We Still Love Authentic Lofts with Private Roof Top Showers: 1619 S. Michigan in the South Loop
We last chattered about this 2-bedroom authentic loft in the Studebaker Lofts at 1619 S. Michigan in the South Loop in July 2010.
See our prior chatter here.
The loft has a massive New York-style open layout with 17 foot ceilings, exposed brick walls, and a refurbished tin ceiling.
Since it’s a top floor unit, it has a private rooftop deck, supposedly with an outdoor shower that is NEVER depicted in the pictures (grr…) and skylights.
The loft also has another unique feature in the master bedroom: a large walk-in cedar closet.
The kitchen has white cabinets and stainless steel appliances.
There is central air, a washer/dryer in the unit, and deeded parking.
The price has been slashed nearly in half since we last chattered about it.
The loft is now a short sale and is listed just $50,000 above the 1998 purchase price.
What will this unique space end up selling for?
Once again, I don’t have a direct picture of this property. But it’s the brown brick building on the far left of the picture below.
Nancy Gaspadarek at @Properties has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #312: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 2800 square feet (per the old listing)
- Sold in May 1998 for $294,000
- Was listed in July 2010 for $638,000 (plus $40,000 for parking)
- Reduced
- Lis pendens filed in September 2010
- Currently listed as a “short sale” for $329,000 (plus $20,000 for parking)
- Assessments of $330 a month
- Taxes are now $7242
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Private roof top deck with shower
- Bedroom #1: 17×15
- Bedroom #2: 10×12
Great post, Sabrina, I love this space. This is what a loft was supposed to be. If this was available for anywhere near the current asking price back in 2002-2004, maybe it would be part of the dwindling JJJ real estate empire. Sure, the finishes are a little bit ugly, but the finishes and the kitchen are fixable without too much cost and the green walls can be repainted without much trouble at all. I think that this could be awesome and updated at high quality for $50k or so. I don’t think that it can be 2800 sqft, but certainly looks to be in the love 2000s at least.
It’s absurd that the summer 2010 commenters thought that this was worth in the range of $600k. It’s a great example of the error of using the list price as a meaningful anchor for a market value. Another example of this foolishness is when people get all offended when a rehabber tries to get 100% premium (without considering their costs) for a few months worth of work. Who cares what it is listed at, the market value is the market value. For this, I would not say the market value is anywhere close to $600k, but it seems like then or now it could go for north of the current asking price.
You can see video, shot last week with one of our clients, from another top-floor unit for sale at Studebaker Lofts here:
http://yochicago.com/a-large-character-laden-south-loop-loft/24879/
Fantastic raw space. Would be an easy conversion to a true loft experience.
“You can see video, shot last week with one of our clients, from another top-floor unit for sale at Studebaker Lofts here:”
Joe Zekas, at some point, will you acknowledge that you use my comment a few weeks ago without attribution, and mention that you should have said that you adapted your prose from a comment on Crib Chatter? If you do, I will let it go and we can let bygones be bygones. If not, I will keep asking you.
Seems like a very good deal. The assessments seem suspiciously low though. I wonder the story is on those.
wow – this is the type of space that commands a premium. i don’t think that anyone buying a place like this at this price could ever be called a “knife catcher”. It is a great space and a great value. If I liked the neighborhood (or had friends/hangouts here), I would definitely buy this place. It is very unique and unique spaces are hard to come by….
This is a great space, although it does need some updating. How many units are in the building? It sure doesn’t seem like it could be many. It also seems like you’d have lots of people looking down into your rooftop shower from nearby buildings. A very decent price though to someone who is willing to do the work to make it beautiful.
Listed by @properties, huh? Is this a good thing? I hear some stories that the company is going under.
Cool. Wonder if the pic of the “office” is what they’re calling the 2nd BR? While I’d like to see the roof deck shower, I’m more interested in seeing the currrent 2 bathrooms.
JJJ,
I did not use your comment. Period. I would acknowledge having done so if I’d done so.
I acknowledge having read your comment before writing what I did. If I had meant to say exactly the same thing I would have quoted you – as I typically do wherever I write.
Will you acknowledge that I was making an entirely different point in what I wrote than you were in your comment, i.e. whether or not a new Sabrina had appeared on this site?
If it helps you get past this I”d be happy to add an addendum to what I wrote noting your contention that I lifted your words. I think my readers will see the difference. If not, so be it.
Joe, don’t worry about JJJ – he/she/it is a tool. Ignore the morons….
“Will you acknowledge that I was making an entirely different point in what I wrote than you were in your comment, i.e. whether or not a new Sabrina had appeared on this site?”
There’s a “new” Sabrina? Whoo…I like it.
Can I be 10 years younger this go around? Oh- and, if it’s not too much to ask, maybe 15 pounds thinner?
Much appreciated!
Don’t ever forget — Joe is NEVER wrong. Even when he insisted that this real estate crash was either not going to happen or wouldn’t be as bad as was seen in California. He saw no evidence of that…
And he can protest as much as he wants about his semantics — his meaning (and intention) back then was clear.
Looking at the 800k example loft that Joe added, great space, but does anyone else think it will be hard to find a buyer for that place? Are there that many people who are interested in a 3 bedroom loft in the South Loop for that kind of money?
I feel like people who have that much to spend are looking for a SFH instead.
“I did not use your comment. Period. I would acknowledge having done so if I’d done so. I acknowledge having read your comment before writing what I did. If I had meant to say exactly the same thing I would have quoted you – as I typically do wherever I write.”
That’s pathetic. In one paragraph you really reveal the kind of person you are. You admit to reading my comment. reusing it without attribution and changing it so that you weren’t saying “exactly the same thing.” You think that you can slightly change phraseology and use synonyms and that avoids plagiarism? You’re wrong. It is immoral and dishonest to take someone else’s original ideas and change them only slightly in order to try to pass them off as your own without credit or attribution.
“Will you acknowledge that I was making an entirely different point in what I wrote than you were in your comment, i.e. whether or not a new Sabrina had appeared on this site?”
I will leave that as an exercise to readers on your site and this site. I have confidence they will see through your behavior.
“If it helps you get past this I”d be happy to add an addendum to what I wrote noting your contention that I lifted your words. I think my readers will see the difference. If not, so be it.”
Yes, please do add an addendum. I will hold you to that. Again, I am confident that upon reading the language in question, your readers will indeed reach an appropriate conclusion. As you have reminded us many times, your readers are very numerous and you have lots of traffic on your site, even if no one ever posts, so I look forward to all of them seeing that.
JJJ,
Your attempt to distort my meaning doesn’t change it. After decades in the publishing business I understand what plagiarism is. I understood what intellectual dishonesty is long before that.
Add a link here to the comment in question so I can link back to it on my site.
As an aside to the comment by ChiTownGal: Our condo association recently dropped @Properties as the management company. The notice of the change from the HOA was quite hostile in their comments about the quality of service provided by @Properties.