Post on 16-Aug-2015
00 Table of Contents
2
01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
What is “the hub?” Why create the hub? Wanna invest? Site Plan
02 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Location Project Objectives Project Amenities Urban Lifestyle Proposed Uses Current Zoning
03 DEAL ECONOMICS
Construction Budget Combined 10-Year Cash Flow Multi-Family Economics
04 FEASIBILITY STUDY
Population Growth Estimates in Davis County The Greater Wasatch Vision for 2040 Professional Perspectives Financing Parking Philosophy Davis County Economic Outlook Multi-Family Feasibility Retail Feasibility Office Feasibility
05 EXHIBITS
3
5
8
10
14
01 Executive SummaryWHAT IS “THE HUB?”
“The HUB,” a mixed-use transit-oriented development, is the community of choice connecting you to your network. It is located adjacent to Layton City’s new transportation hub - where I-15, Layton Parkway, and Frontrunner converge (a.k.a. the center of the universe). The HUB’s proximity to Layton’s historic downtown and the future IHC community hospital, along with its quick access to the Wasatch Front, makes The HUB a very attractive development. These connections create the opportunity of a walkable master planned mixed-use development. The HUB creates an urban center for residents and neighbors through open space, recreation, and a vibrant mix of retail and commercial services.
WHY CREATE THE HUB?
A trifecta of shadow anchors exists around our site which has created a prime development opportunity.
WANNA INVEST?
The Hub is a rewarding development whose location will dictate high quality tenants and healthy profits for years to come. Dev.Fest is excited to deliver an exciting mixed-use, transit-oriented development. Stay connected.
• Unlevered IRR of 7.67%• Levered IRR of 15.02%• 10% Equity Partner needed for $3.16M• 83% Debt Financing• Stabilized NOI of $2.16M
3
• Community Hospital• Destination location• Activity generator• Mutual development
benefit
• Already Zoned MU-TOD• Fulfills Layton City’s TOD
vision• Efficient tax base created by
greater density
• Need land for FrontRunner patron parking
• MU-TOD creates higher ridership
• Increases traffic counts to TOD
TH
EHUBSTAY CONNECTED
TM
R
4
LAYT
ON
PARK
WAY
FLINT STREET
FUTU
REG
ROC
ERY
STO
RE
OLD
DO
WN
TOW
NLA
YTO
N
PLA
NN
ED C
OM
MU
NIT
Y H
OSP
ITA
L
SCA
LE: 1
” =
60’-0
”
FUTU
RE B
USI
NES
SRE
SEA
RCH
PA
RK
PLA
NN
EDTO
WN
HO
MES
ELEM
ENTA
RYSC
HO
OL
KAYS
CRE
EK T
RAIL
MAIN STREET
I-15 CORRIDOR
02 Property DescriptionLOCATION
The HUB is a 20-acre mixed-use, transit-oriented development in Layton, Utah. The site is located within Layton City’s Downtown Plan and is described as the “West Field Area.” The site is west of the Layton FrontRunner station, south of Kay’s Creek, and bordered on the west by an existing neighborhood. The current owner is IHC Health Services Inc. c/o James F. Wood. Our development plan is focused on this MU-TOD 20 acre parcel.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
1. Create a sense of community2. Provide convenient access to transportation3. Improve quality of life with health services and active lifestyle amenities4. Provide a return to our investors
PROJECT AMENITIES
• Live/work/shop amenities• Open space• Utopia Fiber Optic Internet Connection• Community Hospital• Close proximity to transportation
corridors• Kay’s Creek Trail and regional trail system• Close proximity to the freeway• FrontRunner access and parking• Close to Layton’s up and coming
downtown
The project has a healthy mix of residential, retail, office, and recreational uses. In addition to the internal project amenities, there are several neighborhood parks, local and regional trails, and public transit that add value to the development. Layton City plans to add a trail along Kay’s Creek and construct
5
1/4 MILE RADIUS5-MINUTE WALK
1/2 MILE RADIUS10-MINUTE WALK
FUTUREGROCERY
STORE
ELEMENTARYSCHOOL
FUTURECOMMUNITY
HOSPITAL
DEVELOPMENT SITE:ZONED: MU-TOD
