« Condo of the Day: 153 Lincoln Place, #3C Streetlevel: Flowers for Dumbo »

October 21, 2009

House of the Day: 544 Washington Avenue

544-Washington-Avenue-1009.jpg
The two-family house at 544 Washington was recently renovated and appears to be in move-in condition. The only catch is that they have to find a brownstone buyer who doesn't give a hoot about original details and is happy with a Home Depot-esque kitchen. Another negative is that this block of Washington has a lot of traffic on it. On the plus side, the taxes are quite low at $1,800. What do you make of the asking price of $1,375,000?
544 Washington Avenue [Corcoran] GMAP P*Shark





Posted by Brownstoner at 1:10 PM | Comments (42)
Categories: Clinton Hill, HOTD

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/11944

Comments

Oh my god, not to my taste. (I'm being polite.) Well, I guess that's a predictable comment from me.

Posted by: mopar at October 21, 2009 1:16 PM

Its a 15 foot wide house too. I would say 1.1 is a reasonable ask for this.

Posted by: wasder at October 21, 2009 1:19 PM

Details gone, yes. But nice staircase and doors remain...details could be restored.

The kitchen isn't that bad actually. The ensuite master bath unfortunately is ensuite to the smaller rear bedroom but I guess if the street is busy, that's what you want.

Then layout is good with the rental unit on the garden level.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 21, 2009 1:26 PM

Well, it looks clean, that's something. Other than that, the house is narrow and charmless, and the basement duplex layout looks dungeon-worthy. It looks like they tried to fit a 20lb cat in a small paper bag.

Posted by: Maly at October 21, 2009 1:31 PM

The Home Depot is fairly convenient to this location.

Posted by: tybur6 at October 21, 2009 1:31 PM

Lack of details do not bother me so much, but the width of this brownstone is pretty small 15 feet wide is tight. In my opinion the going price of $1,375,000 is pushing it regardless of location.

Posted by: mysideofstuy at October 21, 2009 1:32 PM

quote:
On the plus side, the taxes are quite low at $1,800.

and you people WONDER why brooklyn public schools SUCK SO BAD? ridiculous. taxes on home prices need to INCREASE 10 fold if you actually want the little monsters of brooklyn to get a decent education. ridiculous! im so tired of having to pay like 1/3 of my salary to pay for crappy city schools that I will never have a need for while people in this pay pittance on taxes on their homes. BARF! sorry for the rant, but this has been bothering me for quite some time now.


*rob*

Posted by: Butterfly at October 21, 2009 1:33 PM

Oh, and to add some snark... the current residents have horrible taste in home furnishings. Jaysus.

Posted by: tybur6 at October 21, 2009 1:34 PM

"10 minutes from Atlantic Mall" is NOT A SELLING POINT

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 21, 2009 1:35 PM

I doubt if they can get a million for this. It has nothing going for it. Not location, not size, not beauty, OK low taxes. Actually, it looks kind of dumpy to me. Our housing expectations are so low in NYC. A million dollars! Forget it. A roomy apartment in one of the vintage bland-brick highrises in Clinton Hill would be a better value than this.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at October 21, 2009 1:41 PM

Dark dark dark. Why would yo put your office in the front and cut off that light to the living room/dining room? And the rental- may as well be a mole tunnel.

Posted by: bxgrl at October 21, 2009 1:46 PM

Given that the narrower house on South Oxford (only _10 seconds_ to the Atlantic Mall) could bring in only $1.1M, there is very little reason to think this house (even with the cramped rental) should go above 900K.

Posted by: Boerumresident at October 21, 2009 1:48 PM

Also, is that a legitimate bathroom in the cellar?

Posted by: Boerumresident at October 21, 2009 1:51 PM

Also the listing is riddled with inaccuracies (I'm being polite.)
The property tax is $2,600. You may note that the square footage is not in the listing, but from the floor plan looks to be about 3,000 gross sf- I am not counting the basement rec room, but I am including the 600 sf extension, which may be illegal. The property has a very wonky title history, it seems to be passed back and forth every other year. *alarm bells ring*

Posted by: Maly at October 21, 2009 2:00 PM

(The lower duplex has four bedrooms,)
I only see two. Am I missing something.
Love the Michelin man sofas.

Posted by: Tara in the Slope at October 21, 2009 2:02 PM

The widget doesn't go low enough for this one.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at October 21, 2009 2:02 PM

Completely agree with you Rob.

So... taxes on this are $1800 a year and the Coop of the Day with basically the same price tag is $7400 a year.

What the Fuck!?

