The Obamas Get New Neighbors: 5040 S. Greenwood in Kenwood Sells
We last chattered about this 8-bedroom vintage home at 5040 S. Greenwood in Kenwood in September 2009 when it first came on the market with a “negotiable” price (i.e. no listing price but somewhere between $1.5 million and $2.5 milliion.)
Photos by: Wayne Cable/Selfmadephoto.com
See our prior chatter here.
The 6000 square foot house had been owned by the same family since 1973 and needed, according to the media reports at the time, “substantial renovation” in the kitchen and baths.
It also did not have central air.
It did have its vintage bones intact and, most importantly of all, was directly next door to President Obama’s Chicago residence.
Hence, all the interest in the property.
In October 2009, it got an official listing price of $1.849 million.
Matt Garrison of Coldwell Banker, the listing agent, confirmed on Crib Chatter yesterday that the house has sold for $1.4 million.
You can still see the interior pictures and floorplan here.
5040 S. Greenwood: 8 bedrooms, 3 baths, 2 half baths, 6000 square feet, 2 car garage
- Sold in 1973 for $35,000
- Currently listed in September 2009 for ???? (between $1.5 million and $2.5 million)
- Officially listed in October 2009 for $1.849 million
- Sold in April 2010 for $1.4 million
- Taxes are unknown
- No central air (window units- at least that’s what it looks like with the window unit in the front of the house)
What was the area like in 1973? Anything compared to it now?
You can see President Obama’s block, hear about some of the media frenzy when the home went on the market, and meet the former owner in these videos:
http://www.youtube.com/my_playlists?p=462098114D48D949
Sorry for the bad link. Here’s the right one:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=462098114D48D949
http://www.chicagobreakingbusiness.com/2010/04/96000-cook-county-rental-properties-underwater.html
A study by DePaul University’s Institute for Housing Studies, released Wednesday, also found that $3 billion of multi-family building mortgages already are in foreclosure, affecting more than 32,000 rental units in Cook County. That compares with approximately 38,000 single-family homes in foreclosure in Cook County.
The DePaul study also found that rental revenues are at or below operating costs for 74,000 apartments in the city.
Copying the entire article?
You need to read the copyright laws, homedelete.
“You need to read the copyright laws, homedelete.”
also would be nice if people wouldn’t constantly derail these threads with articles that have nothing to do with the property at hand. I wish Sabrina would start at least moderating a lil bit to cut out some of this crap…
I like the rambling as long as it’s about Chicago RE or even the ecomomy. I just hate talking about sports etc.
I think that’s an interesting article homedelete pointed too. Would like to see a separate thread on it.
Err, economy.
Wow HD what a stupid and completely irrelevant article that has nothing to do with living next to Obama’s house. I’m not going to even go into why those nubmers in that article are skewed, so I’m just going to leave it with “I love lamp”.
As for the property, wow 1.4 million? Its a huge house but probably hasn’t been updated for decades! I hope their neighbors enjoy black helicopters and midnight sirens lol
Does Obama ever spend any time at the Chicago house any more?
It would be neat if this property got bought by some conservative foundation for its offices! Zoning probably wouldn’t work out, though. I guess it’s different on Woodlawn south of 57th, where it seems like almost all the grand old houses have been turned into offices.
Altogether, I don’t see the famous or notorious neighbor as a net positive for residential. You’ve got less privacy, more noise, in the coming years next door will probably get turned into some kind of museum… you’re always going to feel overshadowed. A bed and breakfast could work at this location. Could someone good with numbers work out if it’s feasible from a business perspective?
This story is big enough news that it is now front page on yahoo.com
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100407/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_s_neighbor
opportunity to hustle Bo in some alley hoops games would be a plus
“You need to read the copyright laws, homedelete.”
Seems likely to be fair use:
http://w2.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.php
Altho that would be *substantially* strengthened if HD had added anything to his comment.
I doubt they would ever allow that from a security standpoint, at least not while it is still a residential property (the Obama’s house I mean). I heard there was substantial screening going on for would-be buyers, so I can’t imagine it being ok having rotating guests.
anon (tfo)
Fair use does not include copying an entire article like this. Period.
You and the other folks here who don’t understand copyright law risk having this site summarily put out of business by an aggressive publisher. If you’ve been following the news lately major publishers have been allying to squash sites that allow pirating of their content.
homedelete and Sabrina should both get some advice from a competent attorney. They’re playing with fire.
“What was the area like in 1973? Anything compared to it now?”
I was there in 1981. It was much rougher than it is now. Still beautiful old homes but we were warned to stay away from the area. Lots of gangs and drug dealing at the park on 50th and Dorchester, lots of run down homes, etc.
Since then there has been a lot of investment in the area. It is very nice, the parks are cleaned up and safe for families, and crime is relatively low. I would love to have a house in the area.
On the plus side, they shouldn’t worry about any break-ins… at least not for the next two years.
“Fair use does not include copying an entire article like this. Period.”
