“Special Price” on Floors 7-18 in The Vetro: 611 S. Wells
We’ve chattered about The Vetro, the 232-unit new construction high rise at 611 S. Wells in the Printer’s Row neighborhood of the South Loop, in prior months.
There have been some flippers trying to sell and/or rent in the building.
It is only about 50% sold from the developer and closings began several months ago.
I was all set to chatter about some newer units just listed on the market from the developer on the 16th floor when lo and behold the prices were reduced by $50k.
Here’s the listing for Unit #1607 which is a two bedroom plus den:
Special Pricing!!!**best Value In Area For Limited Time*** End Unit With S+e+w Exp Tons Of Nat Light. Over 1500sqft 2br Den 2.5ba Open Layout. 9ft Concrete Ceilings, Private Balcony,1.25 Granite Kit W/Mosiac Tile Backsplash, S/S Appl, Grohe Fxtrs,dble Bwl Undermnt Sink,disposal,hardwd Flrs In Living Area. Mba Incldes:limestone Tile,sep Shwr And Tub, Dble Bwl Vanity W/Limestne C-top.W/D Incl.Garage Pkg Avai
Unit #1607: 2 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, den, 1525 square feet
- Currently listed at “special pricing” for $434,900 (parking extra)
- Assessments of $533 a month
- Baird and Warner has the listing
Unit #1603’s listing says “SPECIAL PRICE FLOORS 7-18**LIMITED TIME**GREAT VALUE**”. (I don’t yet have interior pictures on this one.)
Unit #1603: 2 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, den, 1667 square feet
- Was listed for $518,900
- Currently listed for $468,900 (parking extra)
- Assessments of $699 a month
- Baird and Warner has the listing
Are these “deals” for that location and square footage?
The price per square foot on #1607 is decent.
Aren’t these assessments higher per sq ft than on that N. Sheridan building? Do you get anything other than a doorman and HVAC for that money?
Why is this building only half sold?
Are all 110+ units that expensive? If so, I would expect further price cuts.
It’s not a bad location; I would enjoy that 3-block walk to work, and the river’s going to get nice eventually. Still, this building has to compete with the fire sale in River City so I wouldn’t be in a rush to buy here.
“this building has to compete with the fire sale in River City”
Yeah, but River City is a pit. Comparing anything new down there to River City is completely unfair to the new stuff.
What the f is up with this concrete ceiling look? Whats up with the industrial look in general? have we all died and gone to the nether world?
I agree with anon. I don’t hold other buildings responsible for the aged “new age” aged architecture of River City that went horribly wrong. River city is in a league of its own in this area as in at the definite bottom of the pack.
I’m not a huge fan of the bathrooms or exposed concrete in Vetro, but these are minor things. Overall the location is A+ if you work in the loop and that every unit has a terrace is quite nice.
I like River City’s architecture…on the outside. Quintessential Goldberg. The interiors vary between mediocre, depressing, and atrocious. But I know someone who just picked up a 3 bedroom townhouse (in the atrium portion) for ~$185K. It’s the type of building that probably should have stayed rental given the general quality of construction and amenities, but if the building association ever stabilizes and invests in some modernization it could be a decent place.
$435K for a nicely done 1500 sq ft just a few blocks from the Loop seems like it’s approaching the realm of high reasonability… drop it to near $400K and include parking and it’s sold (but then the developer’s margin is gone…)
(of course, River City was an American Invsco “conversion”)
River City, horrible architecture? Blasphemy.
Fine, I’ll change my name. The building is super cool looking on the outside, but it’s not a reasonable ownership proposition at prices higher than David’s (the first one) friend–it’s just a pit on the inside, and I haven’t been inside in over a decade.
You either see the sense in Goldberg’s architecture, or you don’t.
I don’t. Round buildings seem intrinsically senseless to me- you end up with bizarre room configurations (pie-wedge is frequent) and lots of wasted space. The buildings are sort of “cute”, but they aren’t terribly livable.
These buildings now seem downright quaint- a “mod” fad of the 60s, like Correges boots or mirror shades, that was done more to look “futuristic” than to make the building function better. And nothing dates more quickly than a style that is all about being “the future”.
How quickly the future becomes the dead past.
I’d much prefer self-dating-but-forward-thinking architecture like Goldberg’s curvy concrete than the dreadful ye faux quainte olde style hi-rise schlocke that people seem to like now… The Bernadin, Lincoln Park 2520, Marquee Michigan, etc.
But yeah Laura is right… generally, most mid-century modern is something you either ‘get’ and love for its aesthetic and functionality, or despise and see as soulless and useless. I’m quite the former, if you can’t tell.
For those interested, only a fraction of Goldberg’s vision for River City actually got built. To the north, on the site of old Grand Central (now a prairie with proposals for two 25-story highrises) were supposed to be three immense towers: http://www.architechgallery.com/arch_images/architech_images/bertrand_goldberg/river_city_towers.jpg
I like the towers, they’re nicer than Marina City which would have been the closest comparison. The stump that actually got built is more on the “quaint” side, which I find endearing, but I can see the argument against it.
Form should follow function. That’s the motto I live by. I hate buildings that try to be something they are not. Why throw non-functional ionic columns on concrete building? It makes no sense. Let the building be what it is and what it is for.
On the other hand, cylindrical buildings have lost some functionality. I agree with Laura. They are great in the sense that there is a high surface area to volume ratio (read more windows). However, it’s difficult to use what volume you have left. Most people live in a square world with square furniture. Square furniture doesn’t fit well into wedge apartments.
Regards,
The 8th Dave
Other than the high assessments, what are River City’s big drawbacks? 185K for a townhouse in that area sounds great to me!
“Other than the high assessments, what are River City’s big drawbacks? 185K for a townhouse in that area sounds great to me!”
At $185k, it’s not so bad; but the previous buyer probably paid $600k for it.
That price is still high… There’s nothing in that neighborhood and streets aren’t very residential friendly. If people want to buy new, so that they can walk to work, they’re better off with that new CMK building on Van Buren.
On a non-related note, I recieved my deposit back yesterday on a 1br / 1.5 bth at 1000 South Michigan. Heard that they defaulted, but I also had been hounding them for the money to be returned. I’m guessing if they are returning funds, the project ain’t happening.
Mike, that is such a bummer. We went to the sales office just yesterday to check out the models/prices and they door was locked and the voicemail was on. Thanks for letting me know why.
I called the sales center to get the pricing on units. Here is what happened: the sales person almost hung up the phone and told me to fill the request form on line and wait until someone gets back to me. Then I told him that he can just take my email over the phone. It took him a few minutes to grab a pen. Next day, I received an email saying that I should visit the website in a few days…maybe they’ll put prices there. Now, WTF is wrong with them, do they want to sell units? Do they have bunch of idiots sitting in the sales center???
Big price cuts on units at Vetro. On the unit I was looking at they cut by ~15%. If they still include the free parking I’m seriously considering moving in.
Aleks I agree with you that the unavailability of their sales staff is indeed puzzling. I tried to call their sales center during the weekend during hours when they were supposed to be open and could not get a person on the phone.