Get a 3-Bedroom Bucktown Townhouse for $45K Under the 2005 Price: 1842 N. Wilmot
There seem to be plenty of 2 bedroom townhouses on the market but finding a 3-bedroom townhouse like this one at 1842 N. Wilmot in Bucktown isn’t quite as easy.
Off and on the market since August 2009, the townhouse has been reduced $140,000.
It is now listed about $45,000 under the 2005 purchase price.
Built in 1997 on a 18×100 lot, the townhouse has 2 bedrooms on the upper floor and 1 on the lower level.
There is also a lower level family room and 2 fireplaces.
The kitchen has white cabinets, stainless steel appliances and granite counter tops.
The townhouse also has a rare 2-car garage.
Is this a deal?
Sarah Ahmed at @Properties has the listing. See the pictures here.
Or see it in person at the Open House, on Sunday, May 1 at 11:30 to 1 PM.
1842 N. Wilmot: 3 bedrooms, 3 baths, no square footage listed, 2 car garage
- Sold in October 2005 for $595,000
- Originally listed in August 2009 for $689,900
- Reduced numerous times
- Currently listed for $549,900
- Taxes of $8200
- I don’t see the assessments (if any) listed
- Central Air
- Bedroom #1: 14×19 (second floor)
- Bedroom #2: 12×11 (second floor)
- Bedroom #3: 13×15 (lower level)
- Family room: 20×14 (lower level)
A SFH right across the street on a full-size lot just sold for $600k. http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1825-N-Wilmot-Ave-60647/home/13356062
Kind of ugly from the curb though.
kitchen looks pretty small. wonder how motivated they are to unload this, i personally dont think i’d offer more than $475 for this.
We looked at a townhouse in this group back in 1997 when it was first constructed. Back then, the price was around $350K, which seemed a lot at the time, considering the out-of-the-way location and our limited finances. We ended up buying a 2-BR condo in a Lincoln Park high rise for around $200K instead.
These are very nice townhouses, with good curb appeal and decent room inside. Also, the two-car garage is a great perk.
The only thing I’d say is, back then this was the very far west end of the gentrified part of Bucktown. Milwaukee Avenue was a dull stretch with no interesting places to walk. West of Milwaukee the neighborhood was very dicey (maybe it’s gotten better). This is a long walk to the North/Damen commercial area. Really you’d never walk it – it’s probably a mile.
But maybe it’s a more interesting area these days. I haven’t been over there in years.
Long walk to North & Damen? I’m showing on google maps that it’s a half mile – 10 minute walk. That whole stretch of Damen between North & Armitage is really great.
Thanks for the insight on the place though, we may take a look.
18×100 lot? Give me a break.
“18×100 lot? Give me a break.”
subtract, give or take 5 feet for stairways and it would be great for people who like to fly american eagle.
There’s always a crib in the 2nd bedroom. It amazes me that people didn’t think of this before signing on the dotted line for $600,000 home. Then again, it’s probably the same logic that convinced them to buy this home with no money down in the first place. My goodness, the monthly nut they’re paying on this place is probably over $3,000 a month. I’d want to get the hell out and stop the bleeding if I could too.
$476,000 + $119,000 = $595,000.
Just be very careful late at night after the bars close lest you be attacked by some f’in degenerate from Avondale looking to score a few credit cards.
“That whole stretch of Damen between North & Armitage is really great.”
hollywood lights is a dead late-90’s giveaway, but that’s easily fixed. Lack of crown molding is probably another late-90’s feature, the main floor looks kind of naked without it, given all the other places we see that have it and it starts to get imprinted on the brain to expect it.
HD: people who buy THs are those that can’t afford SFHs. When these people bought, SFHs were probably going for $800k and up.
I guess they thought that if they didn’t buy now, they would be priced out forever.
“#Dan on April 29th, 2011 at 11:01 am
HD: people who buy THs are those that can’t afford SFHs. When these people bought, SFHs were probably going for $800k and up.”
@ HD – that stuff happens in Lincoln Park/Lakeview too. my friend got punched & fractured her cheekbone at 3 in the afternoon by some effing jerks trying to steal her purse.
Good comment on the crib in the second bedroom. Anyone with kids who’s considering buying a place like this should take note, understanding that someone else with kids found this to not be the place to stay.
I have no idea what schools are like around this area. I do agree that a lot of places do have cribs. Because most places posted on this site are in the city, and the people selling are moving to the burbs.
I forgot there were only 2 BRs on the top floor and the third was on the lower level. For anyone who has a small child and then a second baby, this would be a major flaw, because you’d either have to have your toddler share a room with the baby (not ideal) or your toddler would have to be down in the basement (not going to happen).
