Market Conditions: New Condo Towers Coming Soon- But How Soon?
Crain’s has picked up on a theme we’ve been chattering about here in the last few months.
Inventory of new construction condos, outside of the luxury towers at the Ritz and 2550 N. Lakeview, are almost non-existent. Anything that IS on the market at lower price points, such as in the newly reconfigured Related buildings in the South Loop, are selling like hotcakes.
Demand is there.
Downtown developers are getting ready to bet on renewed demand to live in the center of the city, driven in part by a steady migration of large employers to the central business district from the suburbs.
While the ingredients are there for someone to launch a major project, the fragile recovery isn’t likely to support a second or third tower right away.
“The reason to be first is while you’re out there . . . there’s no competition,” says David Carlins, president of Magellan Development Group LLC, based in Chicago, who says he’s watching the market closely but has no immediate plans to start a condo tower. “That gives you a huge competitive advantage.”
Amid a slow recovery, most developers were content with low-rise projects of no more than a few dozen units.
Part of the problem is getting the loans necessary to build the tower. You would need to pre-sell a certain amount of the units before construction could begin. And how many homeowners looking today are willing to wait 3 or 4 more years to move in?
But that’s the beauty of all the new rental towers that have been built in the last few years. Some of them in River North and Old Town, in particular, are in prime locations. The buildings are already built. It doesn’t take much to convert them into condos.
Still, some are betting CMK may be the first to build a larger building.
The president of Chicago-based CMK Cos. is laying plans to build a 150-unit condo building near the Museum Campus on vacant land he acquired in May, according to a person familiar with the project.
“I think the key to that deal is that Colin is focused on the lower price point, which is a good place to be if you were to go to market with that number of units,” says Gregory Warsek, a senior vice president in the Chicago office of Associated Banc Corp., which is considering the project.
CMK’s 16-story structure would be located near 13th Street and South Wabash Avenue, on a parcel where Mr. Kinhke also is looking to finance a 268-unit rental tower.
Mr. Warsek declines further comment on the CMK project. In general, for a project of that size, the Green Bay, Wis.-based bank would require that half of the units be sold before construction starts, he says.
Mr. Kinhke has reason to be cautious: His best-known project, a 714-unit tower at 235 W. Van Buren St. in the Loop, was completed in 2009 but still has more than 200 unsold units. He did not return calls requesting comment.
Will a new condo tower be announced in 2013?
Or is it a near certainty in 2014?
Are you looking to buy new in the next few years?
Let’s get ready to condo [Crain’s Chicago Business, Micah Maidenberg, Aug 12, 2013]
There hasn’t been a proposal to build condos because they can build a rental and charge over $2000 a month for a 700 square foot one bedroom. They can then sell the whole building for $356k a unit like they did with Alta at K Station or $628k a unit like they did at 1225 Old Town (sale included Plum Market retail). Until it makes more financial sense to sell condo units, they will continue to build apartments.
Mike, I agree completely. When there are too many luxury apartments, the conversions will begin.
There are plenty of small condo developments around the neighborhoods.
How are the sales going in the Legacy condo building? Prime location , great view
Why would people buy converted luxury rentals, rentals are usually so tiny compared to a well built condo
I never understood that
And yes I understand about pension funds and institutions buying up entire buildings like they did with NV or whatever its called
I wish developers would start building family sized apartments, like those in NYC. The reality is that, in the next 20 years, more families will be staying in the city and not all of us want narrow SFH or townhouses away from the central city. Some of us want amenities and views. No one is really making a four bedroom (3500 + sq), pool, building playroom, movie room etc.. While many builders are putting in these amenities, none are focusing on families. With Latin, British, Chicago Grammer, FXW, Peyton and many other schools located in the city center, it makes sense for these families to stay downtown. Moreover, taxes on a SFH will be ever increasing given the city’s debt problems, which makes taxes in a condo (which are less than a SFH for the same square foot) seem more reasonable. It seems that, in Chicago, the new full floor buildings are built towards singles, couples and retirees (no pool, kids playroom, and casual family amenities). For example, you don’t see units with real laundry rooms, closets large enough for a stroller, large storage units on the same floor (tricylce, push cars, etc..) …all the things you need for a family. By contract, in NYC, you see whole buildngs devoted to family living and the units sell like hotcakes. They have 3 to 4 bedroom units, views, pool, gym, kids playroom, banquet/party room, pet care area (dog wash area for all residents to use)…thus transforming city living from a “stage of life” (i.e., single, couples not kids, retired) to a “way of life.” This a market segment that no one is capturing.
