Price per square foot

Realtors sometimes fudge the numbers. With new developments, there is even state-sanctioned fudging of the numbers whereby a fraction of the elevator hallways and gyms and lobbies were included. Your best bet is to always measure yourself, off a floorplan if you're browsing, confirming a measurement or two if you're serious.

I think the standard metric, if there is such a thing, is to do middle of outside wall to middle of outside wall. So yes, hallways, bathrooms, closets, interior walls, interior staircases, etc. all count.

In condos the offering plan and declaration will specify how the ft² were calculated. Very often it's from the outer edge of the outside wall to the middle of walls between units and hallways. Common elements aren't included.

For coops appraisers have a standard, but I don't know what it is. E.g., mine appraised at 1350 but building practice is to call it 1400. A lot of brokers don't specify ft² at all, unless there's some definitive measurement to go by. That way there's no argument with everybody having their own method.

I just go by dimensions of LR, BRs, etc. to get a small/average/big range.

I'm not sure this was a nefarious omission. If I recall correctly, some brokerages prohibit their agents from advertising sqft of coops.

The Real Estate Board of New York (REBNY), the trade association for brokerages, recently sent out two memos to its members.

One discusses square foot measures and the other covers a closely related subject, the definition of a room (as in "this is a three room apartment.") The latter memo is especially nice because it quotes chapter and verse of the law.

I posted both on my blog as one long entry:

http://gothamcityhomes.posterous.com/square-feet-rooms-defined-rebny-explains-all

As the first section explains, there are quite a few different approaches to measuring out there. I personally think closets with flooring (as opposed to cupboards) should always be included in square footage because in theory, at least, the closet's walls can be removed and free up the space for furniture, and I've seen this done in plenty of places. But lots of people don't think closets should count in the square footage cited.

Karla Harby
Charles Rutenberg Realty
kharby@crrnyc.com

Every thing inside of the outer wall should be measured (interior walls, closets). Most brokers simply inflate even though they know the actual square footage. REBNY could very easily specify the above guideline. UK has standard guidelines why not US.

When I measure a floorplan, I include everything within the four walls. How can you not? It's what you will own.
So if you have wasted space with foyers, hallways, etc., you have the option to break walls and turn it into more meaningful space for you. Yes expensive, well then you offer less per foot. For you it's a large renovation.
That aside, I find many problems with stated square footage. And it's not hard to measure. I'll take a floorplan listed, try to find a room with a 10 foot dimension, and with the control key and the roller on the mouse, enlarge or reduce the magnification on the screen until the dimension on screen for 10 feet equals one inch to a ruler I hold against the screen. Now you have a scale where every inch is ten feet, every quarter inch is 2.5 feet, etc. From there, any rudmentary knowledge of geometry will get your figures.
Now with floorplans, the perimeter lines are usually thicker, indicating thicker walls. In any case, I include the entire thickness, just to make sure I am getting largest case scenario the apartment can be. If it's within 10% of stated space, I leave it be.

Problem is, at least 80% of the time, it's not. ANd it's never UNDER. And the culprits are just as often the seller, if not more so than the broker. However, when a broker is notified, it should be on them to correct the ad, or lift the false stated footage.

Bottom line, if they insist on calling it the inflated footage, you just offer less per sq ft.

The main box is 17*65 as per floorplan handed out by the broker putting the apartment at 1300-1400 sq ft. The broker knows it but I am sure that she would not correct. Also, the issue is lazy buyers who do not want to do simple calculations.
http://www.corcoran.com/images/media/ListingFloorplans/2063496.1.gif

who cares what the standard is? measure it in the way that matters to you, and compare that way. For me, I measured from the interior of the outer walls, including everything. I never understood the concept that closets or bathrooms don't count, b/c I certainly utilize both of them daily. I ended up with a higher number, but who cares, b/c everything was standardized so I could easily compare.

I think it's crazy when the kids on the W'burg new-condos threads are talking about "wow, I got apt #6C at $670/sq ft, but at the suchandsuch building, they were selling a similar unit for $675, so I feel like I got a great deal".
Price per square foot is such a bogus number in NYRE, that the importance people place upon it is mind-boggling. Yes, there is a big difference btwn $800 and $1500, but comparing $800 to $850, and making a decision based on that small difference is nuts.
I've had many brokers tell me they are not allowed to quote square footage in a co-op. But, oddly, they'll quote it for a condo, and tell you to your face it's not accurate (well, some brokers will). The whole formula is a joke in NYC. In other states I've lived, I've found quoted numbers to be pretty accurate.

Owner of rentals here, I advertise/rent them myself

I don't list #'s, because:

-People have been sued over them (in sales at least)
-Most other #'s they are comparing them to are not accurate
-If I gave you my honest #, it would seem small vs the broker BS and you would not even come see it.

I would get over the whole square foot thing. You are buying/renting the apartment, and it wont change one bit if you were told that it was 1000 square feet, and it turns out to be actually 950 or 1050. The apartment will be exactly the same as it was. Go to the place, see how it feels, and decide if it is worth the money. $/sq ft is only one measure of value, and it ignores things like layout and ceiling height which can make a big difference. There are 900 sq foot places that feel larger than 1000 square foot places. Getting caught up on $/sq foot will lead you to buy the larger place with an inferior layout.

jhocle, if sq foot does not matter, why is it overstated not understated.

It matters to some buyers/renters, and that is why it is often overstated. I am saying that it shouldn't be the main (or even a large) focus of evaluating a place. It is a measure of size, but it fails to accurately measure how large a space feels (layout, lighting) or even actually is (ceiling height, etc). I am suggesting that using $/sq ft as the standard way to evaluate co op prices is a mistake. If that is your measure, you will get a large place with a bad layout, and think you got a deal.

Jhochle, your example(s) are a 5% difference. That's not what most complainers are arguing about.
Were seeing apartments that are 850 listed as 1000.
Square footage is a factor in comps, taxes, insurance, etc. Isn't it approriate to be judged on apples to apples?
Though I will agree that not all layouts are created equal, and that premium should be paying a higher $ per square foot, not called an inflated square foot.

Much the way single unit floor lofts go for a lower per square foot because elevators and stairs eat up so much.But they get more money when ceilling heights are high, have good layouts, bathrooms near bedrooms,etc.