Remember the Vetro? A 2-Bedroom at 611 S. Wells in the South Loop

611 s wells

This 2-bedroom in the Vetro at 611 S. Wells in the South Loop came on the market in April 2014.

The Vetro is a 232-unit building built at the height of the housing boom.

It was a big story in 2009 as the developer used both auctions and price cuts to finally sell out the building.

See the full story in our 2009 chatter here.

This unit has south, east and west views from floor-to-ceiling windows.

It has concrete ceilings and maple laminate floors.

There is a galley kitchen with dark cabinets, granite counter tops and stainless steel appliances.

It has the other features buyers look for including central air, washer/dryer in the unit and heated garage parking is included.

Originally listed for $465,000 in April 2014 it has been reduced $30,000 to $435,000.

That’s still $79,000 above the 2009 purchase price.

Are the buyers who bought in the dark times in the Vetro in 2009 having the last laugh?

Saul Zenkevicius at Goodwill Realty Group has the listing. See the pictures here.

Unit #907: 2 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 1555 square feet

  • Sold in June 2009 for $356,000 (included the parking)
  • Originally listed in April 2014 for $465,000
  • Reduced
  • Currently listed at $435,000 (parking included)
  • Assessments of $578 a month (includes gas, doorman, cable)
  • Taxes of $5272
  • Central Air
  • Washer/Dryer in the unit
  • Bedroom #1: 13×20
  • Bedroom #2: 10×13
  • Living room: 16×21
  • Dining room: 10×15
  • Kitchen: 9×9
  • Laundry: 7×3

 

21 Responses to “Remember the Vetro? A 2-Bedroom at 611 S. Wells in the South Loop”

  1. This one feels like $399k.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  2. It looks better than I thought it wold look.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  3. niceish place but those views suck a big fat one they are hardly “fabulous”… east you got the metra trains, south you have that building in your way and west you’ve got that awful ugly empty lot

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  4. 07 tier:

    2009: “Assessments run from $454 to $513 a month”
    2014: “Assessments of $578 a month”

    That’s not bad. Wasn’t there always a concern in new construction that the assessments were underestimated by the developer?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  5. Seems within decent price range, nice place. Don’t be fooled by the assessment though. Electric heating with that many windows? You’re looking at a minimum of 400 a month electricity bills in the winter. Views? Don’t expect views at 400k, this is par for 400 with that many windows. That glossy paint finish in the hallways really exposes the horrible drywall job. Do you blame the painter or the builder for that outcome though?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  6. Oh sorry electric heating looks supplemental, never mind.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  7. Decent looking place but the hallways look ‘scary’. Still a decent place on the inside. The cabinets over the kitchen are a necessary nuisance however and it impedes the open floor plan. 1,555 sq ft if true is a sufficiently large space for a 2/2 in a highrise for this price. I think, if I were still a 30 year old unattached bachelor working long hours and I could afford this unit, I could call this home; and it would impress any member of teh opposite sex I would date; although the north shore girls I’ve dated in the past only like streeterville or RN for high rises….living in the Vetro is like living in Northbrook or driving an acura. It’s not the real thing as a 2,000 sq ft 2 bedroom on a high floor off Ontario or Erie.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)
  8. The looks like a similar floor plan, though the one for sale has that wall of doors.

    http://wibiti.com/images/hpmain/377/266377.jpg

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  9. “Do you blame the painter or the builder for that outcome though?”

    Blame the architect

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)
  10. $400 for heat? You sure?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  11. “$400 for heat? You sure?”

    It is not. I looked at one of the units here. It is just supplemental heat. The main heat is gas and is included in the HOA.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  12. This is the type of place I love to hate. A stupefyingly bland oblong box with cheap fittings and ordinary fixtures, ugly concrete ceilings that I would think have ceased to be trendy by now,tiny kitchen with low-end appliances shoved into niches, and no architectural distinction whatsoever.

    The only “nice” things about this place are the huge windows and the balcony- too bad the views are so ugly. As another poster pointed, the heat bills will be killers, with electric heat and all that curtain wall. I would strongly recommend fitting those windows with insulated shades that have an R value of at least 20, and rip out that gray carpeting in the bedrooms while your at it.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 5 votes)
  13. “That’s not bad. Wasn’t there always a concern in new construction that the assessments were underestimated by the developer?”

    They are almost always artificially low from the developers. It makes it more attractive to buyers that way. They can figure out the monthly payment and say, “see- it’s the same or less than renting.”

    The condo board then starts charging more as soon as they take over.

    Anyone know what the reserves are like in this building?

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  14. “That’s not bad. Wasn’t there always a concern in new construction that the assessments were underestimated by the developer?”

    Helmethofer: A good example of what happens in a new building is 600 N. Fairbanks #1505.

    We’ve chattered about this unit over the years so we have a record of the assessment.

    It was $482 a month in 2009 and in January 2014 it was $591 a month. The unit is still on the market and the listing now says the assessment is $632.

    So:

    $482 in 2009
    $591 in Jan 2014
    $632 in Dec 2014

    http://cribchatter.com/?p=21650

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  15. Pretty steep HOA for such a new unit, Sabrina.

    HOAs tend to rise as the building ages and needs updating of mechanical and structural elements. Since the HOAs in this place are already as high as they are in many very old buildings, they will be absolute killers as this places ages. And I’ll bet it will “age” faster than the stuff built in the 20s and 30s.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  16. Laura’s comments seem to be based upon pure misconception rather than any familiarity with the facts. Has she even been in Vetro? The basic finishes are not cheap. Many units are even upgraded from that.

    I bought a studio here at the auction and reported on it back then. It is a great building and I miss living here. I started renting my unit when I took a job out of state and only wish I had purchased more than one unit.

    This unit is 200+ sf larger (and a lower assessment) than the one compared at 600 N Faibanks. This unit has an additional space behind the back kitchen wall that could be used for a large dining area or office or entertainment area but is not walled off as a separate room

    What I miss most are the spas, the 7th floor deck, the fitness center, and the convenience of the parking.

    The building is well managed, has a great board of directors, and has well funded reserves. I wish any of my other 3 condos were in buildings as well cared for.

    The north units clearly have the best N/W/E views. But the south units are the next best because of the 180+ degree views (better 16th floor and higher).

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  17. “The north units clearly have the best N/W/E views. But the south units are the next best because of the 180+ degree views (better 16th floor and higher).”

    They’re likely going to build on the land next to the Vetro soon. Not sure what will go in there or if it will impact the views.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  18. CDC: “This one feels like $399k.”

    They wish. Still on the market, now for $390k.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  19. They dropped the price to $390,000, but then it looks like it sold for above at $409. https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/611-S-Wells-St-60607/unit-907/home/45507951

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  20. Perhaps that was with the extra parking. I just noticed it in the Redfin comments.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  21. ” it looks like it sold for above at $409″

    $409,888. Chinese buyer!!

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Reply