FRONTRUNNERSTATION
!H
!H
!H
!H
!H
!H
!H
!H
S a l t L a k e C i t yS a l t L a k e C i t y
H o o p e rH o o p e r
O g d e nO g d e n
L a y t o nL a y t o n
R o yR o y
B o u n t i f u lB o u n t i f u l
K a y s v i l l eK a y s v i l l e
P l a i n C i t yP l a i n C i t y
C l i n t o nC l i n t o n
W e s t P o i n tW e s t P o i n t
S y r a c u s eS y r a c u s e
F a r m i n g t o nF a r m i n g t o n
W e s t H a v e nW e s t H a v e n
C l e a r f i e l dC l e a r f i e l d
F a r r W e s tF a r r W e s tN o r t h O g d e nN o r t h O g d e n
N o r t h S a l t L a k eN o r t h S a l t L a k e
C e n t e r v i l l eC e n t e r v i l l e
R i v e r d a l eR i v e r d a l e
M o r g a nM o r g a n
P l e a s a n t V i e wP l e a s a n t V i e w
S o u t h W e b e rS o u t h W e b e r
M a r r i o t t - S l a t e r v i l l eM a r r i o t t - S l a t e r v i l l e
W o o d s C r o s sW o o d s C r o s s
S o u t h O g d e nS o u t h O g d e n
H a r r i s v i l l eH a r r i s v i l l e
S u n s e tS u n s e t
W e s t B o u n t i f u lW e s t B o u n t i f u l
F r u i t H e i g h t sF r u i t H e i g h t s
U i n t a hU i n t a h
W a s h i n g t o n T e r r a c eW a s h i n g t o n T e r r a c e
H u n t s v i l l eH u n t s v i l l e
FrontRunner North0 5 102.5Miles
Existing LRT
Pleasant View
Woods Cross
Salt Lake Central
Ogden
Roy
Clearfield
Layton
Farmington
Weber County
Davis County
Davis County
Salt Lake C
ounty
Morgan County
H A F BH A F B
FrontRunner South(under construction)
Airport LRT(under construction)
a tunnel under the existing rail line linking the trail system and neighborhood to the UTA FrontRunner station. On the south side of Layton Parkway, IHC is planning to build a community hospital that will provide medical services to the surrounding community. Not only does The HUB have great access to the transportation network of the Wasatch Front, but it will also deliver its residents and businesses access to the world via a fiber optic network. Layton City is one of 13 cities in Utah to provide its citizens with internet access to Utopia’s Fiber Optic Network. The HUB is where people stay connected to life both virtually and physically.
Given its numerous and varied amenities, The HUB provides its residents with a greater quality of life. Picture waking up and walking to the local fitness center or taking a peaceful walk along Kay’s Creek trail to several nearby parks. Not your cup of tea? Walk over to the local café for your favorite brew and surf the web via Utopia’s fiber optic network. Found out you need to go into work? No problem. Jump on the nearby commuter rail and arrive downtown in no time. Long day at work? Take your family over to the local restaurant and enjoy dessert in the park. Need to get your kids out of the house? Take them on a bike ride along Kay’s creek trail to the nearby library or over to the community club house. The HUB keeps your life running smoothly.
6
UTA PARKING
MEDICAL OFFICEBUILDINGS
HUB 1
HUB 2
HUB 3
HOTEL PAD
CLUBHOUSE
PARK
RESTAURANTPAD
RETAILPAD
IHC ADMINISTRATIONBUILDINGS
7
URBAN LIFESTYLE
The HUB will provide its residents with an urban lifestyle. The project contributes to Layton’s overall downtown plan of creating a “District,” which is a place of distinguishing character. The development will attract more intense use by connecting walkable community places, open spaces, and providing aesthetically pleasing architecture.
The “American Dream” is shifting. Arthur C. Nelson, PH.D, FAICP, University of Utah, called it “A Decade of Changing Housing Demand.” The 40-year career, house in the suburbs, cheap gas, and all homes appreciate attitude has evolved. What is the “New American Dream?” Connections. Connections from home to friends, nature, recreation and technology. “Baby Boomers and Echo Boomers are looking for urban amenities.” The Ivory Institute, 2011. Convenience, connectivity, walk-ability, and efficiency are now associated with current housing demands.
