Structural wall disappeared!

Missing structural wall is just one of the many weird things about this listing which shows a current floor plan composed of 6 bedrooms/baths along with a small living room and galley kitchen. Does this make any sense? Obviously these were originally three apts. but is this "as is" floor plan even accurate? Looks like they took back the hallway separating the three units. Add to that the obviously rendered photos which are not labeled as such and I might call it misleading advertising. But really it's just wrong, no?

Another example perhaps of why combining apts. is not always a good idea. However, there are many combined units at this project which I think says a lot about how much better this area has gotten since first built. Was this originally a rental?

Common charges are high and proposed layout requires an almost gutting of these space so I ask - Is $1,000 psf a reasonable cost for what basically amounts to a shell?

I worked near to this project in the mid-1980's and remember when it was built. It was quite a pioneering project. Area was not called Tribeca back then which was considered to be north of Chambers Street but called City Hall, a designation that apparently no longer exists.

There are no structural walls in this sort of construction. That wall presumably is oversized because of the plumbing stack for the bathroom. Similar issue nevertheless -- unless this is the top floor there are going to be waste and water lines that at the very least need to be boxed in.

I always thought this building was all rental. I know a lot of people who rented here over the years. I still would not call this tribeca.

I am using structural wall loosely to include wall with mechanicals. I think the area now is indeed considered Tribeca as Wholefoods changed everything.