Love Fireplaces? This Victorian Italianate Has Five: 2000 N. Orleans in East Lincoln Park
This 4-bedroom Victorian Italianate row house at 2000 N. Orleans in Lincoln Park came on the market in August 2012.
Built in 1876 on a smaller than standard Chicago lot of 25×77, it still manages to pack a lot of amenities into the space.
It has a front deck, a private rooftop deck, and a two car garage.
The house has many of its vintage features including 13 foot ceilings and crown and ceiling moldings.
There is a 2-story entry foyer and for fireplace lovers- you would have your choice of FIVE fireplaces, with some of them seemingly wood burning.
The kitchen is described as a “chef’s kitchen” with white cabinets and a stainless steel stove.
3 of the 4 bedrooms are on the second floor.
There is a partially finished basement although one of the bedrooms is also in the lower level.
The house has central air.
It’s been reduced $300,000 over the last year and is now listed at $1.695 million.
It is on the corner of Armitage and Orleans within a stones throw of Lincoln Park.
With everything else selling quickly, why isn’t this vintage row house?
Joanne Nemerovski at Prudential Rubloff has the listing. See the pictures here.
2000 N. Orleans: 4 bedrooms, 3.5 baths, no square footage listed, 2 car garage
- Sold in December 1991 for $380,000
- Originally listed in August 2012 for $1.995 million
- Reduced several times
- Currently listed at $1.695 million
- Taxes of $13,560
- Central Air
- 5 fireplaces
- Bedroom #1: 19×14 (second floor)
- Bedroom #2: 13×12 (second floor)
- Bedroom #3: 12×12 (second floor)
- Bedroom #4: 11×11 (lower level)
Wish there was a floor plan
Anon sq ft est please
Has the unicorn c been expanded to 4 bedroom?
Great old house with beautiful vintage details amazingly intact, even the ornate plasterwork in the ceiling. Nice upgrades.
Ditto what Laura said. Striking difference between Sabrina’s photo and the rubloff first and second photos. Also the staging is interesting: downstairs is practically void of furniture yet upstairs still looks lived in.
Ghost or ghosts maybe?
You think I’m kidding. Place has been around a long time and looking at some of those pics gave me the creeps.
One condo we looked at recently that you all have chattered about in the past (444 W. Belmont) sure was a prime candidate. That place had a regular elevator and a service elevator off the kitchen that went down to the huge storage/mechanicals area. I got the creeps when I was there so I decided to do a little sleuthing via the Trib’s archives. Found out that in the 50’s the maintenance guy was found hung in that storage area! I didn’t bother checking this place’s history out and I love old buildings — but many come complete with a sordid and tarnished past. BTW, that did it for me (never pushed to buy the place available, concerned we’d hear chains rattling and voices moaning in that service elevator area for years to come. Oh yeah, high HOA’s too and no parking (ha ha).
Could be some bad vibes coming from inside those walls. Bet if they call the local priest they could exorcise some demons and get the offers rolling in.
Boo!
Anyone of retirement age who owns their residence can simply stay put and enjoy retirement. If you need to downsize, just cash out your massive 100% equity you’ve built up over 30 years. Roll a small part of it into a cozy 1BR, and pay your monthly maintenance. Renters? They will need to leave and go to some low income retirement trailer park community in the South.”
I’ve been saying this for years. HOME OWNERSHIP is the only true path to being able to retire in New York City.
And don’t let these financial academics who pooh-pooh real estate as an “investment”; perhaps it won’t outpace stocks or other investment vehicles. But it’s not SUPPOSED to; at the end of the day, once you reach retirement age, it’s not about whether a stock portfolio would be more valuable than your paid-off apartment. it doesn’t matter that the apartment may not be worth as much as a stock portfolio. Retirement isn’t like a game of Monopoly where at the end of the game everyone cashes everything in; in retirement, you’ll be LIVING IN that real estate investment. You cannot do the same thing with a stock portfolio.
Put another way, let’s say Patrice makes $100K/year. Her budget is $2500/month for housing. Her take-home pay is $4500 a month. After her bills and incidentals are paid, she has $500/month to invest in her retirement.
