The Coolest Crib is Back: 2250 W. Ohio in West Town
We chattered about this cool 3300-square foot loft with amazing rooftop pool at 2250 W. Ohio in West Town in November 2007.
It never sold and was withdrawn from the market.
Thanks to Roy who pointed out that it has again been listed – only now it has a new luxury kitchen.
The asking price, however, remains the same.
Here’s the listing:
The best just got better! This incredible tri-level penthouse loft with rooftop infinity pool and dramatic skyline and Ukrainian Village dome views has a brand new Poggenpohl kitchen and new American walnut floors.
Enjoy 3 bedrooms on one level plus a lofted fourth bedroom adjoining the penthouse family room. Sophisticated stone and slate baths. Two decks. Includes garage parking for three cars (a single and a tandem space). Truly spectacular!
Here’s the old kitchen:
And here’s the NEW one:
Jennifer Ames at Coldwell Banker again has the listing. See more pictures here. See the property brochure here.
Will the new kitchen help it sell this time around?
Unit #306: 3 bedrooms, 3.5 baths, 3300 square feet, 3 car parking, triplex
- Sold in April 2005 for $760,000
- Was listed in November 2007 for $995,000
- Withdrawn from the market
- Currently listed for $995,000
- Assessments of $460 a month
- Taxes of $7,173
- Central Air
That’s really strange. Why would someone put in a new kitchen only to relist the property at the same price? Not that I think they could get a higher price but what were they thinking? The potential increase in value would be a fraction of the cost of the upgrade. And I would have been perfectly happy with the old kitchen. I suspect the food tasted the same.
Ha.. I had the same poggenpohl cabinets in my last house just in white matte. Almost every bottom cabinet chipped.
Gary I guess his realtor kept telling him people who walked through didn’t like the black cabinets. Better to throw in 50k in boxes than lower the price 100k.
Good chance both happens.
Btw… as this new mortgage package goes through you get to own a home HD. Well actually the difference in all the idiots purchase price to new adjusted price… And they get to live there a year for free. That would make me happy enough to go become an arsonist.
As a former San Franciscan, I am beginning to see listings in Chicago that remind me of the style of S.F. loft units, BUT are at prices that are similar or MORE than identical units are being listed for in San Francisco(!), which is a city that we are always told is FAR more expensive than Chicago. I have to be honest with you, Chicago is a great city, and I live here now, but that pool is only good for four months a year, and in S.F. you would not have to drain the water in October, and if price trends continue, I would rather live in S.F. than Chicago if housing prices end up about the same. I am noticing this same trend in rentals, where in S.F. they are dropping fast, while here in the Chicago they are trending down, but very slowly. (There are 2bd units in Pacific Heights for 2,200 a month, when 4 years ago they would have been 4,200 a month)
I think Sabrina could help me on this since she lived in San Francisco for a period of years also, but I feel Chicago should be about 1/3 less (at least) in cost than S.F. which is a city trapped with water on three sides, and mountains on the south, creating a very tight amount of space to build with high land costs. And, let’s face it, there’s Napa, Pebble Beach, Tahoe skiing, etc. etc. all nearby to help attract many foreign buyers.
If I could get this loft for 900K in San Francisco, than I feel it should be about 640 – 700K here in a city with a very long winter. The average income in S.F. is much higher than our city, and although San Francisco is much smaller, the pool of cash buyers with great wealth is huge out there, even in this market.
I was just in S.F. and Napa (84 degrees), and I was shocked at what units in my old neighborhood (The Marina) were now listing at, compared to what I sold my unit for. So why are sellers in Chicago taking longer to “get the message” and reduce prices compared to sellers in California?
Morgan… because 90% of Chicagoans are not holding 0% down loans in a non-recourse walkaway state that make more sense to just immediately forfeit on than to keep. Cali is in a supply free fall. Fundamentals just simply mean nothing at this moment in time (short term).
And I agree… Terraces are nice but unusable in Chicago for too much of the year.
btw.. what really constitutes HUGE?? Over 50% of San Fran sitting on gobs of cash????
I agree IB with what you are saying, but the Bay Area, even today, is a very wealthy area for the relative size of the population. I also agree that all of the GOOGLEaires that were snapping up 3 million dollar cottages in Noe Valley are no longer as rich as they were 4 months ago, but I watched many homes and units in that city being purchased with cash. Chicago is a much larger city, so when I think of San Francisco, I compare it to Lincoln Park, Lakeview and Streeterville/Gold Coast since I think that is a better “apple” comparison. California is in “free fall”, but what is to stop someone like me from not deciding to go back to our firm’s office in S.F. ( at a 20% pay increase) and buy a flat in my old hood for almost 400K less than what I sold my old unit for?
Morgan-
I don’t know what is to stop you from moving. Sounds like you’ve made a very good argument to move away. But, there is obviously something intangible keeping you here. I hope you stay here, thoguh b/c Chicago is a great city!
On the property, everything looks very cool except the outside. Love the views. If there was a way to convert the pool to a hottub in the off-season I would be sold! Put a few propane heaters and maybe a covered bungalow and you could def use it year-round (at least the “hot tub”). I bet you could convert it for 10K and get the asking price.
Morgan,
I made the same argument you just did 2 days ago. I just used Sydney as an example. Don’t think most people have the flexibility though (particularly with kids).
Chi Guy… that’s exactly what my wife did with the place i am now in. Her reasoning was not liking pools of water over her head. We had to redo the entire roof deck because of leaking into our kitchen so she just didn’t want to take a chance again. Being under the roof is only a matter of time before something leaks somewhere anyway.
I guess my final question is, will we see declines in Chicago as large as I am seeing out in California? Could a loft such as this be purchased at under 650K in 2009? (Or am I not yet familiar enough with the “strength” of the Chicago market?)
Morgan at 10% jumbo on the 30yr fix. someone has to LOVE this thing to buy it. Part of San Fran problem is the price made everything a Jumbo and no one wants those right now. For 1 mil I would only be looking River North or LP anyway.
Only parts of Chicago are as expensive as SF. After all the city alone is almost as large as the entire bay area in population. I considered moving there, but I wasn’t willing to lower my standard of living by paying the same rent for 1/4-1/3 the space I get in Chicago as well as affordability of eating out, etc, which is all more expensive all over the bay area.
The Bay Area population is on par with the Chicagoland population, FYI.
I spent a week in the bay area last september and one of the many impressions I had was the the housing out there looks run down, even in some of the better areas. Which would make sense too, because if people are spending larger portions of their income on the mortgage they have less money to spend on regular upkeep an maintenance. That’s not to say there isn’t run down housing in Chicago but overall the housing stock in the nicer areas of Chicago are kept up pretty well on average better than the bay area.
Hd.. Funny I thought the same exact thing. I also thought I was about the only person who doesn’t love SanFran. People loving Vegas is the one though that I never at all understood. What a hole!
I liked the Bay Area, don’t get me wrong. The moutains are closeby, the food is teriffic, it’s beautiful, the weather, although chilly, isn’t as horrible as Chicago. I though that it was more congested; lot sizes were smaller, houses were more run down, streets seemed narrower, there were more people in a smaller area. The bungalow equiv out there is the flat where the garage is the first floor and the living quarters are on the second. regular ranch sized homes had little or no yard just like our mcmanions here. Its a great place to visit but I don’t think I’d live there.
A new kitchen… boy talk about throwing good money after bad.
Should have lowered the price and taken their loss. This is an example of developing above market pricing in a less desirable location. This property will probably end in foreclosure. And it doen’t help that the apartment isn’t staged.
Why is it an improvement to change the color of the cabinets, and remove half of them? I liked the old kitchen better.
Gah! What are these sellers thinking??
As per the listing they also added new walnut floors. They certaily look a lot nicer but not worth the added expense.
Not only did the seller put in a new kitchen, lets not forget the “new American walnut floors”. Why both, just to sell for the same price?
Also? Why replace those wood floors? The walnut is pretty, but new wood can never replace the beauty of old hardwood, with its extravagant knots and swirls. They don’t let ’em cut down the old hardwood forests like they used to. I’ve never seen new wood as pretty as my own circa-1924 oak floors.
[note to self: hit “refresh” before posting so you don’t look like a dumbass…]
G–how much is this place worth? (Don’t forget to add in the “value” of the new floors and cabinets!!)
Ken,
They are listening to their realtor…
Like you said.. what the hell are they thinking!!!
it’s probably not staged because the realtor knows they won’t sell it and more than likely the owner will move to a new agent after 6 more months on the market. the realtor doesn’t want to “throw good money after bad” as in spend their own money on staging on a property that won’t sell. that’s a 1K loss, prob.
“Could a loft such as this be purchased at under 650K in 2009?”
Maybe not 2009, but yeah, a loft like this is probably “worth” about $650k at the point where ordinary 1 br condos in non-descript buildings are back to the low $100s, whenever that happens.
“[bay area] houses were more run down”
That salt fog is a killer. But the other explanations are true, too.
“San Fran problem is the price made everything a Jumbo and no one wants those right now”
Keep in mind, the jumbo cut-off in EsEff right now is $729k. Yeah, not a lot of money available for “jumbo conforming”, but it’s still more likely to work than a 10% jumbo in Chicago. And some of that $$ is in FHA 97% loans! Pricing to meet that market means $750k in EsEff, $430k in Chicago.
“The average income in S.F. is much higher than our city”
Easier to maintain a high average when you have 1/4 the population and most of the poor people living in other cities. Also, the total tax burden is a LOT higher in EsEff, with the high state income tax and the only slightly lower sales tax.
Its probably priced a little high but still this place is the balls people. What a skyline view and converting that pool into a hottub for the winter would make this place fantastic. Is $300 a sq ft really that unreasonable?
I did not mean to twist this into an SF vs. CHI discussion. My point really was that prices are dropping much faster in the Bay Area for both rentals and properties for sale than they are here from what I am seeing. As for the discussion of comparisons, I agree, SF is dirtier, the housing stock is much less attractive, and in general I love Chicago more as well (after all, I am here now). Something to keep in mind is that some positions pay much higher in the Bay Area than here in Chicagoland, and the opportunities in certain industries are very attractive for some there.
On the whole, I think Chicago is the most attractive large city in North America, with the best architecture and fantastic public ammenities. (as for the weather …..)
Am I crazy for renting here and hoping that a loft like this could be 650K (or less) in 2009?
Morgan,
Given the government has shown it is on the side of the overextended and the RE bulls you won’t likely see this place for 650k in 2009. By 2012 probably. The government can only, at best, delay the correction and waste money in the process. Equilibrium will be restored eventually.
Morgan, I don’t see it coming down to $650K, even though it is in West Town–which is already only an “OK” neighborhood (not quite as good as, say, Bucktown), and not going to get any better in this economic downturn. I *could* see $700K, which would be $200 sq/ft, plus a $40K premium on top of that for being so damn cool. But I kind of suspect that the sellers would rather either stay put, or rent it out at a loss, before they’d accept an offer like that any time soon.
Oh, and if anyone looks at the floor plans, you’ll see that there is no need to convert the pool–because there is plenty of room to *add* a hot tub to the deck. Have cake, eat it, too.
Seriously? You folks who trash SFHs (not the crackerbox in bucktown) as not worth $750k can’t see this dropping below $700k? Are there really enough people who make $250k plus who want to live in marginal areas and want something like this to present that high of a floor on the price? Yeah, yeah, it only takes one buyer–but if it weren’t a place you thought was cool, you’d ridicule that one buyer as a sucker.
PS–I think it’s cool. I would like it if I were younger, single-r and less child-having. But it’s about what the alternatives are a a price, and I think that sub-$700k is possible, but not next year–it’s going to take an intervening owner losing money, too, or a foreclosure (which isn’t too likely when someone’s throwing that much good money after bad).
“Will we see declines in Chicago as large as I am seeing out in California?
No. The Chicago bubble is not even close to as bad as the LA or Bay Area bubbles.
This place is way overpriced. You can get a new 4000 sq ft single family home in the area for about the same price.
Well, I hope you are right, anon (tfo), because I’d love to pick it up below $700K. But seriously, the neighborhood is ok (better than South Loop, though worse than Bucktown), the interiors are immaculate, there is the “coooooooool!” factor, it has three parking spaces, a fireplace, TWO huge decks, a swimming pool, and the assessments are not that high given how much space it has. There’s just no comparing how fabulous this place is, to the tiny, awkward little SFH we were making fun of yesterday.
“There’s just no comparing how fabulous this place is, to the tiny, awkward little SFH we were making fun of yesterday”
I know–hence “(not the crackerbox in bucktown)”.
