a tale of 2 lofts: did (removable) decor add $126/ft to value of one 32 West 18 Street loft?

how 2 essentially identical next door lofts can look so different, and what that means in $$$
I am indebted to Jennifer Gould Keil for her Gimme Shelter item in today’s New York Post about a very recent Manhattan loft sale at the Altair 18, 32 West 18 Street. Not so much for the (cute?) rhyme in her lede, as for pointing me a sale that closed this week that I would not otherwise have noticed until the deed gets filed. While it is interesting that the “3,007 sq ft” loft #2A sold quickly slightly above the ask of $3.995mm, I find it fascinating that it sold for 7% higher than the loft next door in May. This pair of not quite identical lofts on the same floor of the same building that sold within 10 weeks of each other makes me wonder how buyers (literally) see lofts.

And by “wonder” I mean more stand-back-in-awe than scramble-to-explain. Which leads me into an aesthetic discussion the likes of which I may never have had in 6+ years of Manhattan Loft Guy data-based blathering. Let’s start with JGK’s rhyme and data, and go from there.

Atoosa on the loosa

Atoosa Rubenstein, the founder of CosmoGirl and former editor of Seventeen, and her husband, Ari, founder and managing partner of Global Trading Systems, have found a buyer for their three-bedroom, three-bathroom Flatiron condo.

The apartment in the Altair 18 building, at 32 W. 18th St., is being snapped up by a mystery buyer for $4 million after a bidding war. The selling price is more than the $3.995 million asking price.

Rubenstein, who is pregnant with twin girls and the mother of 4-year-old daughter Angelika, is trading up to a larger residence on the Upper East Side.

Corcoran Group listing broker Noble Black had no comment.

fraternal twins or Irish twins?
The Altair 18 was a high-end 2006 conversion to condos, with amenities such as doorman, roof deck, and La Palestra health club shared by (and paid by) only 22 units, with two units per floor. The #2A sale, confirmed in our system even though the listing agent would not talk to JGK, was at $4mm yesterday (nice work, JGK!). The “3,292 sq ft” loft #2B closed on May 1 at $4.075mm. Given this sequence, and the fact that both lofts were marketed by the same Corcoran agents, the two sales are not unrelated:

Both lofts are variations on the classic Long-and-Narrow loft footprint, with living room and den fronting on 18th Street and the bedrooms backing into the mid-block to the south. #2B is slightly larger (“3,292 sq ft”) with slightly greater utility, built as 3 bedrooms plus den plus 3.5 baths, while #2A (“3,007 sq ft”) has been condensed from 3 bedroom to 2 plus den, with 3 baths. They had the exact same high-end finishes when sold by the sponsor in 2007, when the sponsor clearly thought that the larger #2B had the (slightly) more valuable feet:

From all the appears in the respective babble and photos, loft #2B resold in the exact same condition as when delivered by the sponsor, while I find only 3 differences in loft #2A: that 3rd (front) bedroom is a den, the ceiling has been dropped in the living room (slightly) to allow recessed lighting, and the living room floor has been changed to limestone from the white oak that is otherwise prevalent in the rest of the loft, and in #2B.

But, and here’s my point (finally!): the lofts look completely different, in ways that are mostly due to transient decor rather than the few (partial) changes made to one wall and the living room ceiling and floor in #2A. I wonder if those differences, which buyers are supposed to be able to see through, contributed to the swing from relative values in 2007 (#2B premium of 3.3%) to 2012 (#2A premium of 7.4%).
 

The dollar per foot differences are not dramatic, but I suspect are driven by impressions that are (mostly) based on things that each of the sellers took with them when they moved. That is to say, my guess is that the #2A seller just (over?) paid for things that were not permanent parts of the loft.

let’s go to the visuals
I found it really helpful to have both sets of listing photos (“Click for large photos”, of course) open in separate windows, so I could easily toggle back and forth.

There’s nothing wrong with loft #2B, with what should be the main photo (pic #2) showing a main public room with great volume, traditional loft elements (such as the high beamed ceilings, column, hardwood floor, huge windows), a fireplace on the left wall, and ceiling light fixtures that are undoubtedly quite expensive.

