Not Your Cookie Cutter 3-Bedroom In The Montgomery At 500 W. Superior In River North
This 3-bedroom in The Montgomery at 500 W. Superior in River North has some unique finishes.
The listing says it is architect owned and has finishes out of the pages of architectural digest and the Merchandise Mart.
It has 10 foot ceilings and a top of the line kitchen with luxury upgrades.
The bathrooms are slate and soapstone.
There are stone walls and dark hardwood floors.
At 2245 square feet, the unit also has a family room.
First listed in May 2010 for $1.2 million, it has been listed on and off between $1.2 million and $975,000 since then.
Will it finally find a buyer in 2012?
Michael Rosenblum at Koenig & Strey Real Living has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #912: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 2245 square feet
- Sold in July 2005 for $679,000
- Sold in September 2006 for $975,000
- Originally listed in May 2010 for $1.2 million
- Reduced
- Was listed in February 2011 at $975,000
- Raised back to $1.2 million in February 2011
- Withdrawn in March 2011
- Re-listed in July 2012 at $975,000
- Raised
- Currently listed at $1 million (2 car tandem parking available for $49,000)
- Assessments of $1257 a month (includes a/c, doorman, cable)
- Taxes of $10,570
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 13×16
- Bedroom #2: 11×16
- Bedroom #3: 10×14
- Family room: 15×15
Nothing there that says Architectural Digest. Nice apartment, but the brokerbabble is a bit of a stretch.
Some nice finishes indeed but it is a bit taste specific. The owner sure has many diplomas or certificates on display. Wondering what realtors think about displays like that. Do that many personal effects actually detract from the buyers attention span? . That was either proof of some serious education or he/she gets them for very mundane things. Maybe they are for french fryer timing certification, milkshake making team lead, condiment filling symposium 2009, etc….
noticed that as well. I would tell them to take them down – clients stop and spend way too long looking at them, not the unit.
This place has possibilities. I still am iffy on the location – too far west and across from Cabrini row houses. But the area immediately south of here along the river is getting very nice. Much better than in the past.
I’d prefer a south-facing unit as I imagine those have incredible skyline views.
LOL at broker photo.
I second that snicker at the broker photo. Yikes.
other than the two stone walls, what’s unique about it. Nice furnishings for the “look”, but those go with the Seller, so you’re left with some oddly colored walls and nice bathrooms, and standard upscale kitchen….. That’s about it as I can see. Interesting vanity wall with all the diplomas. Also it looks like the owner loves to wear exclusively brown blazers, grey-charcoal slacks, and white shirts.
PS I thought the living room photo was the building lobby! What are you supposed to do sit in those 2 chairs and discuss the salad that’s growing as every centerpiece in every room? That’s “AD”?
Doesn’t overlooking the housing projects ruin the fantasy of this place? Kinda of a buzz kill for the martini-stare-out-the-window, living-the-life dream.
“Doesn’t overlooking the housing projects ruin the fantasy of this place? Kinda of a buzz kill for the martini-stare-out-the-window, living-the-life dream.”
There are several buildings in this neighborhood that “overlook” the public housing project. Hasn’t stopped several hundreds (thousands?) of people from moving into those buildings. That public housing project clearly isn’t a secret and it isn’t new. This building has been condos for awhile now. Obviously, it isn’t an issue for most buyers.
“so much for your eyes to enjoy” — I threw up a little in my mouth.
As for the price increases… This strategy is almost as successful as putting toothpaste back in the tube.
One critique of the post — by definition, isn’t this place cookie cutter since there are are the same floorplans (and many of them) above and below???
[Dan #2] “I still am iffy on the location – too far west and across from Cabrini row houses.”
If it makes you feel any better, the entirety of Cabrini row houses between Cambridge and Hudson have been vacant for quite some time now and are scheduled for demolition.