Ah… 235, my favorite failure.
“No one is really making a four bedroom (3500 + sq), pool, building playroom, movie room etc..”
Because you’re looking at a $1.5M and up purchase price with monthly association dues in excess of $2k. At that price point, most Chicago families would rather buy a SFH in the city or north shore. You’re only going to use the pool 3 months a year (if you’re lucky) and who wants to watch movies with your neighbors instead of in your own private movie room.
I really don’t think that market segment exists.
seriously if developers built 3br/2.5ba on a single floor condos with elevator access in the area of 2500 sqft with ample storage and 2 parking spaces, in a good school district, they would sell like fricking hotcakes. Look at the CA23 and CA3 developments in the west loop, I’m sure those are very close to sold out
I don’t know why anyone would want to buy a 750sqft 2/1 in a former rental building
“Look at the CA23 and CA3 developments in the west loop, I’m sure those are very close to sold out ”
CA3, Phase 4… 30 units sold in 8 weeks. Only 20 remaining. I live in CA23… bought mine at the perfect time 🙂
But… these are also low amenity condos. Assessments are in the range of $350-450. CA23 went on the market with starting prices of $500k… now the cheapest is about $700k, but that’s because they only have 20 left, out of about 150 from the start of CA23.
If my assessments were $2k because of a pool, doorman, gym, movie room, etc., I think this would be a very different story.
Theoretically, we’d love more options for high rise family living. We currently live in a high rise and love the amenities, but the limited options for family-sized units (outside the super lux buildings) mean we’re most likely considering a town house or 3-flat when my wife finishes grad school at the end of the year.
The building we’re in currently has many of the dream amenities listed by urban mommy (pool, kids’ playroom, lots of closet space) but not others (no in-unit laundries, let along real laundry rooms, storage units not on-floor) and does have some 3BR/2.5BA. To be honest they are a bit out of our price range, when assessments are factored in. Some of the high price is the rarity that they come up, as most are either owned by empty nesters who plan to live out their days there or by families that have decided to remain in the city.
One thing I’ve never understood is how there is enough demand for all these super high end rentals. I get that some young professionals were scared away from buying after the RE crash, but are there really that many 20-somethings pulling down the six-figures that could justify paying $2000+ for a 1BR apartment? I’d imagine some of these buildings go condo pretty quickly…
“With Latin, British, Chicago Grammer, FXW, Peyton ”
One of these things is not like the others.
“…are there really that many 20-somethings pulling down the six-figures that could justify paying $2000+ for a 1BR apartment?”
You don’t need anywhere near 6-figures to afford $2k/mo rent, especially if you don’t own a car. $70-75k will do it and if you work in IT, accounting, sales you easily hit that 2-3 years out of school.
I think a lot of the high end rentals go to new professional Chicago transplants. They aren’t ready to buy since it’s a new city and don’t want to end up in a “bad” neighborhood.
I’m not a fan of amenities, they become way too expensive, and i’d rather have control over being able to choose whether or not to pay for it. I mean its already annoying that I can’t cut my cable bill if I want to, I can’t imagine paying thousands for stuff I’ll barely use like a movie room
“With Latin, British, Chicago Grammer, FXW, Peyton ”
“One of these things is not like the others.”
Which one? In one way or another, each is not like the others. In a way that is relevant for the point being made? British, bc it’s so far out of the “city center”?
