by Ray Alcorn | ||||
| At least once a week, someone posts to the commercial newsgroup seeking a way to finance 100% of the acquisition cost for an income property. I suppose it is fueled by the late night infomercials touting no money down deals and using pictures of Class A apartment buildings, never saying the one describes the other, but leaving a strong impression that that is the case. The way it comes across, one would believe that all you have to do to become a millionaire in real estate is to acquire the properties with “OPM”, meaning Other People’s Money, and then just sit back and collect the big fat checks they like to flash on the screen. Television is a wonderful thing. After the story is told and the product is sold, no one in the TV cast has to stick around and collect rent. The quest for 100% financing in real estate reminds me of that joke about a dog chasing a car... what's he going to do when he catches it? I wonder, has he thought this through? I laugh every time I see a dog chasing a car, and think how much he is just like an investor high on the “desire to acquire.” That’s the peculiar state of mind that surfaces when the target of our desires looks so good that we’ll do anything to get it, with no regard for the consequences. In real estate, the “desire to acquire” is present when the investor is willing to do anything to get a deal, any deal. Convinced that once you own real estate you’re on your way to the good life, they tap their home equity, or find a seller that will owner finance, and get a bank loan on the bank’s terms, not theirs. Now they’re in a deal, but have they thought it through? Let’s take a look at what happens when you “catch” the 100% leveraged deal. The infomercial gurus teach that if you find the right seller, then you can structure the deal so that there is no money out of your pocket, and leave the impression that there will be plenty of money in your pocket after you do the deal. More often than not, that’s not the result. Let's say that you do find a lender that will loan 80%, and a seller that will carry 20%. In all but the rarest of cases, the combined debt payments are going to eat up all but the tiniest portion of the cash flow. It has to be this way, and I can show you why. Instead of projecting how much you’re going to make from the deal, think about it terms of the occupancy level it takes to break even. Then consider the difference between physical occupancy and economic occupancy. Let’s face it, the deals that we look at with decent prices, motivated sellers, and opportunities for turnaround or upside are usually not the cream of the crop. If it were an “A” property, with well-screened tenants it probably wouldn’t be on the market at a price that would interest us anyway. So it’s pretty likely you’re going to inherit a less than stellar group of tenants. The first advice here is to factor delinquency into your projections to avoid a rude awakening later. Comparing the economic occupancy to the physical occupancy can be an eye-opening exercise. Economic occupancy differs from physical occupancy, sometimes widely so. Economic occupancy is calculated as the actual cash collected divided by the total potential rents. The answer will be a percentage, and it is important, as we will see in a moment. Delinquency in apartment rent rolls is a fact of life. You are not going to collect 100% of the money due, on time, 100% of the time. It is not uncommon for even well-run apartment buildings to run a 5% delinquency rate, and poorly operated projects may run a 30% or higher rate. For calculation purposes, if the rent is past due past the due date it is not included in rent received. In the same way, vacant apartments are also a fact of life in the apartment business. Vacancies are actually phantom expenses that only show up in an economic occupancy analysis. Together, vacancy and collection losses are typically projected to run 5% of gross income. In my experience that is a low number. In the twenty-five plus years I’ve been in this business, a more realistic figure is 5% for vacancy loss and 5% for delinquency and collection loss. In a twenty-unit complex with average rents of $416 per month, that’s equivalent to one apartment vacant for one year. Every investor quickly finds how easy it is to “tweak” these numbers on paper to make the bottom line more attractive. I prefer to err on the side of reality, and would advise that you, “Tweak at your own peril.” But we’ll use the 5% figure for this discussion, just to save the argument, and to prove the point that even using optimistic numbers a 100% leveraged deal is tough to structure. Let’s use twenty-unit apartment building with potential gross income of $100,000. That works out to average rents of $416 per month. If it is a normal building, there will be about 40% expenses, ($40,000), including management, but not including vacancy and collection (delinquency) loss. Included in the expense estimate is a “reserve for replacement” deduction. This is an annual estimate