Pretty stupid planning, but I guess they couldn’t fit a 3rd BR upstairs.
Increasingly, I think layouts are making the difference between places that sell and those that do not.
Homes that are otherwise unspecial but with really good layouts, including efficient staircasing seem to sell.
At a minimum, higher price point family buyers want 3 BR + 2 BTH up plus at least 1 BR and 1 BTH in finished basement or 3rd floor. You really can only get this in a SFH configuration. 4 up is hard and usually sacrifices master bath or is on an oversized lot.
Buyers tend to avoid finished basements that do not have drain tiles / overhead sewers. Otherwise they aren’t really living spaces. To have this, an EXTENSIVE reno has to have occured or you are looking at 1990 or later new construction.
“There’s always a crib in the 2nd bedroom. It amazes me that people didn’t think of this before signing on the dotted line for $600,000 home.”
“Because most places posted on this site are in the city, and the people selling are moving to the burbs.”
Love the generalizations on here. These people bought in 2005. 6 years is a long time and a lot can change in that timeframe. I know that when I bought my first place (2/2), I was living a VERY single lifestyle and not expecting to be married with two kids 6 years later. And we did NOT move to the ‘burbs.
More mouth breathers who spell their kids name in letters aboove the crib. Why are wemoving? Oh yeah, Alex needs to go to school.
You may have not known it but statistically it was probably more likely than not, and madison avenue knows it too.
“I know that when I bought my first place (2/2), I was living a VERY single lifestyle and not expecting to be married with two kids 6 years later. “
“I was living a VERY single lifestyle”
He is not a manwhore, mom, he just used to live a VERY single lifestyle.
Seriously, what’s up with writing your kid’s name in letter above their crib? When did that become a thing?
Kevin,
I’d be interested to hear your perspective when you have a five year old and the local city public school sucks.
I Think Kevin means – “maybe they should have thought about the school thing before going off the pill?”
All I meant was I hate it when people use block letters to spell words on the wall (the kid’s name in the bedroom or “Eat” in a kitchen). A pet peeve that I feel very strongly about.
Thanks to a certain medical procedure performed on my girlfriend in college, I don’t have to worry about schooling a kid so I’ve got no opinion about eductaing kids in the city and the impact that need has on real estate.
Just shallow observations from me:)
Not a good home for a family and not a good enough home for empty nesters. This looks like a home for the type of people who bought it with the plan to move (and make money) to the bigger, better place when the time came. That demographic is mostly gone or at least the ridiculous access to funny money that promoted it. This could move at 100K less. The place is quite boring and looks not just a little cheap.
Interesting to compare this place with the East Lakeview 3/3 co-op of a few days ago. Thy are comparable in size and both have a monthly nut around $3500.
This place has nicer bathrooms, the co-op has a bigger kitchen. This place has a yard and garage, the co-op has the building amenities.
I would take the co-op hands down, for the location and vintage elegance.
Any other opinions?
I also prefer 2500 sq ft on one floor to a tri-level… advantage co-op.
co-op for sure. location, vintage details, view, layout — it’s a no-brainer. The only attribute of this place that is superior to the ELV co-op is the fact that the high monthly out of pocket will always be there in the co-op.
On another note, I don’t know much about this area, but why is it identified as Logan Square on the listing? I thought this was Bucktown?
the co-op also includes all utility bills & amenities in your 3500 nut
so yeah… the co-op for sure
Co-op for the location, vintage charm. The co-op building itself doesn’t have many amenities that I can see, except a door man. The exercise room looks tiny and of course there’s no parking.
I’d take the coop at 3500 over this any day. Not only is the vintage co-op have much better architecture and better details than this, its baths would renovate to much nicer baths than in this place. I’d love to have at the baths and the kitchen at 3500, but there’s no way I’d want to have to cope with the built ugliness of this place.
This place is really is ugly. Notice the strange, awkward locations of windows, which is something you can never change, and the bad location of the third bed. You can add “appliques” like cove moldings, but it will still not look or feel exactly right because there isn’t enough clearance between the windows and ceiling.
And Bucktown will never be 3500 N Lake Shore Drive, ever. There is no comparing the two neighborhoods. I’ve watched the gentrification of the Bucktown area for the past 25 years with gape-jawed amazement, astonished at the redevelopment and high prices of this intrinsically ugly former industrial, semi-slum working-class neighborhood, far from the lake and not exactly convenient to downtown.
The only advantage this place has is much lower monthly maintenance and utility costs, which is important. That, and the semi-private outdoor space, is why it will sell much higher than 3500.
