Skip to content
×
PRO
Pro Members Get Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
General Landlording & Rental Properties
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated about 3 years ago,

User Stats

356
Posts
311
Votes
Allen L.
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Chicago and mainly invests in KS remotely
311
Votes |
356
Posts

lease agreement by lot, not address?

Allen L.
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Chicago and mainly invests in KS remotely
Posted

I have a property that sits on 2 regular sized lots for the area. I want to either sell off the southern lot or build on it, so when I sign a lease for the house on the 2 lots, I want the tenants to be aware of this and "rent" the northern lot (the entire structure is on the northern lot). Since these 2 lots are under 1 address, what's the best way to structure this into the lease? There are some sheds on the southern lot that I don't mind them using, but when I decide to sell/build on it those would go.

Loading replies...