Trying to Sell Two Years Later in Lakeview: 3300 N. Kenmore

We love townhouses- especially in Lakeview. But this townhouse at 3300 N. Kenmore is tired of waiting for a buyer, so it is now also available to rent.

3300-n-kenmore-_c.jpg

It’s also listed for less than it last sold for in 2006.

Here’s the listing:

Terrific 2 bedroom plus den/2 bath fee-simple townhouse. Unit features kitchen with 42 inch cherry cabinets, stainless steel appliances and granite countertops, hardwood floors, wood-burning fireplace, front patio and balcony off kitchen.

Skylite, central air, washer/dryer, plus attached one-car garage. Great Lakeview location, close to everything! Two blocks to “El”. Feels like single family home!

 3300-n-kenmore-_c-livingroom.jpg

Suzanne Rose at Koenig & Strey has the listing. See more pictures and a virtual tour here.

Unit #C: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1521 square feet

  • Sold in February 1997 for $233,000
  • Sold in May 2003 for $374,000
  • Sold in September 2006 for $475,000
  • Originally listed in August 2008 for $479,900
  • Reduced
  • Currently listed for $459,900 (1 car parking included)
  • No assessments
  • Taxes of $6,232
  • OR you can rent it for $2500 a month

8 Responses to “Trying to Sell Two Years Later in Lakeview: 3300 N. Kenmore”

  1. At this rent level buying is a reasonable deal relative to the rent. So the rent must be high! The owner is obviously trying to cover their costs, which makes sense to some degree. However, I’m betting they won’t be able to rent it out at that level.

    0
    0
  2. This nominal price reduction from 2006 isn’t going to save this stuck seller. The Case-Shiller index fell 10% so far, this seller still believes their property is somehow special enough to outpace the overall market.

    This might’ve sold for ask or near it earlier this year, but just another delusional seller chasing the market down.

    0
    0
  3. 2500 is high rent. Maybe they get 2200/mo. in the spring but not in December.

    0
    0
  4. Too much for Lakeview. Downtown maybe but otherwise no. I can rent 1500 sqft in the Loop for that price.

    0
    0
  5. Won’t sell at that price and won’t rent at that price. Look for this to be revisited in a few months as a short sale or a foreclosure.

    Also, this is not 1500 sqft (unless they are counting patio, garage, etc.)

    0
    0
  6. “this is not 1500 sqft”

    It’s ~15 feet wide and three floors. The garage is no more than 225 ft. Is it really less than 40 feet deep? That’s 1800 sq ft, deduct for stairs and garage and your in the ballpark of the listed 1521.

    I’m always critical of fantasy sq footage, but this one doesn’t seem ridiculous–w/o checking an aerial.

    0
    0
  7. This seller is delusional, this is worth at most $250,000.

    BTW. this building is fugly. It kinda reminds me of a grammer school. I’d offer $229,000.

    When will these people admit they made bad “investments” and accept the 40% loss ? Ignorance is indeed bliss.

    0
    0
  8. I think this place is okay. It has nice light and the layout doesn’t look too wierd but..it looks like they took out a wall which enclosed the second bedroom and I think they need to fix that. Just looks like vacant space.

    It’s way overpriced. They need to go back to 2003 price. That may not even be low enough. But it’s great they don’t have an assessment. I wonder how they handle community repairs/projects.

    0
    0

Leave a Reply