“…are there really that many 20-somethings pulling down the six-figures that could justify paying $2000+ for a 1BR apartment?”
Like Fred said, 75k gets it done at 2k a month. Rule of thumb for rent is 1/3 of monthly gross. Obviously situations vary depending on student loan debt and how much money you’re trying to save,etc. However, in normal situations, 2000 in rent can be done comfortably using 50/20/30 making 75k.
” Moreover, taxes on a SFH will be ever increasing given the city’s debt problems, which makes taxes in a condo (which are less than a SFH for the same square foot) seem more reasonable. ”
it’s foolish to assume the city (actual the county, right) won’t catch up on this. The Water dept finally figured out it was time to update technology to better access true water usage, so if one Government Dinosaur can figure it out, the others cannot be too far behind.
I believe the market for large, family-friendly high rise condos with all the amenities would more likely be “move-up” buyers in their mid- 30s or older. I’ve met a number of people with children besides the posters here who would very much like to live in downtown high rise buildings and would be ready buyers for such places if they were available.
“I think a lot of the high end rentals go to new professional Chicago transplants. They aren’t ready to buy since it’s a new city and don’t want to end up in a “bad” neighborhood.”
This and also “empty nesters” who haven’t found the condo they love.
“I think a lot of the high end rentals go to new professional Chicago transplants. They aren’t ready to buy since it’s a new city and don’t want to end up in a “bad” neighborhood.”
Also, people are getting married later and having kids later so there is a demand for nicer rentals.
Finally, about the highrise family units, there isn’t a demand for an entire building or more units. Yes, demand has increased, but nowhere to the point where it’s something that’s profitable. Most families still want a yard and outdoor space for the little ones and Chicago commuting times are much lower than Manhattan if you work in the loop so it doesn’t make sense to build downtown when ther are alternatives in the near in neighborhoods or suburbs.
The nice part about a highrise vs a townhouse is having all of the living space on a single level. Our 3BR is 1600 sq ft but it never feels cramped, yet we toured many townhouses that were listed at 2000-2100 sq ft that felt like they had very little space at all.
It cuts down on the utility bills and it cuts down on the property taxes. What’s not to like?
“Because you’re looking at a $1.5M and up purchase price with monthly association dues in excess of $2k. At that price point, most Chicago families would rather buy a SFH in the city or north shore. You’re only going to use the pool 3 months a year (if you’re lucky) and who wants to watch movies with your neighbors instead of in your own private movie room.”
I disagree. I have been looking for this for a while so obviously there is a market. My husband works on the North Shore and no way are we moving there. Merging two units is costly b/c the assessment then doubles and is higher than what the assessment would be for a single unit of the same size. I could build my own but I don’t want to be the only large unit in the building b/c then we might be the only family that plans to stay a long time and my kids would not have neighbors to play with. A 1.5-2 million condo is much cheaper in River North, West Loop, Loop, Near North than a similiar sized house in this area. For example, look at the townhouses and SFH on Superior and Huron. They sell above 2.6 million. Yes, you could get a similiar SFH for this but you willl be in North Center, Roscoe Village, etc… far north. Even the heart of Lincoln Park is more than 1.5 million for a SFH. If you want to stay in the city center, a 1.5.-2 million condo even with these amenities is cheaper than a SFH. Also, the pool could be indoors so you could use it year round….and pool saves the haul to the beach, city pool, East Bank etc… I would have never used the movie room/party room before kids but would definately use it now (playdates, birthday parties) so its actually more appropriate for a family building. Yes, this style of living is not for everyone, but judging how CA2 and other similiar buildings sold, I do think there is a market for this. I know several people who have built out units this size in River North. I just don’t want to be the only family in a building so having a building in which all units are large is preferable.
