New Construction Strikes Again in Lakeview: 2910 N. Sheffield
Remember the greystone 2-flat that was next to the Enterprise Rental Car at 2910 N. Sheffield in Lakeview?
It sold in 2011 for $490,000, was torn down, and is now a 4-story 3 flat with 2 duplex units.
See our prior chatter about the greystone here.
Here’s a picture of the old greystone.
You can see the Enterprise rental car lot on the left. The building directly behind the cars on the left is the side of 1010 W. George, a church converted into a single family home that used to be owned by R. Kelly.
We chattered about that property several times. Check out our chatter here (where you can also see the Enterprise building.)
What strikes me about the new 3-unit building is that the top floor clearly looks down on the massive rooftop deck of the 1010 W. George house.
I wish I had taken a picture of it from across the street to show you what I mean.
But there’s not going to be that much privacy on that rooftop now.
But let’s get to this new building.
Thanks to “H” for posting about 2 out of the 3 units apparently already being under contract.
I, too, saw the sign in front of the building that said “just one left.”
The building is being done by Studio Dwell Architects. You can see the floorplans and more info here.
Here are the particulars about the units:
- Unit #101: 4 bedroom, 3 baths, duplex down, 2800 square feet, $725,000
- Unit #201: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1350 square feet, $450,000
- Unit #301: 4 bedrooms, 3 baths, duplex up, 2900 square feet, private roof deck, $850,000
It looks like Unit #201, the 2/2, is under contract. Supposedly a second unit is also under contract. I can’t tell which one.
There are single family homes nearby listed for around a similar price as the duplexes in this building (specifically 3015 N. Seminary. See those pictures here.)
What’s the market for a 4-bedroom condo at $850,000 in Lakeview?
With these selling quickly, is it yet another indication that developers should be building everywhere they can in the GreenZone?
I’d bet the view of that rooftop would have been way more interesting during those R Kelly party years. Now you will be bored bt on the upside there is far less likely hood of witnessing a felony or disturbing act.
Doesn’t everyone want to live across Mad River?
I took a walk yesterday. I’ve noticed an empty lot on Newport yesterday and a single family on Newport going up in the 1300 block. There is also a new home going up on the 3300 block of Lakewood. It seems that there is lots of activity in lakeview.
The top floor sold first actually. Units are really nice, contemporary finishes from the Merchandise mart. The second floor unit, which is a simplex, sold with multiple offers the first week.
Sad to see another century old greystone razed for McCondos. I’m having déjà vu of the great bubble.
Yet another hideous three flat…. I wouldn’t be surprised though if these sold for close to asking since people seem to pay any price for “new.” In a few years, when the owners get sick of living next to a car rental agency, the prices will plummet.
I agree, sad to see a nice greystone bulldozed.
really ugly 3 flat. i wonder how these developers are getting financed?
Horrible location, I can’t believe these are selling for such high prices!
Builders build… off the view of my balcony I can see FIVE Cranes putting up high rises! Pretty sure most of them are building “luxury” rental towers. Leave it up to the builders to get into the game way too late
“really ugly 3 flat. i wonder how these developers are getting financed?”
If they have 2/3 units under contract then financing the builder is no issue. The question is how are the buyers getting financed? I haven’t followed the lending law changes in the last year but I am guessing the banks are able to lend to less than perfect borrowers again.
Normally I would agree with you guys– and I’m not a fan of the new building, though you could do worse– but honestly that was not a very nice greystone.
Those old places with the separate front and back units, stairwell between, really don’t work well for rehabbing. May be a missed opportunity for the young family who wants to convert the front unit to SFH and rent the 2 back units, but no question new floorplan will be much more valuable than the old one.
And with that, I will commence to try to wipe the images of the R Kelly rooftop party from my brain. . .
RE: Those old places with the separate front and back units, stairwell between, really don’t work well for rehabbing.
It was a 2 flat. One unit up, one down. The inset ares in the middle is typically to accomodate windows in the bedrooms.
Probably could’ve seen R Kelly doing an upper decker on his upper deck.
