Nate Berkus Designed Penthouse Reduced $49K: 632 W. Wrightwood in Lincoln Park
Back in May 2010 we chattered about whether or not it mattered if a property was “Nate Berkus designed” as the listing says it is for this 2-bedroom penthouse at 632 W. Wrightwood in Lincoln Park.
See our prior chatter here.
Most of you concluded that it didn’t matter so much.
6 months later, the unit is still available, and has been reduced $49,000. It is now listed by Redfin as a short sale (although the listing doesn’t say as much.)
It is also listed $80,000 under the 2005 purchase price.
The top floor unit has vaulted ceilings, skylights and private deck.
It is an elevator building, so there is no concern about hauling groceries up five levels of stairs.
The kitchen has white cabinets and appliances along with granite counter tops. Could a lack of stainless steel appliances be dating this unit?
At 1800 square feet, it is among the roomier 2-bedroom units. It also has 2 parking spaces included, which is rare in East Lincoln Park at this price point.
Will this unit be going back to 2000 pricing?
Sophia Worden at Prudential Rubloff still has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #5W: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1800 square feet, 2 car parking
- Sold in April 1996 for $320,000
- Sold in June 1999 for $435,000
- Sold in June 2000 for $498,000
- Sold in May 2005 for $630,000
- Originally listed in October 2008
- Was listed in May 2010 for $599,000
- Reduced
- Currently listed for $550,000
- Redfin lists it as a “short sale”
- Assessments of $310 a month
- Taxes of $6084
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 20×13
- Bedroom #2: 13×11
“# Sold in May 2005 for $630,000
# Originally listed in October 2008
# Was listed in May 2010 for $599,000
# Reduced
# Currently listed for $550,000
# Redfin lists it as a “short sale””
A “short sale”? What happened? Do you mean people that levered up significantly in the middle part of the last decade to drop 630k on a “penthouse” condo wind up in financial trouble, too? I thought these people were immune from economic woes. Gee golly I wonder what happened?
Back to the bank for this one.
The 2000 price looks about right.
Ups: Nice floors; high ceilings; cool living room windows; top floor with elevator; w/d and ac; balcony; pretty nice location.
Downs: Combined living/dining/kitchen; sure doesn’t seem like 1,800 sq ft; no powder room and doesn’t appear to have a seperate den/desk area; for those current or prospective small families who don’t mind a big two bed, it’s in Alcott; and it’s not clear whether there’s a garage spot or if it’s two outdoor spaces.
To deal with the hassle and uncertainly of a short sale for $600k seems a bit nuts for a 2/2 that’s not in Lincoln elem attendance area. The 2/2.5 that recently sold on Webster in the mid-400’s is at least as good as this place, and the 2/2.5 that recently sold on Cleavland in the mid-500’s is much nicer than this place (despite the fact that neither of those places has an elevator).
$504,000 1st mortgage
$126,000 2nd mortgage
Foreclosure case no. 2010-CH-45780
2005 vintage, baby. perfectly seasoned … for foreclosure.
I didn’t know Nate Berkus was into “hollywood lights” in his bathrooms. I wonder what he charged as mark-up above the $25 cost for that?
Non-short sales, better locations, cheaper, without elevators:
Webster (much cheaper, arguably just as good):
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/321-W-Webster-Ave-60614/home/12805744
Cleavland (cheaper, arguably much nicer):
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1940-N-Cleveland-Ave-60614/unit-4/home/13346010
blah, the entire thing is blah
I have to admit, I like the fact that this place doesn’t have the ubiquitous “kitchen open to the living area”.
I stand by my previous “crazy mad man” rant in the prior chatter.
I’m particularly smitten with the irony of the kitchen cupboard “indulge” directive in this unit.
“Downs: Combined living/dining/kitchen”
You consider this one combined anonny? You weren’t just looking for a unicorn, you were looking for a dark blue unicorn.
“sure doesn’t seem like 1,800 sq ft”
The footprint of the space is about 1800 (90×20) which will *never* feel like 1800 in a building like this even w/o a single interior wall b/c of exterior walls and the stairs.
haha oh this gem. shocked its still on the market and a short sale at that!
Vintage 1997 design
vintage groove77 in the previous chatter
oh man what a disaster
“You consider this one combined anonny? You weren’t just looking for a unicorn, you were looking for a dark blue unicorn.”
While it’s not “combined” in the typical open floor plan sense, it’s really just a partial wall setting it off from the dining/living area. But, as far as partially open plans go, it’s not bad.
anonny,
I was always against open floor plans, but with small kid(s) it’s very convenient.
Maybe it’s just me but in a unit designed by this Berkus fellow I might expecter higher quality (thicker) countertops, bathroom tile going up to the ceiling, non-hollywood lights. Looks like a stock condo with a nice wall unit and decent layout. The furniture, I assume, does not come with and the berkus nonsense is immaterial.
Maybe it’s just me but in a unit designed by this Berkus fellow I might expecter higher quality (thicker) countertops, bathroom tile going up to the ceiling, non-hollywood lights. Looks like a stock condo with a nice wall unit and decent layout. The furniture, I assume, does not come with and the berkus nonsense is immaterial.
RV, my guess is that Mr. Berkus selected the furniture, paint and window treatments. Nonsense it is………
Someone should call Oprah. She’d fix this.
“Nonsense it is………”
Does Nate Berkus designed mean you went to Sears and picked up a couple of bowls from his collection?
