Bust Out of the White Box With This 2-Bedroom Townhouse at 2729 N. Racine in Lincoln Park
This 2-bedroom 3-story townhouse at 2729 N. Racine in Lincoln Park has been on the market for 12 months.
It is part of a 2-unit building so it only has one common wall.
The bedrooms are split, with one in the lower level and one on the second floor.
The listing says it was rehabbed in 2001.
The kitchen has stainless steel appliances and granite counter tops.
There is central air, side-by-side washer/dryer and parking as well as a 11×10 back deck.
The townhouse is currently listed $75,100 under the 2005 purchase price.
Is this a deal?
Jamie Connor at Conlon has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #N: 2 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, no square footage listed
- Sold in October 2001 for $329,000
- Sold in August 2005 for $425,000
- Originally listed in September 2010 for $409,000
- Reduced
- Currently listed at $349,900
- Assessments of $225 a month
- Taxes of $5452
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer
- Parking
- Bedroom #1: 14×13 (second floor)
- Bedroom #2: 14×13 (lower level)
Surprisingly nice little place on the inside. Not the greatest location, and not a great deal of curb appeal. The current ask doesn’t seem too unreasonable. Probably goes for around $325k, I guess.
If #N means that this is the north unit *guessing* then the lot is VERY short. I can’t imagine that having one bedroom upstairs and one in the basement is an ideal layout for many people. I was surprised at how nice the interior is. Don’t get me started on the exterior. A facade only its mother would love.
Google street view shows that the North unit is right on the alley. It looks like a bunch of multi-unit buildings look down into your yard.
I would show them 2131 N Clark from yesterday, a 3BR with no basement bedrooms, and then offer them $275. There’s a new reality in LP.
I think the bedrooms really hurt this place. It either has to go to someone that doesn’t want kids, someone who’s child is teenage or someone who is really shortsighted. The moment you have a baby here you must move. Who would put a baby in the basement down two floors from you? I wouldn’t even put a 6 y/o down there.
Otherwise it is nice inside and while the facade isn’t pretty, I don’t mind it. I just can’t go for a 3 story 1 bedroom+den/guest room.
In a great location, smack dab in middle of GZ.
The bedrooms really are what hurt this place. The second bedroom in the basement is small, and dark. The upstairs bedroom is nice, but the bathroom is small, weirdly shaped, and pretty outdated, in my opinion. Having the parking spot in the back is a plus. Also, the $225k in assessments per month is ridiculous, since it’s only 2 people in the association and there is NOTHING included. (not even heat/water).
I’d say $299K is what it will sell for.
I’m going to create a new word that describes this place perfectly
“fugnificent”
“Also, the $225k in assessments per month is ridiculous,”
yeah $225,000 a month is a bit steep!
Sonies:
There is some evidence that the word “fugnificent” already exists, and it may not mean what you intend it to.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fugnificent
I can see this place as being bought buy a person that rents out the basement part to his/her friend. Young folks in LP live in all sorts of compromising abodes.
Also $225 isn’t high, yes it’ll be higher than a 3 flat becuase you have only 2 people!. Theyr’e probably paying $200/month just to have someone clean the common areas or landscape every other week.
Ugly facade. Location is not my cup of tea.
not that the 225 assessment is a big deal here (other than to a couple of folks) but it says in the listing that it includes water & common insurance. The insurance on the building (which probably needs to be done collectively) is probably accounts for at least 80% of the 225). Also, if you have any issue regarding the assessments or what they are going for, as a buyer here you will have 1 out of the 2 votes!!
damn yeah I should have checked urban dictionary first, thats not what I meant
“Theyr’e probably paying $200/month just to have someone clean the common areas or landscape every other week.”
1. What common areas?
2. *This* is why communal living sux. $200/month for “landscaping” a 10×40 patch of shrubs and sweeping the porch? GTFO!
3. If their water isn’t metered, it’s prolly $600/year between the two units.
4. That porch prolly cost $10k when it was replaced sometime recently–the assessment might be mainly about reserving for porch + roof + paint + tree-trimming.
I doubt they’re setting much aside at all from those assessments. Mayble $20 per unit or so each month. Insurance, and then water and trash, will eat up the rest pretty quick.
