HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals

    1000M in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Chicago Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
Chicago Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1181  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2019, 2:25 PM
UPChicago's Avatar
UPChicago UPChicago is offline
Vote for me for Mayor!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 734
Quote:
Originally Posted by killaviews View Post
Redfin has 79 units showing as pending. Out of 421 units. Not sure how accurate of a measure that is.

I don’t think I would buy a unit in a proposed project. It’s a gamble on what the market will look like in 3-4 years. In the last boom every believed they would make money. People aren’t that eager anymore. If you’re buying here you must really love the building and location.
It is pretty accurate, according to the MLS there are 32 units active and 80 units under contract. The most expensive unit under contract was listed at $3.4m, the most expensive unit active is $8.1m, the median list price for units under contract is $705k, and the median list price for units active is $1m.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1182  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2019, 3:01 PM
MorganChi's Avatar
MorganChi MorganChi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Chicago
Posts: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by UPChicago View Post
It is pretty accurate, according to the MLS there are 32 units active and 80 units under contract. The most expensive unit under contract was listed at $3.4m, the most expensive unit active is $8.1m, the median list price for units under contract is $705k, and the median list price for units active is $1m.

So this is a go ?

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jul 12, 2019 at 3:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1183  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2019, 3:13 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,039
That's actually not terrible in terms of pre sales. I think with 25% sold this could actually happen. I think there is probably also more hesitancy on the part of buyers to commit to buying in a large building like this because so many projects got dumped in the last crash. If this thing actually starts construction I have a feeling it would sell out fairly quickly, but they got to get there first.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1184  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2019, 11:09 PM
UPChicago's Avatar
UPChicago UPChicago is offline
Vote for me for Mayor!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 734
If we assume the units sold near ask (doubtful) then they currently have $78m worth of property under contract at an average list of $974k.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1185  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2019, 1:17 PM
pianowizard pianowizard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Michigan, US
Posts: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright View Post
That's actually not terrible in terms of pre sales. I think with 25% sold this could actually happen.
I just read on the Supertall Construction forum that even though Vista is nearly completed, it's still only 45% sold. Compared to that, 25% at this early point for 1000M actually sounds pretty decent. I hope it will happen, as the location is excellent, and both the condo prices and HOA fees are surprisingly affordable, e.g. a 605 sq ft unit with 2 bedrooms and 1 bathroom has a price tag of only $565,000, and an HOA fee of $293/month.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1186  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2019, 3:02 PM
Ricochet48 Ricochet48 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by pianowizard View Post
I just read on the Supertall Construction forum that even though Vista is nearly completed, it's still only 45% sold. Compared to that, 25% at this early point for 1000M actually sounds pretty decent. I hope it will happen, as the location is excellent, and both the condo prices and HOA fees are surprisingly affordable, e.g. a 605 sq ft unit with 2 bedrooms and 1 bathroom has a price tag of only $565,000, and an HOA fee of $293/month.
How does one fit 2 bedrooms in a 605 sqft unit. My 1BR 1BA is 900sqft...

Are we counting bunk or murphy beds? That's like a hotel room small.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1187  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2019, 3:22 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricochet48 View Post
How does one fit 2 bedrooms in a 605 sqft unit. My 1BR 1BA is 900sqft...

Are we counting bunk or murphy beds? That's like a hotel room small.
I have a few 650 SF 2 beds, if you know how to plan efficiently you can hardly notice it's that small. My bedrooms fit queens comfortably and I have nice open concept living/kitchen areas. No tub in the bathrooms though, but people like poured in place showers better anyway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1188  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2019, 3:34 PM
pianowizard pianowizard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Michigan, US
Posts: 254
Many years ago I lived in a 500 sq ft condo with 2 bedrooms and 1 bathroom. Yes the bedrooms were really small, but the kitchen was rather big, and the living room reasonably comfortable.

1000M's web site has detailed floorplans. This is the unit in question: https://1000southmichigan.com/floorp...tion-41-47-11/

And this 841 sqft unit has 3 bedrooms and 2 baths: https://1000southmichigan.com/floorp...tion-41-47-10/

Last edited by pianowizard; Jul 13, 2019 at 3:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1189  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2019, 5:33 PM
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
>~< , QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: South Loop, Chicago
Posts: 1,208
^Bedrooms are usually way bigger than necessary. In a roommates sharing an apartment situation that makes sense, but if the bedroom is just used as a bedroom, it needn't be large.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead. Trump delenda est.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1190  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2019, 3:09 PM
Ned.B Ned.B is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 475
I've always found that prewar building are much better at proportioning bedrooms versus living space than a lot of current residential buildings. Part of this is being driven by the increased depth of many of the buildings that are being built: longer, narrower units are causing more space to be wasted on corridor space. Part of this seems to be a trend, that in luxury developments is favoring very large bedrooms and bathrooms at the expense of living space. I've seen so many unit plans where you could almost ballroom dance in the bathroom, but you are lucky if you can fit a sofa, coffee table, and TV console in the living space...and forget about having a dining table.

