Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They bought in the West Bronx as well. Related Companies | City Pension Funds Bronx "The 35-building portfolio, purchased from SW Management, consists of medical offices and more than 2,000 apartment units located on Valentine Avenue, University Avenue and Fulton Street in the West Bronx."
Henna,I just noticed that at the very end of The Real Deal article you linked there is a a link to their source,which is an article in The Post. When you get to The Post article,at the end there is this quote from City Comptroller Scott Stringer:
"In a statement, City Comptroller Scott Stringer advised, “The preservation of workforce housing is vital to the health of New York City’s economy. I am pleased that the New York City Pension Funds were able to work with Related Cos. to help maintain affordability in residential buildings housing thousands of Bronx residents. This is a wise investment not only for the City Pension Funds, but for the future of The Bronx. We are looking forward to continuing our partnership with Related as we seek new opportunities to invest in New York City.”
So,apparently the city is involved in facilitating the transfer of ownership of large numbers properties to Related.
I find this very strange and of questionable legality.It raises a lot of questions.
Further mass corporatization,by design,of every aspect of NYC.
This article talks a little bit about Related and its relationship to affordable and rent stabilized units. In this case it's hard to know whether to believe Related or the company that's suing them. Investors sue Related for $390 million in Queens purchase
Also did you know that the entire parcel of land that makes up Willets Point in Queens (23 acres, right next to the 7 train in Corona) was sold for $1 to Related (partnering with Sterling Equities)?
Thanks.It's possible people might not know unless they do a little digging.Related did not buy the buildings in my area in the name of Related but through a corporation with a different name.They probably have thousands of smaller incorporated entities that are set up as holding companies.I guess that's why they call themselves Related Companies
Exactly. I was planning to suggest that, have not had time to look into it.
There is something I cannot quite remember, members of that group are also members of another "investment group" (so they call themselves) ... at one time I was more immediately conversant with the genaeology.
Agree with the comments about Equinox, I had forgotten that involvement - "uncomfortable" is not even a strong enough word. Also my gym.
P.S. The realdeal site is often a good resource because it is also a resource for developers.
Exactly. I was planning to suggest that, have not had time to look into it.
There is something I cannot quite remember, members of that group are also members of another "investment group" (so they call themselves) ... at one time I was more immediately conversant with the genaeology.
Agree with the comments about Equinox, I had forgotten that involvement - "uncomfortable" is not even a strong enough word. Also my gym.
P.S. The realdeal site is often a good resource because it is also a resource for developers.
I'm curious what people mean when they say Equinox is uncomfortable?
Something feels very wrong to me about this apparent relationship between NYC and Related.I feel like we have stumbled onto something that could be explosive.
While Related may be professing to be helping preserve affordable housing around the city,the thing that got me digging was the seeming glut of stabilized apartments for rent,clustered in a few buildings,some of them on the same block.In this neighborhood,you don't just suddenly have 20 apartments for rent in 2 side by side buildings recently purchased by the same entity unless there has been a concerted effort to get people out of those apartments.The asking rents were also absolute top market rents for the neighborhood,like $1,500 /mo for 1 bedrooms. I'd be willing to bet almost anything that the rents on those apartments were less than $1,000/mo for the previous stabilized tenants who were displaced.
It appears to me that Related is trying to pretend they are involved in preserving affordable housing around the city by buying these types of buildings but then turning around and practicing typical predatory landlord management techniques.And for this,they are then handed the keys to the most lucrative real estate mega projects all around the city. It just doesn't pass the smell test.
In the end,the city itself it turns out, is promoting the systematic wipe out it's stock of stabilized housing and putting it all in the hands of a single developer.Did we vote for this ?
Something feels very wrong to me about this apparent relationship between NYC and Related.I feel like we have stumbled onto something that could be explosive.
While Related may be professing to be helping preserve affordable housing around the city,the thing that got me digging was the seeming glut of stabilized apartments for rent,clustered in a few buildings,some of them on the same block.In this neighborhood,you don't just suddenly have 20 apartments for rent in 2 side by side buildings recently purchased by the same entity unless there has been a concerted effort to get people out of those apartments.The asking rents were also absolute top market rents for the neighborhood,like $1,500 /mo for 1 bedrooms. I'd be willing to bet almost anything that the rents on those apartments were less than $1,000/mo for the previous stabilized tenants who were displaced.
It appears to me that Related is trying to pretend they are involved in preserving affordable housing around the city by buying these types of buildings but then turning around and practicing typical predatory landlord management techniques.
Right. Which is rapidly becoming post-predatory, meaning that this logic is simply an assumption.
Do research well, do speak out, and do encourage as many as possible to do the same.
Caveat: Then, do not be surprised when your "colleagues" take the money and run. I have seen this again and again.
Something feels very wrong to me about this apparent relationship between NYC and Related.I feel like we have stumbled onto something that could be explosive.
While Related may be professing to be helping preserve affordable housing around the city,the thing that got me digging was the seeming glut of stabilized apartments for rent,clustered in a few buildings,some of them on the same block.In this neighborhood,you don't just suddenly have 20 apartments for rent in 2 side by side buildings recently purchased by the same entity unless there has been a concerted effort to get people out of those apartments.The asking rents were also absolute top market rents for the neighborhood,like $1,500 /mo for 1 bedrooms. I'd be willing to bet almost anything that the rents on those apartments were less than $1,000/mo for the previous stabilized tenants who were displaced.
It appears to me that Related is trying to pretend they are involved in preserving affordable housing around the city by buying these types of buildings but then turning around and practicing typical predatory landlord management techniques.And for this,they are then handed the keys to the most lucrative real estate mega projects all around the city. It just doesn't pass the smell test.
In the end,the city itself it turns out, is promoting the systematic wipe out it's stock of stabilized housing and putting it all in the hands of a single developer.Did we vote for this ?
In the end nothing will happen. Stabilized apartments, if there are too many low paying tenants in the building (under $1000) are poorly maintained and are often crumbling because there is no incentive for the owner to invest money in repairs, much less upgrades if there isn't going to be a return on the investment. So basically you get what you pay for.
What ends up happening to these buildings is they end up with many code violations, and in a worst case scenario the city gives a vacate the premises order. Of course it takes a fantastic amount of money to do a gut renovation to make the building livable, and when that happens it's bye, bye rent stabilization status. (at least in the more expensive parts of NYC).
Related is not the only large developer making major investments in NYC.
And yes, we did vote for this. These developers get huge tax credits for developing this real estate.
I read that the skyview parc mall and lux condo complexes in flushing are built/managed by related.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