She has the choice of buying a modest $300,000 one-bedroom non-doorman walkup in a not-so-“prime” part of the city that will cost her $2500/month ($1700/fixed-rate mortgage and $800/month in maintenance). Or she can just pay $2500/month for a chic little studio in the East Village.
Option A: Buying. Over the course of 30 years Patrice enjoys the stability of never having to worry about rent hikes or being forced to move when landlords change. Her mortgage payment never changes, but of course, over the course of 30 years, her maintenance will have gone up incrementally. Given that it’s a walk-up, there will be no outsized maintenance increases or assessments on elevator repairs or replacement. There’s no doorman or other building staff except a super, so labor charges are pretty much fixed. For buildings like that, maintenance increases are quite modest … sometimes less than one percent one year, maybe as much as seven percent in another (to buy a new roof and windows, for instance). In the end, over 30 years, let’s say her maintenance increases average 4% each year. By the year 2042, she’ll be paying $1700/month in mortgage, and most likely close to $1700 in maintenance. Hopefully, of course, her career has grown over this time, or at the very least, she’s been getting cost-of-living raises to afford that $3400/month.
But now she’s nearing retirement and won’t be able to pay $3400/month. No fears! Guess what? Next year she pays off the mortgage, and her monthly housing nut will drop to $1700/month — well within her retirement income range.
(We won’t even go into the obvious enormous tax savings she’s been enjoying over the past 30 years, or her ability to have put that extra $500/month towards paying off her mortgage early.)
Now let’s look at Option B: Renting. By 2015, Patrice’s cute little $2500/month East Village studio is already unaffordable; the rent has shot up to $2800. No worries, she can stay … she’ll just use $300 of her $500 in “investing” money to cover the difference. But that only works until 2017, when the rent shoots up to $3200. Now she must move. Let’s hope she’s been saving, because she now has to come up with first month/last month/security deposit PLUS a couple grand for the movers. That’s close to $10,000. THIS year. She moves to Greenpoint in another $2500 unit. THAT lasts for only a few years until it becomes unaffordable. Now she moves again. For another $10,000. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. For the next 20 years.
Even if she’s managed to bounce around from apartment to apartment, finding something new in her price range each time, she’s living like a gypsy and paying tens of thousands of dollars every few years for movers and real estate agents.
Now it’s 2042, and market rent for a decent one-bedroom in the city has skyrocketed to $6000/month. Of course, it’s 30 years later and everyone’s incomes have also gone up with inflation, so she’s now making $200,000/year (which sounds like a lot, but is really the same $100,000 in today’s dollars, just like $100,000 today is like what $50,000 was like back in the ’80s). She’s still paying close to half of her income in rent.
Unfortunately, in 2043, her housing expenses will not drop to $1700. Not in this universe — not in a million years. She has nothing to show for those hundreds of thousands of dollars she’s been pumping into landlords’ pockets over the past decades, except a shoebox full of rent receipts. She’s ready to retire, but no way can she continue to pay $6000/month in rent. She has no choice but to leave New York City and move in with her sister in Cleveland, in an attic bedroom.
Oh, but Patrice has been “investing” in her retirement all along! Well good for her! Unfortunately, that $500/month is really just a drop in the bucket. Even if she’s been upwardly adjusting that amount to coincide with her annual pay increases, it’s still the equivalent of only about half a week’s net pay.
But here’s the dirty little secret the Wall Street financial planners won’t tell you: For a middle-class earner (and Patrice is actually UPPER middle class), it’s mathematically impossible to “save” and “invest” enough to adequately replace the income you will be retiring from.
Option A allows Patrice to live in New York City on only $1700/month. If she wanted to remain in New York City and RENT instead, Patrice’s investments would have to be able to pay her back — until the end of her life — $4300/month — in order to cover her $6000/month rent. Unfortunately, she’d need a nest egg of more than $2 million (in today’s dollars mind you — by 2043 the required nest egg would be more like $4 million). That figure is mathematically impossible for someone in her income bracket to achieve.
So what’s Patrice the Owner’s apartment actually WORTH in 2043? WHO THE HELL CARES? She’s not selling it! She’s LIVING in it!
What’s Patrice the Renter’s nest egg look like? Not nearly enough to enable her to retire in New York City (or frighteningly enough, most other major cities at this point).
THAT is truly the secret to being able to retire comfortably: owning your home free and clear so you’re not paying market rents in your retirement!