Lastly, I don’t know what the prior poster means by “one of these is not like the other.” British is in Lincoln Park but is actually closer to River North and West Loop than parts of Lincoln Park and its high school will be in the South Loop making West Loop and River North a good way to be between both. Peyton is public, but serves a disproportionate number of weathly families (many Latin, Parker, British, City Day kids go there) so yes there are Peyton parents would could afford a large downtown condo.
I do find the switch from “City versus Suburbs” to “SFH versus family friendly high rise downtown Condo” discussion rather refreshing.
“Which one? In one way or another, each is not like the others. In a way that is relevant for the point being made?”
Peyton [sic]. I think that the assumption that future rich kid will test into Payton is tenuous, at best, and I doubt that typical future rich kid parents will be clouted up enough to ‘Rauner’ future rich kid in.
Yes, some/many rich kids get in, but it’s not a ‘likely’ event.
“…are there really that many 20-somethings pulling down the six-figures that could justify paying $2000+ for a 1BR apartment?”
I’m amazed by the amounts of young people doing just that, but I’m also amazed by the amounts of young people’s parents who are helping them out financially… big time. I can’t tell you the number of times I talked with parents over the last few years who are footing the entire bill for their kids living expenses: rent, insurances, car payments (yes, many maintain cars in the city), spending money, college, etc.
Just the other night while walking the dog, I talked with a 20 something girl who was moving into an apartment down the street, and she asked about the permit parking situation in the neighborhood, as her new apartment doesn’t include parking. Here’s a unassuming young girl with a U-Haul unloading boxes with her parents and one would think she’s just another college grad trying to make it in the city, but it turns out that her parents bought the apartment (it was selling for $250K) as an ‘investment’ that she would live in. The parents were nice average looking people from Columbus, I mean they had a U-Haul and not private movers, and you’d never guess they’d be the types to drop a quarter-million on a small 1-BR for their kid, let alone the whole car expense issue; if the street parking didn’t work out for her, she was going to rent a space over on Clark – what does that cost, something like $250 a month?
It’s a bit of a cruel joke to the thousands of other young people just getting by in the city with roommates and ramen noodles, but gather enough of these types of parents together and you begin to understand why someone so young is able to afford so much, and why newly built high rises sell out to what appears to be young new owners. It’s just something we’re not used to seeing in Chicago, but I’m convinced that this is the new normal in the city, and don’t even get me starting with the mainland Chinese, French, and Canadians buying in my small pocket of LP. Welcome to the new LA!
“Yes, this style of living is not for everyone, but judging how CA2 and other similiar buildings sold, I do think there is a market for this”
BUT… CA is low-amenity, and they started it at $500k. What you’ve described is completely different. CA23 found the right niche… semi-affordable, 3 bedroom units, great neighborhood, and low amenities. Without a doubt, if you double the purchase price of a CA unit and quadruple the assessments, the units do not sell like hotcakes.
And I should note, most of my neighbors at CA23 do not have / will not have / have older (moved out) children. Sure, it’s attractive to us 20/30 somethings that are planning on starting a family, but we’re still outnumbered by non-family types in my building. I just don’t see how dramatically increasing the cost is going to lure more families into buying and staying in the city.
“I do find the switch from “City versus Suburbs” to “SFH versus family friendly high rise downtown Condo” discussion rather refreshing.”
Urban mom is in some ways a version of nonny, w a bigger budget and a wider radius of acceptable locations. Maybe they could battle it out to decide which is best apartment option. Then take on @fo from the “far north sfh” bracket.
IT’S PAYTON WITH AN ‘A’ AS IN WALTER, NOT PEYTON WITH AN ‘E’ AS IN MANNING.
Sorry, had to get that off my chest!
Doesn’t even need to be a high rise, a 3/4flat- or even 15 story midrise with elevators is fine too just sick of the only thing being affordable 3 bedroomwise is a 600 sqft/floor townhouse… that just won’t work. My parents and inlaws in a few years wouldn’t even be able to come visit because of all the frickin stairs. we ruled that out quickly
“Yes, some/many rich kids get in, but it’s not a ‘likely’ event.”
