When Old is New Again: A 4-Bedroom in 55 W. Delaware in the Gold Coast
This 4-bedroom in the Park Newberry at 55 W. Delaware in the Gold Coast just came on the market.
Built in 1996, the Park Newberry has 182 units, attached garage parking, and doormen.
It has a unique circular driveway with a fountain in front of the entrance.
The listing says this is a “1-year old gut condo” that is “turn-key.”
It has a modern aesthetic, which is popular in new construction buildings nearby, with designer lighting and high gloss woodwork.
There’s a chef’s kitchen with modern white and wood cabinets, a custom appliance package, a huge center island and a separate breakfast bar along with stone counter tops.
The unit has a unique glass den with moving black doors.
The master suite has an en suite modern black and white bathroom along with a walk-in-closet.
There’s a separate laundry room.
The unit also has Hunter Douglas electric blackout and sheers in all bedrooms and living space.
It has a 32 foot outdoor double balcony with west exposure.
The unit has the features buyers look for including central air and 2-car attached garage parking spots are available. One spot apparently has a unique walk-in storage area.
For those concerned that they are buying in an older building, the listing says the hallways are currently being renovated.
At 3,000 square feet, this is larger than most condos in this neighborhood. It’s also got the all-important 4-bedrooms.
Listed at $2,000,000, is this a deal compared with the new construction buildings nearby?
Shelly Perkowski at Coldwell Banker has the listing. See the pictures and floor plan here.
Unit #616: 4 bedrooms, 3.5 baths, 3,000 square feet
- Sold in June 1998 for $455,500 (included one parking spot)
- Sold in April 2011 for $900,000 (included 2 parking spots)
- Sold in November 2017 for $1,130,000 (included 2 parking spots)
- Originally listed on May 11, 2020 for $2,095,000 (included the 2 parking spots)
- De-listed
- Re-listed on May 12, 2020 for $2,000,000 (2 parking spots now extra for $60,000)
- Assessments of $1408 a month (includes heat, a/c, gas, doorman, cable, Internet, exercise room, exterior maintenance, lawn care, scavenger, snow removal)
- Taxes of $17,193
- Central Air
- Washer/dryer in the unit
- Electric fireplace
- Bedroom #1: 17×14
- Bedroom #2: 19×12
- Bedroom #3: 13×12
- Bedroom #4: 13×11
- Den: 12×8
- Foyer: 15×5
- Living room/dining room: 17×32
- Kitchen: 14×19
- Foyer: 15×5
- Laundry room: 6×13
- Walk-in-closet: 13×11
- Balcony: 32×6
$2MM and I get an electric fireplace?
It’s not a den, it’s a phone booth
Very clean, smart design. It’s unfortunate that so many of the views face an ugly red brick mid-rise.
The glass wall den is an ingenious way to keep the kids honest with internet usage.
If they did a “full gut” why did they leave the guest bedroom larger than the master?
Taking out two or three walls, and redoing the bathrooms is not a “full gut” (not that this place needed it).
Looks nice, but my neck is stiff just looking at that tv.
I like the style of the renovation (including the Den), but question the value given that this building doesn’t have the amenities of some of the new buildings in the area, but is priced almost as high. The view is underwhelming (and primarily in one direction, and West, which is least preferred).
Also while I like the layout generally, the Master Bath appears to have more square footage than the MBR (and not all of it that useful?), the Master closet looks a bit awkward, and what’s with the “back door” from the den to the hall (blocked by a counter/shelf)?
The kids bedrooms are rather taste-specific, but some paint can fix most of that; But doesn’t seem like a Family building to me??
“Taking out two or three walls, and redoing the bathrooms is not a “full gut” (not that this place needed it).”
Sure it is. Look at the “before” pictures in the last sale. It looks nothing like it.
Looking it over I could maybe see it for $1 mln, but not $2 mln. There’s nothing that really stands out, besides decent space and a good location. Modern amenities, I suppose. But is it really worth nearly 5 times what it was 20 years ago? Hard to argue anything is.
“Sure it is.”
Do you know what a gut rehab is? It gets misused all the time, but the most correct meaning is: tearing out everything inside the home to get down to the structural elements: studs, foundation, floor joists, etc.
This *may* be a “full” renovation, but it simply ain’t a “full gut rehab”.
Which–again–would have been ridiculous, in any case, as there was no need to strip this place down completely in order to get to this end result.
“nearly 5 times what it was 20 years ago?”
First buyer got $770k in mortgages ($517k first + LOC) at acquisition–either it was bought in an unfinished state, or there was something hinky with the valuation on the deed.
And, nevermind that ’98 price–is this *really* a cool 800 grand better than what they bought in Nov-17–30 months ago? That’s more than $250 psf–which is the cost for a pretty high-end build out from white box, neither of which is in evidence here.
