| Summary | National Percentile | Rank vs Metro |
|---|---|---|
| Housing | 9th | Poor |
| Demographics | 53rd | Best |
| Amenities | 0th | Poor |
Multifamily Valuation
| Property Details | |
|---|---|
| Address | 104 S Main St, Belfast, NY, 14711, US |
| Region / Metro | Belfast |
| Year of Construction | 1996 |
| Units | 24 |
| Transaction Date | --- |
| Transaction Price | --- |
| Buyer | --- |
| Seller | --- |
104 S Main St, Belfast NY Multifamily Investment
Small-unit asset in a rural Allegany County location where renter demand is modest but stable, according to WDSuite’s CRE market data, positioning it for disciplined operations rather than rapid growth.
Belfast is a Rural neighborhood in Allegany County with a neighborhood rating of B and ranks 21 out of 44 metro neighborhoods — above the metro median and competitive among Allegany County sub-areas. Based on commercial real estate analysis from WDSuite, this translates to a balanced setting for smaller multifamily, with performance driven more by local employment and housing costs than by amenity density.
Amenity density is limited (few cafes, groceries, restaurants, and parks within close reach), so day-to-day convenience is car-oriented. For multifamily investors, this typically favors tenants prioritizing value and proximity to local jobs over lifestyle amenities, which can support steady, needs-based renter demand but may limit premium pricing power.
Ownership costs are comparatively accessible in this neighborhood (median home values are low relative to national levels), which can create competition with entry-level homeownership. However, the renter-occupied share is about 15% of housing units, indicating a smaller but identifiable tenant base for studios and value-oriented rentals. The neighborhood occupancy rate is on the lower side, suggesting leasing strategies should emphasize retention and careful underwriting of downtime.
The average building stock in the neighborhood skews older, but this property’s 1996 vintage is newer than much of the surrounding inventory. That relative youth can help on competitive positioning versus older stock, though investors should still plan for system updates and modernization over a hold period.
Comparable safety benchmarks specific to this neighborhood were not available in WDSuite at the time of analysis. For underwriting, investors typically review multi-year trends using county and state reporting and compare against similar Rural neighborhoods in Allegany County to contextualize risk. Absent direct figures, a prudent approach is to corroborate perceptions with local enforcement data and insurance quotes.
Local employment is primarily dispersed across small businesses, public services, and regional trades, which tends to support workforce housing and commute convenience within the immediate area. Specific nearby corporate employers with verified distances were not available in the dataset used for this review.
Built in 1996 with 24 units averaging approximately 327 square feet, the property skews toward compact layouts that can target single-occupant or value-focused renters. Relative to the older neighborhood stock, the vintage offers a competitive edge on basic systems and curb appeal, while still presenting potential renovation and energy-efficiency upgrades over the hold. According to CRE market data from WDSuite, neighborhood renter-occupied housing is modest and amenity density is limited, so the thesis centers on disciplined operations, retention, and measured rent growth rather than outsized lease-up velocity.
Low ownership costs in the area can compete with renting, but they also stabilize monthly housing outlays for tenants, supporting steady collections when managed with conservative screening and renewals. Underwriting should account for a smaller renter pool and lower neighborhood occupancy, with value-add focused on durable finishes, functional upgrades, and expense control to sustain margins.
- 1996 vintage is newer than much of the area’s stock, offering a relative competitive position with targeted modernization potential.
- Compact unit mix supports rent-per-foot optimization and appeals to single-occupant/workforce renters.
- Operations-focused thesis: prioritize retention, renewals, and expense management in a rural setting with limited amenity premiums.
- Risk: smaller renter base and relatively low neighborhood occupancy can slow lease-up and require conservative downtime assumptions.
- Risk: accessible ownership costs may compete with renting; position upgrades and utilities to reinforce value for tenants.