I still question that the lot is unbuildable. Mrs. Rezko sold it to Michael Sreenan and made a profit on it. Sreenan said he planned to build a condo on the site. He’s now trying to sell it for $1.5mil (making almost a million dollar profit on it).
That’s a lot of real estate movement for a supposedly unbuildable plot of land. I don’t think anyone is going to spend one and a half million to set out a lawn chair and look at Obama’s back porch. I think that either someone extrapolated the “the gate is on Obama’s property” line out further than it deserved or else the lot is technically unbuildable but could receive a variance without much work (again, the city would rather have the property tax from a built lot in a high class neighborhood than from a vacant, unbuildable one).
In other news, there are questions about whether Carol Stream enjoys performing oral sex on angry badgers. There’s no actual evidence, and nobody is making any specific allegations, but, boy howdy, there shur are some questions, I tell you whut.
I’m not grasping this concept. Having an empty lot next door increases property value? Looks to me like it would have the opposite effect. Everyone complains about “gap-toothed” subdivisions. Someone please 'splain.
This isn’t a “subdivision,” but instead, a rather densely developed city neighborhood.
Just going on potentially faulty memory, but I thought Obama’s home was on the second lot in from a corner, with Rezko’s vacant lot being the corner lot.
If Rezko did not sell Obama the extra 10 feet, someone could have built a towering building 6-10’ from Obama’s wall on that side. (In my old NW side bungalow, outside walls of neighboring houses were 6’ apart, with overhanging eaves even closer. In more desireable neighborhoods, these modest-sized homes are being replaced by 3-story new construction, no further from the lot lines than the old homes.)
By selling Obama 10’, Rezko allowed him a side yard buffer from any potential new construction. In Chicago, a 10’ wide side yard can be very significant. However, if the corner lot is now unbuildable, Obama in effect has the use of a double-wide corner lot.
I agree with the many who have observed that, given the machinations of Chicago’s city council, and the apparent rise in price of Rezko’s lot, it is doubtful that it actually is unbuildable. Hell, if the right person was doing the asking they could probably cram a slaughterhouse onto that lot!
I can believe that a well maintained lot next to a home could help increase its value.
What I don’t buy is the “unbuildable” premise. Assuming for sake of argument that it is unbuildable according to code, these codes aren’t written in stone and guarded by mummies. You request a variance, they maybe slap up a “Meeting Regarding This Lot at 8:30pm” sign (and five people show up) you make your case and get permission to build. People legally bend building codes all the time. In a high value area, you’re sure to get permission.
A brief web search shows that Michael Sreenan has a real estate background. I’m sure none of this is news to him.
There is no such thing as an unbuildable corner lot in Chicago, unless it’s a public park, and even then…
There is no doubt though, that the 10’ “strip of land” is considerably more valuable in the eyes of a chicago property owner than in the eyes of a suburman homesteader.
If nothing else, there is a somewhat significant upgrade in value of the plot equal to the potential value of “living next door to the next President of the United States”.
I know that some time ago the Trib ran a survey/map of the lots, but I couldn’t find it on-line.
I DID find this pic of the lot, but it doesn’t give a good idea of how wide the lot is.
This article gives a little more detail (not much). It says the fence you can see in the photo is “right on the property line.” I’m assuming that means the property line as it existed after Obama bought the extra 10’. Apparently that sale and the fence permit were issued the same month.
Right now I’m trying to ascertain whether the attorney named is the same Mike Sreenan I went to law school with.
Man, I really hate when it is so hard to get a simple answer to a straight-forward question.
The 2d article I listed above describes the 10’ wide strip Obama bought as 1500 sq ft. I’m no mathemetician, but wouldn’t that mean it is 10’x150’?
This article describes the neighboring property as 750,000 sq. ft. That MUST be wrong, because if it were 150’ deep - same as Obama’s, it would be 5000’ wide!
Hell, even if they goofed and it is only 7500 sq ft, it would still be 50’ wide. I don’t know that it looks that wide, even if the lot line extends all the way to the curb. (I forget how lots are platted in Chicago - sidewalk, curb, or center-of-street.)
The best thing obviously is for a special prosecutor to be hired to look into this real estate “scandal”. Give them 5 years and a $47 million budget, and I’ll bet they get to the bottom of this!
Dinsdale, do you think this is it? That sez 50 ft by 150 ft. I’m not sure how to get a six-condo unit on that without variances for setbacks. I suppose it could be done, however.
If you will go here and search for that property address, you will get a map which you can zoom in to. You will see a rectangular lot on the corner which is appx. 150 x 50.
Just for the benefit of any out-of-towners, we’re talking about the NW corner of the intersection of Greenwood and Hyde Park. If you go to street view, the red brick house w/ white trim immediately to the N looks like what I recall Obama’s house looking like.
And yes, 90Wt, that address - 5050 S sounds correct for that location. the W side of the street just N of 51st.
Anyone know much about the Chicago Better Government Institution and/or its politics? One of its members argues that this goes beyond the land deal; that Rezko was a close personal confidante and mentor until it became “inconvenient.”
I think I have the correct parcel. It definitely measures 50 x 150 on the City of Chicago link. As a matter of fact, it measures more like 60’ to Hyde Park, but I’m guessing that’s to the pavement and not the right-of-way.
The attorney you mention seems to have been admitted to the bar in 1986.