of funds needed to perform capital improvements. An average figure is between $200 and $250 per unit per year. While many owners do not actually reserve the funds, some lenders will deduct the amount from the cash flow before calculating the debt coverage ratio. Other won’t, but that doesn’t mean the improvements won’t be required. Lastly, if you use the standard projection of about 5% ($5,000) for vacancy and collection loss, then the building must have an economic occupancy of 45% just to operate (40% operating expense + 5% vacancy and collection expense = 45%). That leaves a Net Operating Income (NOI) of 55%, or $55,000. We call it NOI, but the lenders call it, "funds available for debt service." Ever wonder why? Read on. Most lenders require a minimum 1.25:1 debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) to fund a deal. Some are higher, very few are lower. There's a good reason for that. At a 1.25:1 DSCR, 80% of the NOI is used for debt service. (1/1.25=.80). In our example, the maximum debt service would be $44,000, ($55,000 x 80%), or 44% of the gross POTENTIAL rent. Add the 45% of expenses to the 44% of the debt service, and you need 89% economic occupancy to break even. That leaves 11%, or $11,000 for profit, pre-tax. That’s with normal deal structure, and 20%-25% cash equity. At $416 average rent, the profit margin is equal to just over the annual rent on two of the twenty apartments. Or, looked at another way, if there are two vacant apartments for twelve months, and the rest of the complex operates normally, the project is going to lose money for the owner. The lender will get paid (in theory!), but the owner won’t. And that doesn’t take into account any increases in utility costs, insurance costs, property taxes, fix-up cost for a trashed apartment, or any other of a hundred things that can and do change during the year. Now can you see why the lenders are so tough on debt coverage ratios? So now let’s move to a deal that has 100% financing. Say you find the above building and the owner just has to get out. He’s willing to take $500,000. That’s an 11% cap rate on the $100,000 NOI, and sounds like a great deal. You’ve got a bank that will work with you on high leverage deals, and they offer to finance the deal with terms of 80% of cost, 7% rate, and twenty-year amortization. That’s probably a little low on rate nowadays, but a fifteen-year term is more typical of local banks. Further, we’re assuming you’ve got great credit, high net worth and are an experienced real estate operator and can get the best loan terms available. The seller wants out of town so bad he’ll finance the rest at 8%, with twenty-year amortization, but a balloon in three years. He wants out, but he does want his money. The annual debt service on the first mortgage ($400,000) with the bank will be $37,214 with a DSCR of 1.47. So far, so good. The annual debt service on the second, seller held mortgage ($100,000) would be $10,037. That’s total debt service of $47,251, or 47.3% of gross potential income, and a cumulative DSCR of 1.16:1. Add 45% expense and a conservative vacancy/collection loss allowance, and the break-even economic occupancy level is increased to 92.3%. Or, stated another way, the best-case profit is 7.7%, or $7,700 per year. The most you can make is $641 per month, if everybody pays on time and nothing happens. That’s a cushion of one and a half apartments per year over break even, before any unanticipated costs or expense increases. That is a razor thin margin. Now go back to the more realistic 10% vacancy and delinquency loss and the break-even economic occupancy becomes 97.3%. If anything outside the perfect world of the paper projection happens, anything, then you’re running negative cash flow. You’re upside down from the get-go, and few if any options to cure it. So now tell me, you’ve caught this deal, now what are you going to do with it? Can you imagine yourself a year from now being a “don’t-wanter” seller? I’ve seen it happen just that way so many times. I had a call a few weeks back from a fellow that bought a small apartment project we had looked at about a year ago in a town about thirty miles from our office. He wanted to sell, and called us because we are fairly well known as buyers in the market. He started describing the place and it sounded familiar, so I asked if he had bought it from “Mr. Jones”. He said yes, and I knew it was the same deal we had looked at. I asked how much he was asking for it, and he said he was willing to take what he had in it, which was about $240,000. It had more land next door that could be developed with more units and he would include that with the deal. (We had offered the original seller $200,000, owner financing, no money down, and the development parcel next door free and clear, or $175,000 all cash. The Seller didn’t take either offer, and we walked away.) I asked a few questions. Nothing much had changed. He had painted the place, but the rents were the same. I asked him how much he owed, and he said $240,000, twenty percent of which was financed by the Seller. He was three payments in arrears on the Seller’s note because there had been two vacancies he couldn’t get filled. He mentioned that this was his first real estate investment and he really didn’t know what to do. I could hear the strain in his voice, and could tell he really wanted out. I said I was sorry, but I couldn’t help him. I didn’t preach this sermon, figuring he was already paying tuition for an advanced degree in the proper use of leverage. His desire to acquire was stronger than his desire to learn how to figure cash flow before jumping into a deal. He didn’t think it all the way through. If all of this doesn’t give you pause to think twice about high leverage, then consider this. If the building in our example is full, there are twenty tenants with payments due each month. That’s 240 payments due each year. That’s also twenty potential stories each month as to why you can’t get your money, 240 potential stories each year. What is the probability that of the 240 potential payment events per year, somebody won’t pay on time? That should make you wonder how well the tenants you inherit from the Seller were screened. Or did he just get warm bodies to fill the place to sell? Believe me, it happens. Don’t get me wrong; there are situations where 100% leverage is possible and profitable. I’ve done it a number of times, but in every case there was considerable upside available, or a development opportunity that I could capitalize on to better the odds of success, such as my original offer on the deal above. We structured the two offers so that either way we could win. It had the potential to cash flow in the present, and plenty of upside in developing the property next door. We walked when we couldn’t structure the deal to win. Someone else came along and wanted the deal bad enough to do whatever it took to acquire it. Now the Seller has a non-performing note behind a first mortgage that is barely being serviced, both secured by a property that is declining in value because of poor management and a tough market. Did anyone really win? There’s another saying that comes to mind here, “Pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered.” That’s a barnyard expression to describe what happens when we reach for more than we’re entitled. I hope you can see from this discussion why high leverage is a strategy that requires the experience, capital, and resources to use it properly. Be careful when you contemplate highly leveraged deals. Figure the break-even economic occupancy rate. Know what the costs are going in. Know the market. Know your own capabilities and be able to move quickly to capitalize upside. Above all, do not tweak the numbers to support your own “desire to acquire.” | ||||
Peter Harris began investing in real estate in 2000. He was personally mentored by Robert Kiyosaki. He has purchased over 1,000 residential units focusing on large apartment complexes totaling over $20 million.
Multifamily investors have yield in the crosshairs.
Apartment investors are on the hunt. And they’re moving beyond trophy properties into unfamiliar territory in hopes of a rare catch.
In 1H2012, secondary markets posted a 38 percent year-over-year increase in multifamily transaction volume, followed by tertiary markets at 23 percent, according to Real Capital Analytics. Major metros saw only a 9 percent increase during that period.
What’s driving this migration? “It’s primarily a search for yield,” says Ben Thypin, RCA’s director of market analysis. Private investors, equity funds, and some institutional investors have tired of the competition driving down multifamily capitalization rates in core markets.
“It’s gotten to the point where inventory and competition is so tight that my San Francisco buyer is willing to look at higher cap markets such as San Diego and Fresno,” says Davide F. Pio, CCIM, CRS, LEED-AP, a broker associate with BCRE in Pinole, Calif.
The search for yield among class B and C multifamily properties in these markets is less common, Thypin says, but it is happening. Just ask the government.
“Over the last two years, I’ve seen taxing authorities become more aggressive in their valuations of multifamily property,” says Jamie Sieffert, CCIM, director of Thomson Reuters in Carrollton, Texas. “Last year it primarily affected class A product, but this year has been pretty much across the board.”
The government is following the money. Multifamily cap rates in secondary markets fell only three basis points YOY in 1H2012, according to RCA, suggesting that investors are increasingly turning to reposition plays for better yields in markets like Austin, Denver, and San Diego. Marcus & Millichap notes that class C multifamily occupancy was up 100 basis points in 1H2012 — the largest increase among property classes during that period. Plus, class B and C cap rates were 520 bps higher than the 10-year Treasury rate in 2Q12, compared with a 400 bps difference between class A and the 10-year Treasury.