That said, with the two units pianowizard posted, I think they are being a bit disingenuous showing queen beds in some of those bedrooms. In the bedroom with the massive column in the 2 bed unit 11, someone would have to basically climb over the bed to get to the nightstand or the closet. I am all for thoughtful efficient living, but here are several places in the plans where an additional 6" or so here and there would make the units significantly more usable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1191  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2019, 5:02 PM
glowrock's Avatar
glowrock glowrock is offline
Becoming Chicago-fied!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago (West Avondale)
Posts: 19,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ned.B View Post
I've always found that prewar building are much better at proportioning bedrooms versus living space than a lot of current residential buildings. Part of this is being driven by the increased depth of many of the buildings that are being built: longer, narrower units are causing more space to be wasted on corridor space. Part of this seems to be a trend, that in luxury developments is favoring very large bedrooms and bathrooms at the expense of living space. I've seen so many unit plans where you could almost ballroom dance in the bathroom, but you are lucky if you can fit a sofa, coffee table, and TV console in the living space...and forget about having a dining table.

That said, with the two units pianowizard posted, I think they are being a bit disingenuous showing queen beds in some of those bedrooms. In the bedroom with the massive column in the 2 bed unit 11, someone would have to basically climb over the bed to get to the nightstand or the closet. I am all for thoughtful efficient living, but here are several places in the plans where an additional 6" or so here and there would make the units significantly more usable.
Which post-war? Post-WWI units tend to have shoeboxes for bedrooms, barely holding a full bed and perhaps a nightstand (forget about larger beds and the possibility of a dresser!), while units built a bit before to a little after WWII tend to have fairly reasonably-sized bedrooms. I will agree that nowadays the trend is towards big bedrooms and tiny living rooms, which IMO is absurd.

Of course a lot of the differences I've seen in Chicago might be tenement vs. non-tenement buildings in terms of their original purpose.

Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"My first day in Chicago, September 4, 1983. I set foot in this city, and just walking down the street, it was like roots, like the motherland. I knew I belonged here." -- Oprah Winfrey
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1192  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2019, 5:08 PM
Buckman821's Avatar
Buckman821 Buckman821 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ned.B View Post
I've always found that prewar building are much better at proportioning bedrooms versus living space than a lot of current residential buildings. Part of this is being driven by the increased depth of many of the buildings that are being built: longer, narrower units are causing more space to be wasted on corridor space. Part of this seems to be a trend, that in luxury developments is favoring very large bedrooms and bathrooms at the expense of living space. I've seen so many unit plans where you could almost ballroom dance in the bathroom, but you are lucky if you can fit a sofa, coffee table, and TV console in the living space...and forget about having a dining table.
Could not possibly agree more with this post. Do buyers today really value a spacious bathroom and kitchen over having room for a dining table? To me it's insane. I tend to look at Kitchens and Baths as utilitarian rooms built to accomplish a task. Living rooms and Dining Rooms are for spending time in and should be gracefully proportioned. I really think this was best accomplished in the 1920's.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1193  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2019, 5:38 PM
RedCorsair87 RedCorsair87 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 235
^Definitely disagree with you there. As a former cook, I would rather have a spacious and functional kitchen and smaller living/dining room. I rarely have more than one person over at a time. If I do, I have common areas in my building to entertain if need be. My current kitchen is dreadfully small and is creatively stifling when it comes to deciding what to cook.

I recently upgraded from a queen to a king-sized mattress and I appreciate the extra space needed for that in addition to an end table and a dresser.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1194  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2019, 5:54 PM
Vlajos Vlajos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,049
^ I personally love dining rooms, but if my choice were to have a bigger kitchen and no dining room, I would opt to have no dining room. We luckily found and bought a 100+ year old home with a large kitchen (combined old kitchen with a bedroom) and a large dining room. I also agree with the poster that said modern bedrooms are needlessly large. I use my bedroom to sleep and maybe read in bed. That's about it. Just a waste of space as long as my bed and our dressers fit, no need for anything bigger.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1195  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2019, 6:09 PM
LouisVanDerWright LouisVanDerWright is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,039
The issue is that a lot of "open concept" floor plans drop a full kitchen into the living room without making the room larger to accommodate that.

Prewar buildings from the interwar period, particularly the lat 1920s "roaring twenties" era have some of the best floor plans around. That said, there are modern layouts that blow the old ones out of the water, but you aren't going to find them everywhere because spending money on design is developers taboo...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1196  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2019, 6:32 PM
Handro Handro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 265
My building was built in 1916, we have two bedrooms able to fit a queen bed and a nightstand, plus a pretty tight kitchen/living combo. Weirdly large bathroom though, considering the sizes of the rest of the rooms.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1197  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2019, 6:35 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 13,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by glowrock View Post
Of course a lot of the differences I've seen in Chicago might be tenement vs. non-tenement buildings in terms of their original purpose.

Aaron (Glowrock)
Yep... despite the nostalgia that some preservationists like to spout, most working class people in pre-war Chicago did not live in large, gracious apartments. If you were middle class and had a decent income (i.e. not a factory job) perhaps you could afford a nicer, more spacious apartment in a courtyard building. The very wealthiest could afford units in Gold Coast highrises or other lakefront neighborhoods like South Shore or Lakeview.

Ergo, "prewar" apartments are not automatically superior to postwar apartments in Chicago... I personally liked living in my greystone walkup tenement with tiny bedrooms, but I could absolutely see many people preferring a 2BR in a 4+1 from the 60s, for example.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:29 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.