Co-op of the Day: 40 Clarkson Avenue, #4F

Umm... if there's no doorman or any other amenities, why is $1,000 a month "pretty reasonable"?

Really? I am asking honestly. This seems quite high. Let's look at some math:

* 78 Units
* 850 sq ft / unit (guessing a conservative average)
* 66,300 sq ft of "living space"
* $0.80 per sq ft per month
* $53,040 monthly maintenance per month
* $636,480 maintenance fees per month

The tax bill was $115,000.

That leaves $521,480 per year (or $43,457 per month) to pay for heat, water, hallway lights, and maintenance. Let's assume a big chunk of that is saved each year (say 15%) for things like a new roof and replacing the boiler in the future... that's still almost $37,000 a month!

Take the overall "footprint" of the building (143 ft x 184 ft with chunk out of the middle)... the energy and *everyday* maintenance costs would have to be close to $3 a square foot! Or basically $6.70 per sq ft of "living space"

That seems a bit excessive... no? Have I missed something major here?

Actually... I didn't even notice that Property Shark included these other bits of information. No need to guess.

* 97,332 sq ft of residential space

In the 2007 calendar year, they report the co-op income (monthly fees) as $591,650. This worked out to be $0.50 per sq ft. And they still reported a $247,000 pre-tax surplus.

What could possibly justify a 66% increase in maintenance fees? (i.e., 50c --> 83c)

The point is not to argue if the maintenance "compares to what you've seen" -- it's to question whether or not the maintenance fees are "reasonable." Jaysus.

Why would I want to spend money on something if I think the money is not being used properly? Squaredrive, so you base all of your decisions on "what you've seen" -- I shop at Union Market and d'Agostino's so a $5 apple seems reasonable.

Obviously one has to look at the building's financials. I did just that. It says there was a 66% increase in monthly maintenance fees since 1-1/2 years ago!! That sounds downright frightening.

What if they "vote" -- the co-op board who may be long-term residents with no personal mortgages -- to increase the fees another 50% next year?! That's the point. It was bad enough when the monthly maintenance alone didn't seem justifiable given the building's expenses... but to see that there has been an ENORMOUS increase over the last year or so. That's bad.

Today this apartment costs $3000 per month (minus some tax deductions), next year it could be $3500 per month!!? That's why it's a major issue.

Kensingtonian - I thought I captured all of those expenses (I even figured in a 15% “savings” annually for big ticket items. Actually, they reported their 2007 expenses and they showed a $247,000 pre-tax surplus. That included things like $60,000 for the super -- no porter, there ain't no doorman here. And so on.

They ran a surplus at $0.50 per square foot. Average of $632 per unit per month. Now (according to this listing) the rate is at $0.83 per square foot. Average of $1,035 per unit per month.

That's a HUGE increase in a year or so. Another $4,800 a year! Don't you find this starling? And make you wonder about the fiscal health of this place with its "reasonable" maintenance fees?

Flatbushrising -- What's the deal? Was there a huge increase in fees? Do some residents not pay any and are subsidized by newer owners? Seems a bit odd.

Jaysus Squaredrive -- while I'm not looking at the "actual bills," I'm looking at the actual numbers that the Co-Op has reported!!!! And I'm saying that $1000 a month does not seem reasonable because it does not seem to be backed up by the reported expenses.

To me, "reasonable" does not mean in-line with NYC prices. That would be retarded when it comes to monthly maintenance fees.

We're not talking about the PRICE TAG -- we're talking about the MONTHLY MAINTENANCE fees. There is a HUGE difference here. The former is completely dependent on the market forces etc. and "reasonable" is a very flexible concept. When it comes to the latter -- "reasonable" has to be based DIRECTLY on expenses. And 83c for a building with no services seems very high. And, I will repeat, 83c is a startling figure when it appears to be a 66% increase over just 1-1/2 years ago. This makes it even less "reasonable."

Do you get it?

Kensingtonian - my first calculations were based of this unit alone, plus some extrapolation from the number of units etc. But then I noticed that PropertyShark.com listed financials form 2007. Expenses and Revenues. $591,650 in revenues and $344,814 in expenses.

Expenses:
Fuel $94,367
Light $16,911
Wages $60,037
Repair $68,474
Management $22,000
Insurance $33,201
Water $38,548
Lease $0
Miscellaneous $11,276
Land rent $0
Other $0
TOTAL $344,814

Kensingtonian -- I buy that... they probably have some sort of mortgage. And from the mortgage records on Property Shark, it seems to fit with the $100k figure.

However, that's a break even on the average $0.50 per square foot figures in 2007. Why would this unit have a monthly maintenance of $0.83 per square foot?

That's what's alarming.

K - I don't think I've ever see those figures before on Property Shark. I guess they must have had to disclose them in 2007 for some reason.

Kensingtonian -- It's just the free info on property shark. I may not be seeing the full picture.

You're probably right. And i am probably reacting more strongly because of the "that's the way it is" attitude leaking out of Squaredrive. I just don't like to hear this passive bullshit... that's what I see, must be acceptable. It's attitudes like that which make NYC unsustainable... co-op boards don't try that hard to contain expenses (even if they could), contractors charge crazy prices because "that's the way it is," and mediocre or worse apartments are rented for THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of dollars... because that's how it is. Must be reasonable because that's what I see!

I shouldn't bother, but... Squaredrive... don't be a DOUCHE BAG. My "audit" most definitely DID include taxes FROM THE BEGINNING... this figure of $115,000 -- that came from me. And, no, it didn't include a mortgage because it looked like they were only carrying about $500k, not that much I thought, though it could be more -- and oh, yeah, READ MY POSTS and don't just be a twat. Or shut up. You're very selective in your attacks on me -- you ignore the bigger point I'm trying to make simply to be a little bitch.

Kens -- makes total sense to me. I work in a unionized industry where 75% of the operating budget is the payroll and related expenses. The only opportunity to contain costs is within the 25%, so obviously there's little wiggle room.

You seem like a very reasonable person that gets my point. Giving a value like "reasonable" to monthly maintenance fees is ridiculous -- it's either fiscally sound situation or not. The co-op is spending their money wisely or they're not. You can say they are 'high' or 'low' relative to the purchase price (i.e., total monthly costs), but that's about it.

To say it's reasonable because that's what you see others charging is foolish... and it's totally asinine that I was attacked by Squaredrive for asking the question: Wait, but is it really "reasonable" -- i.e., justified? I guess he has so much money that such questions are foolish. You should just pay what the co-op board asks you without question.

Squaredrive -- obviously I'm not smarter than everyone else. If that were the case, I'd have a 3,500 sq ft house and spend my day saying things like today's House of the Day is very small and how my $4,000 a year property taxes are ruining my life. Things like that. Instead I bitch/vent about how poor I am and work in an industry where my potential income is fixed... and go back-and-forth with meanies like you. Oh, and also try to remind folks that a million dollars is a lot of money.

I wish it was *every* morning...

Hmm... I stand by what I said in spirit, but willingly accept factual corrections. 16% since 2005 ain't bad. Either the 2007 "income" reported on PropertyShark is eroneous... or this unit has a significantly different proportion of shares that knock it well above the average "$$ per square foot."

If it's the latter, I wonder what's so special about #4F.

If it's the former -- I wonder what those figures on PropertyShark were based on... and why are they wrong?