Yield is in the crosshairs. But how will demand for lower class multifamily properties in smaller markets affect the future of investment and development?
This investor segment mostly includes private money, which comprised 65 percent and 66 percent of buyers in secondary and tertiary markets respectively as of 2Q12, according to Thypin. “Equity funds represent a bigger percentage in tertiary markets, and they’re more likely to search among the lower asset classes,” he adds.
Thomas McConnell, CCIM, associate director of Marcus & Millichap’s National Multi Housing Group in Elmwood Park, N.J., recently sold an East Rutherford, N.J., apartment property built in 1979. The family owners had not pushed rents or made basic upgrades in many years. “I sold the complex at a going-in sub 5 percent cap rate to a private syndicate that was able to see the upside,”McConnell says. “Within six months, the new owners had dramatically improved occupancy with simple upgrades and a very aggressive, hands-on management campaign.” The property, which is located in a thriving transit-oriented community, is now stabilized at a 7.5 percent cap rate, he adds.
Institutional investors remain cautious in secondary and tertiary multifamily markets, but they could begin to target some class B properties as class A opportunities dwindle. The Portland, Ore., area, for example, saw only five multifamily transactions greater than $10 million in 1H2012, says Anita D. Risberg, CCIM, senior broker with HFO Investment Real Estate in Portland. “The slowdown in this asset class has begun,” she adds.
In the meantime, private investors are driven by what Solange Velas, CCIM, of Southland Realtors in Knoxville, Tenn., describes as a perfect storm: “You have prices that have returned to levels not seen since the 1990s, historically low interest rates, and a tightening rental market due to so many displaced homeowners competing with a steady increase in local population.”
Conforming fixed-rate 30-year loans are “fueling the furor” among investors looking for apartment properties with two to four units in Velas’ market. For Knoxville-area properties with five-plus units, local banks are offering five-year fixed loans with 20-year amortizations and 20 percent down requirements. “I tell my investors that there is a window of opportunity here that may last 18 to 24 months, or longer. It will be characterized by a firming of prices — no further decline, but no increases either.” Velas says. “As long as interest rates stay down, this market will continue to rebound.”
But a rebound also means increased competition in secondary and tertiary markets. T. Sean Lance, CCIM, managing director with NAI Tampa Bay in Seminole, Fla., recently represented a lender in the sale of a 600-unit class C multifamily portfolio in South Florida. His team sent out approximately 200 offering packages, led dozens of property tours, and ultimately received 17 offers that were at or above asking price. An all-cash deal was closed in less than 30 days. “Buyers not only have to be aggressive on price, but equally so with terms,” Lance explains. “There are very few steals in the marketplace and most bottom feeders are coming up empty in their quest for deals.”
Faced with a lack of available product, some multifamily investors are considering alternatives. In Philadelphia, for example, the few companies that control most of units are reluctant to sell as they can’t replace the returns on their current holdings with other opportunities in the market, says Adam Gillespie, CCIM, senior vice president with SSH Real Estate. “One trend that we’ve noticed is owners buying out their equity partners instead of chasing new product to purchase in the marketplace,” he adds. “These returns are usually at substantially higher rates than those achievable by purchasing new properties through a competitive process.”
Smaller multifamily investors are turning to single-family opportunities. “The supply of single family in Knoxville far exceeds the multifamily supply and there is a great deal more choice in location and style,” Velas says. A multifamily investor in her market recently liquidated most of his holdings and began purchasing single-family foreclosures. “He is the proverbial kid in a candy store,” Velas says. “He told me recently that he bought a home sight unseen —unless you count the Internet photo — at auction for $10,000. When he showed it to a local Realtor, he was told it was worth $30,000 or more.”
There is hope, however, that multifamily deals will surge before year-end in these and other markets. McConnell says that reluctant sellers, who otherwise might not have considered selling until next year or beyond, could be spurred on by the potential capital gains tax increase. And some uncertainty remains about just how long this seller’s market will last.
Research firm Axiometrics is tracking 800,000 multifamily units that are still in the planning stage, but new deliveries are expected to total only 87,000 units and 129,000 units in 2012 and 2013, respectively. What’s the holdup? Part of the problem is that developers are focused on more-difficult sites.
