CHICAGO | General Developments

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

Here's more about the 7 story building at 171 N. Wabash from Crain's:



http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestat..._medium=rss&utm_campaign=chicagobusiness

This as currently proposed is altogether depressing. Tasteless architecture aside, the most dissapointing aspect of this proposal is the squandered opportunity for something that takes full advantage of this site. If one could acquire the short garage that is behind this parcel and fronts Lake, you could produce a tower that rises behind Smurfitt Stone and takes full advantage of SE park views. Expounding further on the hypothetical, the acquisition of the squat little buildings facing Randolph could make one hell of a development site (supertall?). The potential here tops even that of another favorite potential development site, the Harold Washington College building.

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by Ryanrule

most of them are luxury only in name and price. they build middle class condos and price them for the upper class.

Shrug. If the "upper class" buys them, then they are upper class condos. My co-workers in Houston think that your residence isn't "upper class" unless it's 5000 square feet with a tacky four car garage. Different markets, different values. In Chicago. some of the amenities you pay for are a view, the ability to walk to work.

[Ryanrule]

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum

Shrug. If the "upper class" buys them, then they are upper class condos. My co-workers in Houston think that your residence isn't "upper class" unless it's 5000 square feet with a tacky four car garage. Different markets, different values. In Chicago. some of the amenities you pay for are a view, the ability to walk to work.

condos and sfh's have different standards.

white carpet all over with granite countertops and ge appliances is not luxury.

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by Jibba

Exactly. Just copy the main elevation of this wholesale:


source

Or make this 7 stories:

source

You only need an extra layer of brick here and there. It wouldn't cost that much, and the additional cost would be offset by not having to order "ornate" windows. Just bulk order all ones of the same size.

Was going to say this earlier but if I blur my vision, the window proportions and openings are good, but the depth and texture of the facade sucks. I agree, another layer of brick for pilasters, change those awful window surrounds for something more Chicago looking. No to those iron balconies. Just a simple brick parapet around a terrace with some nice decorative coping would go a long way.

As is, the design is bad, but I'm willing to roll with it if it can be improved only because I'm tired of generic glass boxes. The good modern designs are in short supply. Just give me something other than blank podiums, glass boxes with slices and pancake buildings with painted concrete.

[Notyrview]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

meh.

i own a condo unit in marina city that i rent out for more money ($1,200/month) than i pay in mortgage/assessment/taxes ($950/month). i don't live there any more, but if i did, it'd be cheaper to own than rent.

and when the mortgage is paid off in 20 years, my wife and i plan to use it as our pied a terre.

I need to move back to Chicago. how many sq feet is it?

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by Ryanrule

condos and sfh's have different standards.

white carpet all over with granite countertops and ge appliances is not luxury.

Maybe that's true, but you didn't say, "luxury" initially. You wrote about middle-class vs upper class. There are a countless number of products and services that aren't about luxury that are only marketed towards, or available to, the upper class. If a condo's finishings don't meet the conventional standard of "luxury", then who's to argue? But I don't think it's coherent to talk about "middle class" condos having "upper class" prices. Again, there's people with seven figure incomes living in condos in London that an accountant in Minneapolis would consider beneath his standards. Doesn't mean that the guy in London has been tricked into buying something "middle class".

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

(*) mortgage payment: $560, assessment: $240, prop. taxes: $150.

It's been 13 years since I lived in a townhouse, and no it wasn't a highrise, but our assessment was less than the property taxes. Does it really cost more to maintain one building than to provide all the city services to that building? I know elevator inspections are expensive, but that seems out of whack.

[jc5680]

Originally Posted by aaron38

It's been 13 years since I lived in a townhouse, and no it wasn't a highrise, but our assessment was less than the property taxes. Does it really cost more to maintain one building than to provide all the city services to that building? I know elevator inspections are expensive, but that seems out of whack.

High rises usually have door/maintenance/security staff. Often times TV/Internet and some level of utilities are rolled in as well.

Personally, it would be hard to convince me to live in a building without a door staff to take deliveries and light concierge type stuff for when I am traveling for work. 240 is pretty cheap, especially for an olderish building.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by aaron38

It's been 13 years since I lived in a townhouse, and no it wasn't a highrise, but our assessment was less than the property taxes. Does it really cost more to maintain one building than to provide all the city services to that building? I know elevator inspections are expensive, but that seems out of whack.

townhouses typically don't have 24-hour staff that need to be paid like marina city and most other large highrises. those salaries are a HUGE chunk of a condo association's expenses. and yes, high speed elevators like those at marina city are very expensive to maintain. also, my marina city assessment includes directTV service to the building which is not optional, everybody pays for it whether they use it or not.

now that i live in a vintage 6-flat condo building up in edgewater, my monthly assessment is lower than my property taxes, but we have no 24-hour doorman, no 24-hour repairman, no cleaning staff, no fitness center, no elevators, and i have to pay for TV/internet myself.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by aaron38

It's been 13 years since I lived in a townhouse, and no it wasn't a highrise, but our assessment was less than the property taxes. Does it really cost more to maintain one building than to provide all the city services to that building? I know elevator inspections are expensive, but that seems out of whack.

