Printers Corner offering six months free or rate buydowns on 19 remaining condos

by Joseph Askins on 1/16/09

With 80 percent of its homes sold and its condo association meeting for the first time next week, it would be easy to file Winthrop Properties‘ Printers Corner into the “old news” drawer. A few one- and two-bedroom homes are still for sale in the building, though, and Winthrop is trying its best to draw a few more buyers into the tower at 171 W Polk St.

The development’s Web site now advertises a “Live Free for Six Months” incentive, in which Winthrop will pay the principal, interest, taxes and condo fees for half a year on a buyer’s new home. Buyers can opt for a rate buydown of up to 1.25 percent instead, if they prefer, a choice which could save them as much as $425 a month over the life of a 30-year fixed loan, the site claims.

The first 10 buyers who take advantage of either offer will get free parking spaces (which normally sell for $36,000 to $40,000 apiece), and qualified buyers can make down payments as low as 3.5 percent, or about $12,000 for the average Printers Corner unit, according to the site.

Sales agent Neil Friedman says the 19 available units are a mix of one-bedroom / one-bath homes with 743 to 769 square feet, priced from the $310s to the $350s (or roughly $430 to $462 per square foot), and two-bedroom / two-baths with 1,145 to 1,168 square feet, priced from the $390s to the $480s (or about $346 to $419 a square foot). All of the homes are ready for immediate delivery, he says.

For the sake of comparison, Printers Corner’s neighbor to the north – Roszak / ADC‘s Vetro high-rise, located at 611 S Wells St – has one-bedrooms with 643 to 1,002 square feet listed from the to the $180s to the $310s (or about $293 to $343 per square foot), and two-bedrooms with 1,133 to 1,667 square feet priced from the $340s to the $460s (or around $276 to $306 per square foot).

NewHomeNotebook:
• Rate and review Printers Corner
• View our list of South Loop high-rises

Share:

Facebook
Google Buzz
Digg
LinkedIn
StumbleUpon
del.icio.us
Google Bookmarks
Live
Posterous
Reddit
Technorati
Tumblr
email

No related posts.

{ 8 comments }

Jeff January 16, 2009 at 10:41 AM: Another abysmal garage podium design. Daley could not have moved Lori Healey out of DPD soon enough for thinking such designs are acceptable. Now he needs to run the other architect running the Plan Commission out of town (Linda Searl).
Joe Zekas January 16, 2009 at 11:03 AM: Jeff,

I think most buyers will be more interested in the unit layouts, which struck me as among the better ones in the area.
cgcg January 16, 2009 at 11:11 AM: Totally agree, Jeff. Heinous.
Alan January 16, 2009 at 1:50 PM: Joe – you’re right, but it shouldnt be all about the consumers. We all have to live with that “abysmal garage podium”.
Joe Zekas January 16, 2009 at 2:05 PM: Alan,

I wasn’t defending the podium.

That said, I don’t have much sympathy for the notion that some people should pay to indulge others’ aesthetic prefernces. Isn’t that what it comes down to?

Added – An attempt was made to make the podium contextual with the forms of other low-rise buildings in the area. I’m not very adept on aesthetic issues so I’ll stay out of the question of whether it was successful; just noting that the issue wasn’t ignored by the architect and developer.
cgcg January 16, 2009 at 5:49 PM: I don’t think it’s necessarily an issue of paying more for a better product but merely demanding a better design. There are plenty of architects who have elevated the parking podium to an art form, most famously Bertrand Goldberg with Marina City but, more recently, Helmut Jahn at his latest high-rise, Ralph Johnson with Contemporaine and 235 W Van Buren (maybe a bit austere by some standards but probably the most economical of the lot). Joe Valerio’s design for the base of 161 W Kinzie looks very promising, too.

This one, however, is just atrocious. Shame on all parties involved.
Alan January 16, 2009 at 6:20 PM: Joe – You have ranted (rightfully so) against blank walls that face the street on townhouse projects that are perpendicular to the street. I think this is so severe of a problem that it should be addressed in a similar fashion by zoning or the planning commission.
Joe Zekas January 16, 2009 at 6:34 PM: Alan,

I hate it when people call me out on my inconsistencies!

I’ll pass on my inclination to weasel out of this with a distinction without a difference, and defer to the “wisdom of the crowd.”