Is River Bend Really River Bust?
If you take one of the architectural boat tours down the Chicago River, the guides will no doubt comment about the high rise condo building at the bend of the north and south branches of the river at 333 N. Canal. It’s hard not to miss it.
Originally touted as a prestige luxury building with stunning views down the Chicago River (and they are stunning), River Bend fell on hard times with even the developer having to secure additional funding in order to keep the project going. The original developer finally went bankrupt and new financiers stepped in. The building was completed in 2002.
But the building always had slow sales. There are a half dozen townhomes at the base of the building and even though it was completed about 6 years ago, there is still one townhouse available from the developer. Unit #104 is on the market for $1.825 million (was listed for $2 million over the summer.) From the listing:
FEELS LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME….DEVELOPER LOOKING AT ALL OFFERS! 3 LEVELS, 5000 SQ FT. OVERLOOKING CHICAGO RIVER W/ AMAZING CITY VIEWS. IN-UNIT ELEVATOR, WALK OUT TERRACES FROM LIVING ROOM & KITCHEN. MASSIVE MASTER SUITE 18X29 W/ 2 STROLL IN CLOSETS. 3B+DEN (BEDROOM), 4 1/2 BA. 3 PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE. ASSES. INCL GAS, AIR, WATER, CABLE, INTERNET, VALET, 24-HR DOORMAN, ONSITE MGR, FITNESS CTR, …
The problem with the townhouses is that they have almost no outdoor space since they are built into the base of the building. There is no backyard. And the nice riverwalk on your front steps goes, basically, nowhere, as it doesn’t connect to any other riverwalk. It runs only the length of the building.
But the slow townhouse sales weren’t even the worst of it. A year ago the condominium association sued the developer (or, we should say, the new developer) for shoddy construction work. From the Sun-Times in August:
A year ago, the condo association at the prestigious 333 N. Canal building, known as River Bend, sued its developers over allegedly cheaping out on construction materials and causing water damage. Now, the association has settled the case and put out a letter averring that the developer, Norman Radow, and his fiscal partner, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., are great people.
Such is the nature of truth as it gropes through the legal process. The association really had a beef with the building’s original developer, who went bankrupt. Suing her would be foolhardy. Radow came in much later, but he had cash when the association wanted some.
Radow said he settled for $300,000, far less than the association demanded. He said that while the litigation surprised him, it was never personal and it appeared more of an “intellectual exercise” by lawyers trying to hang on him the past developer’s sins.
As part of the settlement, the association issued Radow a letter that read, in part, “To the extent anything we said or did in litigation suggested you have not been an outstanding steward of River Bend, we sincerely apologize. We regret that the lawsuit was brought at all, and are equally remorseful for any problems this caused you or Lehman.”
It’s no wonder the assessments in the building are much higher than they should be.
The building also suffers from the problems with its valet parking. Everytime you come home, you have to hand your keys off to the valet who parks your car (and you pay an additional monthly assessment for that privilege.) From talking with people who have lived in the building, it’s an added pain in the behind (to call down ahead of time and “schedule” when your car will be ready for you to leave) not to mention the added cost of doing so.
The architecture of the building was brilliant though. Why even bother with the west side? All anyone would care about were the river views. So they designed the building with the hallways on the west side of the building and all of the units on the east. Every unit, therefore, has a river view. And there are small windows at the top of the rooms in the back of the units to take advantage of western light (as the hallway is one long wall of windows.)
And the view, as I said above, is spectacular. Question is, how long will they have it? As you can see from this picture below, the piece of land with the parking lot on it, otherwise known as Wolf Point, is scheduled to be developed into three high rises, including one 89 story building, by the Kennedy family. Whether or not, in this slowing market, such a project could now get built in the next few years remains an open question. But the vacant land is looming in the picture and at some point, someone will develop it. The river is “hot” now.
How are re-sales faring in the building? Nearly six years after closings, some of the units are showing their age a bit. The building never had the skyrocketing appreciation as other new construction buildings (maybe because of the problems with the developer.)
Unit #2102: 2 bedroom, 2 bath, den, 1783 square feet
- Sold in February 2003 for $580,000
- Currently on the market for $699,000 plus $40,000 for parking
- Clare Spartz at Keller Williams Lincoln Park has the listing
- See picture below of the kitchen in #2102
Unit #1506: 1 bedroom, 1 bath, 1047 square feet
- Sold in January 2003 for $337,000
- Sold in January 2005 for $310,000
- Currently listed for #399,900 plus $35,000 for parking
- Assessments are $621 a month
- Deborah Thomas at Coldwell Banker has the listing.
