dream renovation adds 50% to 39 East 12 Street loft

if you build it …
The petite Manhattan loft #307 at 39 East 12 Street (University Mews) traded four years ago as a build-your-dream loft for $850,000 then again (dream realized!) on May 10 at $1.25mm. I suspect that the dream cost less than $400,000 to build (the space is only “1,000 sq ft”), just as I suspect that the $850,000 sale in May 2007 was an on-the-way-to-Peak price. At least, for the sake of the renovator-turned-seller, I certainly hope that the renovation cost much less than $400,000, as he got to enjoy it for less than 4 years.

loft porn, of the best kind
Feast your eyes on the listing pix (definitely get the larger photos by clicking the “+”), as there is little doubt that the broker babble is true: “[h]igh-end finishes cover every inch of this space”. I generally am not a fan of raised platform areas (though I get it that they create different spatial relations), but I see nothing to quibble with in the design or execution. (Well, just one: that bathroom is too much foreverevreverever for me, but clearly high-end.)

The walnut cabinets and “pod bedroom” are lovely, and the pod is a great solution here that provides privacy for the bed while providing the maximum sense of space with the high ceilings and light from the windows. This pod does not seem like a gimmick, unlike in a 2007 new development we could name.

Net-net: simply stunning. The marketing campaign was quick and to the point: to market to January 13, in contract at the full ask by February 17. Given recent sales in the same line, asking $1.25mm showed confidence that The Market would appreciate the quality of the dream renovation, and The Market did not disappoint.

adjusting for condition (and size??)
The most recent loft sale in the building would definitely need a size adjustment for comp purposes. The “700 sq ft” Manhattan loft #303 sold on April 21 for $667,000, after another brag-worthy renovation (“thoughtfully crafted with the finest materials”). By using the high ceiling to add a sleeping loft “bedroom”, #303 has a similar functionality to #307, in high (but different) style, at a very different price point. Again, I am curious about renovation costs, as that one also sold un-renovated in 2007 (at $598,000).

Our data base has #407 at “950 sq ft” and #607 at “1,100 sq ft”, though they were both marketed as “900 sq ft”, but I can’t see any differences in size between those two or #307 (supposedly, “1,000 sq ft”). Loft #407 sold on September 23 at $965,000; #607 on August 5 at $1.1mm. Obviously, they were in different condition. #407 boasted of new floors and renovated kitchen and bath, but not in terms that would approach mint-y-ness (“delicate blend of industrial loft and rustic home”); #607 was much more enthusiastically babbled, on a par with the detail and enthusiasm as with #307.

The Market noted the different conditions of #407 and #607, valuing them $135,000 apart. Later, The Market found #307 to be of even higher quality than #607 (or, at least, generated a buyer who would match the higher price for #307).

Those clearing prices (assuming all three “x07” lofts are the same size; here using 900 sq ft):

Based on the listing descriptions and photos, #407 was not quite as well dressed as #303, while #607 is of higher quality, and #307 at the top of the heap. The “x07” loft clearing prices line up appropriately. Arguably, the architectural renovation of #307 was 14% more valuable than the architectural renovation of #607. That was a very valuable renovation.

about that raised platform I (generally) don’t like
Recall my comment about the #307 design, specifically the raised dining platform. Here is why that works in this footprint: even #607 with a high-end renovation and a conventional layout ends up with a main room visible on entry that is about 45 feet long but only 12 feet wide (i.e., a bowling alley effect). In contrast, that first walnut built-in and raised platform in #307 break up the space and the view, so that by the time you see the (broader set of) windows, the room proportions are much more comfortable.

A nice solution, indeed. Well played, architect (and seller).

pet peeve about agent price changes
Avert your eyes to avoid a rant…. I have moaned before about agents who change the asking price after a deal is reached so that the listing history shows a full price deal, or a smaller discount than reality imposed. Of course, I still have no direct information about whether these changes are by ‘mistake’ or not, but note that both #407 and #607 show price changes a day or two after the closings, reducing the asking prices to exactly the closing prices. Sloppy work? Coincidences? A cynic would wonder why the inter-firm data-base permits a post-contract asking price change, let alone a post-closing change.

© Sandy Mattingly 2011