Renovation Week: A 2-Bedroom at 1000 N. Lake Shore Plaza in the Gold Coast
This 2-bedroom in 1000 Lake Shore Plaza at 1000 N. Lake Shore Plaza in the Gold Coast came on the market in October 2021.
Built in 1964, 1000 Lake Shore Plaza has just 132 units and leased garage parking.
It’s a full amenity building with door staff, an indoor pool, exercise room, and party room.
The listing says this unit has had a “magnificent renovation.”
It has a new kitchen, bathrooms, wood floors, 2 zones of HVAC, a central humidifier system, new copper pipes and Trex flooring on the balcony.
The kitchen is open to the living and dining room and has modern white cabinets with Iceberg Stone counter tops along with a peninsula with seating for 2.
It has a Viking stove with induction cook top and a hidden exhaust fan that vents to the outdoors and a glass front Sub-Zero refrigerator.
It has a dry bar with a wine refrigerator and many built-in bookshelves throughout.
One of the bathrooms has both a walk-in-shower and a tub.
There is a half-bath.
The unit has all the features buyers look for including central air, washer/dryer in the unit and there is leased parking in the building.
This unit appears to have both south and west views, with sunset views from the terrace.
One dog is permitted, with maximum weight of 25 pounds.
Listed at $860,000 for 2200 square feet, is this a deal compared to downtown new construction?
Randi Pellar and Sharon Glickman at Baird & Warner have the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #21C: 2 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 2200 square feet
- Sold in December 1993 for $280,000
- Sold in September 1998 for $323,000
- Sold in June 1999 for $400,000
- Sold in May 2005 for $545,000
- Originally listed in October 2021 for $860,000
- Currently still listed at $860,000
- Assessments of $2195 a month (includes gas, doorman, cable, exercise room, pool, exterior maintenance, lawn care, scavenger, snow removal, Internet)
- Taxes of $13,462
- Central Air
- Washer/dryer in the unit
- Leased parking in the building
- Bedroom #1: 16×14
- Bedroom #2: 16×12
- Living room: 20×16
- Dining room: 16×10
- Kitchen: 16×10
- Terrace: 13×7
That $2200 assessment is a mortgage payment on a nicer 3/2 unit in a newish boutique building within 10 minutes of this location. Going pass harder than John Stockton on this unit.
“That $2200 assessment is a mortgage payment on a nicer 3/2 unit in a newish boutique building within 10 minutes of this location.”
Jeez, really? With how much down? Or is that 10 minutes via heli?
I’m not seeing 2200sf
Rental equivalent is about $8k/mo
You can def rent nicer for less coin
“Jeez, really? With how much down? Or is that 10 minutes via heli?”
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1311-W-Chicago-Ave-60642/unit-3N/home/175653168
10 minutes via car
Principle and Interest = $2168 (20% Down)
“That $2200 assessment is a mortgage payment on a nicer 3/2 unit in a newish boutique building within 10 minutes of this location. Going pass harder than John Stockton on this unit.”
Which building Nyet?
Within 10 minutes? Are you talking about over in River North? Some of those newer boutique pricey buildings?
Here’s one in one of the River North boutique buildings. Same square footage at 2200 square feet.
Price: $1.975 million
HOAs: $2100
No pool in the building.
Seems like this unit in the Gold Coast IS a deal at this price.
Here’s another boutique building in River North. New construction.
Price: $1.2 million
HOA: $972 a month
No pool but does have a doorman.
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/366-W-Superior-St-60654/unit-403/home/144666080
Additionally, 1000 N. Lake Shore Plaza is a “view” building on the higher floors.
Different buyers for “views” versus short boutiques.
The Palmolive is a nearby “boutique” building with just 90 units.
Door staff. No pool. Exercise room.
This unit is slightly bigger at 2347 square feet.
Price: $1.49 million
HOA: $2381
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/159-E-Walton-Pl-60611/unit-14F/home/12613192
Also, no terrace with the Palmolive unit. Terraces are important now. Love the green tile on 1000 E Lake Shore Plaza. Beautiful.
