Rent or Own? 1833 N. Leavitt in Bucktown

This new construction mansion house at 1833 N. Leavitt in Bucktown was completed in 2006.

It recently came on the market listed for $2 million (but the listing appears to have been withdrawn.)

But it’s also available to rent for $6500 a month.

Is that rental price a deal?

John Voss at @Properties has the listing. See more pictures here.

1833 N. Leavitt: 5 bedrooms, 3.5 baths, 2 car garage, 4600 square feet

  • New construction (I couldn’t find any prior sale)
  • Was recently listed for $2 million (but withdrawn)
  • Is currently listed for rent for $6500 a month
  • Taxes of $5510

19 Responses to “Rent or Own? 1833 N. Leavitt in Bucktown”

  1. $6500/mo seems about right for this place. $2 million is a joke however.

    0
    0
  2. Wow. Just wow. Who in their right mind thought that building a 2 million dollar townhouse in Bucktown was a good idea?

    Even still, whoever is renting this place is losing their butt! A 1.6 million dollar mortgage (figure 20% down on a 2m loan) with a great jumbo rate is over 10k a month. If the place is furnished, that’s a great place to rent. Now they just need to find someone who makes 300k a year and wants to rent a place in Btown.

    And I highly doubt the seller is going to get $434 a sq. ft in that particular area of town. It isn’t a bad area, everything is mostly new built, but still. Come on!

    0
    0
  3. This house has zero curb appeal.

    0
    0
  4. That is crazy. Its a big box.

    0
    0
  5. Mindless bubble building at it’s finest. The only thing someone was thinking of is how much they could flip it for.

    0
    0
  6. Zero outdoor space and the front door is right on the sidewalk. I hate that. Lot is only 100 ft deep so they literally built the house to all four property lines. Just a poor design all the way around.

    6500 is about what mortgage, tax and insurance are on a 1M SFH.

    0
    0
  7. While it pains me to say it, Chicago neighborhoods need a design commission to prevent these developers from building these eye sores. The architect should have their degree/license revoked.

    0
    0
  8. “While it pains me to say it, Chicago neighborhoods need a design commission to prevent these developers from building these eye sores. The architect should have their degree/license revoked.”

    Worst idea ever. This is exactly what the typical people on those design and/or zoning commissions would want. You’d get overhomogonized neighborhoods with a design commission and no innovation (or far too low density with a zoning commission). The house looks ok, it’s just too large for it’s lot, which is a zoning issue at most (and probably conforms to what’s there already). In fact, it almost looks like it could be a rehab of an old corner store/tavern with apartments above, which is what it’s proportions suggest.

    0
    0
  9. “prevent these developers from building these eye sores”

    How is this substantially different from the former corner stores that populate most older ‘hoods in Chicago?

    I don’t like the parapet detailing or the contrasting material under the windows, and it would be nice if it were 5 feet back from the street on the front, but not having the bricked in store window and covered over diagonal corner entrance is no real loss. But the basic box really looks like a corner store building to me.

    0
    0
  10. “it almost looks like it could be a rehab of an old corner store/tavern with apartments above, which is what it’s proportions suggest”

    Dammit–took too long to type my nearly identical thought.

    0
    0
  11. “covered over diagonal corner entrance is no real loss”

    Hey, the diagonal corner entrances with the turret shaped rooms above them are pretty cool.

    Put me on the neighborhood planning committee and you’ll get lots of turrets.

    0
    0
  12. Both rental and purchase price blow chunks…Shitty place.

    0
    0
  13. I said it pains me to say it because I know it is a slippery slope. The place isn’t the worst that I have seen, but it is way too big for the lot. I know I am not the only one who has seen some of these places built and all you can do is just ask wtf was the developer thinking?

    Too many buildings are losing the detail, craftsmanship, and character imho.

    0
    0
  14. CH: “the diagonal corner entrances with the turret shaped rooms above them are pretty cool.”

    With a turret, you betcha. But there are plenty that just have a square corner like this one. Then the corner is just a place to collect trash, except in the rare cases where it’s preserved as an entrance.

    Edu: “but it is way too big for the lot.”

    So, are all the old corner stores also too big for their lots? If you were the lot coverage tsar, would they have to be torn down or otherwise reduced in size?

    Indeed, within this house’s immeidate surroundings, it’s more in place that out of place (notwithstanding the small frame neighbor). Straight out the front door is a full-coverage old corner store–on a triangular lot. So, while I sympathize with the view that, in general, full lot coverage is undesireable, I think this one is fine in it’s context.

    0
    0
  15. I don’t like it more so for the overall character of the place. I do think it is bit much for the lot, but I just think the building is plain. The old corner stores had way more character even if they take up space which makes it more bearable. The challenge is always balancing opinions and taste. I don’t like it, but I am sure others may think it is their dream home.

    0
    0
  16. “The old corner stores had way more character even if they take up space which makes it more bearable”

    Eh, I see plenty of them that are not much different from this one except the aforementioned parapet detailing and the contrasting material under the windows. Like I said, I don’t much *like* it, but hardly see this place as an example of what’s wrong with new development. Look at the townhouses just south of this place or the place across the alley behind it–those I think damage the neighborhood environment much more.

    0
    0
  17. the owner built this for his family after tearing down most of the old apartment building. he retained one rear wall which enabled him to grandfater the zoning and build out the full lot. the interior actualy shows pretty well but the workmanship is generally shoddy. i think a list price closer to $1m would be about right…

    0
    0
  18. This place is just depressing. Built right up on the sidewalk so everyone on the street can check in on what you’re having for dinner while they wait for their dog to take a poop. And yet another open kitchen, which means a thin layer of dusty grease covering everything in your living room after a few months. $6500 a month? Cloud cuckooland.

    0
    0
  19. Agreed that some variety in design is nice, but woof, is this thing ugly.

    It’s a tough call; if you let a zoning board be the arbiters of taste, you might end up with some really tasteless people on the board.

    That said, I haven’t seen much go up lately that I didn’t think was utterly tasteless.

    0
    0

Leave a Reply