Live In One and Rent Out the Other: 1453 W. Foster in Andersonville
This 2-flat at 1453 W. Foster in Andersonville has many of its vintage features in tact, including woodwork and built-ins in the dining room.
The building has a 2-car garage and laundry in the lower level.
Each unit has its own furnace. There is no central air, just window units.
The listing says it also has a 1-bedroom garden apartment that is currently rented but the legality of the unit is “not represented by agent or seller”.
Here are the rents for each of the units:
- Garden apartment: 1 bedroom, 1 bath, $625 a month
- First Floor unit: 3 bedrooms, 1 bath, with one parking space, $1400 a month (currently vacant)
- Second Floor unit: 3 bedrooms, 1 bath, with one parking space, $1275 a month
The property is near the shops and dining of Andersonville.
Is this a good starter property for a future land baron?
Mario Greco at Prudential Rubloff has the listing. See more pictures and a virtual tour here.
1453 W. Foster: 2 flat, 6 bedrooms, 3 baths, 2 car garage
- Sold in August 2002 for $415,000
- Originally listed in January 2009 for $574,000
- Reduced several times
- Lis pendens foreclosure filed in September 2009
- Currently listed for $449,000
- Taxes of $8287
- No central air
- Individual furnaces
- Wood burning fireplace
Mario Greco = sold
Off-topic:
This was on Apt Therapy: http://www.cf-cabo.com/
Chatters/Haters/etc, what’s a good price for this?
at this price it barely cash flows, and if you need to put any real investment into it, you would go into the red pretty quick.
“Off-topic:
This was on Apt Therapy: http://www.cf-cabo.com/
Chatters/Haters/etc, what’s a good price for this?”
Looks like a low 7 figure property.
“at this price it barely cash flows, and if you need to put any real investment into it, you would go into the red pretty quick.”
You mean “investment” like paying fines/”gratuities” for the illegal 3d unit?
It’s a decent price if you intended to live in the first + basement, but you’d almost have to add a second bath right away (or is there one in the basement not shown on the FP?), and rent the 2d floor–the rent on the 2d covers ~50% of your mortgage (ex. taxes, which would go down with HO exempt).
I don’t like it on Foster–just busy enough to be undesireable to me.
Living on Foster would suck… noisy and busy. Back in the day we almost rented an apartment a few doors down. Not very pleasant imho. A’ville is best hood in the city though…very underrated.
It’s been on the market 474 days now. Started at $575K.
It’s on a 32.5×125 lot and zoned RT-4 which means if someone could get the money/financing to tear it down, 4 units could be built on the lot. Additionally, the foreclosure lis pendens is being removed as it was a result of (believe it or not) automatic payments being made by the seller that were mistakenly not being applied to his loan. Seller didn’t notice b/c he doesn’t get paper mortgage statements but he did know that the money was being taken out of his account. Crazy but true…
looks much more reasonably priced than most properties at this level.
“Off-topic:
This was on Apt Therapy: http://www.cf-cabo.com/
Chatters/Haters/etc, what’s a good price for this?”
If you have to ask, you can’t afford it… that would be a pretty awesome place to retire to!
maybe he’s selling time shares
might not be bad if as the owner you don’t mind living in the basement.
Cabo? No way in hell am I buying property in a 3rd world country. Americans can’t even own legal title to property in MX, they have to own it through a bank, which I guess is the same thing…until it isn’t. no way jose. put that property north of the border in San Diego and it’s easily a multi-million dollar property.
“#Sonies on December 4th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
“Off-topic:
This was on Apt Therapy: http://www.cf-cabo.com/
Chatters/Haters/etc, what’s a good price for this?”
If you have to ask, you can’t afford it… that would be a pretty awesome place to retire to!”
My best friend has a mexican citizenship, i’d have him buy it 🙂
Cabo is freaking awesome! Its no 3rd world country there my friend! You should take a vacation there sometime in February.
