pushing slightly above the ask, as 140 Thompson Street loft sells on non-A.I.R. side of West Broadway Arches

well babbled: “this one is ready to go”
Do you notice those lingering listings that have broker babble that has never been edited, such as “priced to sell!!!” or “won’t last!!!”? (The extra exclamation points are for emphasis, I suppose.) After 6 months and a few price drops, agents really should change the text in those cases. The “1,571 sq ft” Manhattan loft #5D at 140 Thompson Street (the eastern part of West Broadway Arches) was not one of those: they said “this one is ready to go” and they were right. It came to market on November 8 at $1.695mm and found the contract by December 20* that closed at $1.7mm on April 10. Ready to go, indeed! (!!)

(*Contract date is per the inter-firm data-base; StreetEasy has it a few weeks later.)

The brief and successful marketing campaign emphasized “magical views and wonderful light” and being “[f]ully renovated to a high degree of understated elegance along with authentic details”.  Only the views and light are slightly distinguishing factors from the last sale in this line, as loft #2D sold on October 14, 2010 at (only) $1.585mm with a “masterful renovation  [that] is elegant, serene, and filled with character” including a top-of-the-line kitchen. There is a lot more light from the 5th floor, as is particularly evident comparing the main #5D listing photo in large format (angled, but 5-story buildings and sky) with the same window shot for the 2nd floor (best viewed on the Corcoran site, using the partially obscured Click Here To View button)

If anything, that floor plan on the same footprint on the 2nd floor has more utility than on the 5th floor, with a study / den that is an easy (interior) guest room, compared to the small (open) office space on the 5th floor as the only ‘extra’ space. (Note the different placements of bathrooms in the two lofts; something you often see in loft buildings but rarely in apartment buildings.)

Accounting 101
How to compare the two same-line loft sales in the same building? Loft #5D just sold for $115,000 more than #2D sold for in October 2010. Market conditions are broadly similar (that “flat” word) in the overall Manhattan residential real estate market. Condition seems roughly similar, based on the listing descriptions and pictures. Loft #2D gets a plus for being more flexible, with that closed second room being a potential bedroom. Loft #5D has a definite premium for being 3 floors higher in a mid-block setting looking at similar buildings, and getting considerably more sky.

The buyer markets for these two lofts do not completely overlap. People who have to have an extra sleeping  room would not consider #5D. For buyers who are indifferent to that #2D benefit, I suspect that the #5D floor plan is more appealing, as it has greater volume in the main room, and the bedroom doors, when opened, provide an even greater sense of space. While that is a subtle difference, the 5th floor sailed through the market, while the 2nd floor struggled to get that $1.585mm.

This may be one pair of sales in which the extra height from even a floor as low as the 5th makes all the difference in market value. In this instance, $38,000 per floor.

an A.I.R. oddity in Soho
West Broadway Arches is a single condominium composed of a building on West Broadway (#468) and this building on Thompson. [UPDATE May2: note the dialogue in the comments about the zoning for each "half" of the building, and whether there might be some truly non-A.I.R. units on the West Brodway side.] Many residential loft conversions aggregate more than one building into a single condo (like this, or like The Chelsea Mercantile) or into a single coop (like 80 Warren Street). However, West Broadway Arches is the only such residential aggregation that I am aware of that has materially different zoning for the original components. That distinction must provide fascinating management issues for the condo, as 468 West Broadway owners should all be certified artists; while 140 Thompson Street owers can include butchers and bakers, as well as (fine, artisanal) candlestick makers.

I mentioned this oddity in my post exploring why sales data are surprisingly unhelpful in looking for economic impacts of the Soho A.I.R. controversies (in my March 7, 2011, it is impossible to prove that the Soho artist in residence regulations are a resale problem unless ‘victims’ come forward), but I am surprised to find only one prior Manhattan Loft Guy post hitting a sale in this condo. That was way back in my  December 11, 2006, a year of pricing dangerously / 140 Thompson loft in contract, about a loft that lingered, and how that compared to other lofts in the building.

© Sandy Mattingly 2012