Selling 2 Years Later: 1862 N. Halsted in Lincoln Park

This seller at 1862 N. Halsted in Lincoln Park isn’t looking to make much profit on a purchase in 2006.

1862-n-halsted.jpg

What will this unit ultimately sell for?  It seems to have all the positive Lincoln Park attributes, including parking and a nice private deck.

It has been listed for nearly 2 months.

Here’s the listing:

Top flr space within space! Unique lofted rm. (19’8 x 15′) for hobbies, playroom, office or a ‘cozy’ book nook!

Great Rm/Liv Rm w/cathedral clgs. & wood burning FP; Sep. din. area w/bay of windows; Kitchen w/new gran. C.T. + brkfst bar; Mst. Bdrm w/french drs. open to private deck; Mst. Bth.+ jacuzzi tub! In unit W/D; Attached 1 car gar included in price.

LOCATION! LOCATION! LOCATION!

 1862-n-halsted-_3s-livingroom.jpg

1862-n-halsted-_3s-diningroom.jpg

Isabel Mikell at Prudential Preferred has the listing. You can see more pictures and a virtual tour here.

Unit #3S: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, no square footage given

  • Sold in April 1993 for $190,000
  • Sold in November 1998 for $325,000
  • Sold in November 2002 for $424,500
  • Sold in April 2006 for $476,000
  • Currently listed for $499,000 (includes parking)
  • Assessments of $242 a month
  • Taxes of $6,098
  • Central air

11 Responses to “Selling 2 Years Later: 1862 N. Halsted in Lincoln Park”

  1. Hard to believe they’re looking for a 5% price increase two years later in THIS market (unless they’ve made some improvements). Personally, I think they’ll be lucky to get the ’06 price.

    0
    0
  2. I can’t wait to see the financing details behind the purchase in 2006.

    Lets guess people: did they actually put down 48-96k or another youngin’ livin’ the 0 down dream. I think we all know the answer here..

    0
    0
  3. What crazy person would expect a profit on something bought in 2006? Check out the 1998 listings and light a candle they hold up.

    0
    0
  4. I know some people think this is unconstitutional or something, but they may have to actually sell for less than they paid. Yes, there was a time when this kind of thing was actually common (every previous real estate bust). I can’t see them getting more than $450,000 in today’s market, and even less in tomorrow’s market.

    0
    0
  5. David (the first one) on September 22nd, 2008 at 1:44 pm

    424.5 in 2002 was probably too high, too – depending on the square footage, that’s probably closer to what these sellers can expect. I’d be surprised to see it go for higher than $450k, though as a somewhat “unique” space it does maintain that slim chance that a prospective buyer could fall in love with it and pay a premium.

    0
    0
  6. Bob, the 2006 purchase for $476,000 was financed for a total of $411,000 with WaMu (380,800+30,200.) Those loans were refi’d in 2/07 for $365,000 with MERS. In that time the lady on the first mtges acquired the gentleman’s last name.

    This seller has plenty of skin in the game, but desquamation appears imminent.

    0
    0
  7. It’s a pretty cool unit, but the cost is too high. Don’t forget that this is on Halsted and you’ll be hearing the traffic all day and all night.

    0
    0
  8. The unit is on the wrong side of the street, which is one of the reasons it’s not selling quickly. Noise on Halsted is not an issue (having lived there myself). Same unit on the opposite side would sell better because of the Lincoln Middle School district.

    0
    0
  9. I think I am finally starting to smell fear. Denial lasted way too long.

    0
    0

Leave a Reply