I don’t do 3rd world countries anymore. I don’t care if it’s a nicer part of a 3rd world country, I won’t set foot into foreign jurisdictions unless it’s 1st world. Maybe my fear is a bit irrational, I realize that, but I don’t care.
You must live quite the exciting life!
Wow. According to this list of most overpriced housing markets Chicago is top 5.
http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/03/cities-overpriced-sales-lifestyle-real-estate-miami-florida-homes_chart.html
Thought it might interest the crowd here.
“According to this list of most overpriced housing markets Chicago is top 5.”
Weird data set. And weird to do it based solely on rank, without any scale w/in the ranking (ie, it’s possible that the absolute diff b/t rank 1 and rank 5 is greater than the diff b/t 5 and 40) and using medians has its issues, as we’ve hassed over muchly here.
PS: Also, it’s only measuring how overpriced was the initial asking price for places that actually went under contract during the relevant time period. And I think we know that many, many places here have been seriously overpriced at initial list.
CK,
That is interesting but I would really want to see is how many square feet a person can buy with their salary. In this city it’s ridiculous (I know NY, SF, LA, Boston are worse but those places are insane).
They kind of have a strange measure. 3 out of 4 of the metrics reflect the degree to which sellers are smoking dope – which is what I think they are trying to get at. The 4th measure is where are prices going.
“The 4th measure is where are prices going.”
And on that scale, Chicago is 11th best.
And the other three all can be manipulated by local MLS practice regarding de- and re-listing.
Uh, because I won’t go to Cabo, Cancun or Kingston? I’ve been on four continents and seen enough to know that I don’t want to go back.
“Sonies on December 4th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
You must live quite the exciting life!”
Not a bad looking place for an owner-occupied situation. These 2 flat/2+garden’s only really make sense in that situation. And only if you are going to live there for a while. My wife and I are going this route. 3 flat Greystone (inc legal ‘garden’ unit). We have the top fl. 3bed/1 bath+ den. Garden + 1st floor cover ~60% of PITI or 80% of PI. Upstairs is plenty of room for us & 2 smaller kids. Been there 1.5 year, another 4-6 years and move down stairs and duplex into the garden (not the biggest fan of duplex downs but atleast my lower level is less than 50% below grade). Another 10 years there and then convert to SFH. By then they’ll be teens and I’ll be begging for more space between us.
Better plan than all my friends with 900sqft 2/2s that barely hold 2 adults. There all wishing to be able to sell in a year or 2 and run to the burbs. People used to buy ‘homes’ that they would live in because they were ‘homes’. Now they buy ‘units’ as investments for 2-3 years.
HD said: I don’t do 3rd world countries anymore. I don’t care if it’s a nicer part of a 3rd world country, I won’t set foot into foreign jurisdictions unless it’s 1st world. Maybe my fear is a bit irrational, I realize that, but I don’t care.
HD, the path the US is heading, in a couple years you might be living in one…
I think it is a little shady that the realtor mentions the income on an illegal basement unit and the income ($1400) on a vacant unit. Esp. because it is $125 more than the most likely identical or larger second floor unit.
This place is in ok condition, not bad enough to tear down, but it would cost a lot to make it really nice.
It is on a very busy street with a bus route, too. I lived a block East on Foster years ago and the Foster bus would literally shake our apartment.
Don’t think this is such a good deal…..
How is it shady to mention the rent that the seller received this year before the lease expired when it clearly says the unit is V-A-C-A-N-T? And as for the garden unit – not representing its legality and it actually being illegal are 2 different things. These garden units are all over the city if you haven’t noticed. I’m pretty sure most real buyers will actually find the rental figures helpful as an indicator of market rent and may help them decide if the building makes sense for them.
