Post on 30-Apr-2018
SLUC: Who’s Hot and What’s NotSLUC: Who s Hot and What s Not
Prepared by: Maxfield Research, Inc.
February 27, 2013February 27, 2013
Metro Area Growth
2
Size of Millennials and Seniors
• Size of the US Population (2010 Census)• 18 to 24 30,672,088• 25 to 44 82,134,554• 45 to 64 81 489 445• 45 to 64 81,489,445• 65 or older 40,267,984
3
Growth of Millennials and Seniors
900000
Growth of Millennials and SeniorsTCMA
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
800000
al Pop
ulation
25‐34
65+
0
100000
200000
300000
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Tot
4
Household Renter Rates by Age‐TCMA
1990 201015‐24 85%25‐34 46%35‐44 23%
15‐24 84%25‐34 48%35‐44 29%35 44 23%
45‐54 20%55‐64 16%65 74 22%
35 44 29%45‐54 20%55‐64 17%65 74 17%65‐74 22%
75+ 40%65‐74 17%75+ 31%
5
TCMA Employment Growth
2009 2011Total Employment 1,541,281 1,563,725
Gross Job Gains 117 865 135 943Gross Job Gains 117,865 135,943
Gross Job Losses 184,381 102,811
Job Gains from Expansion 86,787 106,479
Job Losses from Contraction 143,127 77,444
6
TCMA Employment Growth
2009 2011Total Employment 1,541,281 1,563,725
Gross Job Gains 117 865 135 943Gross Job Gains 117,865 135,943
Gross Job Losses 184,381 102,811
Job Gains from Expansion 86,787 106,479
Job Losses from Contraction 143,127 77,444
7
Rental Vacancy Rates in the TCMA
Source: Marquette Advisors: Market Trends Report
8
Apartment Construction & Absorption
9
Source: Marquette Advisors: Market Trends Report
Apartment Unit Absorption
10
Source: Marquette Adivsors
Twin Cities Rental Pipeline
Twin Cities Pipeline-Apts/Senior
3000
3500
General OCC. Senior
2000
2500
ber
of U
nits
1000
1500
Num
b
0
500
11
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
What Can We Expect?
Convenience and preference for other leisure time activities will continue to drive households to the rental market (younger and older people)
Millennials are likely to continue renting for a longer time than did their parents
As rents move higher, a portion of households may consider owning a townhomeOr condominium to achieve convenience. However, ongoing upkeep costs are more regulated than optional (appreciation likely to remain modest in the short‐term)
By 2014, we will see vacancy rates rise again to at least the market equilibrium level and potentially higher in submarkets with significant construction. This may spur some additional development in suburban locations.
Average project absorption rates are likely to slow from their current rate of about 25 to 30 units per month to about 15 units per month by mid‐2014.
12
Multifamily Construction Trends
What is being built
Where is it being builtg
Who is building ItWho is building It
Rick FenskeBusiness Development Vice President612.243.5000rickfenske@weisbuilders.com
MULTIFAMILY CONSTRUCTION STARTS BY PRODUCT TYPE7‐COUNTY TWIN CITIES METRO AREA, 2008‐2012
Student5%
Condo1%
Senior 30%
Market Rate47%
Aff d bl S
Affordable13%
Affordable Sr.4%
MULTIFAMILY CONSTRUCTION STARTS BY PRODUCT TYPE7‐COUNTY TWIN CITIES METRO AREA, 2008‐2012
8,000
9,000
399Student
8,010
6 000
7,000169Condominium
Market Rate
Affordable
Aff d bl S i
5,000
6,000
4,820
Affordable Senior
Senior
3,963
3,000
4,000
1,473
186
197
2 080
2,587
1 000
2,000
1 699
208
194
141
387 304
179
400 1,100
955586
7684828
125
1862,0801,716
0
1,000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
498 6051,246
1,6991,381164 96
387 304
Distribution of Multifamily Product Built 2008‐20122008 2012
Distribution of Market Rate Housing Built 2008‐2012Built 2008 2012
Distribution of Senior Housing Built 2008‐2012Built 2008 2012
Distribution of Affordable Product Built 2008‐2012Built 2008 2012
Distribution of Multifamily Product Built 2008‐2012Built 2008 2012