“We are seeing more gravitation toward infill sites with much more density than the typical three-story garden-style walk-ups that peppered suburban markets in the last 20 years,” Lance explains. “We think this trend will continue as the demand for infill is strong with prospective tenants, and most equity groups prefer it over suburban right now.” Lance has participated in the sale of six South Florida multifamily sites since 2010, and several similar deals are in progress.
Investors are probably wondering: What will happen when these units eventually come on line? Consider New Jersey, where builders are delivering 2,412 units this year, according to McConnell, a nearly fivefold increase over 2011. “With the influx of new starts, investors are keeping a watchful eye on their older, existing product,” Mc
Connell says. “On the flip side, I believe the new developments will cater to the folks who would have been home buyers a few years ago. The tenant going into the new product is in a different income bracket than the tenant going into the older garden community.”
Demand for new properties is also driving multifamily development in Knoxville.“Though we already have some nice older complexes with typical amenities such as pools and tennis courts, we are seeing a pent-up demand for upscale, luxury-laden, well-located projects,” Velas says. “The younger crowd likes the newer styling that’s hard to replicate in buildings built in the 1960s and’70s.” The vacancy rate for these new projects is under 5 percent and rents are approaching $1 psf. “I know this doesn’t sound like much compared to the major metros, but up to this point, our most expensive rentals in the best locations topped out at 75 cents psf,” Velas adds.
Potential tenants are looking at the price-to-rent ratio, according to McConnell. And in some markets, including New Jersey, effective rents are closing in on the max point. “When the rents max out, the tenants will be redirected back toward homeownership,” he says.
But this scenario is a distant dream for many secondary and tertiary markets, and developers know it. Still, pursuing multifamily construction projects in smaller markets requires extra care. “Understanding the pipeline is critical,”says Drew Dolan, president of Titan Development in Albuquerque, N.M. “In bigger markets, you might just need a great site.”
Titan Development recently broke ground on the first phase of a multifamily development project totaling more than 460 units in Albuquerque. The first phase is being financed by a regional bank that had longstanding relationships with Titan and its project partner, Alliance Residential Co. And that’s just the beginning. Titan currently has six more Albuquerque-based multifamily development projects in the queue.
After several years of developers and investors chasing 6 percent cap rates on multifamily in major markets, Dolan is beginning to see the first signs of change as those markets become overbuilt. “Dollars here can buy a lot more return than dollars in bigger markets,” he says. “But by the time investors recognize the stability of markets like Albuquerque, they’ll be too late.”
Rich Rosfelder is associate editor of Commercial Investment Real Estate.
In 1H2012, secondary markets posted a 38 percent year-over-year increase in multifamily transaction volume, followed by tertiary markets at 23 percent, according to Real Capital Analytics. Major metros saw only a 9 percent increase during that period.
What’s driving this migration? “It’s primarily a search for yield,” says Ben Thypin, RCA’s director of market analysis. Private investors, equity funds, and some institutional investors have tired of the competition driving down multifamily capitalization rates in core markets.
“It’s gotten to the point where inventory and competition is so tight that my San Francisco buyer is willing to look at higher cap markets such as San Diego and Fresno,” says Davide F. Pio, CCIM, CRS, LEED-AP, a broker associate with BCRE in Pinole, Calif.
The search for yield among class B and C multifamily properties in these markets is less common, Thypin says, but it is happening. Just ask the government.
“Over the last two years, I’ve seen taxing authorities become more aggressive in their valuations of multifamily property,” says Jamie Sieffert, CCIM, director of Thomson Reuters in Carrollton, Texas. “Last year it primarily affected class A product, but this year has been pretty much across the board.”
The government is following the money. Multifamily cap rates in secondary markets fell only three basis points YOY in 1H2012, according to RCA, suggesting that investors are increasingly turning to reposition plays for better yields in markets like Austin, Denver, and San Diego. Marcus & Millichap notes that class C multifamily occupancy was up 100 basis points in 1H2012 — the largest increase among property classes during that period. Plus, class B and C cap rates were 520 bps higher than the 10-year Treasury rate in 2Q12, compared with a 400 bps difference between class A and the 10-year Treasury.
