Trying To Re-Sell 16 Months Later in Sono: 860 W. Blackhawk in the Clybourn Street Corridor
We haven’t chattered about Sono, the newer construction high rise at 860 W. Blackhawk in the Clybourn Street Corridor in the Near North Side in awhile. (yes- I’m probably getting the neighborhood wrong. What do you call this location?)
The building finally sold out and there haven’t been any recent resales until this 2-bedroom unit came on the market.
For some reason, I don’t have a picture of this building so we’ll have to do without.
This unit is a Southeast corner unit, which has views of the downtown skyline.
You can see from some of the listing pictures, that the new rental building, Sono East, that is nearly completed next to this building (originally it was supposed to be condos but now it’s apartments) does NOT block the downtown views from this unit.
This unit has all the finishes of new construction.
The kitchen has dark cabinets, stainless steel appliances and stone counter tops.
There are hardwood floors in the bedrooms and custom window shades (not a small thing in a corner unit.)
The unit is listed $26,900 above the 2010 purchase price.
With Sono East right next door available to rent, with granite counter tops and Poggenpohl cabinets, will it hurt this unit’s resale value?
You can see pictures, floorplans and amenities of Sono East here.
Joe Kennedy at @Properties has the 2-bedroom in Sono. See the pictures here.
Unit #707: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1436 square feet
- Sold in November 2010 for $473,000
- Currently listed at $499,900 (includes 2 parking spaces)
- Assessments of $620 a month (includes heat, doorman, cable)
- Taxes are “new”
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 17×12
- Bedroom #2: 13×12
Note that it includes *2* parking spaces.
Is this really 860 N? South of North, west of Halsted should make it 1500ish north or 800ish west.
It’s 860 W. Blackhawk.
It is a very nice unit with beautiful views and a nice outdoor area. I’m not sure how much the rentals will hurt the price though as some people even today only consider buying. Also, for such a nice unit the bathrooms kinda disappointed me.
I’ll venture that this should sell close to but under the last price.
Just call the neighborhood North Cabrini.
$420 is pushing it.
“It’s 860 W. Blackhawk.”
Whoops. Thanks. It’s been fixed.
That’s what happens when you’re writing posts at midnight. 🙂
“It is a very nice unit with beautiful views and a nice outdoor area. I’m not sure how much the rentals will hurt the price though as some people even today only consider buying.”
I should also point out that this 2-bedroom is considerably bigger than the 2-bedroom rentals next door. This is just over 1400 square feet. The rentals are around 1100 square feet.
Does anyone know how the second SONO tower that was to be condo, but is now rental, is going to impact prices of condos like this? I would assume that the rental units will be able to use the same gym, garage, and other public areas as the owners?
agree nice looking unit with a killer view and nice outdoor space. Those bathrooms however, are terrible. Really Hollywood Lights?
I can’t see this going over the 2010 price and in fact, perhaps a little less.
Either the bathrooms don’t photograph well, or they are really a disappointment in comparison to the rest of the unit, which may be my dream apartment.
These units are pretty nice and actually very large compared to most new construction 2/2s. The living area is actually large enough for real furniture and a true six person dining room set with room to spare. The balconies are also huge. You’d be hard pressed to find balconies this large in most highrises, particularly at this price point. I’m not too keen about the area as it is very congested, but it is convenient. Overall, I think it is a solid building at a decent price point.
I’d call the neighborhood “north and clybourn” and leave it at that. I’m pretty sure the big red sign that says “Rent Now” is located on top of the condo building! That’s got to irk some of the owners. Also the rental building has a better location than the condo building as it’s located further east. Developers always try to sell out the inferior location first, they we probably planning on a second condo tower originally.
The only units in this building worth considering are those that occupy this corner. The views of the city are phenomenal.
I work right down the street from sono and have toured the units throughout the years. The view really is spectacular but the location is terrible. you are two big intersections away from a neighborhood.
Looked at these units several times when they were first for sale. Always liked this building but my client didn’t like the location – thought it was too isolated and preferred being downtown. The decks are really cool and the views are awesome. Even before tax benefits it looks to me like buying is cheaper than renting assuming a 4% cost of capital and a 1.6% tax rate on the purchase price.
“they we probably planning on a second condo tower originally.”
The developer was always up front about this but that second tower was supposed to be condos.