PROPOSED USES
The proposed use is congruent with the current zoning. Our site plan will consist of mixed-use, transit-oriented development with residential, office, and retail. Layton City and UTA have proposed either a tunnel or sky bridge that will allow easy access to the FrontRunner station.
CURRENT ZONING
Mixed-Use, Transit-Oriented Development (MU-TOD). The land is currently zoned in accordance with our proposed use; therefore, no zoning changes will be required. “The purpose of the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Zone is to provide locations for developments near
transit centers that allow for concentrations of commercial, retail, and multiple-family residential uses that can take advantage of public transportation facilities. This zone also uses the demand for higher density development generated by mixed-use design to help accomplish Layton’s land preservation goals through the voluntary use of transfer of development rights.” Layton City Municipal Code 19.26 Mixed-Use/Transit Oriented Development (TOD)Zone, 19.26.010-Purpose and intent (July 8,2009).AA
R - SR - S
R - 1 - 6R - 1 - 6
R - 1 - 6R - 1 - 6
C - T HC - T H
B - R PB - R P
M U - T O DM U - T O D
:1 inch = 300 feet
R-1-8R-1-8
R-1-8R-1-8
8
03 Deal Economics The HUB will be a community success and a financial one as well. Based upon the realistic assumptions given in the pro forma, the leveraged IRR for the project is 15% and unleveraged is 7.6%. Because of these attractive returns Dev.fest’s excitement for The HUB isn’t limited to the fee we will earn managing the project. We also want to participate in the cash flows of this project and will thus contribute our development fee as deferred equity. However this leaves another $3.1M that is required in additional equity. According to Stan Castleton, CEO, DDRM Development, it is easier to raise 100 million than 100 thousand dollars. Projects like The HUB illustrate this principle. An economist from AEW has shown that with today’s capital markets, institutional money can be crucial for large scale projects. Additionally, institutional money managers demand class A investments. We are confident that the appealing returns will attract the necessary joint venture partner(s).
CONSTRUCTION BUDGET
COMBINED 10-YEAR CASH FLOW
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
POTENTIAL GROSS REVENUEGross Income - - 2,057,344 4,239,998 4,412,743 4,592,525 4,779,631 4,974,361 5,177,024 5,387,944 5,607,457
Vacancy - - (2,070,570) (3,184,585) (1,709,042) (386,435) (355,758) (385,336) (417,375) (452,076) (489,663) EFFECTIVE GROSS REVENUE - - (13,226) 1,055,414 2,703,701 4,206,089 4,423,873 4,589,024 4,759,649 4,935,867 5,117,794
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES - - (735,872) (1,516,566) (1,578,353) (1,642,657) (1,709,582) (1,779,233) (1,851,722) (1,927,164) (2,005,679)
NET OPERATING INCOME - - (749,099) (461,152) 1,125,348 2,563,432 2,714,291 2,809,791 2,907,928 3,008,704 3,112,114
OPERATING CASH FLOW - - (749,099) (461,152) 1,125,348 2,563,432 2,714,291 2,809,791 2,907,928 3,008,704 3,112,114
ACQUISITION AND RESIDUAL SALELand Acquisition Cost (6,241,277) - - - - - - - - - - Construction Cost - (19,498,807) (10,045,315) - - - - - - - -
Land Sale for UTA Parking Lot 1,289,351 Land Sale for Hotel 593,180 Land Sale for Office Building 1,128,889 Land Sale for Restaraunts 1,086,709 Land Sale for Retail 251,216 Sales Price 4,349,344 - - - - - - - - 43,832,597 - Selling Costs (2% + Commissions) (330,550) - - - - - - - - (3,331,277) -
Unlevered IRRCASH FLOW BEFORE DEBT (2,222,483) (19,498,807) (10,794,414) (461,152) 1,125,348 2,563,432 2,714,291 2,809,791 2,907,928 43,510,023 7.67%