Loft #2A has the same column, same beamed ceilings, same large windows, but the feel of the main photo (pic #1) is radically different from that of pic #2 next door. The windows are evident with light coming from behind the sheers, but the closed sheers focus you completely on the inside space,m rather than inviting you outside as in pic #2 next door. The flooring is hard to read in the photo but the text says it is white limestone, which gives a different look than the hardwood next door. The fireplace in #2A is obscured by the couch in the main photo, but shows clearly in pic #3, with the strong dark vertical carrying across that side of the room in contrast to the white-on-white fireplace facade in #2B.

The living area in loft #2A is all whites and blacks (floor, walls, ceiling, window wall sheers, all the furniture, fireplace wall, and dramatic photo), with only three items adding the same (red?) color to the white coffee table, and the two bits of green flora in the rear distance. There is one spectacular lighting fixture, with other lighting recessed into the dropped ceiling. Lines are clean horizontals, with the round column being mimicked (intentionally, I assume) in the cut-outs and shape of the two side chairs. This looks like a design magazine.

The living area in loft #2B is nearly exactly the same size and volume, but (again) a different feel. The mahogany window frames complement the dark wood furniture, the picture frames over the fireplace, the fireplace mantle, the area rugs and couch accent pillows, and even the floral art over the sideboard. The choice to have the drapes open obviously highlights the huge windows and beautiful frames, but also places this loft on the historical and industrial block of West 18th Street.

If anything, the two dens are even more different in look and feel. The #2A den (even with the sheers open!) is all light and dark (that massive TV wall woodwork matches the window frame; presumably why the sheers are open), with the color again being green foliage and some red in the flower tops and wall art. Nearly all lines are low, vertical or horizontal. There’s got to be a hidden compartment for the media controls, right?

The den in #2B looks like a family uses it. Comfy couch and easy chair, with throw and pillows that all match the curtains and the color schemes in the adjoining living room. Shelves can’t be minimal with books and (gasp) family photos. Even the foliage has a touch of the unruly.

I could do the same thing with the master bedroom photos, but if you don’t get my point already … you don’t.

What amazes me is how different the lofts feel, yet how much of that difference will be absent after these two sellers moved out. When all the windows are open to 18th Street, and all the rugs and furniture and art work is gone, the lofts will look much more alike than they do in the listing photos. #2A will still have a limestone floor in the large public room, and the black-and-white fireplace wall will still be an eye-catcher, but you probably won’t then notice the difference in ceiling lights or levels.

One more time: I believe that these bits of ephemera drove most of the $92/ft difference in value in favor of #2A in 2012, more than erasing the 2007 difference of $34/ft that used to be in favor of #2B.

Intentionally or not, these two lofts never competed head to head in the current iterations, with #2A coming out days after #2B closed. Someone with the minimalist sensibilities of the #2A sellers might have bought #2B before knowing that #2A even existed. Or the buyers of #2A might have bought it to make it feel more like #2B.

I, for one, love a Manhattan loft world in which two such beautiful and different lofts not only exist, but exist side by side.

for readers with long memories
Yes, I hit #2B back in the day, when it was a difficult resale story in a changing resale market, in my  September 26, 2008, one data point leads to another / net loss on sale at Altair 18. The ‘problems’ that I identified for #2B then should still obtain, and should apply equally to #2A:

I suspect part of the problem here was the second floor location. If I have the right unit in memory, the bedrooms overlooked a parking lot on 18th Street, with some kind of HVAC unit not too far outside at least one window. (I saw this unit in January, when I featured it with another nearby loft listing at a [then] similar price, size and level of finishes; January 18, dueling $4mm open houses at 217 West 19 Street + 32 West 18 St.) No light to speak of and little incentive (or reward) to keeping the windows uncovered back there. This unit could then have been peculiarly disfavored by the resale market.

Note the hint of why #2A may have decided to focus entirely inward.

© Sandy Mattingly 2012