I honestly read it as “here’s a bunch o schools that would be attractive to such families and you could prob get into one or another (i.e. british)” comment, not that one could nec count on getting into payton, or latin or parker for that matter.
“we toured many townhouses that were listed at 2000-2100 sq ft that felt like they had very little space at all”
Well, 200 to 450 of that was (probably) the garage, so, yeah, the rest would feel cramped split over 3 (or 4!) levels.
“Then take on @fo from the “far north sfh” bracket.”
Noooo. Don’t want ’em, if the attractive school options are described as the privates and Peyton [sic].
312 is a great location for SEHS tho, as it’s super easy to get to 3 of the top 4.
Parents/family have been helping their offspring for a long time now. My grandparents gave my parents money for their first house…my parents gave me money for my first condo (in addition to the 20% I saved)… I know only one person in my age bracket who didn’t receive any help from parents (or inlaws) to buy a first place.
I was talking to my friend the other day and she literally told me it was her dream to save money so she could help her kids buy their first homes (her parents couldn’t afford to help her, but her husband’s family helped them). She thought the tradition was great.
“Yes, this style of living is not for everyone, but judging how CA2 and other similiar buildings sold, I do think there is a market for this”
BUT… CA is low-amenity, and they started it at $500k. What you’ve described is completely different. CA23 found the right niche… semi-affordable, 3 bedroom units, great neighborhood, and low amenities. Without a doubt, if you double the purchase price of a CA unit and quadruple the assessments, the units do not sell like hotcakes.
I agree these are separate markets. My comment was directed more to the notion that SFH/townhouse always trumps condo mentality of the Midwest. New Yorkers often prefer condos with a wide floorplan and better light to narrow townhouses. In the Midwest there is this mentality that SFH ownership is better than condo ownership and I think that is changing. People with kids don’t like the 600 sq foot a floor living which feels cramped and causes you to spend an inordinate amount of time running up the stairs. I think many people would sacrifice fee simple/SFH living if they had a wide, better floorplan, some amenities and light/view as a trade off. In short, either Midwesterners are changing their view of city living or the city is now attracting people from the coasts/international who are fine with condo living.
As for the price difference for CA2 and my alternative (1.5-2 K), I think they are separate markets but there is room in the market for both price points. The CA2 at 500k-800K is a less expensive alternative to big buildings with amenities and SFH/townhouses on the far north. You get a closer neighborhood for less. The same goes for the 1.5-2 million. These people might normally be in the marekt for a SFH in River North, Near North, Lincoln Park where costs are now exceeding 2.5 for anything new. Thus, both of these are less expensive alternatives than were people might otherwise not buy. 2.5-3 million is too rich for me and that is what it takes to be in Near North/Lincoln Park in a newish, well laid out SFH. I’d be happy with a 1.5-2 that offers 3-4 bedrooms and amenities for a family (storage, real laundry rooms for the tons of laundry you do, parking, building amenities….)
As for the list of schools, your right that no one should buy on the basis that their kid will get into Peyton. My point was that there are many great schools in the downtown area and chances are you will get into one of them. The commute from the Loop, West Loop, Near North Old Town to Latin, Payton, British…is fairly similiar. You still have the same issue if you go public. If you buy in Kindergarten there is risk that the school boundaries change, the school gets overcrowded, high school is not good and SES is hard to get into…. finding a K-12 alternative in the same neighborhood is challenging to everyone but being centrally located gives you more options for high school.
“I was talking to my friend the other day and she literally told me it was her dream to save money so she could help her kids buy their first homes”
It’s my dream for my child to find a job he enjoys and be able to buy his home himself.
“If you buy in Kindergarten there is risk that the school boundaries change”
Nah, everyone gets grandfathered in. Risk is closure or conversion, but highly doubtful for any school one (even vaguely in that bracket) would choose to use.
It is odd that there aren’t more larger units on non-“penthouse” floors in the $500 psf buildings.
