Get a 3-Bedroom Townhouse for Under $700,000 in Roscoe Village: 2044 W. Roscoe
This 3-bedroom townhouse at 2044 W. Roscoe in Roscoe Village came on the market in January 2021.
Built in 1893, this building was converted into 6 townhouses in 1999.
It has heated garage parking and there are multiple decks.
This townhouse has a first floor living area that is 22 feet wide with a wall of windows, exposed brick and 10 foot ceilings.
There’s a first floor fireplace that has a sitting area in front of it.
The kitchen has white cabinets which the listing says are “newly refinished”, along with stainless steel appliances, quarter countertops and a 6 foot island with seating which is open to the dining room.
There are oak hardwood floors throughout the first floor and designer lighting.
The first floor has a half bath.
All three bedrooms are on the second floor along with the two full baths.
The primary bedroom is en suite and has a walk-in-closet.
There’s a small patio area off one of the secondary bedrooms which leads to stairs, which are outside, up to the rooftop deck on the third floor.
The townhouse has central air, a washer/dryer and heated garage parking spaces for 2 cars are included.
This building is surrounded by the shops and restaurants of Roscoe Village.
With Roscoe Village single family home prices usually well over $1 million, is this an affordable single family home alternative?
Mathew Boemmel at Compass has the listing. See the pictures and floor plan here.
Unit #3S: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, 2100 square feet, townhouse
- Sold in July 2005 for $582,000
- Sold in May 2012 for $515,000
- Listed in January 2021 for $679,990
- Currently still listed at $679,990
- Assessments of $265 a month (includes cable, exterior maintenance and snow removal)
- Taxes of $13,123
- Central Air
- Heated garage parking for 2 cars included
- 1 fireplace
- Bedroom #1: 22×17 (second floor)
- Bedroom #2: 12×11 (second floor)
- Bedroom #3: 11×10 (second floor)
- Living room: 24×11 (main floor)
- Dining room: 18×11 (main floor)
- Kitchen: 17×11 (main floor)
- Sitting room: 14×11 (main floor)
- Walk-in-closet: 7×6 (second floor)
- Foyer: 20×7 (main floor)
- Deck: 28×22 (third floor)
That’s a duplex up condo. I like it more than most duplex ups in 3/4 unit buildings, but it ain’t a townhouse.
I’d want to invest the $100k in a pergola, etc, for the roof top–wonder if there are any restrictions/if the roof was built with than much weight in mind.
“Built in 1893”
Didn’t know they put CMUs on top of brick walls in 1893–see the featured pic. Pretty sure this was a single story building before the ’99 addition.
There’s a new 2-unit building down the street, with a duplex up and a duplex down–feels spendy to me, which is probably why we don’t see more of them:
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/2254-W-Roscoe-St-60618/unit-2/home/172653254
Does that “HOT HOME” tag on Redfin mildly annoy anybody else? I can’t put my finger on why it bugs me, but it does. Just a little.
“Does that “HOT HOME” tag on Redfin mildly annoy anybody else?”
Every time. As well as the claims stating “This home is expected to sell x% quicker than others in the area”, which are more often than not inaccurate.
I’m sold. I’m buying into the realtor’s description too. I see no neatives to this place, except lack of storage. Roscoe isn’t a bus route so the location is cool too. But not a fan of Man-Jo-Vins, even in the old location.
“not a fan of Man-Jo-Vins”
You really like to emphasize that you don’t know WTF you’re talking about, don’t you?
Suppose someone living here would shop at the “new Aldi”, too!
There are some attractive features here. It’s filled with light thanks to the big windows, there’s a nice open, spacious feeling in some of the rooms, and a rooftop deck is nice. The location is also pretty good, if you like Roscoe Village (I do).
Some issues include the stairway taking up a good portion of an already small living room, and the fact that you’re living above retail but paying a lot for it. This could be a deal breaker for some, but I’m undecided.
It’s definitely a good choice if you really want to live in the neighborhood but can’t afford $1 million or more for an SFH. Problems are that it’s really not that big (bedrooms 2 and 3 are tiny – maybe OK for small kids, but tight for teens). There’s also nowhere to go to get away from anyone if you’re a family living here – no basement rec room/playroom.
But it might do if you can deal with that and are really dedicated to raising kids in the city. Or maybe for a couple with grown-up children.
“It’s definitely a good choice if you really want to live in the neighborhood but can’t afford $1 million or more for an SFH. Problems are that it’s really not that big (bedrooms 2 and 3 are tiny – maybe OK for small kids, but tight for teens). There’s also nowhere to go to get away from anyone if you’re a family living here – no basement rec room/playroom.”
Agreed, one of many condo units that seem to have been configured with a DINK couple, and only a DINK couple, in mind (huge master suite and then two afterthought rooms that are only useful as an office or guest room… I’m sure it will sell but will anyone ever want to live here more than 5 years? will anyone ever not lose money on this place?
I wish they would make it illegal to designate a space a bedroom if its the only deck access point
there’s some signs of water damage at the deck entrance door
Agree that this is for DINKs
The 2 car garage is nice but must be a waste as the majority of Chicagoans dont have a car
“The 2 car garage is nice but must be a waste as the majority of Chicagoans dont have a car”
The majority of Chicagoans don’t own real estate so therefore this entire site is a waste as is property within Chicago by that logic.
Or could it instead be that those more likely to own real estate in Chicago might also be more likely than the median Chicagoan to have use of a 2 car garage?
No that couldn’t be–your anecdata must be correct.