Are you the type of homeowner with a view of the lake from the 16th floor? Or do you prefer a lifestyle closer to terra firma — something short, squat and less than eight floors, perhaps?
That’s the difference between high-rise and low-rise life as defined by the City of Chicago: eighty feet or eight floors, according to Bob Levin, principal of the condominium management and real estate firm Wolin-Levin Inc. “You’re really talking about different types of people,” Levin says. “Low-rise owners often want vintage buildings with high ceilings and large rooms and plenty of architectural detail. High-rise owners like amenities and services and a view.”
Both options have their fans.
Retired social worker Sylvia Telser, and her husband, University of Chicago economics professor Lester Telser, bought an I.M. Pei-designed Hyde Park town home as new construction in 1961 — and have never considered moving. Over the years, they’ve visited friends in nearby high-rises — Jackson Towers and 1700 E. 56th Street come to mind — but Mrs. Telser is adamant. “Not for us, no! High-rises won’t do. I like my gardening too much,” she says. “I’m a passionate gardener. I have a nice plot here.
“You know, we originally thought of our home as a `starter house,’ where Lester and I could begin a family. Because these town homes were designed for families. They were put up in batches of six with protected play areas for the children. Did I think we would stay 45 years? No, certainly not. But you become attached,” Telser says. “I love it best during the years when we have lots of young children around. It’s more alive. I enjoy the children and my neighbors. I’m not so sure you know your neighbors in a high-rise.”
Jim McKechnie Jr. might be called the high-rise yin to Telser’s yang. McKechnie, executive director of the Illinois Society for the Prevention of Blindness and president of the John Hancock Building Homeowners Association, also is a rarity among residents of this iconic building called Big John.
He’s an original owner.
McKechnie bought his first Hancock Building unit in 1972, when the building was converted to condos. “I was a young guy just starting in a career,” he recalls, “and I’d been looking at apartments from the river north to Lincoln Park, and I heard a new word: `condominium.’ Who knew about condominiums in 1972? What is it, a house? An apartment?
“I liked the idea of no maintenance. No yard to care for. No snow to shovel. A friend told me to look at the John Hancock Building and I remember saying, `They have apartments up there? People live up there?’ Thirty-three years later, I still meet people who think the Hancock building is all offices.”
McKechnie hasn’t missed owning a suburban home with the proverbial white picket fence.
He’ll rattle off all the benefits of his Hancock Building lifestyle: pool, health club, commissary, 24-hour security. He mentions location and status. “There’s the 400-foot elevator ride just to get to our lobby,” he says. “All the glitz here. The sizzle. The Hancock Building never ceases to impress me.”
And, McKechnie says, “We’ve never had a special assessment.”
Sylvia Telser’s observation about not knowing the neighbors in a high-rise probably wouldn’t faze McKechnie. “Living here lets me be as public or as private as I want to be,” he adds. “We have the greats and the near-greats. You pass each other, and you’re cordial. I’ve just delighted in our [Hancock Building] community — and it is a whole community.”
Near Oak Street and Lake Shore Drive, Ed and Virginia White appear to have melded the finer points of Gold Coast high-rise and low-rise living. The Whites live on the third floor of a 23-story building, and their condo is above what was formerly Nantucket’s Cove restaurant. (That space is now occupied by Harris Bank.)
“The roof of Nantucket’s Cove is our 1,000-square-foot patio,” says White, an attorney who moved back to the city from Lincolnshire about 20 years ago. “We had amazing luck,” he says. “We rented for a year — and then our present home became available, and it’s not a high-story lifestyle,” White says. “I’ve got my grill set up out there. I barbecue for our family on the patio when they visit. . . . It’s very nice, very relaxed.”
And convenient, he says. “My wife is happy because she doesn’t need to drive everywhere, like in Lincolnshire. Everything’s in walking distance.”
But what about the condo association’s reserve fund, assessment increases and budgetary shortfalls? “There were many elderly people here when we moved in — and we had board battles. Many of them wanted to scrimp by and do the bare minimum,” White says. “It took time to change that way of thinking. But now people seem to understand you have to keep the place up, and the building does a wonderful job there.”