“It’s my dream for my child to find a job he enjoys and be able to buy his home himself.”
Wow, my dream as well!
What is this thread about? The coming of age for Gen Y…..and where they prefer to live in the next 5-15yrs? There are a bunch of 17-27yr olds that will want to live near the city center. Hopefully they buy all the underwater condos.
“If you buy in Kindergarten there is risk that the school boundaries change”
Nah, everyone gets grandfathered in. Risk is closure or conversion, but highly doubtful for any school one (even vaguely in that bracket) would choose to use.
True your kids get grandfathered in but boundaries can change and increase the total population…some schools are taking in the school closure kids. Lincoln ES is so overcrowded that many of my friends who moved their for the school are rethinking. 35 kids, even well behaved smart ones, is too much in one class. Some of the northside schools are overcrowded and boundaries have been expanded. Budgets are dismal. Read the letter from the Blaine prinicpal. I gave me pause. We contemplated a SFH in our price on the northside and decided we would look for a less expensive condo and stay put in private school. Point being, you have no control over CPS and CPS is broke so investing in a SFH on the northside for the schools is not the perfect solution as once thought.
“If you buy in Kindergarten there is risk that the school boundaries change”
Nah, everyone gets grandfathered in. Risk is closure or conversion, but highly doubtful for any school one (even vaguely in that bracket) would choose to use.
True your kids get grandfathered in but boundaries can change and increase the total population…some schools are taking in the school closure kids. Lincoln ES is so overcrowded that many of my friends who moved there for the school are rethinking. 35 kids, even well behaved smart ones, is too much in one class. Some of the northside schools are overcrowded and boundaries have been expanded. Budgets are dismal. Read the letter from the Blaine prinicpal. I gave me pause. We contemplated a SFH in our price on the northside and decided we would look for a less expensive condo and stay put in private school. Point being, you have no control over CPS and CPS is broke so investing in a SFH on the northside for the schools is not the perfect solution as once thought.
So if I’m reading you correctly urban mommy, what you’re *really* looking for is a family friendly large apartment (3500 sq ft) in a high-amenity with views/parking downtown new high-rise condo building that only contains equally large apartments that have lower than SFH taxes and lower assessments than combined units… for around $428 a sq ft? Really? Does urban daddy know about this? Gotta run, I think that’s Cindy Crawford in a one piece knocking at my door.
There are few 4BR condos in high rises because family migration (or more like non-burb migration) to the city centers is a recent phenomenon. The cycle used to be college to city center until marriage + kids (mid/late 20s) to burbs to possibly back into city once empty nesters (mid/late 50s+). The spike in prices in the Southport corridor is evidence of this change as former burb buyers were looking for affordable SFH options. They then increased the desirability of the schools in their chosen hoods.
I am surprised LP 2550 hasn’t come up yet. They have plenty of 3-4 BR options will a ton of amenities. Sounds exactly like what urban mommy wanted. I think they are grossly overpriced and that is the problem – once you start looking at a 3500 sft apartment for $500 sft you are in SFH territory and the appeal of owning your own land / controlling costs / privacy start to look good. I looked at both condos and SFH when looking 2 yrs ago. At the time the value proposition strongly favored SFHs.
“jay (August 13, 2013, 1:53 pm)…
Gotta run, I think that’s Cindy Crawford in a one piece knocking at my door.”
You just dated yourself there!
“urban mommy (August 13, 2013, 1:22 pm)…you have no control over CPS and CPS is broke so investing in a SFH on the northside for the schools is not the perfect solution as once thought.”
I believe that CPS has switched to per pupil funding for schools (someone please correct me if I’m wrong). This is actually beneficial to the “good” CPS schools since they no longer have to sacrifice funding for the under used schools on the south side. CPS was formerly able to low ball the “good” schools knowing the parents will make up the difference thru fundraising. Now they get a fixed amount per pupil and the fundraising goes to other school needs / wants. All that being said my kid goes to private school.