FINANCINGLoan Funding 16,362,628 9,800,251 Debt Serv. Payments/Payoffs - - (588,093) (1,411,423) (1,411,423) (1,411,423) (1,411,423) (1,411,423) (1,411,423) (24,516,786) -
Levered IRRCASH FLOW AFTER DEBT (2,222,483) (3,136,179) (1,582,256) (1,872,575) (286,075) 1,152,009 1,302,868 1,398,368 1,496,505 18,993,238 15.02%Cash on Cash Return -141.1% -71.2% -84.3% -12.9% 51.8% 58.6% 62.9% 67.3% 854.6%
Acres Feet Price/SF Total PriceLand Purchase from IHC 15.92 693,475 9.00 6,241,277 Land Sale to UTA 2.52 109,732 11.75 1,289,351 Land Sale to Hotel Developer 1.07 46,524 12.75 593,180 Land to Office Building Developer 2.07 90,311 12.50 1,128,889 Land to Restaurants 1.35 58,741 18.50 1,086,709 Land to Retail Developer 0.36 15,701 16.00 251,216 Remaining Land for Dev.fest 8.91 1,891,933
LAND ALLOCATION AND PRICING
Total Costs Land Value Dev Fee Addit EquityMulti-Family 31,521,541 3,929,811 2,200,000 3,158,662
31,521,541 3,929,811 2,200,000 3,158,662
CONSTRUCTION BUDGETUSES OF FUNDS Acres Size (SF) PSF Project Costs Loan Equity
Land Cost Minus Proceeds from Sales 8.9 388,167 n/a 1,891,933 Land Improvements 8.9 388,167 5 2,037,878 Multi-Family 340,600 71 25,391,730 26,162,879 Developer Fee 7.0% 2,200,000 2,200,000
Building Costs 27,591,730 Building Costs Incl. Land 31,521,541 Initial Equity 2,200,000 Additional Equity Needed 3,158,662 Uses of Funds 31,521,541 26,162,879 5,358,662
SOURCES OF FUNDSTotal
Bank FundingMaximum Loan Amount 26,162,879 83.0%
JV PartnerAdditional Cash Equity 3,158,662 10.0%
DevFest FundingDeferred Equity 2,200,000 7.0%
Total Sources 31,521,541 100%
9
MULTI-FAMILY ECONOMICS
Units Leasable SF Total SF Lease Rate Inc/Unit/Mo StabilizedStudios 10% 40 350 14,000 1.27 442.75 212,520 1 Bed - 1 Bath 20% 80 600 48,000 1.11 666.60 639,936 2 Bed - 1 Bath 25% 100 860 86,000 0.87 747.34 896,808 2 Bed - 2 Bath 30% 120 1,020 122,400 0.87 886.38 1,276,387 3 Bed - 2 Bath 15% 60 1,170 70,200 0.79 926.64 667,181
400 340,600 3,692,832
Gross income 3,692,832 Less: MF Vacancy & Turnover5.8% ($212,338)Effective Gross Income 3,480,494
Operating Expenses: Cost Per YearAdministrative 146 Per Unit 58,320 Management 3% 261 Per Unit 104,415 Advertising 211 Per Unit 84,240 Turnover Cost 156 Per Unit 62,280 Repairs and Maintenance 338 Per Unit 135,000 Payroll 935 Per Unit 374,040 Utilities 593 Per Unit 237,240 Taxes 529 Per Unit 211,680 Insurance 134 Per Unit 53,640
Total Operating Expenses 3,302 Per Unit (1,320,855)NET OPERATING INCOME 2,159,639
MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT ECONOMICS
Total NOI 2,159,639
Cap Rate ValueMulti-Family 6.35% 34,010,068
Total Value 34,010,068
INCOME APPROACH TO VALUE
10
04 Feasibility Study The Park Lane Village in Farmington is a reasonable comparable based upon the type of programing and proposed uses. The HUB’s rents are in line with other similar products in the surrounding area. Construction costs are based upon current industry standards for the type of construction.
POPULATION GROWTH ESTIMATES IN DAVIS COUNTY
GREATER WASATCH VISION FOR 2040
Wasatch Front Regional Council and Mountainland Association of Governments:• Average household transit use in 2040 45%
higher than today.• Walkable community: new homes are
twice as likely as today’s homes to have convenient access to places to work, shop, play and learn.
• More vertical development, less sprawl: by 2040 there will be 40% more vertical development.
Vision 2040• Utah is among the fastest growing states in
the nation. • More than 900,000 growth-related
residential units will be constructed by 2040.