“I’m pretty sure the big red sign that says “Rent Now” is located on top of the condo building! That’s got to irk some of the owners.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but given that the units have sold out, the building should now be in control of the association, not the company building the rental building next door. So the association must have decided to allow that sign be placed for a fee?
i like the unit. location still iffy and i’d just never overpay for that kind of view.
yes, it’s great, but all it takes is one new tower somewhere close in your line of sight to really damper that sweeping full effect.
location is neutral to me. and assessments are not bad but nothing special either.
so, to me, it comes down to new construction/view premium?
for all that is out there similar for ~$250/SF…sure seems like $300/SF-$325/SF tops to me.
split the difference and call it $448K. i’d be more comfortable at $425-430K.
Original buyers always new there was suppose to be another building next door HOWEVER the building was suppose to run parallel to the condo building. Instead, the developers tuned the apartment tower perpendicular so that it it runs much longer north-south now which kills all but this units eastern view. The apartment tower now has way better view because of this.
eek. i sure said “to me” a lot in my post.
and, to elaborate a bit, when i said “similar for $250/SF” i mean similar finishes with 2 spots.
the new construction and views/extra big balcony though makes this better so $300/SF or a touch over seems reasonable to me.
Looks like seller is simply trying to recoup his purchase price, ergo this contrary-to-market listing price. Nice unit, but not a $.5 million unit finishes-wise. RE tax likely to be a whopper when finally calculated and billed – (and already issued as 1st installment for 2011 tax bill?), as is case w/new construction units. Alot’s relying here on that terrace view. I hope assessments include air-conditioning and garage maintenance charges too.
“agree nice looking unit with a killer view and nice outdoor space. Those bathrooms however, are terrible. Really Hollywood Lights?”
My thoughts exactly
“Even before tax benefits it looks to me like buying is cheaper than renting assuming a 4% cost of capital and a 1.6% tax rate on the purchase price”
Nice try. I found leases on the interweb for <$3100 including parking.
Also, factor in that down payments are pretty much write-offs when you go with a newish 2/2 around here. Even prime River North 2/2 buyers are getting their down payments wiped out. This is North Cabrini so I wouldn't expect your "investment" to do any better.
“Original buyers always new there was suppose to be another building next door HOWEVER the building was suppose to run parallel to the condo building. Instead, the developers tuned the apartment tower perpendicular so that it it runs much longer north-south now which kills all but this units eastern view. The apartment tower now has way better view because of this.”
Figures. Shysters.
“So the association must have decided to allow that sign be placed for a fee?”
I doubt it. Smithfield’s owners *paying* a fee to the owners they’ve screwed (as per above)? Not likely. Love to know the truth. I think the humiliation is forced on the condo building somehow, but I don’t know for sure.
If I recall correctly, the views from this side of the building are generally protected. I believe the British school has the land directly in front and is building their new school addition which is only a few stories tall.
this is from the SONO website regarding zoning…
“With the exception of our property, the current zoning plan prohibits residential high-rises in the area bounded by West North Avenue, North Halsted Street, West Division Street, and the Chicago River.”
“It’s 860 W. Blackhawk.”
It’s easy to find. Just hang a left when you pass VIPs Strip Club. If you get to the Section-8 buildings or Cabrini leftovers, you’ve gone too far!
Directly to the south of SONO is a parking lot and Solomon’s Wines and Spirits. (British School is 1 block south) A new tower would ruin the views of the skyline from the SONO condo tower. Also, the rental tower units have a MUCH better view of the city and lake than the condos. They did switch the orientation of the second tower and blocked many SONO condo owner’s views of lake and skyline.
“this is from the SONO website regarding zoning…
“With the exception of our property, the current zoning plan prohibits residential high-rises in the area bounded by West North Avenue, North Halsted Street, West Division Street, and the Chicago River.””
A carefully placed check in the hands of the right Alderman could change that pretty quickly, couldn’t it? Given its proximity to downtown, I’ve gotta think that would be the next area of highrise condo growth when we have another bubble, but that will probably be at least a decade or two away.
note that the open lot a block south (bounded by dayton, evergreen, kingsbury and easton) is supposed to be breaking ground soon (or maybe has already?) as a Petsmart and Buy Buy Baby, so that lot won’t become a high rise.
“all it takes is one new tower somewhere close in your line of sight ”
New City site is still possible, too, tho not in the prior plan, or the current, no resi, plan. And outside of the “protected” are of:
“the current zoning plan prohibits residential high-rises in the area bounded by West North Avenue, North Halsted Street, West Division Street, and the Chicago River”
“my client didn’t like the location – thought it was too isolated”
I lived out here back before SoNo & Whole Foods. More shopping cart guys & hookers then.