“new high-rise condo building that only contains equally large apartments that have … lower assessments ”
The lower assessments is harder with fewer units, as the fixed employee costs are spread less. Really need to have higher unit count to keep the assessments more reasonable.
See, eg, this place: http://cribchatter.com/?p=10178 that fits the bill for size, almost for location, not at all for amenities, and not at all for either price or assessment or taxes. Just shows how hard it is to do.
“I believe that CPS has switched to per pupil funding for schools (someone please correct me if I’m wrong). This is actually beneficial to the “good” CPS schools ”
It’s a farging *disaster* for the good schools. Most of the ‘good’ northside schools are getting ~$750,000 whacks out of their budgets. Many, many of the ‘bad’ schools are getting sub $100k cuts.
“the value proposition strongly favored SFHs”
lemme guess, you’re from the midwest (I’m just channeling urban nonny)
“The lower assessments is harder with fewer units, as the fixed employee costs are spread less. Really need to have higher unit count to keep the assessments more reasonable.”
Why is that true if we’re assessing it on a psf basis?
“You just dated yourself there!”
You going for meaning A or meaning B there?
“It’s a farging *disaster* for the good schools. Most of the ‘good’ northside schools are getting ~$750,000 whacks out of their budgets. Many, many of the ‘bad’ schools are getting sub $100k cuts.”
What’s driving the diff?
“Why is that true if we’re assessing it on a psf basis?”
I didn’t mean assessments were nec on psf basis. Just that if you want low ass from a 3500 SF place, why is it nec case that it will be higher if other units are also large versus a mix of large and smaller (and if ass are based on estimated price or something, if larger places cost more ona psf basis…)
“Why is that true if we’re assessing it on a psf basis?”
Not really on a pure psf basis, or the (received wisdom) fact that 2 combined units have higher assessments than a similarly-sized single unit would have wouldn’t be possible.
“What’s driving the diff?”
Not entirely clear to me. Have not been to any of the LSC budget meetings, which prob would fill me in.
“(received wisdom) fact that 2 combined units have higher assessments than a similarly-sized single unit would have”
There wasn’t a perfect pair of comparables but after looking at asspsf for 1211 s prairie for one min, seems to me the larger (not through combination) units may have higher asspsf than smaller. Where’s bobbo, need him to run one of those multivariate whatchamacallits for me.
Do CPS alumni ever contribute to their schools? If they don’t solicit donations, maybe they should. Private schools get huge donations from successful alumni. Why not the same for CPS?
New construction condos have been trending towards larger units. I just don’t think you’ll find this in a high rise in River North. 2 examples I can think of are the new development at Hermitage and North. I think they’re calling it Hermitage Sixteen 11. All 3/2’s. There’s also a smaller development going up on Damen near Webster by Noah Properties. All large units and over a million. They’re all under contract.
“jenny (August 13, 2013, 2:44 pm)…Private schools get huge donations from successful alumni. Why not the same for CPS?”
Because their donations would just go to paying pensions. Public school donations = taxes.
anon – I guess you are right about the per pupil funding.
“I am surprised LP 2550 hasn’t come up yet. They have plenty of 3-4 BR options will a ton of amenities. Sounds exactly like what urban mommy wanted. I think they are grossly overpriced and that is the problem – once you start looking at a 3500 sft apartment for $500 sft you are in SFH territory and the appeal of owning your own land / controlling costs / privacy start to look good. I looked at both condos and SFH when looking 2 yrs ago. At the time the value proposition strongly favored SFHs.”
We looked at LP 2550 and, aside from the fact that its not center city (definately green zone but not downtown), its too pricey for us. I don’t think its a good value. To much of the price is because of the supposed name. If you took the inside of that building and didn’t know where it was you would not think it was an ultra lux building. The four bedroom that is large enough for a stroller/storage is 3 million — as much as surrounding SFH. I’m looking to save a little by giving up SFH. Also, you pay a lot for being on the park and views. When I say view, I mean good light not windows looking at your neighbors brick wall…they don’t have to be among the best in the city. These units could be built for less in river north.