• Nearly 1.9 billion square feet of new and rebuilt space will be needed to accommodate the projected 2.9 million jobs we’ll have by 2040.
• The Wasatch Front has limited land available for development, and building roads to serve widely dispersed populations will become increasingly impractical and expensive.
11
PROFESSIONAL PERSPECTIVES
“IHC hospitals tend to generate lots of activity and become a destination.”Tom Uriona, IHC, Corporate Real Estate Director, CRE, MAI, CCIM
We do lease property, out of necessity, at the Layton Station for overflow parking. This will be going away in the next few months as development starts where we currently have the temp lot. The preference would be to capitalize the land and improvement costs once and not being subject to a lease that could expire, increase or terminate. Ryan McFarland, Manager, UTA, Transit Economic Development
Trails along Kay’s Creek would provide additional means of pedestrian circulation connecting to a future trail system across the city. These new circulation routes will open this area to greater development opportunities. Kay’s Creek would be developed as a pedestrian-friendly zone fronted by urban amenities such as nearby mixed-use buildings. Wasatch Front TOD Study: Layton Downtown- Proposed Commuter Rail Station
FINANCING
We plan to use the HUD-221-D4 Construction/Perm loan program to finance our multi-family project. Loan structure: 42 Year loan with 2 years Interest only that transitions into a 40 Term. This is a 100% Non-recourse loan with a fixed interest rate of 4.25%. The loan amount is based off the lesser of LTC/LTV at 83% + 7% Development fee + 3% Contractor fee. This type of financing is typical for multi-family financing right now.
“Approximately 80 percent of all units proposed to be built are planning on obtaining HUD financing.”2012 Commercial Real Estate Symposium, by Kevin M. Hart, Vice President ARA, West Region
DEBT UNDERWRITINGTest #1 Multi-FamilyMaximum Loan to Value 83%Maximum Loan based on LTV 28,228,357
Test #2Minimum Debt Service Coverage Ratio 1.17Annual Debt Payment Supported by NOI 1,845,846 Monthly Debt Payment Supported by NOI 153,820 Debt Variables: Term / Amortization (years): !" 40 Rate: 4.25%Maximum Loan Based on Debt Service PV 35,473,547
Test #3Maximum Loan to Cost 83%Maximum Loan Based on on LTC 26,162,879
Maximum Loan Amount 26,162,879
12
PARKING PHILOSOPHY
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake, CitiVenture Associates LLC.
DAVIS COUNTY ECONOMIC OUTLOOK
The economic outlook for Davis County shows signs of growth. Davis County posted a 4.5 percent increase in jobs over the last 12 months. The Standard Examiner reports that the county had a net gain of about 4,600 jobs from November 2010 to November 2011.Source: 2012 Commercial Real Estate Symposium, pg. 75
MULTI-FAMILY FEASIBILITY
Potential Home Buyers Are Becoming Renters: Many would-be first-time home buyers are staying in the rental market. In many cases they cannot qualify for a home loan, and/or they simply don’t want a mortgage.Source: 2012 Commercial Real Estate Symposium, Kevin Hart, Vice President, ARA, West Region, pg. 54
The number of households is expected to continue to expand, which in turn will add even more demand to the rental market.2012 Commercial Real Estate Symposium, Source: Apartment Realty Advisors
Transit Oriented Developments typically command 10% higher rents than comparable properties.Bruce Jones, Chief Legal Counsel of UTA, presentation to NAIOP chapter meeting
2010’s will be a decade of increased rental demand. Arthur C. Nelson, PH.D., FAICP, Metropolitan Research Center
Multi-‐Family Vacancy Absorption Lease Rates Cap RateAvg. Class A 5.75%-‐6.25% 1% per year $927 8.28%Source: ARA January 2012
13
RETAIL FEASIBILITY
Retail was a strong performer for 2011. Vacancy rates are slightly higher than last year at this time but are down from six months ago. Larger anchored centers enjoy higher levels of occupancy with an average vacancy rate at 9.32 percent. Source: 2012 Commercial Real Estate Symposium: Davis County-Robert Lindsey, Cushman & Wakefield, Commerce, pg. 75
OFFICE FEASIBILITY
Office Vacancy Absorption Lease Rates Cap RateClass A 14.35% 175,000 sqft $14.56 8.72%Source: NAI West 2012. Office, Davis and Weber Counties Market Overview
Retail Vacancy Absorption Lease Rates Cap Rate9.08% -‐25000 $15.43 6.35%
Source: NAI West 2012. Retail, Davis and Weber Counties Market Overview