White and McKechnie touched on reserve fund issues such as underfunding and the specter of special assessments, those unexpected fees for essentials such as a new roof or new boiler. Or replacement windows for the entire building — all 492 units, in McKechnie’s case. According to Levin, high-rise condos have other financial challenges. Specifically, Chicago’s recently adopted wall facade ordinance requiring regular inspections of exterior surfaces. “Vintage high-rises are vulnerable,” he explains. “I can’t think of any that won’t need to spend money at some point for facade repairs.”
Utilities, insurance and maintenance costs also contribute to higher condo fees. Wolin-Levin property manager Sharon Schingoethe emphasizes energy and labor as the one-two punch that often keeps high-rise condo association reserves under-funded.
“A 30-story building on Sheridan Road that was built in the early 1960s and converted to condominiums has high overhead expenses,” she says. “There are five or six maintenance people and a 24-hour door staff and a head engineer to take care of the boiler. That all adds up. Add a $1.1 million assessment for a new roof and new boiler and new risers for the water chiller. And there are energy costs to plan for. That’s 40 [percent] to 50 percent more this year. The high-rise lifestyle offers freedom — but a lot of care and responsibility come along with that freedom.”
Schingoethe says typical monthly assessments for a Sheridan Road high-rise unit run $350 to $700.
Sylvia Telser confides that her homeowner’s assessment for exterior maintenance is only $400 year. “And some years it goes down,” she adds.
Dick Lockhart, a low-rise owner in the Printers Row neighborhood, loves his $237 monthly fee, which includes cable TV.
Lockhart, a lobbyist who often travels to Springfield, bought his unit in 1986 because “I can walk to my office in the South Loop and have easy access to the Stevenson. And, I control my own heating expenses. I pay for it myself. Heat’s not included in the homeowners fee.”
Lockhart acknowledges he never considered high-rise living. Rather, it was the four-story building with tri-level units and west facing decks and the emerging Printers Row neighborhood that “intrigued” him. And he doesn’t mind not having a grand view. “I can’t see three states from my deck, no. But I can see 16 precincts. At least that’s what I tell people.”
Telser and Lockhart readily admit that their low-rise lifestyle doesn’t come with the services and amenities enjoyed by high-rise owners such as Sheli Lulkin, who has called her 20th floor Sheridan Road condo home for 10 years. Lulkin, executive director of the Edgewater Chamber of Commerce, disputes the argument regarding energy costs in high-rise versus low-rise buildings and how the elevated price of natural gas has sent high-rise homeowners fees through the ceiling.
“My building was designed as a condo and has individual heat,” she says. “If I want to, I can put on three sweaters and dial down the heat. Just like someone living in a low-rise building.”
Lulkin makes it clear, however, that she chose high-rise living for the services and security and not because of the utility arrangement. “I like not having the dust from Sheridan Road and all the street noise I had before. And I just feel safer in a tall building with 24-hour security.”
Regarding amenities, she said: “Here’s one I wouldn’t have had if I’d stayed in my low-rise unit: Last year, I broke my shoulder. The doorman was there to help me out of the car and take my packages and open the door and help me inside. You don’t have that sort of service in a low-rise condominium.”
But what about those homeowners fees?
Low-rise living equals fewer amenities and usually, a lower monthly assessment. High-rise living has more bells and whistles, but you pay the price — don’t you?
“Every building is different,” says Bob Levin. “The goal is to have an involved, empowered condo board.” Low-rise or high-rise doesn’t matter: All buildings grapple with wear and tear. McKechnie and Ed White have been proactive in encouraging their respective condo boards to be aware of major expenses looming several years out and long-term maintenance issues. Frank Rathbun, spokesman for Alexandria, Va.-based Community Associations Institute, cautions condo associations against relying on special assessments or borrowing to fund capital projects. “Hire a certified reserve specialist and conduct a reserve study. Explore your needs and determine how much your condo association will have to raise and put away for long-term capital projects, like roofs and boilers and windows and elevators,” he says.
“Every association will have capital improvement projects over time,” Rathbun says. “Condo associations that don’t plan ahead in an organized fashion won’t avoid special assessments or borrowing.”
