Wednesday, June 10, 2015

Fear over rent hike in Kew Gardens Hills

From Crains:

Eight months after Manhattan-based Hudson Realty Capital sold the biggest residential portfolio in Queens in nearly two decades—a 65-year-old, 53-building Kew Gardens complex with 1,270 apartments—work to spruce up the property has begun. New lighting is being installed, front doors replaced and brickwork repointed, and two security guards have been hired to police the parcel, which sprawls over five city blocks.

Now residents await news of what will come next. Having paid $216 million for its asset and committed to undertaking well over $10 million in renovations, Manhattan-based A&E Realty will likely want to raise rents on the 1,270 one- and two-bedroom, mostly rent-regulated, apartments.

Although the new landlord declined to comment on its plans, residents note that rents in the three-and four-story redbrick and clapboard buildings—which stretch across a tree-studded landscape that runs from Kissena Boulevard to 150th Street and 72nd to 75th roads—have long been relatively inexpensive in keeping with the buildings' down-at-the-heels condition.

Based on the improvements, the landlord could increase rents several hundred dollars per unit, but tenants interviewed said they'd be willing to pay more for better maintenance. The landlord has not jacked up rents at other complexes after renovations it has made.


Anonymous said...

Probably kew gardens hills not kew gardens. The picture is kew gardens??? No matter how many major capital improvements are done the maximum rent increases cannot exceed 6% a year.

Anonymous said...

MCI increases continue, even after the landlord recoup his costs. But MCI will be approved for improvement to buildings, not for security guards.

Anonymous said...

Try sprucing up borough hall across the street. What a dump!

Anonymous said...

pretty sure that's incorrect, i believe these were built in the 50's and had to be before '47 to qualify for rent stabilization. they can raise it as much as they want if that's the case.

Anonymous said...

Its C/O was issued in 1960, but the building was built in the 20's.

Anonymous said...

That picture is wrong, but the location is right, it's in KGH.

The renovations they're doing there actually look nice - planting pretty bushes, putting in actual metal fencing instead of the hideous plastic fencing currently in vogue.

But if it ends up raising the rents on one of the last affordable locations left in the neighborhood, it won't be worth it.