Davis County Units Under Construction
Ridgeview Ph II 50 North Salt LakeEaglegate Apatments 220 North Salt LakeParklane Village Ph I 325 Farmington
Total Units Under Cons: 595
Davis County Proposed 2011/2012 ConstructionLegacy Crossing 160 CentervilleTuscany Villas 40 LaytonKays Crossing 156 LaytonRenaissance 110 Woods CrossEastgate at Greyhawk 110 LaytonEaglegate Lofts 215 North Salt LakeTo Be Determined 160 Layton
Total Proposed Units: 951
14
05 Exhibits
Introduction
Layton City, in collaboration with the area merchants, stakeholders, residents, the Utah Department of Transportation and an Advisory Committee, has moved forward to create a plan focused on the Old Downtown and Fort Lane areas. This document is based on a foundation of ideas and the vision that many people have given to the project over the years. For the purposes of this plan document, downtown Layton refers to the 280-acre study area described on the map below. This Plan document was generated from planning committee meetings, advisory committee meetings, text from the Downtown Revitalization Study (2001), Envision Utah’s TOD Guidelines (2002, the Layton City RDA Plan (2004) and various other studies affecting the downtown area.
The key organizing compass that has emerged to guide the development and redevelopment of downtown Layton is the vision of a “district”. While urban development issues are by nature rather complex, this complexity does not have to confuse participants, especially when there is a very clear goal: a district. A district is an area or place with a “distinguishing character”. In order to be successful, this Plan will rely on the leadership and skills of all those who have interests in the area and a desire to implement the strategies outlined in this Plan.
LAYTON DOWNTOWN PLAN
1
Map 1: Downtown Study Area, 280 Acres
15
BuildingThe Future We Want
The Greater Wasatch Vision for 2040The Greater Wasatch is one region, stretching from Weber County south to Utah County and from Tooele County east
to the Wasatch Back. We compete economically with other regions, comprise one job and housing market, and share
the same air and water. Where and how we shape tomorrow’s neighborhoods, communities, and economic centers
within our region will dramatically affect the quality of our lives, including how much time and money we spend getting
around, the quality of the air we breath, and the choices we have available to live, work, shop, and play.
General Land Use Legend
Residential
Industrial
Special Use District
Commercial
Green Space
N
Wasatch CHO ICE f o r 20 4 0
NOTE: The Wasatch Choice for 2040 (May 2010) is a vision illustrating how growth
could unfold. The map’s purpose is to guide the development of our regional
transportation plan. The vision map reflects the Regional Growth Principles
adopted by the Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) and the Mountainland
Association of Governments (MAG). The map is not a general plan and has no
regulatory authority. WFRC/MAG encourages cities and counties to consider the
growth principles and the vision map as local plans are updated in order to keep
people and goods moving, our communities livable, and cities prosperous for
generations to come.
Challenge and OpportunityUtah is among the fastest growing states in the nation. Growth brings both benefits
and challenges:
• Two-thirds of the buildings that will exist in 2040 have not yet been built.
• Total investment in new development will approach $700 billion.
• More than 900,000 growth-related residential units will be constructed by 2040.
About 180,000 existing dwellings will be replaced, rebuilt or renovated.
• Nearly 1.9 billion square feet of new and rebuilt space will be needed to
accommodate the projected 2.9 million jobs we’ll have by 2040.
• If we continue current patterns of development, municipalities will soon find
that growth-related expenses exceed expected revenues.
• The Wasatch Front has limited land available for development, and building
roads to serve widely dispersed populations will become increasingly
impractical and expensive.
Source: Arthur C. Nelson, Presidential Professor of City and Metropolitan Planning, University of Utah (2009)
Envision Utah’s 3% StrategyWhat if we respond to market demand and allow one-third of our future homes,
jobs, and stores in walkable town centers and villages…and link them with a world-
class transportation system?