” The insurance on the building (which probably needs to be done collectively) is probably accounts for at least 80% of the 225). ”
.8*225 = 180 * 12 = 2160 * 20 = 4320.
Is condo structure insurance *really* over 4 times more expensive than gold-plated homeowner *full* (ie, not just structure + liability) coverage?
I pay about $1k/year for all my HO coverage, with structure replacement coverage similar-ish to what this would be.
“Insurance, and then water and trash, will eat up the rest pretty quick.”
1. Insurance–Seriously? On a two-unit building? For just structure + liability?
2. Water ain’t more than ~$50/month. If they got meters installed, should drop to ~$10/month/unit.
3. 2-unit building = City Trash collection.
I think this place would have sold by now if the agent had Zarkosky’d is up a bit and put:
“GET READY FOR YOUR ANTICPATION TO SURGE INTO THE GREEN ZONE”
It’s a sufficiently cool word that I figured it had to be out there already. I assumed fro the start you intended a portmanteau of “fugly” (already one of those) and “magnificent(ly).”
I just looked at the pic again and noticed that there are two separate entances. Anyway, depending on the owners I wouldn’t be surprised if they had somone come by to do some light landscaping. Leaves sweeping….
Anyway, the bulk of the assesment goes for insurance and that $4k seems close. It’ll be a commerical policy….with all the benefits of paying more!
The exterior of this place makes me feel bad about life.
“It’ll be a commerical policy”
Why? It’s two units. There’s no D&O coverage, just structure and liability.
Thanks for the comments about the bedrooms. I’d have considered this for my situation, without thinking about the limited resale appeal. I still might, but the number changes.
“I think the bedrooms really hurt this place. It either has to go to someone that doesn’t want kids, someone who’s child is teenage or someone who is really shortsighted. The moment you have a baby here you must move. Who would put a baby in the basement down two floors from you? I wouldn’t even put a 6 y/o down there.”
There are certainly more creative sleeping arrangements available for very young kids.
Single person’s retreat? This is an odd duck. Interior finishes, aside from granite countertops, look cheap. Look at that rough stucco face on fireplace surround, bathroom fixtures, dumpy basement “bedroom”, etc. Nobody’s used term “knife-catcher” in a while – I think this place qualifies at anything over $180,000 as a one-bedroom suspect stucco older frame carriage house.
architect, I thought the rooms looked beautiful. Can you be more specific in your analysis of the rooms?
What looks dumpy about the basement? It looks brand new.
I can’t notice any details about bathroom fixtures, as they’re so small. Do you mean the faucets?
The living room looks right out of a magazine spread!
The only thing I do see is the fireplace stucco looks dated.
Amy,
Can you be more specific why no-one has “snapped this up” yet?
Bob, can you even read? I didn’t say anything about the price or why it hasn’t sold. I was asking about why he thinks the interior looks so bad to him. That’s all. This site is rife with illiterate renters with no money.
Amy–the reason I am accumulating money so fast is my housing costs are relatively low vs. yours. To own a comparable unit would cost me at least 20% more.
I’m so poor I’m laughing all the way to the bank! 😀
For me to rent something to accomodate my family of six would bankrupt me.
Nonsense. There are plenty of families who have crammed themselves into three bedroom flats; or at worst you could move to some exurb and get a large house very cheap. Your lifestyle would change, of course, and your commute might grow, and the location/luxuries may be less than desirable, but saying that rent would bankrupt you is quite absurd.
“Vlajos on October 7th, 2011 at 7:21 am
For me to rent something to accomodate my family of six would bankrupt me.”
“To own a comparable unit would cost me at least 20% more.”
And mean you’re at least 90% stupider. Who in Chicago *buys* a studio apartment as a primary residence?
Nonsense. There are plenty of families who have crammed themselves into three bedroom flats; or at worst you could move to some exurb and get a large house very cheap. Your lifestyle would change, of course, and your commute might grow, and the location/luxuries may be less than desirable, but saying that rent would bankrupt you is quite absurd.
It would bankrupt me in my situation. Of course I could move to fn Englewood and buy a $25K house. I don’t think my wife would be too happy. You are a moron.
“It would bankrupt me in my situation.”
Huh? Your income relies on living in an owned property in the City? Does not compute.