If you didn’t know that Nate Berkus was a high end designer, and someone said, “My condo was decorated by Nate Berkus”, wouldn’t you wonder if they had their alderman design their place? “Nate Berkus” just sounds like a very “Chicago machine politician” name to me
Yves Smith says lenders face losses of 70% on foreclosures, versus a mere 25-40% with loan modifications:
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/10/our-new-york-times-op-ed-how-the-banks-put-the-economy-underwater-2.html#comment-217061
IMO the seller of this condo should count themselves lucky if they get the same inflation-adjusted price as the ’96 seller — about $450k today.
Or have the value of (Alderman) Nate Berkus-designed condos dramatically appreciated these last 14 years?
Nate Berkus sounds like a guy I’d share a beer with at the local neighborhood old people’s dive bar (think Old Style sign hanging out front).
If I were ever to invite a bunch of my friends over to my nice condo and said a snooty comment like “Oh its a Nate Berkus design” my friends would probably hit me upside the head then go looking for pink sheets or pillows.
“Nate Berkus sounds like a guy I’d share a beer with at the local neighborhood old people’s dive bar”
uhhh – i don’t think that’s the kind of bar he would go to….
Is it really so terrible to be in the Alcott school district? I thought it was one of the “better” public schools that was giving nearby St. Clement’s some good competition, and also served as the test kitchen for the “healthy school lunch” program.
(Although if my memory serves me right, my high-school lunch program also emphasized food that was “good for you” – and mostly ended up in the dumpsters while the burgers and chips were devoured. Kids, alas, will be kids!)
I saw him at RL a few summers back. Lives in NYC now
You don’t need a fancy Italian name anymore to be retail chic…..some dude named “stuart weitzman” has a store on Michigan Avenue and sells high-end women’s shoes, not polyester men’s suits on Roosevelt Rd. like one would think.
“Nate Berkus sounds like a guy I’d share a beer with at the local neighborhood old people’s dive bar”
Yeah, and Sy Devore, long-ago tailor-to-the-stars, had that “ethnic” vibe going for him too.
The ‘Nate Berkus’ name might not make this place more expensive, but if he is responsible for the the lovely wall unit, the non-structural beams and the not-too-open kitchen, he definitely earned his keep.
“Downs: Combined living/dining/kitchen; sure doesn’t seem like 1,800 sq ft; no powder room and doesn’t appear to have a seperate den/desk area; for those current or prospective small families who don’t mind a big two bed, it’s in Alcott; and it’s not clear whether there’s a garage spot or if it’s two outdoor spaces”
Its only 1800 sq ft…powder rooms and dens would ruin the space. Walling off this kitchen would not make the space more attractive…the hallway would become an echo chamber and the kitchen would become a sauna.
Maybe nate berkus after a long night of happy houring at the wrightwood got lost and took a slash here?
I’d rather think Nate Berkus hangs out at Crossroads Public House, Weiner Circle & Burwood Tap.
All establishments run great deals to help nearby residents who paid too much for real estate during the boom. I think Burwood even has a free hot wing buffet on weeknights.
“I’d rather think Nate Berkus hangs out at Crossroads Public House, Weiner Circle & Burwood Tap”
uhhh I think Sidetracks, minibar and roscoes are more up his alley…..
Yeah I just wiki’d him. I should not have assumed just because he had a regular Joe’s name that he was a regular joe!
Oy vey.
I’ve looked at this unit online and the “Nate Berkus” designed doesn’t impress me at all even though I like NB, and I would go in and change the entryway paint color right away! No one has seemed to pick up on what I’ve observed – I think the kitchen looks really SMALL. It’s too bad this unit is so overpriced because it looks like a really nice unit, that’s the one thing that has prevented me from considering it as I’ve looked at another unit in Wrightwood Commons.
Looks like Nate Berkus himself is trying to unload his condo:
http://chicagobreakingbusiness.com/2011/01/nate-berkus-lists-gold-coast-condo-for-2-65m.html
“Chicago interior designer Nate Berkus, who rose to national fame through his frequent appearances on the “Oprah Winfrey Show” and who now hosts his own eponymous and Winfrey-backed, New York-based talk show, on Tuesday placed his seven-room, full-floor Gold Coast condo on the market for $2.65 million.
Berkus, 39, has owned the 3,980-square-foot condo unit since 2003, when he bought it for $500,000. ”
He really believes his condo is either worth over 5x what he paid for it, or at least 2-3x with room to negotiate. LOL.
The real estate market is not going to treat you so fabulous, Nate Berkus.
maybe Oprah will buy it… LOL
Bob – there is something screwy about that purchase price. The taxes on the unit are 30k and the assessments are nearly 4k/month. I highly doubt he paid 500k for it in 2003. Once again, you can’t believe everything you read on the internet.
Clio, I read you on these internets and I find you incredulous.
hd – talking about people screwing up facts – not opinions
Clio, I agree. I’m sure anon, HD, or G will dig into this and find out some more info on that ’03 transaction.
here:
2003 sale says $1.5 mil.
if you go to CCRD w/ the PIN, it shows Nathan Berkus, so this is the unit.
The place in Manhattan he paid $550k for from the article above.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1325-N-Astor-St-60610/unit-8/home/14126497
gaaaah.
“gaaaah.”
$75,000 per year *before* the purchase price. gaaaah, indeed.