Trying to Sell a Bank Owned 2/2 in Streeterville: 247 E. Chestnut
This bank owned 2-bedroom at 247 E. Chestnut in Streeterville came on the market in August 2011.
Priced at $262,000 it has since been reduced to $219,900.
The corner unit has hardwood floors in the main living space.
From the pictures, it appears the kitchen is intact and has stainless steel appliances and granite counter tops with white cabinets.
While there is central air, there is no in-unit washer/dryer and parking is leased in the building.
Before you all argue that the assessments are too high (at $1025 a month) for a sale even at $219,900, Unit #1502, which is just 3 floors above this one and had similar finishes, sold in August for $220,000.
This is a Fannie Mae HomePath property.
It can be purchased for as little as 3% down.
Have prices fallen since the August sale of #1502?
What will be the sales price of this unit?
Jason Shapiro at Rising Realty has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #1202: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1226 square feet
- Sold in May 1993 for $110,000
- Sold in November 2005 for $245,000
- Sold in October 2006 for $265,000
- Lis pendens foreclosure filed August 2010
- Bank owned in June 2011
- Originally listed in August 2011 for $262,000
- Reduced several times
- Currently listed at $219,900
- Assessments of $1025 a month (includes heat, a/c, gas, doorman, cable)
- Taxes of $4350
- Parking is valet and leased in the building
- Central Air
- No in-unit washer/dryer
- Bedroom #1: 14×12
- Bedroom #2: 12×12
I think there’s a cheaper 2/2 in the same building…priced in the $170s.
Guys, this generic 2/2 dump couldn’t even get above $265k DURING THE BUBBLE! Good luck seeing any appreciation from here. Sub-$200 could be the new reality for 2/2s like this.
“Unit #1502, which is just 3 floors above this one and had similar finishes, sold in August for $220,000.”
Sur La Table called. They want their knives back.
This place is boring.
I agree this building is a dud. I think it was a condo conversion about 10-15yrs ago.
Better as apartments.
#403 REO listed 5/11/11 $217,900 now at $177,000
#1902 listed 11/1/10 $275,000 closed 7/28/11 $230,000 (don’t know how “OWNER WILL PAY 1 YEAR OF MONTHLY ASSESSMENT!” figured in.)
the nearly 1400 a month before your mortgage is killing the price of this place since it looks like a snoozer of a rental with no view
Whether or not people on this thread like the unit someone will buy it soon. 1502 and 1902 establish the value, which is not far from the list price. With some appropriate discount for the PITA factor, someone similar to those other buyers can get a better deal on this one probably.
This unit is definitely worth more than #403, the kitchen and baths in that unit definitely need work. Not sure what Gary meant by discount for the PITA factor though, I bought a Homepath this summer and it was anything but a PITA. They were very easy to deal with, I’d say much easier than some delusional 07 buyer who refuses to accept it’s not 07 anymore.
I’d say no in-unit washer/dryer could be a good thing in this building too, given how many shift-working medical staff probably live there.
principal
interest
taxes
assessments
=PITA
“principal
interest
taxes
assessments
=PITA”
A discount because the rent is too damn high? Isn’t that circular?
also means Pain In The Ass.
I was thinking Pain In The Ass. My assumption. Good to know that something related to the government can work out well.
well I always feel a PITA when I pay my PITA
I like this building for its location and rooftop deck. The ceilings are low and the kitchen is more than tiny, yet the 02 units still seem comfortable. This is a great example of a building that will suffer even lower prices due to the age of the building and high assessments. I would consider buying in this building, but prices still need to go down more.
On the one hand, I’d like to have a place like this to call “home” when I escape back to Chicago from the west coast every few weeks, and at the ask I could afford it (as opposed to real estate out here). But who can ignore the assessments? Even if I lived in it full time, I wouldn’t spend $1,000/month on gas and electric — heck, I wouldn’t spend half that — and the thrill of a doorman just ain’t that thrilling, you know?
“It can be purchased for as little as 3% down.”
of course it can. But we ought to worry that government welfare for Streeterville residents may make them more dependent upon & hypocritical about welfare spending. How can this work out well?
A nice unit for a single woman with 2-3 cats that will never get asked to be married.
The building info on the listing says the building has 60 units. That sounds low (though maybe reflecting some combined units?!). Still, sharing a doorman expense–particularly if they are “around the clock” which requires 4 full-time doormen salaries & benefits–has to represent a significant chunk of where the assessments are going.
As prices go lower (due to high assessments) will buildings like this decide to get rid of doormen–or perhaps move to 1 shift covering daytime hours on weekdays (to accomodate deliveries & such), thereby allowing some lowering of assessments? Might that be a plan for increasing the value of units at some point?
JAH, I think that many buildings will be looking at ways to economize, that includes less doormen.