I really liked that it was a bit isolated. It felt like it was a quiet island in the middle of a bustling city but with everything within arms reach.
Dear Helmethofer,
I am hoping that the others will join me in asking you to stop using words like shyster and Japp in your posts. There is no room here for the ugliness that those words convey. You do this quite often, and it needs to stop.
“breaking ground soon (or maybe has already?) as a Petsmart and Buy Buy Baby”
Site work has commenced.
Also, removal of the rail line in Kinsbury, and repaving as a real street, is on going.
Also, the YWF has introduced delivery. So you wouldn’t need to feel foolish either driving 1.5 blocks, or using a stolen shopping cart, to make your(/anonny’s) weekly grocery run.
Finally, after the last couple of days, “shyster” is what carey wants stopped?
” There is no room here for the ugliness that those words convey.”
Just words and letters.. the ugliness is the total waste of life behind them.
Full Disclosure: I own and live in an “-07” condo in SoNo, a few stories above this one. This is the most desirable tier on the southeast corner. I will address some concerns here.
I love the building. One of the biggest assets is the view, which is pretty much the best in Chicago. The new apartment building does block some of the view to the east and northeast, but the money-view is still there. Others have pointed out the British School’s new building–which is one block away and is to be 4 stories only. It’s a “panty-dropping view,” as a single young lady once said to me.
This 2/2 is much bigger than most on the Chicago market. This unit seems to have all the original bathrooms and kitchen. The original bathrooms are indeed a bit meh. Many of the owners have upgraded them.
Frankly, I think the location is one of the best in Chicago. I walk regularly to the Whole Foods, Aldi, Trader Joes. I count five gyms within two blocks, and two yoga studios. There’s a big medical practice, a chiropractor, an REI, a doggy daycare, and two kiddy daycares within ONE block. For some odd reason, people still identify this area with the old Cabrini Green even though the remaining Cabrini residents live more than a freaking mile away. All of my neighbors are good people, and I’m friends with many of them.
The upcoming rental units will NOT share the gym, garage, or any other parts of our building. That’s fine with me, as I prefer to share my stuff with other owners, not renters. It does seem a shame to overlook a nice cabana and pool in the rental complex (this unit will do that) without being able to take a dip. I’ll bet our condo association can work out some sort of “pool membership” with the rental management company. Otherwise however, I’m overall glad not to share in the cost of maintaining a swimming pool.
Anyway, do your homework and check out this unit if you’re in the market for a unique 2/2. It doesn’t matter too much to me; I’m not selling mine.
You can see the views from this tier and meet the president of the homeowners’ association in this YoChicago video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHQI8jCO8sI
The neighborhood was downzoned in an attempt to prevent the SONO buildings. The developer sued the city and won. Any new towers nearby would have to get the neighborhood upzoned again or go PD – either way the whole city council is going to need to approve. I think it’s likely that SONO is going to keep whatever views they didn’t ruin with the rental tower.
“what do you call the move where they told the condo owners one thing, and then truned around and did another?”
Dolchstoss?
The units in this tier really do have spectacular views, although they were spectacularer before the condo tower took out the really cool view of the entire north side. However, it’s still a basic 2/2 format with nice finishes in a weird location. Something like $460 maybe will do it but I just don’t think higher than one of the later closings in the building (right?) makes sense. Would love to get some good data on the sales in different tiers. I’ll have to poke around.
Damn, with the deletions, I’m left total non-sequitor at 7:30pm. And I really liked that one.
FTR, that was Danno Heilhofer I was quoting.
how do you know so much german, anon(tfo)???
“how do you know so much german, anon(tfo)???”
That’s “history”, not “german”.
“That’s fine with me, as I prefer to share my stuff with other owners, not renters.”
860 W Blackhawk: 19 units rented to date through the MLS, 6 additional units for rent but cancelled. Likely more that were rented outside the MLS.
07 Tier: #2807 (top floor) rented 12/2011 for $3,150
“. It does seem a shame to overlook a nice cabana and pool in the rental complex (this unit will do that) without being able to take a dip”
So the “owners” don’t get pool accessl, but the “renters” tower does? I use quotes for owners and renters since as was mentioned above, there are plenty of renters in the condo (“owners”) tower, including one of my coworkers. What is the logic by only allowing the renters to have pool access by the developer?
“Frankly, I think the location is one of the best in Chicago.”
You need to get out more.
I forgot to mention that Sono East is being sold to Prudential Realty in the next few months. We expect our rental neighbors will run a top notch rental property.