That unit is 1600 square feet Nyet. Not similar. Please show us at least 2000 square feet.
Maybe something in 1414 n wells, Nyet?
Nothing as big as 2200 square feet on the market right now. This one is 1700 square feet. Doesn’t have the finishes of the unit in the chatter either.
Price: $649,000
HOA: $750 a month
No door staff, no pool.
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1414-N-Wells-St-60610/unit-207/home/14115506
I don’t think a buyer who would consider 1000 n lake shore plaza would EVER look at a 6 or 8 unit building with no amenities or staff.
“I don’t think a buyer who would consider 1000 n lake shore plaza would EVER look at a 6 or 8 unit building with no amenities or staff.”
Or a place a couple blocks east of the expressway.
“That unit is 1600 square feet Nyet. Not similar. Please show us at least 2000 square feet.”
LOL
Bless your heart, you think this is anywhere near 2000sf
* west
Floorplan in the listing for 20C, which sold in June for $680k:
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1000-N-Lake-Shore-Dr-60611/unit-20C/home/14121747
Looks like about 1850 sf.
Never been in this building but looks like 8ft ceilings. Agree w Johnny this does not look like 2200sq ft either, maybe theres a bunch of wasted hallway space not photographed. Seems more comparable to a 1500sq ft unit.
As a multi-residential builder you can choose to use the BOMA “gross” method or the “net” method to calculate square footage. IMO it’s very unethical to use the “gross” method that is inclusive of the full thickness of your exterior and interior walls since that’s not usable square footage…
Easy way to swindle suckers legally. (Not saying that was the intent here.)
I’ve seen many lawsuits from condo presales buyers against developers that use the gross method because they end up disappointed with the size of their condo.. Depending on the unit design, you could lose 20-30% of usable living space.
The buyers lose these lawsuits every time.
its just a number
Not sure where the $180k premium for 21C is Vs 20C?
JFC – looking at the price history for 20C is a shitshow. Initial ask of $1.1MM – LOL. Some flipper got their ass handed to them
Is that HAWT ™
“As a multi-residential builder you can choose to use the BOMA “gross” method or the “net” method to calculate square footage. IMO it’s very unethical to use the “gross” method that is inclusive of the full thickness of your exterior and interior walls since that’s not usable square footage…”
IMO the interior walls should be included, however, I’d prefer the sf to be based on the inside perimeter walls.
“The buyers lose these lawsuits every time.”
because it’s mostly likely documented somewhere that they missed or didn’t care to look at.
I just think we should use one standard since people do comps by $/SF.
as both an architect and a managing broker, SF is calculated to the outside of the exterior walls and to the middle of the demising walls with everything in between counted (stairwells and other double height spaces within the unit are included at 1/2)
The building has been around forever.
The floorplans were put out there in the 1960s and 1970s. They are also usually on the building’s website. Common knowledge what the square footage is in these buildings from back in the day.
Jack: “Weiss Architects” who served as expert witness within this litigation referencing the two BOMA options:
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914e5faadd7b0493490a513
“Users of this standard must clearly and prominently identify which measurement method is employed as part of any presentation of the results of its application. Likewise, any reference to this standard in any context, such as a lease, appraisal, declaration, prospectus or other marketing materials and databases, must cite Method A or Method B in order to be unambiguous.”
How many condo buyers have any idea there are two different applicable measuring standards? Using one standard throughout the State would prevent a lot of confusion.
“ The floorplans were put out there in the 1960s and 1970s. They are also usually on the building’s website. Common knowledge what the square footage is in these buildings from back in the day.”
That may be but it ain’t 2200sf. If it’s common knowledge, why are you and the realators grossly overstating the sf?
“stairwells and other double height spaces within the unit are included at 1/2”
So, the area under the stair well counts 100%, plus you add 50% for the stairs themselves, and airspace counts at 50%, on top of the 100% on the lower floor?