Given the age of the building and the amenities it has, that assessment is actually pretty low, even accounting for the unit size. IIRC, they had some pretty hefty special assessments a decade or so ago, which probably enabled the regular assessments to be low now.

I live in a 14-unit vintage condo association in River North just about a 10 minute walk from Marina City and my assessment is lower than my taxes, although we do pay for a guy to do cleaning, snow removal and basic repairs to the common areas on a weekly basis. Even including the few special assessments we've had in the 11 years I've lived there, the average is still below my average taxes, although not by a huge gap. Maintenance can be expensive in older buildings - that said, we maintain our buildings quite well. We probably wouldn't even have needed the special assessments if it hadn't been for some fraud by a previous management company (landed the guy in prison for a couple years, probably not how he expected to spend his golden years - he was 70-something).

[mattshoe]

Mega Mall Redevelopment Plan Returns With Major Updates. Via Curbed

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by emathias

Given the age of the building and the amenities it has, that assessment is actually pretty low, even accounting for the unit size. IIRC, they had some pretty hefty special assessments a decade or so ago, which probably enabled the regular assessments to be low now.

those must have all cleared just before i bought there in '06.

we've had no special assessments in the 9 years i've owned at marina city.

[brian_b]

The ownership time horizon and the natural resistance to planning ahead also plays a role in SFH vs Condo costs.

Most people don't own their place long enough to need to replace major systems so they aren't going to be setting aside money every month to pay for future repairs and replacements unless they are forced to do it. A condo association doesn't give you the option but a SFH does. That's just the way that goes.

If you tried to run your home the way a condo building is run, you'd be setting aside a hundred or so per month so that no repairs need to be paid out of pocket. But you don't run a house like you run a condo building, so that cost (which does exist) is not counted when running comparisons.

[UPChicago]

^ I know people will hate that because it isn't modern, but I love that!

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

those must have all cleared just before i bought there in '06.

we've had no special assessments in the 9 years i've owned at marina city.

That's correct, Marina City went through a nasty round of special assessments during the early stages of the last boom. You bought at a good time because those assessments were what kept Marina City's units relatively affordable throughout the bubble. Prices are starting to rise in earnest in Marina City again now since the board seems to have it's shit together now.

That's the biggest problem with condos, you are putting your asset in someone else's hands. If the board or management company bungle it, you can see long term price effects for entire buildings as they can even get "blacklisted" by banks for being financially unstable making it very difficult for new owners to get a loan to buy in the building. Obviously only being able to attract cash buyers is a major problem. That's what happened to River City after American Investco got blown up. You could pick up a sweet duplex 3 BR for like $150,000 because no banks would lend on that building for like 3 years straight. I think River City is just now recovering from that mess.

[Via Chicago]

the first one wasnt anything to write home about anyway. i agree, i think this is WAY better, assuming they execute well. thats a big if. details can be fudged in impressionistic watercolors. but i like where this has gone. (clocktower is a pretty cliche tho)

[Steely Dan]

the watercolor seems to indicate a pretty high level of detail. if it can actually be built that way and somehow avoid the VE axe, it could turn out quite nice.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

the watercolor seems to indicate a pretty high level of detail. if it can actually be built that way and somehow avoid the VE axe, it could turn out quite nice.

yea, i just meant material choice. as long as its not generic happy brick.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by mattshoe

Mega Mall Redevelopment Plan Returns With Major Updates. Via Curbed

I actually think this is a fairly nice design with a lot of decent detailing, the problem is I doubt that will translate through to reality. The fact of the matter is that drawing and designing ye olde buildings is not all that difficult, getting it built as designed is because we lack the trades and budgets to execute it. IF it turns out looking exactly like this rendering, then it will be a great building, but I am willing to bet what we will actually get is more akin to the happy brick garbage from the last cycle directly across the street. Little triangles slapped on the parapet of a jumbo cinderblock six flat, not finely detailed brickwork.

[Jibba]

Originally Posted by mattshoe

Mega Mall Redevelopment Plan Returns With Major Updates. Via Curbed

Just ... sick of Antunovich. Flair Tower, Bernadin, this bullshit. Some of the most regressive, uninspired, poorly executed nonsense. A clock tower? Come on.