FYI Its a farmers market across the street from here, not Cabrini row homes
This is a good buy b/c the building is awesome, Montgomery Park (formerly Erie Park) was just renovated with a new kids playground and dog park, its quieter than Streeterville and next to 4 million dollar mansions. Most importantly, CHA just annouced that it is not renovating the row homes and will likely tear them down. This will completely change the neighborhood and the view.
Page 17 of the 2013 Plan for Transformation: http://www.thecha.org/filebin/pdf/FY2013_Annual_Plan_PublicCommentDraft_8.29.12.pdf
CHA continues to work with the Near North Working Group to incorporate Frances Cabrini Rowhouses into the broader redevelopment plans for the former Cabrini-Green sites. CHA completed the rehabilitation of 146 units at Cabrini Rowhouses in FY2009. At the request of Federal Judge Marvin Aspen in FY2009, future rehabilitation was put on hold and CHA reassessed its previous plans for the non-rehabilitated portion of this site. After numerous stakeholder meetings and deliberate considerations, CHA has concluded that it will no longer support 100% public housing at the Cabrini Rowhouses property.
In FY2011, CHA hired an Urban Planning team to assist the Near North Working Group with drafting a Master Plan for the remaining redevelopment of the former Cabrini-Green sites. In FY2013, CHA anticipates that as part of the Master Planning process, it will solicit redevelopment bids for the entire remaining Cabrini property which may include other types of housing, commercial, educational, and/or social service components. Part of this process may include the demolition of some or all of the remaining 437 non-rehabilitated units in Cabrini Rowhouses. CHA does not expect that any such demolition would occur in FY2013.
http://www.skylinenewspaper.com/news/09-12-2012/Still_standing
Agree on the no-man’s land location. Building exterior is hideous. Unit itself makes up for those flaws. Balconies are great, but to get those sweeping views of downtown you have to be removed from it, that’s why this is in no-man’s land. However, you have excellent car access to the Ontario/Ohio ramp. Views of the static buildings/skyline get old (the buildings never move), but you could view some great storms from time to time blowing up from the south.
oops…above post was about 340 W. Superior building.
This area has more room for price improvement than the other RN property posted today. The building, and lobby are nicer…the building has pedigree. Its next to the dog park and new Montgomery Ward Park (formerly Erie Park) with a new playground. Yes, its next to the Cabrini Row Houses but CHA just announced in the 2013 plan for transformation that it is demolishing the row homes. So this are will be spectacular once the public housing is gone. Great light, views, quieter and more neighborhood than the rest of RN which is a tourist trap.
looks like it has functional windows. that’s the toughest part of some of these hi-rises is that John Hancock etc. don’t have windows that you can open. You have to continuously breathe in recycled air. Not good for you.
“looks like it has functional windows. that’s the toughest part of some of these hi-rises is that John Hancock etc. don’t have windows that you can open. You have to continuously breathe in recycled air. Not good for you.”
You can understand why they don’t- right? Even just a small object dropped out of a window at that height can kill someone on the street below. (Not to mention the dangers of suicides if they WERE able to open more. We won’t get into a list of the buildings where people have jumped out- but they’re out there.)
I thought there were small vents that opened at the Hancock so you could let in air? Where are our Hancock experts?
“Even just a small object dropped out of a window at that height can kill someone on the street below.”
Has to actually be pretty heavy.
“I thought there were small vents that opened at the Hancock so you could let in air?”
I’ve always understood that the resi floors have (some) smallish operable windows.
“Even just a small object dropped out of a window at that height can kill someone on the street below.”
“Has to actually be pretty heavy.”
What about a golf ball (on a calm day)? Which I don’t think of as pretty heavy. Would that kill someone w a solid strike to the head? What’s terminal velocity, whihc I’m thinking would be ~reached of the 70th or 80th floor.
You can totally open the windows at the Hancock. There are some removable barrier thingys that prevent you from opening the windows more than a couple of inches, but if you remove the barrier thingys then the the window can majorly open (it swings in).
“What about a golf ball (on a calm day)? Which I don’t think of as pretty heavy. Would that kill someone w a solid strike to the head? What’s terminal velocity, whihc I’m thinking would be ~reached of the 70th or 80th floor.”
