgrades.”
Unit 1209 was listed for $443,000
Unit 1210 was listed for $317,000
add in the extras above and consider the upgrades a typo and you have the $927,774 closed price.
“1 imagination room 51,000”
What *is* that? A glorified storage space?
Explains why it’s more than the 1309 unit, even with being stripped.
This *could* be a cool loft-ish building, if the spaces were larger, un-walled and cheaper.
I’ve seen references to potential office or guest room use. Best I can tell, pic 7 here is what is referred to as a finished suite:
http://chicagoarealistings.com/listing/IL/Chicago/310-S-Michigan-Ave-Unit-1804/07819774
Also, some units have the imagination room on a different floor.
“I’ve seen references to potential office or guest room use. Best I can tell, pic 7 here is what is referred to as a finished suite”
Wasn’t expecting windows. Faces into a light well? Google aerial sux b/c of shadows.
Looking at bing bird’s eye, if there is a lightwell, it’s covered (with glass?) at the top.
I was surpised, too. I don’t know the setup. Their website refers to “on floor storage lockers” with limited availability. That could be something else. It also refers to “tastefully designed guest suites” which might mean these were originally intended to be a common element?
“It also refers to “tastefully designed guest suites” ”
I was poking around for floorplans, and saw a reference to the two “just completed” (in 2007, iirc) guest suites on the 12th (again, iirc) floor, which were clearly common elements. I was guessing they were converted from unsold studios, but the “imagination” rooms seem another likely candidate, esp if there is a lightwell–probably with fire escapes.
In a perfect world, the no-view sides of the building would have been chopping into v. large loft-y spaces at much lower $$ psf than the view side, with the %ages based on initial value, rather than SF. If even a piece of the west side of the building could be done with no hallway, so the units had windows on the westside *and* the (speculative) lightwell, that could be a cool space. Still not a $1mm space, times 20 (or however many floors) but not godawful like this turned out.
Don’t make the mistake of judging the Metropolitan by this one unit. This is actually a beautiful landmark building that was done wonderfully. Lots of great units in the building. But, like everything else in the market place, took a huge hit on values. The timing of this project was really bad. They started marketing the projects years ago, but only began delivering units when the market had already turned south. So, many buyers chose to walk, forfeiting earnest money and leaving the developer with a lot of unsold units. The developer then deeply discounted units to get them sold. The developer is indeed SOLD OUT now, contrary to what was written in this posting. But, it’s cost a lot of owners more value.
As for this unit, indeed it looks atrocious. Can’t believe someone paid $1mm for it, in any market. The units that face east in this building and have protected, unobstructed views of the Lake and Millenium Park are much more desirable than ones that stare at concrete, offering little to no views and no light.
As for imagination rooms, those are appx 15×15 rooms, some with finished plumbing, that can be used as offices, guest rooms, ets. They are often on a different floor from the unit. They were marketed by the developer as add ons instead of trying to sell studios with only interior window wells. Some are more finished than others. Up to the individual owners.
The guest suites that are referenced are finished rooms in the building that the developer designed for guests of owners to be able to rent out by the night. Kind of like a mini-hotel in your building. But, I think there’s only two. And only an owner can book it. This could be super convenient for in-laws, friends, etc. coming to visit.
Wow – I walk past that building every day and always thought “this would be a great place to live”. How can ANY development in that location have gone so terribly, terribly wrong!!
“Wow – I walk past that building every day and always thought “this would be a great place to live”. How can ANY development in that location have gone so terribly, terribly wrong!!”
Jim, doode i have been asking the same thing and my answer is always GREED.
i understand the difficulty of turning a office building into a livable space. but to create a bunch of “garden apts” is horrific.
some crazy marketing analysis old the developer that the rear units will cost less because of view. so instead of upping the sqft and creating a upped unit to offset that they went for, “its a shytie view so let do a shytie job of everything from layout to finishes, ect.”
btw, in case anyone but me cares, I found a couple descriptions of the building as “u-shaped”.
Haven’t had a chance to walk by to check, but if correct, that makes what they did layout wise really in excusable.
“Haven’t had a chance to walk by to check, but if correct, that makes what they did layout wise really in excusable.”
that might be plausable,
Any CC’ers work close to the metropolitan tower? or close enough to send a summer intern to go walk by and report? please do so as i would like to know by lunch