Two props in one, freebee or a lot of headaches?

Question

I've been looking at a deal that apparently has 2 properties on the same lot. When I look up the tax info. I get one record as the primary property and another as the primary and the secondary property.... how could this be?

Considering we are talking about two properties for a really low list price, it is potentially a 60-70% ARV deal without even low-balling (and of course you would).

What could the negative recourse be with two properties on the same lot? What are the typical problems you run into with two units on one property. Are they harder to sell? I'm thinking it may be a good idea to try and split the lots too, but would I do that before I rehabbed them both for tax purposes? One may have actually been condemned at one point, maybe that is why it doesn't show up on one tax listing?

The good news is, when you look at these properties from the outside, it looks like a mini slum between the two of them. With some major demo and trash removal and a little rehabbing on one prop and probably a total gut on the other it could be a smoking deal. But there may be some pitfalls, your thoughts?

Thanks!

Jim Wineinger · Answer

I believe you are using your terminology incorrectly.

There are never two properties on one lot! There may be two buildings one lot. Or there may be a duplex (2 units) but one building which has 2 separate address for multi family purposes.

Each property is sold in its entirety with all the land and buildings that come with the "lot" unless it is subdivided, in which case it becomes two separate lots or properties.

If a building has been condemned, in most cases, no one is allowed to enter such a building. Not even to attempt to fix it up because it is unsafe for anyone (even an experienced contractor or builder) to be inside. and thus it was condemned. Usually the only option is to (as you said) tear it down and remove it.

Ralph S. · Answer

No such thing as a free lunch.

I have such "a" property.  Two detached SFR on one lot, one behind the other, with separate adresses.  The only thing they share is a water bill.  When I look at the tax info, it's as if the back house doesn't even exist, except that it's zoned for two families.

Built between 1890-1900, it is considered an approved zoning variance, meaning it doesn't comply with today's zoning, but the city can't do anything about it.  There may, in some areas, be limitations placed on what you can do with such a deviant property.  I have been told by local inspectors that the city would prefer the back house be torn down, and that I would be unlikely to get any building permits approved (in essense, I would be prolonging the life of a building they would like to see go away).

It is unlikely that you would be able to split the property, unless it satisfies current street frontage, setbacks and minimum lot size requirements, and asking for an exception would be a very long shot.

You can't look at this property's ARV as if it were two sparate properties.  It is, essentially, a duplex, and the zoning should reflect that, and when looking at comps, should be compared to other duplex properties.  That they are detached should be considered, but I have found it's not material.

I'd check with local zoning and building inspectors to get their take, and check for any existing code violations and any potential obstacles in the "R" part of your ARV.  The best way to determine what you can expect is to go to the source.  Worst case, if you still want to move forward, is you'll have ammunition to argue a lower price if you do find limits on what you can do with the property.

In the FWIW category, the second house, since it is behind and away from the street, is an really easy rent.  Mine has a driveway leading to parking between the two and the back house is quieter and secluded.  The downside is trying to sell.  The unusual and "grandfathered" nature will raise questions and doubts, just like you're doing now, and there will be those investors who will just not consider such a property in this market for those reasons.

Of course, you experience may be different.  Just don't scrimp on the DD, and if the local authorities do frown on the property and will make life difficult, it's a good argument for a significant discount.

Mariah Jeffery · Answer

Were you able to find financing for this, or were you trying to buy it in cash? I am interested in buying two properties on one tax lot, and finding financing with a fixed interest rate is providing to be challenging.

Craig Grella · Answer

there are many reasons why there might be two structures on one lot.  Zoning back then may have permitted such a use.

Even if it is a non-conforming use now, which it sounds like it may be, once you demolish you will have to build to code, which might prohibit two structures on a lot.

I would start with local zoning board and confirm the legal zoning use, because that's the one that will matter moving forward, and that's the standard you'll be held to as the current or future owner.

Shane M · Answer

2.2! :P And with potential for better if I can negotiate lower (or worse if the repairs cost grows), but as always it needs a more thorough analysis

Shane M · Answer

The two buildings are actually side by side like neighbors would be but the drive-way is in between and shared (it is quite wide). Well water is shared too.

If I considered it a duplex and didn't have to tear down the one building it could be an amazing deal. I've got to double check my repair numbers too. Right now I'm at about 25K in repairs, it is listed as 25K and both units together could rent out for 1100/mo. That leaves about 200 in cashflow without low-balling the deal.

I'll let you know how it goes and if I get turned off by the local inspector.

Shane M · Answer

Thanks for the correction! So there are two buildings on the same lot. But here is another weird thing, they both have address numbers on the outside of them that are in sequence. And the tax info. in one case has the non-delapidated address and in the other has both. Both records have the same parcel number too.

Okay upon closer inspection of the records the one with the non-dilapidated building as the address on the tax record without the second says it is for 2010. The one with both for 2009.

It is a 70x110 lot, does that sound too small for two properties if the second building was fixable and I could split the lot?

It is going to be expensive to demo an entire 700sq/ft house!

Two props in one, freebee or a lot of headaches?

Most Popular Reply