Yield is in the crosshairs. But how will demand for lower class multifamily properties in smaller markets affect the future of investment and development?
Adding Value
Today’s multifamily investor is willing to compromise in search of the right deal.“Buyers are reconsidering their investment parameters to place capital,” says Aaron Mesmer, of Block Real Estate in Kansas City, Mo. “That includes considering deals in second-tier submarkets, non-arterial locations, and other deal-specific complications that would have otherwise caused them to pass only 18 to 24 months ago.”This investor segment mostly includes private money, which comprised 65 percent and 66 percent of buyers in secondary and tertiary markets respectively as of 2Q12, according to Thypin. “Equity funds represent a bigger percentage in tertiary markets, and they’re more likely to search among the lower asset classes,” he adds.
Thomas McConnell, CCIM, associate director of Marcus & Millichap’s National Multi Housing Group in Elmwood Park, N.J., recently sold an East Rutherford, N.J., apartment property built in 1979. The family owners had not pushed rents or made basic upgrades in many years. “I sold the complex at a going-in sub 5 percent cap rate to a private syndicate that was able to see the upside,”McConnell says. “Within six months, the new owners had dramatically improved occupancy with simple upgrades and a very aggressive, hands-on management campaign.” The property, which is located in a thriving transit-oriented community, is now stabilized at a 7.5 percent cap rate, he adds.
Institutional investors remain cautious in secondary and tertiary multifamily markets, but they could begin to target some class B properties as class A opportunities dwindle. The Portland, Ore., area, for example, saw only five multifamily transactions greater than $10 million in 1H2012, says Anita D. Risberg, CCIM, senior broker with HFO Investment Real Estate in Portland. “The slowdown in this asset class has begun,” she adds.
In the meantime, private investors are driven by what Solange Velas, CCIM, of Southland Realtors in Knoxville, Tenn., describes as a perfect storm: “You have prices that have returned to levels not seen since the 1990s, historically low interest rates, and a tightening rental market due to so many displaced homeowners competing with a steady increase in local population.”
Conforming fixed-rate 30-year loans are “fueling the furor” among investors looking for apartment properties with two to four units in Velas’ market. For Knoxville-area properties with five-plus units, local banks are offering five-year fixed loans with 20-year amortizations and 20 percent down requirements. “I tell my investors that there is a window of opportunity here that may last 18 to 24 months, or longer. It will be characterized by a firming of prices — no further decline, but no increases either.” Velas says. “As long as interest rates stay down, this market will continue to rebound.”
But a rebound also means increased competition in secondary and tertiary markets. T. Sean Lance, CCIM, managing director with NAI Tampa Bay in Seminole, Fla., recently represented a lender in the sale of a 600-unit class C multifamily portfolio in South Florida. His team sent out approximately 200 offering packages, led dozens of property tours, and ultimately received 17 offers that were at or above asking price. An all-cash deal was closed in less than 30 days. “Buyers not only have to be aggressive on price, but equally so with terms,” Lance explains. “There are very few steals in the marketplace and most bottom feeders are coming up empty in their quest for deals.”
Plight of the Hunter
The bottom feeders aren’t the only ones to blame for a slowdown in multifamily transaction activity in some secondary and tertiary markets. In Albany, N.Y., multifamily investors are primarily looking for class B property, or class C in a class B area, says Robert Giniecki, CCIM, of Foresite Realty Advisors in Albany. “Our problem is that it’s very difficult to locate owners who are willing to sell, and, if they are willing to sell, the cap rate may be below what a buyer is willing to accept,” Giniecki explains.Faced with a lack of available product, some multifamily investors are considering alternatives. In Philadelphia, for example, the few companies that control most of units are reluctant to sell as they can’t replace the returns on their current holdings with other opportunities in the market, says Adam Gillespie, CCIM, senior vice president with SSH Real Estate. “One trend that we’ve noticed is owners buying out their equity partners instead of chasing new product to purchase in the marketplace,” he adds. “These returns are usually at substantially higher rates than those achievable by purchasing new properties through a competitive process.”
