Penthouse Home in the Sky: 630 N. State in River North
630 N. State in River North is one of those buildings that you probably have walked by or driven by a hundred times but don’t really notice.
It is, however, situated right in the heart of the “action”- surrounded by hotels and restaurants and not far from the Mag Mile.
This 3-bedroom penthouse unit has been on the market since September 2008 and has been reduced $35,000 (or the parking was simply stripped out of the prior asking price- it’s unclear.)
Is the large assessment hurting it in this market? The assessment includes heat and air conditioning.
Ricardo Jimenez at Rubloff has the listing. See more pictures and a virtual tour here.
Unit #2710: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 1800 square feet
- Sold in June 2006 for $640,000
- Originally listed in September 2008 for $710,000 (not sure if this included the parking or not)
- Reduced
- Currently listed for $675,000 plus $35,000 for parking
- Assessments of $1139 a month
- Taxes of $6307
Appreciation over 2006 bubble peak pricing? No.
I second a’s comment.
Assessment sucks. bedrooms look a little cramped.
I’d def. like this condo, though. nice view. decent layout. doesn’t look cheap.
Very nice unit in a prime location but I agree with the others. The pricing needs to reflect market conditions. There are a few 3 BD foreclosures showing up, withing a mile radius, at 500k. I am certain this assessment has turned quite a bit of buyers away. A. Banks are taking a harder look at assessments when qualifying a buyer. B. This unit costs almost $1800/month just to live there, not even adding the mortgage. If you loose your job, will you be able to rent this place out for $6500 to cover the expenses. Something worth considering in this shaky job market.
This is a beautiful unit, one of the few modern places I’ve seen that I really wish I could afford. But from what I’m hearing from affluent prospective buyers, the price needs to come down a little on this place. It looks like a good deal at first blush, until you consider it is priced above 2006 levels.
No matter how much you like the place, and how good a deal it seems, run the numbers first. Everything, absolutely everything, is going back to 2002 levels at least, and maybe lower, as a function of the unwinding of the pile of bad debt, and the deteriorating economy. Chicago is a major victim of the downturn in that this city is heavily dependent upon the FIRE economy, and many high-paying jobs will be lost in this sector, affecting not only financial and real estate professionals, but IT professionals and lawyers as well. Nobody will escape unscathed, and our local unemployment rate will probably reach 9% by the end of this year.
A lot of the posters believe condo values are going to 2002 levels, although list prices may still be at 2006/2007 levels. Just curious, how would you value new construction in today’s market? For example, if a 1/1 condo was listed for the first time preconstruction in 2006/2007 for 500,000 in Streeterville then what would you value it at now?
I’d appreciate your opinions.
Find the most similar units that were around in whatever year you believe prices will revert to and you have your answer.
In Towner,
Case Shiller actually has a condo index. The last data I saw on it was through November I believe and had shown that condo values were 6% off their peak values in 2006. I was quite surprised at this as I was under the impression that condo prices were more volatile than SFH’s. So far in this downturn that hasn’t been the case.
There are a lot of doom and gloomers on this site (I’ sometimes one of them), but so far condo values in Chicago have held up relatively well if this index is correct.
Another method might be to make deductions back from a known date based on the Case-Shiller housing index.
It is best to use several methods and weigh their merits in your final conclusion.
But don’t you think there’s a premium with new construction? Maybe I’m just a sucker who falls for the marketing and believes new is better (unless your talking true a vintage with architectural charm)
There are less foreclosures in desirable areas but when they sell they set the comps for everyone. Sellers and realtors say “but those are distressed sales and they don’t count, etc” but they do count as comps and they do lower the value for everyone in the building.
And btw we’re headed back to 1999 pricing….we’re not at 2006/2007 pricing in many areas we’re at 2004, and in some cases pre-2004 pricing.
I don’t consider much of a premium with new construction other than the potential ability to customize your unit. Personally I don’t care if someone else lived in a unit before me, but this might be important to others.
Find the most similar units that were around in whatever year you believe prices will revert to and you have your answer.
If you are currently looking at new construction, find new construction from prior years. That will take care of any “premium.”
In Towner,
I almost purchased a 3 bed/2 bath new construction duplex up in Bucktown about 18 months ago. After a pre-closing inspection (Tomacor Inc), over 60 k in problems were discovered. I walked out at the closing and with the current market being what it is, have been thankful everyday since. The inspectors recommended looking for a place that had a few years on it so that possible construction problems would have had a chance to show up.
Don’t equate new construction with quality.
homedelete: I agree, last year we were saying 2000 pricing, but we’re approaching that and dont see any end when we should be. 1999 is the new 2000.
The bottom pleateau of the bubble is: 28/36% dti for most properties within reason for buyers with 20% down and good credit. You want a nice condo in River West that sold for $500k at the height of the bubble? figure out 28/36 dti, save a sizable downpayment and make sure your credit is above 720. It will be become ‘let’s make a deal’ by that point. Banks have been playing let’s make a deal for a few months now.
You want a 3bd/2bd in Lincoln Park? is your credit above 720? Do you have something larger than a nominal downpayment? Do you have steady employment? What are your 28/36 dti numbers…OK – LET’S MAKE A DEAL!!!
Ok maybe not lincoln park, I wrote that to get a rise out of some people, but Lincoln Square, Roger’s Park…south loop, west loop, river west, west town, etc.
homedelete: What can I do with a rating of 775? 😉
LET’S MAKE A DEAL!!!!
Another strike against new construction is that the board would be controlled by the builder/developer. You want that to be in place and well established by the time you move in too (unless you want to be a pioneer in that).
“And btw we’re headed back to 1999 pricing….we’re not at 2006/2007 pricing in many areas we’re at 2004, and in some cases pre-2004 pricing.”
Homedelete- how right you are. I’m even finding properties listed for under 2004 prices in, gasp, Lincoln Park. So I shudder to think what is happening in the less desirable areas.
I wouldn’t be surprised if “less desirable” areas fared better, since they have been cheaper to start with and – especially out in the neighborhoods, there are a lot more local people who want or need to stay close to relatives etc.
I suspect there will be a shake-up in what areas are considered desirable after all this is over as well, though I can’t say yet where and how.
“Don’t equate new construction with quality.”
So true, look at Invesco….
“look at Invesco”
Invsco buys crummy (occassionally, incidentally, new) **apartment** buildings and converts them to condos with minimal upgrades. Expecting quality from Invsco is a mistake.
Thank you Sabrina.
Sabrina on January 19th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
“And btw we’re headed back to 1999 pricing….we’re not at 2006/2007 pricing in many areas we’re at 2004, and in some cases pre-2004 pricing.”
Homedelete- how right you are. I’m even finding properties listed for under 2004 prices in, gasp, Lincoln Park. So I shudder to think what is happening in the less desirable areas.
Didn’t they do some new construction?
jason:
They certainly have purchased some under-development projects (345 N LaSalle?? I think), but I’m not aware of any buildings that Invsco was the *real* developer on.
Well, anyway, there is alot of very poor quality new construction out there, believe me. Do your homework.
Didn’t Invsco develop 33 W. Ontario? Or was it converted? Either way it is another building with Invsco stamped all over it.
“Didn’t Invsco develop 33 W. Ontario?”
Yep. Forgot/didn’t know about that one.