Marine Drive Apartments in trouble on the waterfront

[4248]

Yea - what he said -

[WNYresident]

This is kind of a non-issue unless the city can prove it has the ability to property market and sell potentially valuable land for development that will actually bring in tax dollars back to the city. Look at how land at canalside, harborcenter, the waterfront, Ellicott st. and others are handled, and I think it's still clear that they can't. If they kick out these low rent (but still tax-paying) apartments only to put on it's site a subsidized museum, or tax-free condo, then it may not be much of a net gain. Let's allow the city economy and waterfront development to grow a while longer until this Marine Drive site becomes so valuable that developers are begging to get their hands on it without major subsidies.

It's not a non issue.

THe buildings need millions of dollars worth of repairs from what we have been reading. Raise the rents to cover the repairs or they need to sell the buildings. Simple as that. If home owners taxes go up or they can't afford to repair their homes they sell them.

Why should this group of people be any different? NOW I'm not referring to the truly elderly or truly disabled.

[300miles]

Raise the rents to cover the repairs

They're already talking about doing that. It's right in the article:


"Tenants and sources at the authority said the BMHA has discussed raising rents, at first for new residents, and later, for those already living there. One recent applicant was told that an apartment that formerly cost $392.50 will cost $567 – a hike of 44 percent"

[WNYresident]

And yes you are correct. I said raise the rents to cover the repairs.

I didn't say for "new residents" but leave current residents having others to pay for the repairs "their" homes need. Raise them all at once.

Why is the BHMA involved with the complex anyways?

They are just a drain on the revenue that those apartments generate.

[300miles]

It says "raising rents, ..., later, for those already living there"
They can't raise rents immediately for people who already signed leases.
When the lease is up for renewal, then they can increase the rent.

[4248]

Just spit ballin here:

The rent increases could/should be based on income and market
- If a person is on social security, disability type situations
- rent should be lower than other working tenants with larger incomes.

Yearly income checks and IRS statements should be reviewed and verified.

Sub letting/renting or family pass downs should not be allowed under any circumstance . People allow family members to move in or life partners without proper permission or notice. Some actually use relatives on fixed income to apply for a unit - then that person turns the unit over to others.

The number of occupants for each unit should be strictly enforced/verified.

Renters should not be able to rent a two bedroom and change the configuration. Some people have rented two bedroom units and converted them to single larger units.

Also - why not have some units rented at market value as they become available. You could allow a percentage to be rented at current market value without subsidies. If a person or family wants a two bedroom and they make over $30-40 thousand a year(Just a starting point-could be adjusted) - then they pay market rate for a standard two bedroom ! (If that's legal - I don't know if it is or could be ?)


Management should produce a yearly maintenance plan/schedule and projected costs. They are over paid and seem to be unaccountable for property deterioration and lack of maintenance plans.

Just some ideas/opinions.

[FisherRd]

It says "raising rents, ..., later, for those already living there"
They can't raise rents immediately for people who already signed leases.
When the lease is up for renewal, then they can increase the rent.

Will it cover the costs? No. Which is the obvious point.
$567 for a months rent including utilities isn't covering the costs. You have to be aware of this, right?

[300miles]

Actually my point to Rez was that you can't raise rents on people that already have existing leases. They have to wait for lease renewals.

Regarding the increases on new leases covering the costs, they can't just take a $300 apartment and suddenly start charging $900 because nobody would pay for that in what is still essentially a project-style apartment building. Just because it's on the waterfront doesn't mean they can charge luxury rents without drastic renovations first.

[WNYresident]

Actually my point to Rez was that you can't raise rents on people that already have existing leases. They have to wait for lease renewals.

Regarding the increases on new leases covering the costs, they can't just take a $300 apartment and suddenly start charging $900 because nobody would pay for that in what is still essentially a project-style apartment building. Just because it's on the waterfront doesn't mean they can charge luxury rents without drastic renovations first.

I understand they would need to follow the yearly lease price. It would depend on when the lease expires. They will need to raise all the rents so that needed repairs can be made. THere is no other choice. Why should other people pay for needed repairs?

[300miles]

I understand they would need to follow the yearly lease price. It would depend on when the lease expires. They will need to raise all the rents so that needed repairs can be made. THere is no other choice. Why should other people pay for needed repairs?

And they will raise all the rents eventually. They already said that. But they need to start with new leases first. Then later they will get to existing tenants.

[WNYresident]

They estimate that it would cost at least $42 million for long-needed upgrades at the aging complex.

I wonder if they can generate enough revenue to do the repairs. I read something like $42,000,000 in repairs.

$42,000,000 / 600 apartments = $70,000 an apartment. I wonder what time frame they want to work with to make the needed repairs.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

I wonder if they can generate enough revenue to do the repairs. I read something like $42,000,000 in repairs.

$42,000,000 / 600 apartments = $70,000 an apartment. I wonder what time frame they want to work with to make the needed repairs.

It's not possible. 2 things are either going to happen.

1 - The City/State/Fed/Taxpayer funds the $42M in repairs

2 - The buildings are sold and the residents are forced to move

[joe d.]

It's not possible. 2 things are either going to happen.

1 - The City/State/Fed/Taxpayer funds the $42M in repairs

2 - The buildings are sold and the residents are forced to move

The buildings should be sold to private sector...and be put back on the city tax rolls. The present property taxpayers are losing out, and subsidize city services...for which these buildings get for free. These buildings should be forced to pay their fair share.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

The buildings should be sold to private sector...and be put back on the city tax rolls. The present property taxpayers are losing out, and subsidize city services...for which these buildings get for free. These buildings should be forced to pay their fair share.

But that's racist! You hate poor people! How would you feel if someone wanted to kick you out of your home?

[WNYresident]

And they will raise all the rents eventually. They already said that. But they need to start with new leases first. Then later they will get to existing tenants.

I understand they have leases. What I should have said is you can't grand father people in just because they are there. Leases are year to year so there shouldn't be an issue.