“Do you know what a gut rehab is? It gets misused all the time,”
By your definition, it could never be done in a condo.
“By your definition, it could never be done in a condo.”
Yes, brilliant response.
You’re exactly right–it is *impossible* to strip a condo to the studs and structural elements, and equally *impossible* for a condo to have floor joists and a foundation as such structural elements.
JohnnyU–you are/have been in the business: is it *impossible* to strip a condo unit down to studs and structure?
“JohnnyU–you are/have been in the business: is it *impossible* to strip a condo unit down to studs and structure?”
In a building like this, let ‘er rip. I haven’t run across a Structural or load bearing drywall yet.
At that price point, I’d choose something in a tower with a view, or a SFH near DePaul.
2M buys a bigger, nicer SFH in the area. Plus no HOA and the SFH probably has a 2-3 car garage. No need to drop another $60k (lol) on 2 spaces. If a buyer really wants to drop 2M on a 3k ft condo, they can get something comparable in building with better views.
Nyet, couldn’t agree more. For half this price I could get something nearby with an incredible view. Why pay so much to look at the wall of a building across the way?
“2M buys a bigger, nicer SFH in the area.”
Not everyone wants a house. They could travel a lot and don’t want the maintenance. Perhaps they want the security of doormen. Maybe they get a lot of packages delivered and want a package room.
But nicer? Nicer than these finishes?
“At that price point, I’d choose something in a tower with a view, or a SFH near DePaul.”
I don’t understand this argument because just 2 blocks away is one of the hottest buildings in the city which has absolutely no views and few amenities.
In fact, most of the units look just like this one, with similar modern luxury finishes.
Fuck off anon(tfo).
So, can’t just admit you’re wrong?
Have to be nasty?
JUST LIKE the Trumpkin.
“just 2 blocks away is one of the hottest buildings in the city which has absolutely no views and few amenities”
Which building?
anon (tfo):
No. 9 Walton, I assume! Its actually only about .1 mile away.
Here’s from Crain’s, which compared the building to the best neighborhoods or streets of the past for city mega-elites. “In the past year, a few dozen corporate chiefs, pro athletes and other big names have bought multimillion-dollar homes in a single condo tower, No. 9 Walton, resulting in the tallest stack of high-end home sales ever in Chicago.”
“Following billionaire Ken Griffin’s purchase of the top four floors for a record-shattering $58.5 million in November 2017 came a sale at $12.1 million, one at $9.9 million and seven for $6 million to $7 million. That’s 10 sales at $6 million and up;”
“No. 9 Walton, I assume!”
But that makes no sense, as it absolutely has “city views” to the North and West, and at least somewhat to the East.
The south side does look dead into 2 W Delaware, tho–but that’s also where the building core is, and every unit that has a south-facing wall is a corner, double corner or full floor unit, and so has at least some view.
So “absolutely no views” wouldn’t be accurate for No 9.
Also, not sure where the line dividing “few amenities” from “amenity rich” is, but No 9 sure seems to have a lot more than Park Newberry.
“So “absolutely no views” wouldn’t be accurate for No 9.”
No 9 has NO VIEWS!!!!!!!
Do you move to Chicago and think, “I want to live in a view building. I love seeing the sunrise, the sunset, the planes landing at O’Hare and the Lake. Let’s go look at No. 9 Walton.”
Laughing my fucking ass off.
By your definition EVERY building that is over 5 stories in the Gold Coast and River North is a “view” building.
My god.
No one is buying in No. 9 Walton so they can brag about the view.
No one.
“By your definition EVERY building that is over 5 stories in the Gold Coast and River North is a “view” building.”
Regarding 100 E huron:
Sabrina on November 12th, 2019 at 10:05 pm
“My question, as I don’t know the block just west of here. Is there a building going up? Is something blocking the West view? There’s no pics.”
Nothing going in just west of this building (for now.) The Thai consulate is there. There is the Holy Name project which will block the views to the highway but it’s several blocks away. There’s also a possible high rise next to the Giordano’s but then they landmarked those vintage graystones so that’s unlikely now. Those are also a block away.
West views are nice.
Sabrina on November 17th, 2019 at 8:40 pm
“Any west-facing unit of 100 E Huron other than the highest floors would have views smack into the windows of the east-facing units of 30 E Huron.”
This in incorrect. I’ve been in the west facing units in this building. They aren’t blocked. North and south are blocked with buildings directly across the street. 100 E Huron is not. The west views are quite nice city views and if you’re up higher you can see all the way to the expressway (at least until the Holy Name monstrosities go up.)
Sabrina on November 18th, 2019 at 8:42 pm
“This is typical CC “what does ‘blocked’ mean w/r/t views”.”
“Blocked” is 300 W Grand’s north facing units which look directly across an alley into the parking garage of The Silver.