Smaller multifamily investors are turning to single-family opportunities. “The supply of single family in Knoxville far exceeds the multifamily supply and there is a great deal more choice in location and style,” Velas says. A multifamily investor in her market recently liquidated most of his holdings and began purchasing single-family foreclosures. “He is the proverbial kid in a candy store,” Velas says. “He told me recently that he bought a home sight unseen —unless you count the Internet photo — at auction for $10,000. When he showed it to a local Realtor, he was told it was worth $30,000 or more.”
There is hope, however, that multifamily deals will surge before year-end in these and other markets. McConnell says that reluctant sellers, who otherwise might not have considered selling until next year or beyond, could be spurred on by the potential capital gains tax increase. And some uncertainty remains about just how long this seller’s market will last.
Fresh Units
Owners of existing multifamily product might also be motivated by the new supply that’s poised to come on line during the next few years. New multifamily construction increased 45 percent YOY in July, according to the Associated General Contractors of America. In addition, developers acquired more than $2 billion in multifamily development sites in 1H2012, nearly double the volume for all of 2011, according to RCA. However, much of this activity is still concentrated in major metros and strong secondary markets such as Seattle and Raleigh, N.C.Research firm Axiometrics is tracking 800,000 multifamily units that are still in the planning stage, but new deliveries are expected to total only 87,000 units and 129,000 units in 2012 and 2013, respectively. What’s the holdup? Part of the problem is that developers are focused on more-difficult sites.
“We are seeing more gravitation toward infill sites with much more density than the typical three-story garden-style walk-ups that peppered suburban markets in the last 20 years,” Lance explains. “We think this trend will continue as the demand for infill is strong with prospective tenants, and most equity groups prefer it over suburban right now.” Lance has participated in the sale of six South Florida multifamily sites since 2010, and several similar deals are in progress.
Investors are probably wondering: What will happen when these units eventually come on line? Consider New Jersey, where builders are delivering 2,412 units this year, according to McConnell, a nearly fivefold increase over 2011. “With the influx of new starts, investors are keeping a watchful eye on their older, existing product,” Mc
Connell says. “On the flip side, I believe the new developments will cater to the folks who would have been home buyers a few years ago. The tenant going into the new product is in a different income bracket than the tenant going into the older garden community.”
Demand for new properties is also driving multifamily development in Knoxville.“Though we already have some nice older complexes with typical amenities such as pools and tennis courts, we are seeing a pent-up demand for upscale, luxury-laden, well-located projects,” Velas says. “The younger crowd likes the newer styling that’s hard to replicate in buildings built in the 1960s and’70s.” The vacancy rate for these new projects is under 5 percent and rents are approaching $1 psf. “I know this doesn’t sound like much compared to the major metros, but up to this point, our most expensive rentals in the best locations topped out at 75 cents psf,” Velas adds.
Potential tenants are looking at the price-to-rent ratio, according to McConnell. And in some markets, including New Jersey, effective rents are closing in on the max point. “When the rents max out, the tenants will be redirected back toward homeownership,” he says.
But this scenario is a distant dream for many secondary and tertiary markets, and developers know it. Still, pursuing multifamily construction projects in smaller markets requires extra care. “Understanding the pipeline is critical,”says Drew Dolan, president of Titan Development in Albuquerque, N.M. “In bigger markets, you might just need a great site.”
Titan Development recently broke ground on the first phase of a multifamily development project totaling more than 460 units in Albuquerque. The first phase is being financed by a regional bank that had longstanding relationships with Titan and its project partner, Alliance Residential Co. And that’s just the beginning. Titan currently has six more Albuquerque-based multifamily development projects in the queue.
After several years of developers and investors chasing 6 percent cap rates on multifamily in major markets, Dolan is beginning to see the first signs of change as those markets become overbuilt. “Dollars here can buy a lot more return than dollars in bigger markets,” he says. “But by the time investors recognize the stability of markets like Albuquerque, they’ll be too late.”
Rich Rosfelder is associate editor of Commercial Investment Real Estate.
inShare