18 Months and Still Waiting on a Buyer for This Custom Built 3-Bedroom SFH: 1748 W. Cortland in Bucktown

This 3-bedroom single family home at 1748 W. Cortland in Bucktown has been on the market since July 2010.

In that time it has been reduced just $26,000.

The listing says it was custom built by renowned archiect Joe Valerio.

The house, on a 24×125 lot, has a 2-story living room with a lofted bedroom.

The kitchen has white cabinets and what looks like white appliances along with zinc counter tops.

There is a third floor master suite.

It has central air and a 2-car garage.

Last purchased in 1995, there was a lis pendens foreclosure filed on the property 19 months ago.

Are buyers simply waiting until it goes back to the bank?

Robert John Anderson at Baird & Warner has the listing. See the pictures here.

1748 W. Cortland: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 2264 square feet, 2 car garage

  • Sold in March 1995 for $93,000
  • Lis pendens foreclosure filed in June 2010
  • Originally listed in July 2010 for $825,000
  • Reduced
  • Currently listed at $799,000
  • Taxes of $7563
  • Central Air
  • Bedroom #1: 18×13 (third floor)
  • Bedroom #2: 15×14 (main floor)
  • Bedroom #3: 16×15 (second floor)

19 Responses to “18 Months and Still Waiting on a Buyer for This Custom Built 3-Bedroom SFH: 1748 W. Cortland in Bucktown”

  1. Lovely!

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  2. Floorplan would help a lot.

    Why bedrooms on 3 different levels?

    In what way is it a 2-flat? How do you divide it?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  3. This place looks really nice. The outside is ugly, but I kind of like it anyway.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  4. anon, the floorplan is, unsurprisingly, weird. It think it works quite well for the current owner (single woman with renters), but it would be an odd conversion project for single family. The one-bedroom rental is everything to the front of the two-story addition; the rental living room and kitchen face Cortland, right at street level. The entrance to the owner’s unit is further back from Cortland, on the eastern side of the building. And the owner’s unit really is only a one-bedroom: the agent is calling the lofted space over the living room a bedroom, even though you’d have to go through the master bedroom (directly above it) to get to the only full bathroom in the owner’s unit (and even though both the master bedroom and the lofted space are doorless and open).

    It’s a really great, interesting space, but (in my mind) ideal only for childless people who want to be landlords (or keep the rental unit separate as a work space, in-law space, etc.)

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  5. Looks like it’s flipping off the street.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +5 (from 5 votes)
  6. Calyx–Thanks!!

    “the floorplan is, unsurprisingly, weird. It think it works quite well for the current owner (single woman with renters), but it would be an odd conversion project for single family. The one-bedroom rental is everything to the front of the two-story addition; the rental living room and kitchen face Cortland, right at street level”

    So, calling it a SFH is a total farce?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  7. When I first looked at the pics, I thought they took a bunch of pictures of a kids playroom.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  8. I love the giant angel statues on the top of the church across the street…they look very cool lit up at night.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)
  9. I have viewed this home. There are major problems with this property. For one, the flat roof off of the first level in the front is pitched incorrectly. Water flows towards the windows of the second level. There is evidence of water damage thru out this home. The same issue exists in the rear of the home – water flows toward the house.

    The rental portion of the property is actually is in the front on the street level of the property. The rear is the main part of the home. This home hasn’t sold because it is a mess and needs a lot of work to correct some major issues. In this market and at the asking price, this home will not sell in my opinion.
    Stephen

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)
  10. Negative curb appeal. And custom built for whom? I’ve had several clients laugh when the description says custom built. Certainly not custom built for the next buyer.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +7 (from 7 votes)
  11. With the pictures and calyx’s description I am still confused. The over mount sink and bathroom look like the place needs updating. Definitely going back to the bank I think.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  12. I wonder how much it cost to heat this place. If it’s forced air, not radiant heat, wouldn’t the space always be generally chilly, with the warm air going to the ceiling and the cold air rolling/falling off the windows into the main living area?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  13. anon: I suppose it’s possible (though not likely) that the place has been converted into a genuine single family since I looked at it in summer of 2010, so I can’t say it’s a “farce” to be listed as a single family. But for *my* single family, it would definitely have needed a significant reno.

    Benjamon9: Ha! I wish I could explain the layout more clearly; it really is unusual, and, maybe, very appealling for the right person. The photos basically show all of the owner’s unit except for the half bath (tucked under the stairs going up to the open lofted area) and entry closets. (The unit consists of the double-height living/dining area, the kitchen and the entryway/half bath area tucked under the lofted den, and then the master bedroom above the den.) There are no photos of the rental, which faces the street and has the tall windowed “flip-off” (per Joe T.) tower.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  14. “I suppose it’s possible (though not likely) that the place has been converted into a genuine single family since I looked at it in summer of 2010, so I can’t say it’s a “farce” to be listed as a single family.”

    The listing calls it a “Bucktown Cstm built SFH/2-flt”. With the description of the layout, I don’t see how it could be both–unlike a SFH with a basement suite (eg this place http://cribchatter.com/?p=9363)–so one or the other is at least severely misleading. It makes every multi-unit that is for sale a SFH/[multi-unit], as, of course, one *could* convert it.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  15. I’va also looked at this place. The entire thing just wasn’t good.

    1. It was a total mess. When we walked in we were greeted by a horrible smell, and TONS of clutter. The pictures must be old, because even during an open house, it looked nothing like that. Cat food dishes scattered all about, litter boxes, etc (We couldn’t even look at the laundry room because the animals were locked inside).

    2. It seemed glued together. Doors were broken, water damage, horrible windows.

    I hate to seem so negative, but I get frustrated when people feel the right to list a property at this amount. Why try to burden the next home-owner with your misfortune and mess? I guarantee no one would ever take this place after an inspection.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  16. I went poking around the Recorder of Deeds site, and am having a hard time deciphering how much is owed on this atrocity. Certainly not $799k.
    The exterior is just SO HIDEOUS.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  17. “I went poking around the Recorder of Deeds site, and am having a hard time deciphering how much is owed on this atrocity. Certainly not $799k.”

    $296k, with a fc pending, plus $175k. So, yeah, nowhere close to $799k, even with a lot of defualt interest.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  18. So the owners would rather give it to the bank and hurt their credit rather than “give it away” at what is owed? Sad story.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  19. A few fancy pix of the sapce here:

    http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/October-2007/Self-Portrait/index.php?cparticle=6&siarticle=5#artanc

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

Leave a Reply