Here’s what it looks like: https://www.trulia.com/p/il/chicago/300-w-grand-ave-411-chicago-il-60654–2104622507
Everything else is regular city living (across a street.) No one says a condo on Diversey is “blocked” because there are condos on the other side of the street.
Sabrina on November 18th, 2019 at 9:22 pm
#3305 has fantastic views. Wow.
But if you just have west, it’s really great too. 30 Huron is over a block away (if not more). You aren’t “blocked.” Those are city views. You can see all the way to the Kennedy from the higher west floors. It’s quite lovely.
As I said, the Holy Name project will take some of those expressway views away but it’s far enough way to not be a big deal.
The western views from this building also give you good weather views (of storms coming in.)
So, “city views” count as “views” sometimes, but not others? WTF?
I never said 100 E Huron was a “view” building. I said the west views were nice. They are. Go to the 30th or 35th floor. Lovely. They are not blocked across the street and you can see out to the expressway. Although the Chicago Place complex will now “block” some of the coolness of seeing the billboards way out on the highway and whatnot.
Nothing is a view in No 9 Walton. Even the Citadel penthouse has nothing. NO lake views.
And that’s fine. If you’re not looking for a view, it’s fine. So I don’t understand the complaints of the “view” in 55 W Delaware when it is the same “view” as No. 9 Walton. NEITHER has a view. And NEITHER is a view building.
I think we can agree that we all know the “view” buildings, right?
So give it up already. You’re looking like a fool.
“NO lake views.”
So, now lake views are the sine qua non? Huh.
There are NO FUCKING VIEWS from NO. 9 Walton.
You are looking like a fool. Stop.
Wait just a second
I distinctly recall being told/repremanded ad nauseum that lake views weren’t preferred Vs looking into unit across the street as its not what they showed in the movies
If only I could remember who that was…
Not what the showed in the movies = No lake view, only looking into the unit across the street
I think it was a Mel Gibson movie
from JohnnyU
“Wait just a second
I distinctly recall being told/repremanded ad nauseum that lake views weren’t preferred Vs looking into unit across the street as its not what they showed in the movies
If only I could remember who that was…”
From Me
It’s well known: Regarding views, the Sabrina site owner massively prefers city views over lake views
“Sabrina on October 10th, 2018 at 10:08 pm
“How, in the name of all that is holy, could lake views not be preferred?”
The lake view is boring. In advertisements and movies, they never live on the lake. They have “city” views.
At night, the “lake view” is simply looking into the darkness. It’s boring.”
and why does it matter if a building is a “view building” vs a unit. Each post here is about a SFH, a condo, a townhouse – one unit. And we primarily comment on that unit and tangentially the building and go off the rails politically.
do the right thing Sabrina – ho fatto un errore
“How, in the name of all that is holy, could lake views not be preferred?”
————————–
And I was the one who came up with the above line. I was about to pull up the posting and Sabrina’s response. You beat be to it, chichow.
“There are NO FUCKING VIEWS from NO. 9 Walton.”
Isn’t there a school to the North and a park to the West?
“Isn’t there a school to the North and a park to the West?”
To the west is a church and then Bughouse Square.
“The west views are quite nice city views and if you’re up higher you can see all the way to the expressway [and nothing is getting built on Washington Square]”
“You can see all the way to the Kennedy from the higher west floors. It’s quite lovely.”
“The western views from this building also give you good weather views (of storms coming in.)”
The school is Ogden, tho, so you’d have to deal with entitled prick parents like [who was it??] who think they should be able to idle in the loading zone for 30 minutes while picking up lil Tanner.
But I suspect the No.9 doormen are even more aggressive on getting people towed.
“do the right thing Sabrina – ho fatto un errore”
“The school is Ogden, tho, so you’d have to deal with entitled prick parents like [who was it??] who think they should be able to idle in the loading zone for 30 minutes…”
sounds exactly like Gonefishin
Sabrina ACTUALLY in the past admitted she was wrong.
Was like pulling teeth though – bloody and painful
https://cribchatter.com/?p=25902
Don’t die on the view hill. that hill isn’t worth it. It’s only marginally better than the furniture won’t be there mound
“do the right thing Sabrina – ho fatto un errore”
“Sabrina ACTUALLY in the past admitted she was wrong”
Unpossible
“Unpossible”
Only took 11 months.
Jason Heyward’s going to be leaving some pretty cool city views behind.
“Jason Heyward’s going to be leaving some pretty cool city views behind.”
This building is so ugly. Could they make it any worse? Barf. And, as I’ve said before, being right across the street from the Elysian only emphasizes how horrible it is.
Once you’re inside, they did a good job with the standard luxury features however. And the balconies are pretty private and sheltered. Since it’s a shorter building, you might actually use the outside space unlike in Aqua or other tall residential buildings.
If you’re into outdoor space, this is the luxury building to look in.