Apologize for extra “is” in 2nd paragraph, didn’t see it until too late to correct.
I have toured this townhouse. It appears that nothing has been updated since it was built in the late 90’s, and the wear and tear shows. In addition, the homeowners have 4 cats. The clutter of cats and kids is everywhere. This is actually a good part of Bucktown, but this needs some real TLC to bring it back.
Wow – judging from all the “chatter” going on as of April 29, I guess it’s really true that not EVERYBODY was busy watching/commenting on the Royal Wedding.
Bride was cute, groom looked “lost,” dress was pretty. Just like every other wedding, including your own.
I thought the dress was a bit of a disappointment for a Royal wedding. The train was not long enough IMHO. But she looked lovely. I only saw some videos on news sites though. I am happy Harry Potter is still available…lol
A friend of mine, who is a designer of formal wear and was fairly prominent in the 90s and early 00s (she was in Women’s Wear Daily frequently then)watched the wedding and was very, very disgusted because the dress worn by one of the bridesmaids was EXACTLY, from the fabric and cut, down to the last tuck and dart and thread, like one she herself designed a few years ago.
really? I did not watch the thing so I don’t who what the bride maids were wearing but maid of honor, Pippa was wearing a pretty classic McQueen. In fact, the dress is so simple I would say any designer has had some version of it produced since twenties.
“On another note, I don’t know much about this area, but why is it identified as Logan Square on the listing? I thought this was Bucktown?”
There is no such thing as “bucktown” as far as the MLS listed neighborhoods are concerned. It’s either Logan Square or West Town- even when it is clearly IN Bucktown.
That’s why if you search by neighborhood, you have to search in the Logan Square neighborhood to get Bucktown listings.
Miumiu – I think Kate was trying to be a bit more conservative than Di or Fergie, in keeping with “the times” and all the baggage the Royals have had to carry recently. Her train was definitely shorter than Di’s, which was close to the proverbial “whole nine yards” long. (Some lexographers opine that the phrase originated sometime in the Victorian era when nine yards of fabric following a bride’s dress was a status symbol.)
Diana’s train was the longest in royal history- at 26 feet. Fergies was 17 feet (and she also married in the abbey.) How long was Kate’s? It looked to be about 10 to 12 feet.
I thought it was still dramatic enough. I thought the dress was fantastic and was, essentially, Princess Grace of Monaco’s gown from 1956 (with a more plunging neckline.) Grace’s dress still stands the test of time today.
yup definitely looked like Grace Kelly’s. I thought the same. It is a nice simple dress and won’t look crazy like Diana’s. I disliked Fergie’s dress, but then again she is just so unattractive and classless that I think she will made anything look shabby. Kate is pretty and elegant though so she definitely added to the dress. I just expected something more, especially from McQueen granted he is no more with us. There is cool link on royal bridal gowns here:
http://nickverrreos.blogspot.com/
I love Soraya’s Dior dress!
Also I would have loved some subdued version of the first gown:
http://www.fashionologie.com/out-world-without-any-space-influence-sight-1669050
Sabrina – thanks for the info on buck town.
Old age must be creeping up on me, Sabrina – I wasn’t thinking Princess Grace so much as Luci Baines Johnson Nugent (1966; can be found on the interwebs.)
Laura,
You made some very good points about this place. As I said, I was there in 1997 and my memory of it isn’t all that clear. I do remember liking it a lot at the time, but if I went back now, who knows what I might think. Certainly no good for people with kids.
I owned/lived in one of these single-family rowhomes (calling it a townhome is a disservice as it implies it is all vertical space) for more than 5 years and I cannot say enough good things about the quality of the construction (brick and frame–no block), interior and exterior floorplan/space (even a small, private backyard for our dog), tree-lined street, friendly neighbors, and walkability of the neighborhood.
When I moved, the homes were all selling for more than $700K (even the ones with only two beds up) as they are a really special product. The market has brought the numbers way back down but the quality and desirability of these homes remain so now is a great time to get one.
This particular home has the smallest/narrowest floorplan of the development and needs some updating but, at its current price, it is a great buy in a great location. I did and would live here again over a townhome or condo anyday.
“Buyers tend to avoid finished basements that do not have drain tiles / overhead sewers. Otherwise they aren’t really living spaces. To have this, an EXTENSIVE reno has to have occured or you are looking at 1990 or later new construction.”
Boy howdy. Allcaps probably isn’t enough emphasis.
“This is a long walk to the North/Damen commercial area. Really you’d never walk it”
Sorry I missed that one. Google sez 9 minute walk, and their timing is pretty conservative.