As for assesssments, in the few buildings we have been looking to combine the assssment is not based entirely on squre foot. We looked at combining two smaller units but the assessment was more than a unit that was twice the size so that would hinder resale someday. Trust me, I punched the numbers in several buildings.
And Jay, not only does your Cindy Crawford comment date you, so does your assumption that urban daddy is footing the bill (Does urban daddy know about this?). I have worked full-time in a high earning career for a decade. I paid for half of our last residence and plan to do so in the future….hence the desire not to move to the burbs.
I too know very few who buy without parental help. With a 2k rent payment I can see it taking 10-15 years for an ordinary person to get anywhere near a 20% down payment.
jenny (August 13, 2013, 12:21 pm)
Parents/family have been helping their offspring for a long time now. My grandparents gave my parents money for their first house…my parents gave me money for my first condo (in addition to the 20% I saved)… I know only one person in my age bracket who didn’t receive any help from parents (or inlaws) to buy a first place.
I was talking to my friend the other day and she literally told me it was her dream to save money so she could help her kids buy their first homes (her parents couldn’t afford to help her, but her husband’s family helped them). She thought the tradition was great.
‘You just dated yourself there!’
Lol, totally. I prefer around my own age with similar amounts of aches/pains/cramps/habits, than someone younger who may, or may not, kill me in the process. Also, something hot about someone of a certain age who can well afford to buy their own damn stuff!
” I prefer around my own age with similar amounts of aches/pains/cramps/habits….something hot about someone of a certain age…”
I made a t-bar and on the first side I listed all the good aspects about the ones our age… when i was done I began my list of the benefits of those much younger.. Point one was rock hard ass.. then i just laughed, crumbled up the paper, and threw it in the garbage…
The 30% of gross income on housing rule of thumb should be changed for Millennials. Retirement prep must start earlier and stronger; Social Security is a sunk cost. After taxes and decent medical, a $75,000 salary nets about $4150/mo. Subtract $2000 for rent, another $1000 to $1500 for food/entertainment/phone/utilities, and one’s left with $500 or so for a car, savings, debt, and retirement. That’s no way to get ahead.
“Social Security is a sunk cost”
SS will continue to exist, but benefits will be at a lower level–something like 80% of current benefit levels in real dollar terms. That’s not enough alone to have a nice retirement, but it’s enough to keep HD in the *premium* cat food, at least.
“All 3/2?s.”
These are “large”? What’s the square footage?
To me- 1700-2000 is not “large” for the Chicago market. But that’s what they build a lot of the 3/2s as. If I’m raising my kids there, I want a family room. So that means 2500-3000 square feet.
If I’m spending a million- why would I live in a small building with someone above and below me and NO amenities? I’d rather have a house. You buy the apartment in the sky for views and the pool/doorman/party room/exercise room. Full service buildings are SO much different than 3, 6 or 8 unit buildings where you hear your neighbor come home from work every night.
“Just shows how hard it is to do.”
Not THAT hard, actually. This unicorn DOES exist.
I think it’s that rich-kid schools tend to have more experienced, higher-educated (and therefore more expensive) teachers. Since what counted previously was the position, not the salary, those schools got ‘more’ when schools were funded with a fixed number of positions; similarly, schools that could only attract inexperienced, lower-credentialed teachers didn’t get additional positions just because their teachers cost less.
Funding dollars-per-pupil means schools with expensive teachers will see a hit compared to their positions-per-pupil history.
(There are likely other factors including losing additional funded positions that tended to be over-represented among rich-kid schools, e.g. those of ‘magnet cluster’ schools)
HTH
DZ (August 13, 2013, 2:22 pm)
“It’s a farging *disaster* for the good schools. Most of the ‘good’ northside schools are getting ~$750,000 whacks out of their budgets. Many, many of the ‘bad’ schools are getting sub $100k cuts.”
What’s driving the diff?