Looks like a nice place but it’s small and cramped looking, which is asking a lot of a $1M+ property. Somebody is trying to make a HUGE profit selling this place. This your place Jay?
Chichow–don’t see the interior space per floor being over ~1350 per floor, and probably a bit less. If someone said 4000 (inc basement, of course), I wouldn’t be too worked up (still think a little generous) but anything over that is fantasy.
That 4000 sq feet has to include the roof and the patio in the yard too.
Seems like they way over-asked back before the market picked up. $1.7 still seems just a tad steep, especially if Armitage is the source of any noise/reduced privacy. Otherwise, it’s pretty awesome.
Wierd, shows up as 336 W. Armitage on redfin… http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/336-W-Armitage-Ave-60614/home/13348143
If Redfin is mapping this right, which agrees with Sabrina’s description but not with the realtor’s listed directions on how to get to the place, it should have an awesome view out the front windows of the little ugly coach house on the alley that we have chattered about before.
“If Redfin is mapping this right, which agrees with Sabrina’s description but not with the realtor’s listed directions on how to get to the place”
IN what way are the realtor’s directions wrong? That *is* how you would drive to get to the garage.
btw, no way (barring a dugout garage with a lift–doubtful) there is 2-car garage parking there. 2 car parking, yes–one in the garage, one in front of the curbcut on Orleans.
Also, taking a second look, think that it’s max 1250 per floor, and the non-fantasy max SF is ~3700.
‘This your place Jay?’
No HD, not my place. But if I ever do decide to sell, I’ll give you first rights bud.
Nice enough place, fantastic original details, but in the wrong location: Park West immediately to the east, on busy Armitage, the other houses that make up this row are mostly commercial (Geja’s, some wine bar that used to be a Ben & Gerrys, tanning place, etc), loud sports bar across across the street – there’s a reason for the high retaining wall in the front yard. The first floor of this place is being used as an art gallery, I’m guessing it’s zoned accordingly hence the commercial possibilities/price, and I think the owner lives upstairs. Garage: two cars… if they’re both Smart Cars parked an inch apart and you feel comfortable climbing out the trunk. Brick: painted white, and if cleaning/retuckpointing it were only as simple as Joanne’s bait and switch computer skills, you’d save yourself a bundle on that project.
This place on Webster is similar, but nicer, in a better location, and under contract with a listing price of $1.375: http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/900-W-Webster-Ave-60614/home/13353911
Love the interior with those high ceilings and lots of light, and also the outdoor space looks good. I think it might be held back by its location. Too close to a busy intersection. May need to be priced lower (but not much lower).
I’d take the Webster place posted by Madeline over this in a heartbeat. Much better location. Of course I’d get fat living there, because it’s too close to the Athenian Room.
“This place on Webster is … in a better location”
That’s not even Lincoln Park, Madeline. And in Mayer attendance area too. May as well move to Napertucky.
“That’s not even Lincoln Park”
If you’re not in LP, then you might as well be in Long Grove.
“IN what way are the realtor’s directions wrong? That *is* how you would drive to get to the garage.”
When you go look at a listing, do you park in the garage or in front of the house? I’ve always parked in front….
“When you go look at a listing, do you park in the garage or in front of the house? I’ve always parked in front….”
I’ve parked in driveways at open houses before in the city.
If given a choice between a free spot and a metered spot, do you always choose the metered spot? If so, why?
That’s not even Lincoln Park, Madeline. And in Mayer attendance area too. May as well move to Napertucky.
Well, sure, it’s not ELP. Or not the “good” part of ELP. I mean, it’s not even east of Halsted, let alone east of Clark. Plus it’s on the north side of Webster and everybody knows that the “real” ELP is east of Clark, south of Webster and North of Dickens. There are fewer than 10 addresses that actually qualify as the “real” ELP. Or something.
“Well, sure, it’s not ELP. ”
ON a more serious note about that place: WFT is “French Victorian”? That’d be “Second Empire” or “Third Republic”, but I guess that not enough people know what that is (and anyone who does would say “not quite right” about that place), so mush two vaguely related, yet still contradictory, words together, and make it sound fancy. Classy decision there.
This is the house my mom’s friend Colette grew up in. She’s 79yo now.