Unit #1401: 2 bedroom, 2 bath, 1617 square feet
- Sold in October 2003 for $568,000
- Currently listed for $646,000 with parking extra
- Koenig & Strey has the listing.
- The pictures below are of #1401
There are approximately 19 units currently for sale, out of 149 in the building. Unit #1506 is also available to rent for $2600 a month.
Assuming that you want to hear the truth after this slanted presentation, allow me to relate the following:
The building did not fall on hard times; the developer did. She did not go bankrupt during this process. She is a very wealthy, however, she lost the building which was then taken over by one of the lenders who brought in a new developer to complete the building and sell it out. There were never new financiers, just same old ones.
Slow sales – tpical in Chicago. One Mag Mile was still selling developer units far longer than 6 years after completion. Trump has been marketing 4 years now and still has 1/3 of the building to sell. This is far from unusual.
The 3 townhouses that were sold are stunning. If outdoor space was an issue, they wouldn’t have sold. They all have large private terraces which suit the buyers very well. Most townhouses don’t have outdoor space – just postage stamp sized “yards”. The townhouse still left if of particularly poor interior design and is quite close to the tracks. Finishes are not terrific. It needs an interior rebuild. The new developer did not finish it at the level at which it is priced. Those are the reasons it is still there. The Riverwalk at this time doesn’t connect because the Levy’s have not developed the property to the south.
Shoddy work – mentioned in the lawsuit – was an attorney term. The suit reflected items that were not completed in the project such as unpainted emergency stairwells. The building is extremely well constructed, certainly to a level of far more costly buidlings such as the Forham and the Pinnacle for example. DeStephano is a well respected architect and Power Construction is one of Chicago’s finest commercial general contractors. This was not an early effort by people new to Chicago.
Regarding the lawsuit, the developer insisted that an “apology” be written to save his reputation as part of the settlement. Condo Board was not about to jeopardize cash settlement over a simple one-page letter which means nothing, thus the words about “remorse”. There have been a few leaky windows and these have been repaired promptly. This is certainly now new in high rises. The settlement is very substantial for the Association and there is no remorse for this.
Assessments are perfectly in line with those in other buildings particularly in those with such quality and complete services. Also unit sizes are far more substantial than typical buildings in this price range. 3 bedroom units range in size from 2600 sq ft to 3700 sq ft. and 2 bedroom units are 1600 to 2200 sq ft. Assessments are naturally higher than for buildings with a meager lever of service but assessment increases have been extremely modest since the ‘turnover” averaging barely 5% a year. Many new buildings see assessments rise as much as 50% following the turnover.
The building now runs its own parking facility and costs and parking assessments have been reduced. Valet is required because all cars go to parking floors by elevator. Many buildings charge $300 per month or more for this service. Today a phone call produces your automobile in about 10 minutes. If your departures are scheduled as in early mornings, your car will be waiting when you come down. The building has ample guest parking and one doesn’t have to seek out street parking when visiting.
As far as Wolf Point goes, the alderman has reported publicly that there is no plan for construction on this site. There have been plans from time to time for 30 years or more but nothing ever materialized. That site has only one entrance in or out and has many potential problems – green spaces, boat accidents waiting to happen, sea wall, general congestion just to name a few. This latest publicity comes from a “Crains” article which was based completely on hearsay, not on fact. A better balanced article would have been appreciated.
Ron: I’m relating what people told me about the valet parking who LIVE IN THE BUILDING. I don’t see why they would be lying about what a pain the valet parking is.
It is what it is. You either like waiting for your car or you don’t.
I never said the building was poorly constructed. I was commenting that it hasn’t had the appreciation of other buildings built at that time period. One of the reasons is location. It’s not a “prime” location. And other buildings haven’t had any trouble selling out- but this one has. Why? We just experienced the biggest housing boom Chicago has seen since the 1970s. If you’re not selling quickly during that time, when do you?
I’ve been in the building. It has great views right up the River. You claim nothing will be built on Wolf Point but isn’t the first rule of city real estate to know what can or cannot go on an empty lot that has the possibility of blocking views? (or an older building that could or could not be torn down?)
Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t think I’d trust the “nothing has been built on that land in 30 years” argument.
But given the state of the housing market right now, it’s likely nothing WILL be built on that land for a good long time. And for that, River Bend owners are lucky.
What a dissapointment to come out of your building and see that area on the west side of the street. A beautiful building as long as you only look east.
im looking into a condo on the 14th floor for around 750k..2400 sq feet..is that a gud deal? i think its with the bank…and anyone on the rent i cud get from that condo?