Could it (ie, if it hit Humpty Dumpty)? Sure. Would it be more likely than not? Doubt it, but that’s a fairly testable question.
From here: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/airfri2.html , terminal velocity seems to be 32 m/s, with a mass of .046kg (baseball is 33 m/s and .145 kg). Someone should be able to do the maths.
“Could it (ie, if it hit Humpty Dumpty)? Sure. Would it be more likely than not? Doubt it, but that’s a fairly testable question.”
Yeah, you’re prob right. By “would it”, I’m not assuming something freakish happen, other than getting a good solid hit square on the head (which is a bit freakish bc the odds of hitting someone are probably pretty low to start w). From your link, 72mph (as it’s expressed in this country), I think of as maybe around the release speed of a regularish (non prof athlete) male. I think it’s not automatic for a prof baseball player to kill someone at 95mph, even wo a helmet. So w less mass and less velocity (energy proportional to square of velocity, right? miumiu?), golf ball seems unlikely. I had been thinking it might get up well over 100mph. Pro golfers are around 125mph, at which point seems to me some combo of the amount of force and penetration at point of impact could kill someone, if you think of hitting someone at point blank range.
Death by baseball at terminal velocity seems possible though. But if you’d care to come by the office, we could test this all out.
“72mph (as it’s expressed in this country)”
Not by anyone attempting to calculate the force of the impact.
“combo of the amount of force and penetration at point of impact”
Much more likely combo on the relatively soft side of skull (or, say, directly at eye) than on top of skull.
“Death by baseball at terminal velocity seems possible though”
Absolutely. But Dickie Thon and Tony Conigliaro both took balls traveling at least 74 mph directly in the face and didn’t die–not that anyone would think their injuries minor.
“Not by anyone attempting to calculate the force of the impact.”
I must have missed where that calc was done (and done in a meaningful way wrt the question at hand).
“Much more likely combo on the relatively soft side of skull (or, say, directly at eye) than on top of skull.”
Sure, but the more I think about it, the more I think there’s a pretty good chance of death (say, 20 percent) even on top of skull.
Roll of quarters should do it though, no?
“Roll of quarters should do it though, no?”
Sure. Or a classic swingline stapler.
Query: If preventing people from throwing/accidentally dropping stuff from their windows is a meaningful reason that some resi hi-rises don’t have operable windows, then why was Legacy allowed to have balconies?
“Or a classic swingline stapler.”
Yeah but I’m not giving mine up. It’s the one thing I’ve carried aroudn to every office job I’ve ever had. New staplers are dreadful.
When I lived at Marina City a sternly worded flyer was left under our doors one day: “Don’t drop shit off the balconies–somebody just about brained a valet parker with a jar of pickles.”
Two jumpers in my time there, saw the aftermath of one. Only thing I ever threw off the tower was a pair of paper airplanes.
We were high up but we entertained/charcoal-grilled/sat and read on our balcony very often; found it a wonderful and disaster-free amenity. And at MC you not only have the huge balconies–the large, flat roof itself is open to residents. I think the Trump/Montgomery choice of hermetically sealing the apartments is mistaken.
” I think the … Montgomery choice of hermetically sealing the apartments is mistaken.”
In this case, the pix of the windows really, really look like the lower panel is operable.
“Trump”
Are you sure? coulda sworn i’d seen the lower panels on teh windows open sometime (maybe a pic?).
No, you’re right, neither one is “hermetically sealed.” But they don’t have balconies. Or wait, does Monkey have balconies on the E/W ends?
Point is, I lived in a place with a high-up balcony and people falling off the building all the time and even so it was great (going out in a storm as somebody said in another thread).
“does Monkey have balconies on the E/W ends?”
At least some do:
http://www.urbanrealestate.com/property/500-W-Superior-Unit-801-CHICAGO-IL-60654-WLDXTT4MNYQ3W.html
Looks pretty tight, and you then lose most (all?) other windows in the unit because of the giant corners.