Not necessarily. See http://chillingeffects.org/fairuse/faq.cgi#QID824
“Question: Can I copy an entire news article from a commercial news web site and post the article on my web site?
Answer: The fair use doctrine, as currently interpreted by the courts, probably would not entitle you to do so. Even though news items are factual and facts themselves are not protected by copyright, an entire news article itself is expression protected by copyright.
A court would apply the four factor fair use analysis to determine whether such a use is fair. [Discussion of ruling in] L.A. Times v. Free Republic, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5669 (C.D. Cal. 2000). ”
The absence of any commentary is a very bad fact. But copying entire articles is not per se (or “Period.”) excluded from fair use.
Of course, you’re going to say that “like this” was intended to wrap in that whole concept. Fine. Next time, tho, when you’re pontificating about the absolutes of law, spell it out, instead of being opaque.
“You and the other folks here who don’t understand copyright law risk having this site summarily put out of business by an aggressive publisher.”
Then you’d have to post on your own website! Maybe I have an elevated sensitivity these days, but I haven’t seen a single thing posted from Joe Z. that has been helpful, instructive, or non-combative on here lately. I never had a problem with his comments before, but recent posts have mainly been idle threats and unsolicited advice…
And I would also say that constant outward criticism of the website hostess is a bit bush league.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
you might want to read up on the Fair Use Doctrine. Just because he copied the whole article doesn’t mean it’s not Fair Use. The fact that he linked to the original article and there’s no economic benefeit to him leads you towards Fair Use. It’s not a clear cut case either way.
i dont know why anyone pays joe z any mind. he’s a paid shill. skip his posts like you skip the other ads and hope mozilla comes out with a Z-block add on.
“The fact that he linked to the original article and there’s no economic benefeit to him leads you towards Fair Use. It’s not a clear cut case either way.”
I’ve gotten on people here who cut and paste entire articles w/o attribution and w/o any commentary–first b/c it’s problematic from a CR/Fair-Use perspective and second b/c it’s poor intertubez etiquette. Linkage goes a long way toward absolution, especially in comments on a non-large-revenue generating site (see cited case involving Free Republic, which is a large-revenue site).
Jon said:
“Maybe I have an elevated sensitivity these days, but I haven’t seen a single thing posted from Joe Z. that has been helpful, instructive, or non-combative on here lately. I never had a problem with his comments before, but recent posts have mainly been idle threats and unsolicited advice…
And I would also say that constant outward criticism of the website hostess is a bit bush league.”
My sentiments exactly. I am totally regretting my recent post defending JZ’s role on this site in a post a couple weeks ago. Ugh.
Anyone who thinks that anything clearly is, or is not, Fair Use knows nothing about Fair Use. There is nothing clear (or fair) about it. Total crapshoot of extremely expensive litigation.
As for this place, I too am surprised it sold for this. It is a really, really nice block, and great curb appeal. . . but if I recall electric has not even been updated, so you’re talking gut rehab (through, I assume, plaster walls). . . ugly.
Makes me assume this is not a flipper but someone who actually plans to live there. Which is good I guess, but I too share doubts that the Obamas will ever live there again (their presence was a nightmare to the immediate neighborhood, security-wise).
Jon, chi_dad
Well, I guess posting video of the site in question isn’t helpful to anyone.
Nor is suggesting that this site protect itself against behavior that could cause it trouble. including defamation and copyright violations.
Any competent attorney giving advice on copyright issues is going to caution a client to adhere to bright-line rules.
My bad.
God all you lawyers are dorks!
“God all you lawyers are dorks!”
Sonies, thankfully i didnt waste my money on law school either, best choice i ever made!
^^^
Joe,
Sometimes it’s not what you say, it’s how you say it. I am sure you have heard this before. Work on the soft start. And I say this as someone who has not attacked you/has not been attacked by you. Just someone that has newly tired of you and your combative nature.
“Any competent attorney giving advice on copyright issues is going to caution a client to adhere to bright-line rules. ”
Yeah, b/c those attorneys are covering their own asses.
There are plenty of competent attorneys who provide advise about operating in the gray areas of all sorts of legal regimes. Hell, isn’t that the primary job of (good, high-dollar) tax lawyers?
I still don’t see the logic in paying a premium based on who your neighbors are….they can always move. 1.4M for a fixer upper in Hyde Park seems steep given the size/location. If it were one of the giant mansions on Kenwood or Dorchester then maybe. It’s a beautiful house but I wonder what the value will drop to once the Obamas move.
Heh. I was born in 73, and lived at 55th and Cornell… not too far away from this house. I was too young to know at the time, but my parents were able to use crime and gangs as an excuse to take flight to Indiana in 77 or 78.
There are some beautiful houses in Hyde Park, and this one would be nice to see in person. Worth $1.4 million? Well, not to me, but hopefully the new owner got it because he/she/they loved the house & not because of who their next door neighbor MIGHT be in 2017 (or 2013, if Obama is a one-termer).