MG-if the basement were legal, you can bet the ad would call this a three flat. It’s not that much of a mystery. Sure, Chicago doesn’t prosecute landlords for illegal basement units, but I think it is wrong for the lister to put it in the factual part of the listing. What do other realtors think?
what is the truth compared to 6%
Again – and I’m not trying to pick a fight (I can count on westloopelo for those) – how is it wrong or in anyway misleading to include the garden unit, the rent it generates and clearly state that it may or may not be a legal unit?
its false advertising.
you can mention (verbally) it b/c its a gray area but writing it into the listing gives it legitimacy (what dahliachi said), which is what you want but can mislead many buyers who are not familiar with real-estate/laws
deception similar to listing parking as separate when it isn’t deeded separately.
i saw a place with a listed 3rd bathroom but it didn’t work (no water or usable toilet) so how is a bathroom? its like-raw space, it could be reno’d into an office/closet from that state as much as a bathroom.
would you say the Wrigley guy’s raw space as a 20 room 4 bath and 5 bedroom space? i could write that it has ‘income potential’ but thats not right, either.
certainly later, it puts the buyer in an awkward position, when they has already counted their chickens b4 they purchased, and now have a mess on their hands, trying to make it legal.
The bathroom situation is not the same at all. This is an actual unit that generates income and is disclosed as being of undetermined legality. Neither the seller nor I know if it is legal – hence the language. Not mentioning the garden at all is doing a disservice to the seller and not giving the full picture.
You don’t know if it is legal because you don’t want to know.
If you looked into its legality you would almost certainly determine that it is not. Hence you cover your butt with the “Neither seller nor agent…” clause which is commonly understood to indicate a unit which is not legal.
If it is “commonly understood to indicate a unit which is not legal,” how are you confused? Legal or not, it is a unit that is rented and generates income.
If it has two legit exits and separate gas/electric then its probably legit.
And it does – seller just doesn’t have anything in writing from the city confirming the legality in writing.
The cook county assessor doesn’t know the unit is there:
http://www.cookcountyassessor.com/Property_Search/Property_Details.aspx?pin=14083010160000
Taxes would most likely have been higher all those years…..
Oh please…
it is most certainly illegal, and I’ll bet a very cursory examination of the place would show that to be the case.
If you’d like, maybe we should send a city inspector over to clarify it for the seller???!
MG,
I think it is fine for you to mention that there is an income generating unit of unknown legality in your agent’s remarks.I realize they are very common in Chicago. Likewise it is fine to say that the first floor WAS generating $1400 in the PAST in your remarks.
Where you cross the line for me is where you put it in the facts and figures part of the listing. You even have the $1400 security deposit listed. Is that waiting for me if I buy the building? If not, why mention it?
There are real potential implications for the buyer. Will the mortgage broker count extra-legal income?
The listing sheet says the unit is vacant. How would a mortgage broker be confused? There is no way to indicate in the rental amount field that this is previous income but the field for lease expiration date says “vacant.” Take a look at other 2-4unit listings and you’ll see that this is how this situation is dealt with.
“How would a mortgage broker be confused?”
Dude, you’ve seen some of the properties brokers made loans on. It’s entirely possible for a broker to be confused by anything without his name and a dollar sign on it.
ethics or dollars that is the question?
just remember a brother has got to eat.
“Take a look at other 2-4unit listings and you’ll see that this is how this situation is dealt with”
also remember it takes one person to change things just because its the way “it is” doesn’t mean its correct.
I agree that change is incremental but flouting convention to the detriment of my seller is not the way to go. If the MLS could get their collective heads out of their rears and change fields to they are helpful to both buyers and sellers, I’ll be the first one to make the change. Just as an example, I’ve been fighting for 6 years to have them add a field for RENTAL PARKING and covered outdoor parking (they now have “g” for garage and “s” for outdoor space only) so buyers and their agents can easily search for (or exclude) these types of parking. Not sure why adding a “c” for carport and “r” for rental is so difficult for them but it apparently is.