That’s certainly commercially reasonable for calculation of rent, but that’s misleading to individuals not in the business.
Nice building and location. Low floor, wrong tier.
Buying a unit in this building without a lake view seems short-sighted. Especially for this kind of dough.
I don’t know the ceiling height but I’d concur they’re probably low. Maybe 8 feet.
I’m on the 50th floor of the Hancock looking north and I look down quite a bit to the top of 1000 LSD Plaza, which is 55 stories!
Granted, the Hancock has a lot of parking, office, and utility floors between the ground and 50 that all have relatively high ceilings. But even my unit there has a ceiling of around 9 feet, and some have higher.
I get the feeling ceiling height wasn’t much of a consideration in 1964 when 1000 LSD Plaza was built.
“I don’t know the ceiling height but I’d concur they’re probably low. Maybe 8 feet.”
I love low ceilings. Humans weren’t meant to live in 11, 12, 15 foot high ceilings. It’s not cozy. Lower ceilings are like “cottage” type ceilings.
I’m with you, Sabrina. I’ve been in units in the Hancock on 91 and 92 and the 11-foot ceilings are definitely too high for me. I’ve also been in Frank Lloyd Wright homes with 7.5 foot ceilings and they do feel quite cozy and pleasant.
I personally prefer ceilings 9′ to 10′. Anything less than 9′ makes the place feel cramped, and higher than 10′ means vertical space that is out of reach and useless. Also more expensive to heat.
Laughably overpriced. Even old people aren’t dumb enough to pay this much.
“Laughably overpriced. Even old people aren’t dumb enough to pay this much.”
Hey Rob, what do you think the price SHOULD be?
As I posted, this is priced well below similar square foot units in the Palmolive down the street which is also a boutique high rise.
Maybe some people on this blog don’t understand what the downtown high-rise market is like.
It should be priced whatever morons are willing to pay, makes sense to start high (I don’t blame them).
This building was built in 1964 and this unit has a $2,200 HOA. There’s plenty of rental options that are much newer with better layouts & amenities for that price range. Invest the deposit and live better imo.
The value to me personally is much lower than what it will sell for as I’m not at all the target market. Even for the target market I think this is $100K too high.
“ Hey Rob, what do you think the price SHOULD be?
As I posted, this is priced well below similar square foot units in the Palmolive down the street which is also a boutique high rise.
Maybe some people on this blog don’t understand what the downtown high-rise market is like.”
The ask is $180k above what 20C sold for. That would be a pretty good starting point, no?
I’m assuming the last comment is some honest self analysis
“The ask is $180k above what 20C sold for. That would be a pretty good starting point, no?”
They haven’t listed it for sale by owner. There must be comps that support their price point. And it’s possible the market has tightened since last March, when 20C finally went under contract.
It’s listed $100,000 above the sales price of 20C, not $180,000 above.
Supply and demand. The downtown market has tightened, that means prices are going to rise.
“This building was built in 1964 and this unit has a $2,200 HOA.”
The HOA is actually reasonable given the size of the building, the age, the amenity. I don’t know why you keep bitching about HOAs Rob, when clearly high rise living isn’t for you. I don’t think you understand what it takes to run a high rise building.
All buyers should be researching building reserves, what maintenance has been done, etc.
As I showed with my links to several other buildings, the HOA for this square footage in a full amenity building with this number of units is actually similar to other nearby buildings.
What would a rental with 2200 square feet cost you?
About $7,000 to $12,000 a month, depending on the building.
“ They haven’t listed it for sale by owner. There must be comps that support their price point. And it’s possible the market has tightened since last March, when 20C finally went under contract.
It’s listed $100,000 above the sales price of 20C, not $180,000 above.
Supply and demand. The downtown market has tightened, that means prices are going to rise.””
Or you can take the simple solution that it’s grossly over priced based upon it sitting since Oct + significantly over that last similarly updated sale
Smolette gonna Smolette