This is in Kenwood, not HP. In my view the entire premium was based on proximity to the prez. There are 1.5mill homes in Hyde Park but they’re about a mile south.
Oh and I guess it wouldn’t be a legitimate CC thread without Jay Zee pretending to still be a lawyer.
“This is in Kenwood, not HP. In my view the entire premium was based on proximity to the prez. There are 1.5mill homes in Hyde Park but they’re about a mile south.”
I disagree. It might have given them a clear leg up in a tough market, but the price is not out of whack for the area.
Overall, other than a few small pockets of HP (Woodlawn near 57th) I would say the most expensive homes in the area are in the Kenwood mansion section. Many are in the $1-2M range.
Bob,
You’re right. It is Kenwood. Guess I ignored all the “KENWOOD” in the headlines… just had Obama=Hyde Park in my head.
Up to 47th street east of Drexel there is absolutely no conceptual difference between Kenwood and Hyde Park. Nothing magical happens when you cross 51st street. That part of Kenwood is typically considered as part of the greater Hyde Park community. Very much like western morgan park is conceptually part of Beverly (ie the 107th street dividing line is meaningless).
I’ve always considered south of 47th as Hyde Park and north of it “North Kenwood.”
There is one big change north of 51st street – the lots (and houses) get dramatically bigger – not just wider, but deeper, since several streets don’t go through. This block has always been desirable, if not always high priced. Look at the aerial view and you’ll see that this house (and the Obama’s) are actually on SMALLER (shorter) lots than the rest of the block.
I’m laughing at RK’s comment, since HP has never had that serious of a gang or crime problem, at least not since the 60’s, just a perception problem.
Russ, north of 47th is Oakland.
Sheridan B,
Kenwood extends north to 43rd St. Most people refer to the area north of 47th St as North Kenwood or North Kenwood / Oakland. You’ll see lots of street banners down there.
It’s fairly common for Hyde Parkers to refer to Hyde Park / Kenwood – more so among people who live in the part of Kenwood from Hyde Park Blvd (5100 S) north to 47th St.
http://knol.google.com/k/the-ultimate-list-of-chicago-neighborhoods
Speaking of Hyde Park, and trying to avoid the needless bickering, let’s take a look at this new listing:
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/5123-S-Dorchester-Ave-60615/home/13949872
One hell of a beautiful old greystone on a great block w garage and yard; no interior pics presumably means it is currently 3 trashy rental units. But listing says “lots of original woodwork.” Who wants a project?
Deals abound in this area. Not long ago there was a 2/2 condo for sale in Woodlawn on 61st st. a block away from the UC law school for 90k. If the interior wasn’t completely trashed (no pics) its turn-key cash-flow positive, or even if so its cash flow positive after work.
Ha, Zekas pretending to be a lawyer….check this out, here he pretends to be an urban designer (rather then just a developer shill):
http://yochicago.com/weekend-opinion-%E2%80%93-why-not-build-volo-in-bronzeville/14218/
I’m quite suprised that there was no mention of the Seceret Service purchasing this home. If the new owners are not revealed then we taxpayers might actually be the new owners. I know that they picked up a home adjacent to the new George W compound in Dallas for thier staff use.
I suggest this theory as NBC5 reported that the new owners were building a “tunnel” to the garage. Is this even legal? If that is the case it sounds suspiciously like a s.s. plan.
My guess is that if B.O. does make two terms then he NEVER moves the family back into his current home. When done with a second term he will end up in a high security, extremely affulent, area of the country. I’d suspect an oceanfront estate in Hawaii. Teh absolute last place he will end up is back on the South Side of Chicago near his buddies at “Cominskey Field.” Perhaps as a long shot he will keep the home but I’d bet that he will never “live” there again.
If he has to evacuate 1600 in three years then maybe he will return to the Chicago home for a short time. I think that the SS will likely push for an easier location to keep him secure. It is a true business keeping former presidents safe and secure. My childhood friend works fot this department. They have a tough job. It is unfortunate but my guess is that B.O. will endure an extra high levels of threats for the rest of his life.
Any other c.c’ers think that this place ends up as a s.s. home?
I need to use spell check more often…..
I think your theory is plausible. I don’t think they will be moving back either. If anything, that home may wind up becoming a tourist attraction or library.
No doubt that it will be a tourist attraction but not a presidential library. After becoming a president an already large ego gets even more enormous. His policies have made plenty of democrat buddies rich. Mark my words. President B.O. will build the biggest presidential library ever.
I’d bet that it will likely be on Chicago’s south side. There are plenty of locations for that facility. Hre likes Hyde Park so maybe he can get them to pull down that silly Museum of Science and Induustry Museum that appeals to people from other neighborhoods and turn it into his estate. Daley hates McCormick place East so watch for a suspicious fire right as B.O. is leaving office. The next morning Daley/Rahm/and B.O. will have a press conference explaining that the best thing to do now is to build a library on that site.