who gets the light?
The “1,025 sq ft” Manhattan loft #3A at 100 Hudson Street that just sold for $1.535mm with some “customized elements” looks a lot like the loft when it sold in June 2008 for $1.283mm with very enthusiastic broker babbling about the kitchen and the (single) bath. Having seen them, I can’t imagine those customized elements (“a beautiful exposed brick wall[,] a custom wood panel wall with steel accents [and b]uilt-in bookcases ”) account for a significant piece of the $252,000 premium (20%), though they are … nice. (The brick is obviously behind the bookcases on the left in the main listing photo, with the steel-accented wood panel wall on the right.)
Yet I also have my doubts about the value added by the big layout change between 2008 and 2013: in the old floor plan the little bedroom was in the northwest corner, using only 2 of the 3 windows that the new “master suite” in the new floor plan uses; while the old master was in the southeast corner, with its own built-ins, where the (smaller) new second bedroom uses the 2 air shaft windows. (Notice in listing pic #4 that the kid’s curtains are closed? There’s very little light coming in through those windows.)
In the old layout, the grown-up bedroom was in the dark quiet corner; in the new layout, the grown-ups get the (true) west light and the noise that may bleed in from Hudson Street 25 or so feet below. I wonder if the bedrooms were switched as the main point of the renovation, which then also added those “customized elements”, or if the 2008-buyers-turned-2013-sellers decided first on a renovation that would expose the brick and generally jazz the place up and only then also decided to switch the large and small (dark and light) bedrooms. Clearly, the 2013 market likes the current layout and finishes more than the 2008 liked the other layout and finishes.
the missing babble
I mentioned that the kitchen and bath in loft #3A were enthusiastically babbled in 2008. This enthusiastically:
Kitchen features Viking, SubZero, and Bosch Stainless Steel Appliances and a Built-in Marvel Wine Refrigerator; Pietro Cardosa Countertop and a lovely Glass Tile Backsplash. The Bathroom boasts Glass Tile Walls, Limestone Countertop and Floors as well as a Lacava Sink and Chrome Shower Fixtures
What’s odd is that the same agents who came up with that litany of proper proper names and materials in 2008 left the kitchen and bath out of the 2013 babble completely. Indeed, while they used a photo of the bath in the 2013 marketing (listing photo #6, obviously) they did not picture the kitchen. This is mere quibbling about a marketing campaign that took 17 days to get a contract at a near-record for the building (see below) and at a 20% premium to the last time this kitchen-bath combo sold, but quibbling offering informed opinion as Manhattan Loft Guy is what they pay me the big bucks for. (Oh, wait ….)
not quite a new (temporary?) building record
Only one loft to date at 100 Hudson Street has sold for more than the $1,488/ft that #3A just got. The much smaller, 1-bedroom only, “815 sq ft” loft #4C sold 7 months ago at $1,521/ft. That one was said to be “stunning” and gut renovated, though probably not nicer than #3A.
The prior record holder was the slightly larger, not as well finished loft #8E, which sold 17 months ago at $1,296/ft with much better light and views. These two loft sales seem rationally related in value, with #8E getting the benefit of light and views from the (real) 12 windows (floor plan, here) 60 feet higher than the 6 useful windows in #3A, and with #3A having brag-worthy kitchen and bath, those customized elements, and the boost of the stronger current market. (Don’t make me do the plus-minus adjustments between them, just accept the net-net $192/ft [15%] spread in favor of #3A. Please.)
not fitting a logical pattern
Note to self (and to readers) … I have been talking a bit about a second-bedroom-premium, here (in my September 3, jaw-dropping views provoke jaw-dropping price for 261 Broadway loft, and in my September 10, 133 West 28 Street loft sale shows the squeeze in 2-bedroom buyers) and in the Twitterverse (with @Tribeca Citizen). Note that the 100 Hudson Street sales in 2013 do not fit that theory, with the 1-bedroom-now-and-forever #4C beating the 2-bedroom #3A.
You see that sub-head above about building records? It’s possible that the $1,521/ft for #8E may be bested soon. If so, the new record-holder will sit on the same footprint as #3A, but is already optimized as a 1-bedroom-now-and-forever (without ruining the “stunning architect-designed” look and layout, with a “state-of-the-art chef’s kitchen with built-in bar [that] is open to the entertaining space”, among many other “superb luxury finishes”. That will be another sale that contradicts the theory that there is a second-bedroom-premium, at least in this corner of prime Tribeca.
© Sandy Mattingly 2013