The lawmakers in this little town have to get some balls and stand up to the House-owners and make them pay their fair share and stop raping the apartment/condo folks. (colorful language intentional)

Seriously... a $1 million property should have the same fucking taxes... no matter what shape it takes. I pay the same tax on a $50 bottle of perfume and a $50 Xbox game.

I know the argument -- the homeowners have a strong voice. Well, there are a hell of a lot more condo/coop owners getting a broomstick in the bunghole. Just doesn't make sense. And it needs to be fixed!!! If you spend millions of dollars on a property, it's completely absurd to think you should only pay 0.18% annual taxes!!!

Posted by: tybur6 at October 21, 2009 2:10 PM

It is 16 and a half wide according to propshark not 15'. and 3500 sq ft'.
(remember all real estate dimensions are from outside footprint not interior but you all knew that cause u know realestate).
If hate the homedepot look of the kitch..order new cabinet doors to your liking. Should get good income from rental and nice size duplex (even has the required powder room on parlor level).

Posted by: Petebklyn at October 21, 2009 2:15 PM

Tybur, it's not strictly a condo/coop vs houses. The taxes are determined by just how long ago did you get a COO times what income fo you derive from the property. It favors the old against the young, the locals vs. the transients and the residential vs. The commercial. Is this fair? Not really, when someone very rich can buy into a very old house's advantageous property tax.
Politicians are pretty smart though, few people vote in NY, but the 60+ homeowner set does vote.

Posted by: Maly at October 21, 2009 2:23 PM

tybur6, buy a house.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 21, 2009 2:25 PM

DIBS -- I'd love to buy a house... but I can't.

But what I would like is funding for my public services!! Why is NYC looking to the federal government for stimulus money and cutting services left and right? It's because someone is living in a $3 million house and paying $3500 in taxes. That's fucking retarded.

Meanwhile, if I try to find a $250,000 apartment... I'm probably gonna get slapped with a tax bill of the same or similar amount.

Oh, unless there's some retarded multi-decade tax abatement deal (something that makes NO FUCKING SENSE in my head) and makes me wonder how this city produces any revenue.

Posted by: tybur6 at October 21, 2009 2:35 PM

again tyburg, as always this city is highly discriminatory against people who dont breed and don't want to live in ridiculously large brown rowhouses! something should be done about it, but like someone mentioned above, it's status quo. and since i dont vote, maybe i SHOULD shut up, but i wont shut up cuz that aint my style

*rob*

Posted by: Butterfly at October 21, 2009 2:40 PM

His/hers excercise bikes. Awwwwww.

Is that recessed lighting?

***Bill Thompson for Mayor***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at October 21, 2009 2:50 PM

Yeah, breeders like dibs get every break.

Posted by: Maly at October 21, 2009 2:55 PM

DIBS is quite the exception.

*rob*

Posted by: Butterfly at October 21, 2009 2:57 PM

People who make a lot of money in NYC pay a lot of taxes. NYC is no tax haven for the rich.
Until relatively recently most wealthy New Yorkers lived in co-ops. People of modest means by and large owned the old, undesirable and un-fashionable houses in the Boros. "Brooklyn" was code for "working class".
Real estate assessments have not kept pace with the incredibly speedy spike in house prices in the boros, but never fear, the adjustment is coming. People who buy these homes and expect their taxes to remain so low are dreaming.


Posted by: Minard Lafever at October 21, 2009 2:58 PM

well that is awesome news to my ears minard. it's about time. you want to pretend your section of brooklyn is Beverly Hills East, then fine, you should start paying beverly hills style taxes. and while youre at it, introduce some of your children to a bar of soap.

*rob*

Posted by: Butterfly at October 21, 2009 3:03 PM

rob, most New Yorkers who own property pay some of the highest overall tax rates in the nation. Naturally, you wouldn't know this.

Posted by: denton at October 21, 2009 3:06 PM

Actually denton, real estate taxes outside NYC tend to be higher. NYC has the wage tax, a high sales tax and a huge base of revenue from hotel & meals & services taxes.

But, rob is right. I paid more than 2X the taxes in My 750 sq ft manhattan condo than I do for my 2,560 sq ft bed Stuy brownstone. My taxes would be double to triple if my house was in CH, PS or BH.

I am not complaining

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 21, 2009 3:14 PM

Denton, the issue is not "most New Yorkers" --- the fact is that "most New Yorkers" (including renters paying their landlord's taxes) are SUBSIDIZING thousands of property owners that are currently paying disgustingly low taxes. This property is a case in point, but there are many many many more. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if your house was a great example of this too!

There should not be a huge disparity between tax liability.