Further to this, MLS’ response always is “we have descriptive fields that cover this issue” and mine back is “they are not REQUIRED fields and agents often leave these fields blank.” Falls on deaf ears but if they make these fields required (an even easier change), it would solve the problem – but again, too difficult for them apparently…
I dont have an knowledge of how bad the MLS is but have heard many complain of inconsistencies and dragging feet. It must suck for realtors trying help their client by getting out as much information as possible but cannot do so. I always thought the MLS set standards and enforced them, but after reading here at CC i see that i am wrong and MLS seems like a joke and a hassle.
IMO which is only my opinion anything below grade should be storage, mechanicals and laundry room anything else is insane.
I dont think a “garden apt” should be listed but can be mentioned during a showing or phone call. But i see where you would be doing a disservice to your client if you didnt list it
The MLS only enforces silly things like fining us (up to $2500 – not a misprint) if we share our password with our assistant(s) b/c the MLS can’t get it into their vacuous collective crania that a) it’s not 1974 anymore and the way real estate is sold has changed and 2) the agent isn’t sitting at a computer all day making changes or looking things up in the MLS for clients, etc. Seriously…
MLS is a stupid union style cartel, I don’t blame realtors for hating it, but they can’t do much business without it.
to go off of dahliachi’s comment, I have seen listing agents put ‘none’ if the apartment was vacant for sec. deposit and rent fields.
If the 3 unit isn’t “legal” the banks are going to treat it as a 2 flat. However, this isn’t entirely bad as the 2 units are easier to finance than 3 or 4 unit buildings. Yet, the potential owner will probably continue to collect the third unit rent so they get to have their cake and eat it too.
The only reason this would be problematic is if that 3rd unit’s income is needed to qualify for the mortgage. Most of the buyers I have seen lately of multi-units usually qualify without the market rent though.
To Russ’ point, putting the market rent in the rent field while clearly calling it VACANT can actually help the buyer figure out the numbers and whether the building makes sense to pursue. It cuts down on useless showings from “investors” who don’t know their a– from a hole in the ground when it comes to income/expense etc. Putting NONE in the rent field for a vacant unit really helps nobody.
And if you guys think buyers or their agents actually ask questions before scheduling showings, or listen to us when we tell them “it needs work” or “it’s right next to the El” (for example) and/or take the time to actually parse listings before scheduling 15-property marathons in which 13 were a waste of a phone call that could have been avoided by asking or listening, you probably also think Tiger was really at the driving range honing his swing (ahem) when he showed up late for dinner. 🙂
It took almost a week for the first tiger joke, i am surprised by you crib chatterersersersers.
To hop on MG’s last rant,
We have to show a ton of property to people that cannot afford it nor would even have wanted it if they knew it was “this” or “that” prior to the showing. They walk right in and say things like “oh, I have to have a deck off the kitchen” etc and then continue to pick the place apart even though they don’t even want it.
We have to get showings for our buyer. I don’t believe in deceptive listings nor is this listing above listed as a 3-flat (it’s a 2-flat as listed), but we can’t differentiate on the MLS for many things. So, we list information in the remarks.
Rental parking is the perfect example… if my client rents parking or if there is parking readily availble for rent next door, I will put parking in the listing and explain what it is clearly. All agents or buyers have to do is read the listing or ask us before showing. If we leave parking off the MLS listing because its rental, then it makes it harder for buyers to look for this option too. It may make more sense for someone to buy a place with the possibility of rental parking than look for properties with parking only… especially in a neighborhood like East Lakeview.
For example, way back I bought a place in a secondary (to me) neighborhood because we needed parking for my wife. I hd blinders on… “must have parking”. Had my agent at the time even mentioned the rental option in a better neighborhood, or, had we searched props with rental options we could have bought in more desirable location and been happier.
In the case of this two flat, a buyer knows there is an actual apartment in the basement that someone actually rented, legal or not prior to showing up.
currently off the market-wonder what happens next…..
1449 W Foster, a similar two flat in similar condition just sold quickly at 240k.