“Sad to see another century old greystone razed for McCondos.” Thanks for the post, Sabrina! I think this one resonates with me because we saw it when we were looking some time back and then saw it getting razed. What a sad, sad sight. It was indeed a two-flat and much though I hate to admit it, needed more work than could ever be cost effective given the immediate location, whether to deal with it as-is (it was rentals but at a point had been a rental + owner’s unit as the upstairs unit was significantly nicer albeit dated) or convert. Still. What is with the seemingly hypnotic lure of the McCondo? From a curb appeal perspective, surely there are other options. It’s the 4+1 of the current times and will age just as poorly. And for the price/location/features, I don’t see it, but I guess we never, ever were anywhere close to the target audience for this kind of building. I confess to wondering just who the target audience will turn out to be. Plus, for all the folks entranced by “new” it’s not like it’s some sort of guarantee that all will be wine and roses. It kind of reminds me of the people on House Hunters. Oooh! Stainless appliances!!! And voila! They’re hooked. If the putative buyers here could look into a crystal ball, what would they see??? Only time will tell.
I don’t understand the appeal of new when the new options are this ugly and at such a premium over “used.” I know someone who bought new a about 2 years ago and when looking at townhouses, only looked at new places and refused to look at anything else. His reasoning was he just really wanted to be the first person to live in the place and he was willing to pay the premium. He also didn’t want to negotiate with people who lived in the house (so he could be ruthless with his negotiations without feeling bad) and he also wanted to move very quickly. He could have bought something larger that had been lived in before, but he wanted new. I think a lot of people are like that.
“Horrible location, I can’t believe these are selling for such high prices!”
Sonies, my apologies in advance for being so dense, but why is this a horrible location? It’s a block and a half from the Wellington Brown Line and not on the train side of Sheffield. A quick map browsing shows that the nearest park is a bit farther than I would like at Sheffield and Wrightwood.
“He also didn’t want to negotiate with people who lived in the house (so he could be ruthless with his negotiations without feeling bad) ”
Jenny – While I understand the desire to be the first one in a home I suspect that the friend would have had an easier and more successful outcome being “ruthless with negotiations” on a private sale. Often those sellers are paid off or the owners may have passed making it an estate sale. Any sale will bring profit to that seller. They may be very open to a quick all cash or easy term deal instead of holding out for the highest price. Ironically the developer that is not at the end of the rope is far more likely to have little room to budge. And you really do not want to buy a home from the developer that is at the end of the rope. They might have more negotiation room but you will end up with problems down the line from all the shortcuts they chose to make in an effort to be more profitable.
“I don’t understand the appeal of new when the new options are this ugly and at such a premium over “used.” I know someone who bought new a about 2 years ago and when looking at townhouses, only looked at new places and refused to look at anything else. His reasoning was he just really wanted to be the first person to live in the place and he was willing to pay the premium. He also didn’t want to negotiate with people who lived in the house (so he could be ruthless with his negotiations without feeling bad) and he also wanted to move very quickly. He could have bought something larger that had been lived in before, but he wanted new. I think a lot of people are like that.”
I’m not sure jenny is really talking about homes…
“It kind of reminds me of the people on House Hunters. Oooh! Stainless appliances!!! And voila! They’re hooked”
you know those people already had a house under contract/purchased before they went on the show, right?
“you know those people already had a house under contract/purchased before they went on the show, right?”
Yes… meant to imply it sets off a Pavlovian reaction. Bring on the SS (no matter what it is). Oooh! Shiny!!!
Tipster – why is this a horrible location?
Because you have the awful Enterprise car rental place literally right next to you. And if you’ve ever used that enterprise you’d understand it is a gigantic clusterfluck and I’m sure you have morons honking all day and night and clogging up sheffield (which is a horrible intersection in itself in desperate need of some turn signalage)
In addition to that, you have Mad River and Vaughn’s and The Kirkwood which are horrible college bars full of frat boy idiots urinating or puking on your stoop constantly.
The 2 sets of El Tracks are still quite noisy from here and then, to top it all off you have the hospital right there literally across the tracks (think ambulances ALL the time)
But other than that, its great!
and mad river has pretty bleh food, even for a bar.
I remember going there for one of their ‘happy hour’ specials where you usually get free food and drinks for 2 hours and their “food” was a bowl of pretzels, and a bowl of chips and salsa on a buffet table… pretty comically bad
“why is this a horrible location?”
It’s only horrible if you are past going out all night and getting sh*t faced on a regular basis. If not, this place is great. Welcome to Lakeview.
Mad River is no longer a Michigan bar, which I think is good for everyone.
Seems a bit disingenuous to bitch about single-bath abodes with tiny bedrooms and then get all teary when one of these things gets wrecked. Chicagoans want bigger machines for living, and by God they’re gonna get ’em.
Top floor sold before it was even constructed, the middle unit simplex 2/2 actually sold with multiple offers the first week. The units on the inside are actually really pretty and taken straight from a designer in the Merchandise Mart. It looks more like a higher end UK Village build, which is definitely not the norm for the neighborhood which goes for the more traditional look.
As for the new thing, I’ll say again that Chicago should consider an aesthetic emissions tax. There’s boocoo revenue to be raised.
so it’s ala Oak Brooke UIC now?
“Red G (August 14, 2012, 4:44 pm)
Mad River is no longer a Michigan bar, which I think is good for everyone.
“
“In addition to that, you have Mad River and Vaughn’s and The Kirkwood which are horrible college bars full of frat boy idiots urinating or puking on your stoop constantly.”
Don’t mind Sonies. He’s just projecting since he lives in River North and has talked about all the clubsters puking near his building’s front door over the years.
🙂
“It was a 2 flat.”
Thx for the catch, I did wonder about that for a minute, but that’s a very deep inset if that’s what it is. I.e., still not a friend to the floorplan for a renovation.
Changes my opinion only by a degree though– still not a high end greystone, still won’t miss that porch roof especially.
Still can’t unsee the R Kelly roof party image either.
While the prices are a bit much for me, reading the comments here had me shaking my head.
Architecturally, this is one of the nicest infill developments I’ve seen in the city in the last year. You ignorant morons who can’t tell quality architecture from wannabe old money schlock are the reason Chicago is slowly devolving into an architectural backwater while places like Tokyo leave us in the dust.
Studio dwell is definitely on the short list of best architectural firms in the city, especially when it comes to smaller developments.
Actually sabrina I am shocked it hasn’t happened more (only 1 time inside the elevator, ewww) and just a few times in front of the front door or on a nearby corner, and it actually has pretty much been nonexistent since we hired a weekend security guard 8)
“Mad River is no longer a Michigan bar, which I think is good for everyone.”
Yes but you trade obnoxious Michigan fan drunks with obnoxious condo owners. Oh, the times!
I like Sabrina’s picture of the new construction, you can just see the incredible sound-proofing they’re using. The second-floor owner is really lucky. /sarcasm
Given bubble-GZ prices, the super GZ within the GZ, how are there any post-college kids still around those bars near Halsted like Glascott’s, McGees’s, etc. Where do their patrons live? Seriously….
The owner of the 3rd floor of the property directly adjacent, to the north, loses his windows and southern exposure.
“It’s the 4+1 of the current times and will age just as poorly.”
Not a good comparison. 4+1s were like dorm-rooms for post college-kids, the mccondos are much bigger and have far superior finishes.
I wonder if there are matching windows on the right side, if only to get a nice view of the neighbor’s split faced block. Personally I can’t wait to drop near a million dollars on a beautiful condo such as these right near the el tracks. You save so much (300k) over a newer SFH without backdoor proximity to the el (not el stop but actual el).
“Actually sabrina I am shocked it hasn’t happened more (only 1 time inside the elevator, ewww) and just a few times in front of the front door or on a nearby corner, and it actually has pretty much been nonexistent since we hired a weekend security guard”
Glad to hear the weekend security guard is helping Sonies. He must scare them off so they puke in front of the building down the street instead. 🙂
Can’t say you don’t have a point, but I don’t see why they can’t at least preserve the greystone facade. I know that’s not the purist preservationist approach, but those buildings are a unique part of Chicago’s history & legacy. Do you have any idea how hard it is to get stones of that quality now?
I really despise the flat-fronted new construction, they suck the joy of life right out of the streets, which go from looking like a wing of masterpieces in the Art Institute to a bland concrete canyon.
And I’d bet this developer got a zoning bump – anyone know?
“Seems a bit disingenuous to bitch about single-bath abodes with tiny bedrooms and then get all teary when one of these things gets wrecked. Chicagoans want bigger machines for living, and by God they’re gonna get ‘em.”
“And I’d bet this developer got a zoning bump – anyone know?”
It’s RM-5, which is the same as R.Kelly’s old place, and less than the 5.5 for the couple of lots to the north. So probably not.
“Glad to hear the weekend security guard is helping Sonies. He must scare them off so they puke in front of the building down the street instead. ”
Exactly, problem solved! As long as its NIMFY!
Wait, doesn’t that require manufacturing if it isn’t grandfathered in? This city’s zoning is so completely inconsistent/fucked up.
“It’s RM-5, which is the same as R.Kelly’s old place, and less than the 5.5 for the couple of lots to the north. So probably not.”
“Wait, doesn’t that require manufacturing if it isn’t grandfathered in?”
No. The M after R implies Multi (RS ~ Resi Single).
I thought all “R” (including RM) required side setbacks that this project lacks on it’s north property line?
Sheffield is quite busy and this isn’t a great location. Okay yes, but not great. Rather go to Lincoln Park (there are or were some 2/2 for $450K). Train noise, car noise, next to commercial building… no way these should have sold so quickly. Don’t get it.
I do admit I love Studio Dwell. I looked at some of their places in near West (Bucktown, WP, etc.) They really target a specific group who appreciates modern… so that could be the reason for the quick sell. Still the noise, traffic, train, etc. is something that can’t be changed. The commercial building may eventually disappear… who knows.
gotcha, thanks. I really need to read that zoning book….
“No. The M after R implies Multi (RS ~ Resi Single).”
As much fun as it is to read the code, I like this for the super basics. Believe it’s mostly accurate, though obviously not complete.
http://www.clvn.org/pdf/zoningCodeSummary.pdf
thanks – this is the book I was referencing, btw:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Politics-Place-History-Illinois/dp/1893121267
Went to see this place from the outside and the pictures are much nicer. The brick color is a little off and again the location is NOT that good. It is too busy and just not ideal especially for this price range. I like Studio Dwell and give them kudos for putting windows on the side of the rental car place. At least they are letting in natural light. Never figured out why some developers just didn’t put windows even if little light comes in – who cares it’s better than nothing!
Contemporary Concepts Inc. is the developer Studio Dwell is the architect.
SquareD: excellent link, thanks!
Who is sure this is zoned RM? If it were, it would require side-yard setbacks: “total 20% & each side min of > 2′ or 8%”
If it’s zoned B, maybe Sheffield is zoned business, then there are no side-yard setbacks required: “None unless abutting R zoned lot. Then R zoning setback applies.”
It doesn’t look like it’s set back anywhere at all in the photo.
“It doesn’t look like it’s set back anywhere at all in the photo.”
Determining lot line location and distance therefrom based an angled photo is a nice parlor trick. Gotta be a circus somewhere where there’s some money in that.
Look at the floorplans: http://www.2910nsheffield.com/
17′ wide interior on a 25′ lot with “no setbacks” would mean stupid thick walls.
thanks for doing the work, anon.
[skeptic] “Can’t say you don’t have a point, but I don’t see why they can’t at least preserve the greystone facade. I know that’s not the purist preservationist approach, but those buildings are a unique part of Chicago’s history & legacy.”
You have no idea the horror that would be unleashed is that trend of bastardization ever came to fruition. It cheapens the history of the greystone vernacular, would strangle progressive design and leave the door wide open to hideous conversions left and right.
If you want to preserve Chicago’s residential architecture history, go to Lawndale, Garfield Park, Washington Park, South Shore and Grand Boulevard where they are literally falling apart, being stripped during “renovations” or worse yet being razed simply because they are vacant.
Taking down a dilapidated two flat sandwiched between a rent-a-car lot and some McCondos for a four unit building designed by one of the best contemporary Architecture firms in the city is not the worst thing in the world.
dude, I say tearing down a greystone is what is cheapening our history. They are quite literally irreplaceable.
Go to the 1700 block of west Belmont, and look at the south side of the block where an old theater had its facade preserved – that is far superior to this “contemporary” crackerbox crapola, which is as much a McCondo as anything else in the area. Bland. Flat chested. BORING.
“Go to the 1700 block of west Belmont, and look at the south side of the block where an old theater had its facade preserved ”
False equivalence skeptic.
No way that the old building should have stayed in that location, given what has happened to the rest of the street. Hopefully (if doubtfully) they salvaged the facade to use on a new construction home elsewhere.
“I say tearing down a greystone is what is cheapening our history. They are quite literally irreplaceable.”
Also cheapening it: historicist new construction. It tries but can quite replicate the look of the old. It shouldn’t try.
Which is not to endorse what Studio Dwell has done here. The mass of this building alone makes it ugly. But what are you going to do? Buyers have suburban size expectations and Chicago has 25-foot lots. Seems if you want to save greystones, the choice is keep them as rentals or SFH-ize them.