If you own a house and it has stayed in your immediate family... I can see tax increase caps. So, yeah, your taxes may be relatively low. HOWEVER, and this is a big however, if you sell the property for millions?! Why should the new own not be freshly assessed?! (And a predictable, appropriate tax liability applied to the property.)

If I buy a house for $3 million and the old lady that just kicked the bucket was paying $2000 a year -- should this really be passed on to me?! That is just plain fucking stupid.

I don't really care what "most New Yorkers" pay -- I care that a certain number of property owners are effectively gaming the system and harming the City as a whole... including causing harm to "most New Yorkers."

Posted by: tybur6 at October 21, 2009 3:16 PM

I have a stupid question.
How are property taxes assessed? I thought it's based on home value and assessed annually.
(I'm not a homeowner, so bare with me.)

Posted by: Tara in the Slope at October 21, 2009 3:21 PM

To be simplistic... Property taxes are assessed through a very complex formula. There's a "tax rate" for different types of properties -- and then this is applied to the property's "value."

It's the value part that makes the tax liability so retarded. Basically, the baseline is when the Certificate of Occupancy was issued... or when property taxes started, whichever is earlier :-)

Then there are caps on annual increases... so if the house was assessed in 1945, it doesn't really matter how much the house is worth now (or not much at all). The taxes are bases on the 1945 value + the annual % increase.

Newer places and houses that were converted to condos/co-ops recently are paying HUGE taxes. Because instead of paying taxes on 1945 prices, you're paying taxes on the 2004 prices (or whenever the C of O was issued).

But guess what! The taxes are attached to the PROPERTY, not the owner. So, if you sell your house based on 1945 prices for $24 million, the new owner "inherits" your old tax rate... so, there's a good chance the new owner will pay a couple thousand dollars for a multi-million dollar mansion.

Posted by: tybur6 at October 21, 2009 3:39 PM

Class 1 properties (1-3 family owner occupied homes) are taxed based on 6% of market value. Other classes are taxed at 45% of their market value. Market values cannot increase by more than 6% per annum or 20% over a five year period. Houses are just plain taxed at a lower level than condos. It's stupid - and I'm a homeowner.

See page 17 of the document linked below for more detail.

http://emma.msrb.org/EP332052-EP37100-EP659128.pdf

Posted by: trudylou at October 21, 2009 3:53 PM

In most cases when brownstones are renovated, spiffed up and expanded, the assessment shoots up. In Brooklyn Heights the assessment on recently renovated and improved houses are comparable to most of the burbs. In other words, very high. And DIBS, what is happening today in CH, PS, and BH is heading your way sooner or later. Keep in mind that the more you pay in real estate taxes the less you pay in Federal and State taxes. The important thing in NYC is to make a a great deal of money. Everything else sorts itself out.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at October 21, 2009 3:57 PM

Oh one more detail. We co-op owners have been getting substantial rebates on our taxes from the city for about five years. How long that will continue no one can say, but it has been great so far.

Posted by: Minard Lafever at October 21, 2009 4:00 PM

Minard... while it makes me sad, your statement couldn't be truer. "The important thing in NYC is to make a a great deal of money. Everything else sorts itself out." If only... herrumph. I guess I should give up my career working for the "Public Good" -- it doesn't pay enough.

Posted by: tybur6 at October 21, 2009 4:06 PM

Thanks for the info. I'm still a bit confused, but I think I get the gist of it.
So homes aren't assessed every year? Just when you renovate or change a C of O?

Posted by: Tara in the Slope at October 21, 2009 4:06 PM

quote:
The important thing in NYC is to make a a great deal of money.

Winner for the Dumbest Quote of the Day Award! i have never heard such hogwash in my entire life


*rob*

Posted by: Butterfly at October 21, 2009 4:21 PM

RE Taxes are capped at an 6% rise per annum. yes, assessments change.

And homeowners were getting those rebates too. I was amazed that i got the full $400 when I pay under $2,000 in RE taxes in Brooklyn.

The rebates are over fells, for everyone. At least for a couple of years, probably forever.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 21, 2009 4:35 PM

I had not heard the co-op property tax rebates are over.
Are you sure?

Posted by: Minard Lafever at October 21, 2009 5:03 PM

liv and din have no windows. why would you make an office in the front of the house and take away the windows, then 2 small windows on the side of the building in the kitchen.
apparently no one was thinking about light and ventilation here.

Posted by: STARGAZER at October 22, 2009 9:17 AM

I hate this block, every Sunday the whole block is crammed with churchgoers double parked up and down the street and NYPD Traffic does nothing about it. It is also a major thoroughfare for people heading from PH/CH to Atlantic Terminal/Center.

Posted by: bohuma at October 22, 2009 11:04 AM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions