| Summary | National Percentile | Rank vs Metro |
|---|---|---|
| Housing | 45th | Good |
| Demographics | 47th | Poor |
| Amenities | 19th | Good |
Multifamily Valuation
| Property Details | |
|---|---|
| Address | 45 Dardess Dr, Chatham, NY, 12037, US |
| Region / Metro | Chatham |
| Year of Construction | 2003 |
| Units | 37 |
| Transaction Date | --- |
| Transaction Price | --- |
| Buyer | --- |
| Seller | --- |
45 Dardess Dr, Chatham NY Multifamily Investment
Newer 2003-vintage asset in a predominantly older housing stock area, with neighborhood occupancy competitive among Hudson neighborhoods, according to WDSuite’s CRE market data.
The property sits in a Rural neighborhood within the Hudson, NY metro, rated B by WDSuite. Local occupancy for the neighborhood is competitive among Hudson neighborhoods (ranked 2 of 45), suggesting a stable leasing backdrop relative to the metro. Rent-to-income trends indicate manageable affordability pressure, which can support retention and steady collections.
Daily-needs access is serviceable for a rural setting: café density ranks 2 of 45 metro neighborhoods and is top quartile nationally, while grocery access ranks 6 of 45 and is competitive among Hudson neighborhoods. Park, pharmacy, and childcare options rank toward the bottom (45 of 45), so amenity-driven premiums may be limited without on-site or nearby substitutes.
Within a 3-mile radius, demographics point to a modestly expanding renter pool over the next few years, with households projected to increase and average household size edging lower—both supportive of multifamily demand depth and absorption. The share of housing units that are renter-occupied is expected to rise, broadening the tenant base and supporting occupancy stability.
With an average neighborhood construction year near 1925, a 2003 delivery positions this property as newer than much of the local stock—an advantage for curb appeal and operations versus older comparables, while still warranting normal mid-life system updates or selective renovations to maintain competitive positioning.

WDSuite does not provide a published neighborhood crime rank for this location, so investors should benchmark conditions against county and metro trends and rely on standard due diligence (local law enforcement briefings, insurer loss runs, and property-level incident history). Use comparative context rather than block-level assumptions when underwriting.
Regional employment is anchored by technology and corporate services reachable by car, supporting commuter convenience and a diversified renter base. The list below highlights a notable nearby employer relevant to leasing stability.
- IBM — technology & corporate offices (21.9 miles)
Built in 2003 with 37 units, 45 Dardess Dr offers a relatively newer product in a B-rated, Rural neighborhood where occupancy performance is competitive among the 45 Hudson metro neighborhoods. The neighborhood’s rent-to-income dynamics suggest manageable affordability pressure that can support retention, and within a 3-mile radius WDSuite points to a growing renter-occupied share and more households—signals that typically reinforce leasing stability and absorption. Based on commercial real estate analysis from WDSuite, the asset’s newer vintage versus the area’s older stock can be a differentiator if paired with targeted mid-life upgrades.
Counterpoints for underwriting include limited nearby parks, pharmacies, and childcare—tempering amenity premiums—and potential competition from ownership options depending on submarket pricing. Overall, the combination of occupancy resilience, an expanding tenant base, and a competitive vintage supports a durable, operations-first investment case.
- Competitive neighborhood occupancy among 45 Hudson metro neighborhoods supports stability
- 2003 vintage is newer than much of the local stock, with value-add via selective mid-life updates
- 3-mile view indicates more households and a higher renter-occupied share, expanding the tenant base
- Manageable rent-to-income dynamics may aid retention and reduce turnover costs
- Risk: limited nearby parks/pharmacies and potential competition from ownership alternatives