Live on Historic Alta Vista: 3805 N. Alta Vista in Lakeview
Alta Vista Terrace is a street in Lakeview where the rowhouses, which were built between 1900-1904, were constructed to resemble London rowhomes.
It’s a popular street for history and vintage buffs.
Last September, we chattered about 3842 N. Alta Vista. It was an estate sale and sold “as-is.”
3842 N. Alta Vista:
- Was listed in September 2007 for $565,000
- Sold in October 2007 for $555,000
Another unit is now on the market at 3805 N. Alta Vista. Here’s the listing:
DISCOVER THE MAGIC OF ONE OF CHICAGO’S MOST BEAUTIFUL STREETS. THE FIRST RESIDENTIAL LANDMARK DISTRICT IN CHICAGO ON THE NAT’L REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, THESE 40 HOMES ARE TRULY SPECIAL.
THIS IS THE ONLY HOME OFFERED FOR SALE THIS YEAR. BEAUTIFUL BUFF BRICK INTERIOR W/ SPECTACULAR FANLIGHT. HDWD FLRS THRUOUT. GFA HEAT & CENT A/C. FABULOUS ROOF DECK. INTERIOR LIVEABLE, BUT REQUIRES RENO…
The west side of the street has parking whereas the east side does not. This rowhouse appears to be on the east side.
@Properties has the listing (no interior pictures available.)
3805 N. Alta Vista: 3 bedrooms, 2 baths
- Sold in June 1997 for $63,000 (went into foreclosure)
- Sold in March 1998 for $353,000
- Currently listed for $585,000
- No parking
- Central air
- Taxes of $5,698
$63,000, eh?
A charming street. The east side is definitely more desirable due to less L noise.
If only we had more rows like these. It’s tough to price such a unique product, but they are asking for more than the recent comp while admitting that the interior needs renovation.
the listing agent remarks actually say “does not show pretty.”
and it’s off the market (CANC) until after Labor Day as of today.
SO CUTE! the fascade is gorgeous!
I used to live very near this street; I’ve spoken with a few owners. They’re all in agreement that the units are very small and cramped. But definitely beautiful from the outside.
That $63K *must* be some kind of typo…!
I wish I could see some interior pictures. I wonder how many square feet of living space/how many rooms are in these.
Since its in the Nat’l Registry, you’re stuck with several teeny-teeeny-tiny rooms (instead of fewer, but much larger ones)/bad plumbing/inadequate electrical infrastructure/rotting-/leaking-/crumbling-everthything – and some silly, mad, insane crazy red-tape bureaucratic nonsense to get all of the requisite approvals to change anything more than a lighbulb…
Not that I’d mind, but off the Registry, you could REALLY bring out your inner “Bob Vila’s This Old House”: scouring the city for salvaged fixtures (vintage doors and doorknobs, claw-foot batubs, intricate woodwork, etc. from the 1890’s-1920’s, this city’s got tons of the stuff available…!) – never mind that “Flip This House” slap-dash nonsense…
Heck, for $63K, I’d pay cash TODAY for something like this, never mind a mortgage….!
Even 263K, I’d buy it for cash (It’d empty out my accounts, the taxes would suck, etc, but one snapshot and I’m practically in lust…!)
Ah, well. Back to cookie-cutter white-box McCondos…..
YoChicago has a couple of larger, slightly more-detailed photos of both houses in neighborhood context:
3842 N. Alta Vista:
http://flickr.com/photos/yochicago1/253817728/in/set-72157594301491788/
http://flickr.com/photos/yochicago1/253817852/in/set-72157594301491788/
3805 N. Alta Vista:
http://flickr.com/photos/yochicago1/253814934/in/set-72157594301491788/
http://flickr.com/photos/yochicago1/253814841/in/set-72157594301491788/
Seeing houses/neighborhoods like this gives me renewed appreciation of the varied architecture of the city (certainly much eye-pleasing than the exactly-look-alike rows of houses out in the ‘burbs)….
They really have beautiful facades. Some architect should dig the old plans out of the city archives, and redesign the interiors to be less cramped, and have period details and good closets.
A lot of the “historist” condo-flats and townhouses being built now would have been improved a lot if architects had just dug old plans out and revisited them. Oftentimes, the old floorplans are better than modern ones.
“Since its in the Nat’l Registry, you’re stuck with several teeny-teeeny-tiny rooms (instead of fewer, but much larger ones)/bad plumbing/inadequate electrical infrastructure/rotting-/leaking-/crumbling-everthything – and some silly, mad, insane crazy red-tape bureaucratic nonsense to get all of the requisite approvals to change anything more than a lighbulb…
Not that I’d mind, but off the Registry, you could REALLY bring out your inner “Bob Vila’s This Old House”: scouring the city for salvaged fixtures (vintage doors and doorknobs, claw-foot batubs, intricate woodwork, etc. from the 1890’s-1920’s, this city’s got tons of the stuff available…!) – never mind that “Flip This House” slap-dash nonsense…”
——
I’m no expert on the landmark district designations- but Alta Vista is designated a Chicago Landmark District. (Not sure if it is also a state landmark district.) Pullman, on the south side, is the only historic district in the city to have all three landmark designations: city, state and national. (If I’m wrong on that- someone please tell me. That’s what they told us on the Pullman House Tour.)
