Foreclosure Alert: 3-Bedroom Vintage Under 2002 Price: 670 W. Irving Park Road
The Pattington is a 1904 vintage court yard building on Irving Park Road a block or so from the lake on the edge of Lakeview and Uptown.
This 1800 square foot 3-bedroom unit at 670 W. Irving Park Road just came on the market from the bank and is listed below the 2002 purchase price.
The listing says it has beamed ceilings, arched french doors and a wood burning fireplace.
The unit has no central air, but it does have in-unit washer/dryer. Parking is available to rent for $75 behind the building.
The assessment includes heat, water and cable.
Is this a deal for a large vintage unit in that location?
Henry Jones at Jones Realty has the listing. See more pictures here.
Unit #G8: 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1800 square feet
- Sold in January 2000 for $215,000
- Sold in May 2002 for $290,000
- Sold in May 2004 for $325,000
- Bank owned
- Currently listed for $239,900
- Assessments of $724 a month
- Taxes of $3812
- No central air- window units
- In-unit washer/dryer
- Parking available to rent
- Wood burning fireplace
- Bedroom #1: 13×16
- Bedroom #2: 10×11
- Bedroom #3: 8×9
Looks like the building was converted to condos without doing anything the the mechanicals or kitchen/baths. I wonder why the assessments are so high?
is 8 X 9 really a bedroom, come on I would guess the high assesment is for the on site building guy, and the fact it probably has an ancient boiler
not knowing the area or unknown issues involved, this seems reasonable (aka i can afford it). 3rd bedroom would be nice for an office, since it’s pretty small. Also looks like it would be an decently cheap “rehab” if you didn’t try to go all out.
Assessments suck but oh well. I’d say this goes for $275k, as $240k seems like it will attract a few bids
Yeah 270k seems about right if that square footage is accurate.
What? Those assesments are crazy.
I bet it goes for $235,000.00
These places are old rental dumps being sold as condos. I used to live very close to this and the property itself is semi-appealing, but its technically not Lakeview, but “buena park” or “uptown” (since its on the north side of Irving Park Rd.)
With those assessments I’d expect it to go for around what they’re asking, but then again there’s always some dummy out there that will probably see this and pay a lot more.
Holy crap – click on ‘more pics’ link above & take a look at the tub (pic #6).
Is the 50′ of white coax included? If so, sold!
8×9 bedroom? That is smaller than what I had in college.
i sure do hope thats hard water stains and not… essence de la tubgirl.
I’m going to stop calling ridiculous assessments “assessments”. Instead I am going to start calling them a “stupidity tax”.
And for the occasional large one I will call it a “special stupidity tax” in accordance with the updated nomenclature.
I could deal with the small 3rd as well but the association fees are ka-razy!
I live with a half finished Master Bath with walls missing and it is still better than that bathtub. Absolutely freakin gross!
Sonies, Every building of this age was rentals for some time before it became condos, unless it was built as a co-op. 🙂
I showed a place in this building a number of years ago and iirc they were doing some major work including new backstairs – the french doors in the dining room were an addition that was optional to the owner at the same time. Even with the high assessments this building might be a good deal depending on how much work was done – ie there arent a lot of pending capital expenses (i just dont have anyone looking for this so im not going to bother to call)
There are buyer who like these large rooms that you dont find in a lot of newer places. i bet it pushes up close to 280-290 maybe more
The third bedroom that is 8×9 was likely the maid’s room in the original floorplan (as apartments of this era had rooms for the maid and other help.)
CountDeMont, you are right that it was originally rentals. Most buildings of this era (up until the 1940s, actually) were built as rentals. The “condo” was virtually unheard of as an entity. Rich people simply rented.
The building marketed that it incorporated concrete as part of its fireproofing method which apparently had only been used in industrial or commercial purposes previously.
The garages for the building were built in 1910 or later.
It’s been a condominium building since 1977.
My partner and I looked at a unit in the Pattington a couple of years ago. It’s a beautiful property. There’s a huge footprint which I’d bet contributes to a fairly high property tax exclusive of individual units. I’m a bit bemused by the complaints about the tub…tubs are cheap, refinishing a tub is cheaper.
” Most buildings of this era (up until the 1940s, actually) were built as rentals. The “condo” was virtually unheard of as an entity.”
From Wikipedia (not verified by me): “The first condominium law passed in the United States was in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in 1958”
The Illinois Condo Act was first passed in 1963. So, “Condo” was not a valid ownership interest in Chicago until 1963, and was *completely* unheard of (colloquially speaking) before 1958.
“Sonies, Every building of this age was rentals for some time before it became condos, unless it was built as a co-op”
Yeah but this place was a rental building 2 years ago.
“Yeah but this place was a rental building 2 years ago.”
Um, Sonies, look at the sales history for the unit. There may have been (or still be) units for rent, but it was not a “rental building” two years ago.
http://tours4.vht.com/Viewer/PhotoGallery.aspx?ListingID=1126091&Style=API
http://tours3.vht.com/Viewer/PhotoGallery.aspx?ListingID=1043654&Style=STD
Looks much better furnished…
Those furnished/unfurnished pictures are night and day. Not just the furnishing but quality of the photos.
Assessments/Association Dues: $724… very high for a 4-story building with no elevators.
I used to own a condo in the Pattington and sold it in May 2007. It’s a beautiful building that has been lovingly maintained and has nice landscaping and a playground/grilling area for residents. The assessments are high because they include heat, which is the biggest item in the budget. There are modern furnances for the building – it does not rely on the old boiler, although the boiler is still there but not used. The assessments also include a reserve for an outstanding loan taken out i think about 10 years ago to pay for tuckpointing and a new roof/gutters. Every unit varies in updates. Some are fabulous, some haven’t been touched in years. Obviously, they would list higher if the assessments weren’t so high.
BTW: the taxes are kept relatively low for the building because the property is on the national historic register.