spectacular renovation does not prevent 161 West 15 Street loft from closing down 7% since 2006

awkward layout does not help (but did not change)
I suspect that there are other people like one set of buyers of mine who really puzzled over the “1,440 sq ft” Manhattan loft #5A at 161 West 15 Street (Jensen-Lewis Building) while it was available for nearly 18 months, at 7 different prices. (It finally sold on February 6 at $1.375mm.) After all, “1,440 sq ft” is a reasonable amount of space, it was very enthusiastically babbled for an “amazing” renovation (not a word you see every day modifying renovation, not like “meticulous” or no-detail-spared or “triple mint”), and these buyers did not necessarily have to have 2-bedrooms (the right space for a 1+something could work). Interesting at $1.695mm in June 2010, it got more interesting over time (remember: 7 prices!). It just never crossed the threshold into workable.

Through their eyes, I could see the resistance of The Market to an admittedly impressive renovation, all very black-and-white, with touches of grey in the bathroom. Even though the footprint should work for a 1+something buyer (there’s an awful lot of room in the east wing) it didn’t. At the end of the day, they passed. As did much of The Market. Therein lies another tale, but let’s stay with shapes for a while.

(probably) limited by the stacks
The footprint has two rectangles, apparently separated by some length of load-bearing wall. One enters loft #5A in the west box, dedicated to living and and kitchen and dining, and limited by 2 (sorry) not really “over-sized” windows. The east box is a little longer and much more endowed with windows: 3 (truly) over-sized windows with 2 exposures. In traditional loft design, when presented with one rectangle with less light and a second with more, the lesser light is dedicated to bedroom(s) with the public space getting the better light.

I suspect it is not possible to play enough with the layout because of limitations on where the kitchen can go (not to mention, the seller already paid for an “amazing” renovation, as is), but one logical use of the space would be to make the kitchen / dining area the bedroom (with but 2 windows), open up as much of that middle wall as possible, and use the only space with very good light as the living room. There’d still be room (if there are stacks) for a kitchen and dining area at the darker end of the east wing, and an office in the (new) foyer in the western box.

But there’s the rub: radical renovation (if even possible) is more expensive than an upgrade. And this loft was already priced as having an amazing renovation. Though it did not sell for quite a while, bringing me back to that other tale.

no resistance in 2006
Contrast the long listing history from June 2010 to contract in November 2011 (remember: 7 prices!) with the marketing campaign when these recent sellers were competitive buyers:

July 6, 2006 new to market $1.395mm
Aug 25 contract
Dec 14 sold $1.475mm

Overall, the Manhattan residential real estate market was no more robust in 2006 than 2011, yet note the differences between The Market’s reaction to loft #5A. A bidding war and 7 weeks to a +6% contract in 2006; 6 price drops and 18 months to contract at a 7% loss in 2012. Same awkward floor plan.

In (probable) fact, the same renovation.

kitchen follies
That surprised me, though maybe it should not have. The recent broker babble that claims that the (overall) renovation was “amazing” and “gut”; the bathroom is “completely” renovated; ahhh … but in a bit of a syntax salad, there is “a fantastic brand newly renovated kitchen with only high end stainless steel appliances” (my italics). So I thought that the kitchen was, like, brand newly (or something else recent). In which case, a February 2012 sale $100,000 less than the December 2006 (old kitchen) sale begins to look like much worse than a 7% hit. Except that the old kitchen might be the new kitchen (sigh).

We don’t have 2006 era pictures in out database, and StreetEasy has but one, angled away from the kitchen (is that a white-faced kitchen island?). But the 2006 babble sounds just like the 2010-11 babble:

one bedroom plus home office, one beautifully renovated bathroom with an option for a second, a grand living room and a stunning custom built kitchen with all high end stainless steel appliances. All the cabinets are enhanced with custom back lighting. … oak strip flooring is throughout the apartment … custom track lighting, a washer/dryer and abundant closet space.

The new kitchen is all black and stainless, with no white. So maybe it is brand newly, in which case the 2006-buyers-turned-2012-sellers-and-kitchen-renovators took a really big bath. Or maybe the old kitchen facing was just turned into black, in which case the 2006-buyers-turned-2012-sellers took a smaller bath.

Either way, they got wet.

Manhattan Loft Guy bait
Of course I look at deed records, to see where loft buyers come from and loft sellers go. In this case, the babble pretty much taunted me to do so (“[t]his celebrity loft …”). Really? No offense, but the celebrity appears to be this person in the film industry (note the West Hollywood notice address on the deed), of whom I have never heard.  (The same could be said about many ‘actual’ celebrities [more widely celebrated celebrities?] I suppose. ) I don’t think the local celebrity is this former (local) NFL player because the middle initial does not track. In this case, at least, The Google is not my friend. Sigh.

© Sandy Mattingly 2012