From what I understand, the historic designation means you cannot change the front exterior. You CAN change the back (as they do in Pullman actually) and you can do whatever you want to the interior.
So there is no reason you couldn’t rip down walls, add a new bathtub etc. I’ve seen them do it in the Pullman rowhouses to great affect. (And many of those are also smaller and narrow.)
The permitting process isn’t that insane in Pullman. But this is, again, just what they told us on the House Tour.
I helped a client who needed to build a new porch on his historic unit in Pullman after getting ticketed by the city. There are a couple of extra steps to get the permit. It’s not that difficult to get through landmarks it’s just time consuming due to the waiting time and the extra steps. In this particular case the porch was shared by three units and one of them was an REO so that further complicated matters.
Back porch, in case it wasn’t clear above.
DancesWithVols:
Please check your facts, as you are misinformed concerning historic designations. Easements, etc. help all enjoy beautiful streetscapes and keep “Bob Villa’ types from mucking up and tearing down beautiful old properties. As Sabrina indicated, this requirement does not apply to interiors or the backs of properties.
I recently went for a run and ended up going down Alta Vista. There is a house on the West side of the street towards the north end that is completely gutted on the inside- down to the studs. I peeked in the window and it appears they are going with an open floor plan. Based on that, I would assume it is possible to renovate the interiors. I also saw a couple of the house on the east side of the street with “for rent” signs.
HomeDelete – Now I see why you get paid the big bucks. You spend time getting permits for a back deck?? That had to be worth about $50 for difficulty and taken you about 6 hours. LOL!
SH:
There’s a story behind why I helped this particular client but I don’t really care to share it with you.
“There’s a story behind why I helped this particular client but I don’t really care to share it with you.”
Good comeback HD, that was a real zinger!
David commented earlier that the east side of the street is better becuase of the el noise. It is also better because you have the potential to have attached garage parking (but you give you living space on that level).
I am fairly certain that the homes on the west side of Alta Vista do not have the ability to add garage parking.
The facades on this street are gorgeous. 3805 doesn’t seem overpriced to me. 3824 was an estate sale (no AC) and not as pretty (is that a large glass block picture window? barf)
The assessor has 3805 at 1,484 SF and 3824 at 1,641 SF.
Deaconblue, your comments are stupid, sophmoric and juvenile. For the love of god, please leave your 800 sq ft studio apartment at 600 NF or whatever ubiquitous condo building you live in downtown and find something else to do. Your constant barrage of insults is irritating 98% of the posters on the board. You have no connection to real estate other than your passive speculative investment in condo buildings downtown. At least SH is allegedly an underemployed realtor, Joe Z runs a RE website that gets no hits, G is a lackey in an analyst’s office and I’m an administrative court regular. What did you say you do for a living?
““There’s a story behind why I helped this particular client but I don’t really care to share it with you.”
Good comeback HD, that was a real zinger!”
I generally don’t agree with HD, but come on guys the personel attacks are not constructive at all.
BROKERS TAKE NOTE: NOBODY wants to register with your site just to look at a property. The information is out there, and you’re just putting a huge block on perspective clients.
I think I speak for most people when I say that whenever I’m confronted with having to register on a website just to look… …I move onto something else.
I used to work as a broker, and if there’s one thing I’ve learned… …the best potential clients are the most reluctant to give away personal information. Those who do give personal information will simply fill in the blanks with fake names, phone numbers and addresses.
Mikey, the group that owns the mls requires agents/agencies to allow full access *only* after registration. You are absolutely right that it makes people less likely to look at the properties at all–but the owners of the database think this is somehow good for their industry as a whole. And actually, anti-competitive rules usually ARE good for the industry as a whole (even though individual members would always be better off defecting/allowing free access)–here, they make access to the mls harder to get at, therefore more valuable. (Or something.)
So I guess this rule isn’t especially surprising, even though it certainly is irritating.
Most agencies in Chicago (except @Properties) let you look at *their* listings without registration. As far as I know, there is no way to see any additional information about this particular property without registering with some agency.
I found this policy of @Properties to be very annoying early in my search — in perhaps a half-dozen cases I knew the address of a property they were selling (where they had a sign) but I could not obtain any further information without establishing a “business relationship” with them and implicitly permitting them to spam me for the next few years. (It probably cost them an offer — we were essentially indifferent between two properties, one @ and one not, but felt more comfortable with the non-@ sellers’ agent.)
One option to get around the registration requirement to see properties listed by @Proprerties (FYI Habitat had the same requirement until they were absorbed by Baird Warner) is to go to Realtor.com. No log-in is needed on that site, and you can see the majority all the listings that are on the MLS. Hope that helps!
Realtor.com doesn’t seem have all MLS listings though. Instead it takes a few minutes to set up a bogus yahoo email account so you can access the full MLS and not get spammed ad infinitum.
If you would like to see all Listing on the MLS you are more than welcome to visit my company’s website. http://www.hudsonparker.com
Simply write “Do Not Contact” in the “Comments” field and I will give you my personal guarantee you will never be contacted or spammed. Our MLS search is one of the most accurate in the industry.
Have fun!
Still listed a over a year later at $555,000. Still waiting for just the right buyer, eh?