I was talking about the trashing that SFHs in Lincoln Square, Andersonville, hell, Lakeview west of Southport almost always take on here.
anon(tfo)
child-having? I didn’t know you were trying to get HD pregnant 🙂
Sorry… I had to… it was too easy.
“No. The Chicago bubble is not even close to as bad as the LA or Bay Area bubbles.”
The relevant comparison is the EsEff (city only) bubble and the East of Western north of Cermak Chicago bubble. They have a lot in common in demographics and desirability compared to the metro area. I’m not up-to-date on what’s happening with pricing in EsEff.
There is no doubt (in my mind) that the bubble was a lot, lot worse in, say, Vallejo than in Joliet and in Oakland, CA than Oakland, Chicago.
I love this place. If it was $700K, I would buy it. I’ll be watching to see what it sells for (if it sells this time). it looks like they’ve moved the furniture out (unless it was staged last time it was on the market) – could they be more desperate this time?
“child-having?”
*less* child-having. Intentionally bad and of a piece with the progression from correct (youger) to bad, but idiomatic (single-r) to the sublimely dumb (less child-having). And, on the easy one–G.O.
Oh god no… No grammar.. I hate grammar. Numbers till my eyes bleed o.k., but no grammar.
I think I liked the original kitchen better, too. The new one is kind of bland. Also, it seems strange that all of the black bathroom cabinets and such were left in place, when clearly they were put in at the same time as the first kitchen and were intended to match it.
If you can afford this place you can afford to keep that hot tub hot 12 months a year and thus dont have to drain it.
hot tubs are not expensive to keep up. Just need a nice 4-5 in thick cover. that’s a pool though which is worthless about 9 months a year.
Bob–if by “bay area” you mean the several counties around SF (Marin, ContraCosta, Alameda, and SF County), then the areas are similar population-wise to the greater Chicago area. However, the respective land masses are vastly different. Given that fact, I disagree that SF area and Chicago area are same pop.-wise. SF has more residnets than the entire state of Alaska, but it’s still less than 700,000.
The real question is “could Sarah Palin be mayor of SF?”
John 2… No! But I bet a lot of people do dress up as her in the next gay parade.
IB and it’s tonight on Halsted Street. I think it kicks off about 8 pm.
Very cool unit. Not a great location
This isn’t really RE related, but I’d probably consider getting a divorce before closing on a place like this…
That “pool” is way too small to be used as a pool. It would be a great size for a hot tub, but is totally worthless as a pool.
Does anyone know what kind of mortgage this place has?
The C-S predicts a 30% drop in housing nationwide, peak-to-trough, with peak being 2005. Say it’s actually 20%. That makes this place about $600K in its trough. I could afford it! 😀
That is one of the best lofts that I have seen in the city. 3 levels might be a bit much, but for that much space and those finishes, plus the pool and 3 garage spaces is huge. My buddy has a 4,000 sq foot loft on Grand that after their rehab of it was $735k. Two outdoor parking spaces, all one one level, but farther west than this.
There is nothing wrong with this location. If you want a true loft in the city, you are going in west town or south loop. $300/foot right now is tough, and I think if they took this down to $850k they’d get it. My wife had a buyer on this two weeks ago but someone in the family said “terrible area”, which it’s not.
Kenworthy — from CCRD
PIN 17-07-114-050-1012
Bought for $760,000 on 04 Apr 2005 (with 2 parking spots)
Mortgage with ABN-AMRO for $608,000 on 04 Apr 2005
Mortgage with National City for $75,500 on 04 Apr 2005
National City mortgage released on 14 Jun 2005
Mortgage with JP Morgan Chase for $50,000 on 12 Sep 2006
So, original purchase appears to be 80/10/10, with the second repaid within a couple of months. Another second was opened a year later, taking out a little equity (maybe for a remodel?).
Assuming 30-year amortization on the first, the principal paid to date is mid-$20K ($29K at 6%, $26.5K at 6.5%, $24K at 7%), so outstanding principal on both mortgages might be $640K.
they won’t let it go for anywhere near that much though. I think if anyone came in at $750k or above they’d start listening, and wouldn’t even flinch if someone came in at over $800k.
Omg this is amazing i would love to live here so i think i might just!
Andrew Mason of Groupon owns this Loft.