Most Active Cities for Multifamily Development Twin Cites Metro, 2008 to 2012,
City ProjectsUnits Built
% of all MF Units
Minneapolis 65 7,016 39%
St. Paul 17 2,217 12%
l i 11 1 109 6%Bloomington 11 1,109 6%
St. Louis Park 6 717 4%
Lakeville 5 477 3%Lakeville 5 477 3%
Woodbury 4 447 2%
Edina 4 365 2%
Maplewood 4 354 2%
Ramsey 2 293 2%
Maple Grove 3 260 1%Maple Grove 3 260 1%
Most Active Cities for Multifamily Development Twin Cites Metro, 2008 to 2012,
CityTotal Units
BuiltMarket Rate*
Senior(Market)
Senior (Affordable) Affordable Student
Minneapolis 7,016 4,680 77 138 1,036 935
St. Paul 2,217 1,199 371 50 597 ‐
Bloomington 1 109 516 466 77 50Bloomington 1,109 516 466 77 50 ‐
St. Louis Park 717 602 115 ‐ ‐ ‐
Lakeville 477 ‐ 350 87 40 ‐
Woodbury 447 372 30 45 ‐ ‐
Edina 365 150 215 ‐ ‐ ‐
M l d 354 250 40 64Maplewood 354 ‐ 250 40 64 ‐
Ramsey 293 293 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Maple Grove 260 ‐ 158 ‐ 102 ‐p
* Market Rate figures includes general occupancy rental and condominium units
Multifamily Development in MinneapolisBuilt 2008‐2012Built 2008 2012
U of MNorth Loop
L i
Loop
DowntownLoring Park
Uptown
Most Active Neighborhoods for Multifamily Construction Minneapolis 2008 to 2012Construction Minneapolis, 2008 to 2012
Minneapolis Units Built % of all MFMinneapolis Neighborhood Projects
Units Built % of all MF Units in Mpls.
U of M 18 1,627 23%
U t 10 1 273 18%Uptown 10 1,273 18%
North Loop 8 1,198 17%
Downtown Core 4 783 11%
Loring Park 3 671 10%
Hiawatha Corridor 7 544 8%
Subtotal 50 6,096 87%
Most Active Multifamily Developers T i Ci M 2008 2012Twin Cites Metro, 2008 to 2012
Organization Units Built Product TypeOrganization Units Built Product Type
Presbyterian Homes* 1,017 Senior Housing
Greco 950 Market Rate/Senior
Southview Senior Living 728 Senior Housing
Gunsbury 651 Market Rate/Student
Doran 567 Student/Market Rate
TE Miller 555 Market Rate
Sherman Associates 494 Affordable/Market Rate
Opus 471 Market Rate/StudentOpus 471 Market Rate/Student
Dakota County C.D.A.* 456 Affordable (Senior & Family)
Village Green 429 Market Rate
Dominium 396 Affordable (Artist)
* Not‐For‐Profit Organization
Most Active Market Rate Housing Developers T i Ci M 2008 2012Twin Cites Metro, 2008 to 2012
Organization Projects Units BuiltOrganization Projects Units Built
Greco 5 742
Gunsbury 6 651
TE Miller 4 555
Village Green 2 429
St t C ’ 2 358Stuart Co.’s 2 358
Magellan Development 1 354
City of St. Paul 2 314
Richdale Group 1 282
LeCesse 1 254
Stonebridge 2 241
* Gunsbury and Miller co‐developed 3 projects totaling 441 units. The above figures include these units in both developers totals
Most Active Affordable Housing Developers T i Ci M 2008 2012Twin Cites Metro, 2008 to 2012
Organization Projects Units Built
Dakota County CDA* 9 456
Dominium 2 396
Sh A i t 4 316Sherman Associates 4 316
Sand Company 4 299
Aeon* 4 235
CommonBond* 5 233
Catholic Charities* 2 170
Dunbar Development 3 149
Project For Pride In Living* 3 134
Portico* 3 114Portico 3 114
* Not‐For‐Profit Organization
Most Active Senior Housing Developers T i Ci M 2008 2012Twin Cites Metro, 2008 to 2012
Organization Projects Units Builtg j
Presbyterian Homes* 7 1,017
Southview 7 728
Shelter Corp/The Waters 3 306
Ecumen* 2 304
United Properties 4 265United Properties 4 265
Ebenezer* 4 264
White Pines 5 255
Walker ElderCare* 2 220
Greco 2 208
V l t f A i * 1 179Volunteers of America* 1 179
* Not‐For‐Profit Organization
Senior Housing Construction Trends T i Ci i MTwin Cities Metro
1,800
1,400
1,600
Memory Care
Assisted Living
Ind. w/ Services
Limited Services
1,000
1,200
600
800
200
400
01980‐83 1984‐87 1988‐91 1992‐95 1996‐99 2000‐03 2004‐06 2007‐10 2011‐13
Rick FenskeRick FenskeBusiness Development Vice Presidentp
612.243.5000i kf k @ i b ildrickfenske@weisbuilders.com