This approach, which would accommodate one-third of projected growth on just
3% of our region’s developable land, encourages targeted investment to create
exceptional places, maximize efficiency, keep the cost of living in check, and reduce
growth pressure on critical lands. Market analysts suggest that one-third of Utahns
will want to live in walkable neighborhoods, close to school, church, the grocery
store, and other services (Sources: RCLCO, Wasatch Front Development Trends,
Nov. 2007; Nelson, 2009). Declining household size, increasing housing and energy
costs, and a growing desire to trade commute time for family, service, work, and
recreation time will drive this demand for walkable living. Currently, the supply of
these neighborhoods lags behind demand, increasing their cost and reducing choice.
The 3% Strategy responds to this consumer demand, while preserving traditional
single-family neighborhoods for the majority who prefer suburban living.
How?• Focus growth in economic centers and along major transportation corridors.
• Create mixed-use centers throughout the region.
• Target growth around transit stations.
• Encourage infill and redevelopment to revitalize declining parts of town.
• Preserve working farms, recreational areas and critical lands.
Growth Principles for a Bright FutureWhen we plan together—understanding the local and regional impacts of our land
use and transportation decisions—we create thriving urban environments, friendly
neighborhoods, and a prosperous region. Our nine regional growth principles,
developed through extensive public input and adopted by elected officials, provide a
common framework and regional benefits:
1. Efficient InfrastructureMaximizing existing infrastructure and building more compactly
and contiguously conserves green space, saves taxpayer dollars, and
makes high-quality, lower-cost services available to us all.
2. Regional Mobility (Transportation Choice)With a balanced muti-modal transportation system, more
transportation options, and jobs and services closer to home, we
reduce the growth in per capita vehicles miles traveled, we spend
less time in traffic and have more time for friends, family, and doing
what we enjoy.
3. Coordinated PlanningLocal land use planning and regional transportation investments
impact one another. Coordination makes our communities healthy
and connected and our region vibrant.
4. Housing ChoiceEncouraging a variety of housing options, especially near transit
and job centers, addresses market demand and makes living more
affordable for people in all life stages and incomes.
5. Health and SafetyWhen our streets are walkable, interconnected, and safe, we lead
healthier lives by walking and biking more and driving less. These
streets also provide efficient access for emergency services. Trails
and access to nature provide healthy recreational opportunities.
6. Regional EconomyStrategic transportation investments and land use decisions can
encourage business investment and help secure jobs closer to home,
so we can provide for our families and keep our dollars in our
region.
7. Regional CollaborationBroad involvement, information sharing, and mutual decision making
preserve common values and encourage progress toward shared
goals.
8. Sense of CommunityLand use and transportation decisions that preserve our local
heritage while valuing diversity enrich our community life, keeping
our towns and cities beautiful and neighborly.
9. EnvironmentProtecting and enhancing air and water quality as well as critical
and working lands also protects our health, safety, and quality of life
for our kids and grand kids. Conserving water, energy, open space,
and other resources is good for the environment and our economy.
Coordinated trail systems will enhance access to areas of natural
beauty and recreation.
Growth Principles Come to Life
We protect local food production.
We live close to where we work.
We enjoy access to recreation and nature.
We enjoy walkable, bikeable streets. Transit connects
communities to job centers.
We save billions on infrastructure costs.
We cultivate vibrant urban centers for living, work and play.
We provide more housing options and preserve existing neighborhoods.
Vision Highlights
CorridorsThe Wasatch Choice for 2040 is our renewed vision, and it
informs our transportation investments. This “Choice” points
the way forward, focusing growth in a variety of activity
centers across the region, many of which are coordinated
with our existing and near-term transportation system:
freeways, rail lines, rapid busways and key boulevards. While
these centers are coordinated with today’s transportation
system, tomorrow’s transportation investments will enhance
service to these centers, including our region’s special
districts – like the Salt Lake International Airport, the
University of Utah, and Brigham Young University.
Commuter Rail / TRAX Freeways
Realizing The Wasatch Choice for 2040Why WFRC and MAG Developed a VisionOur cities and counties do a terrific job planning for their individual futures, but there are no groups better able to facilitate discussion about the collective future of our metro area than the Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) and the Mountainland Association of Governments (MAG)—groups led by mayors and county commissioners. WFRC and MAG have developed the long-range regional transportation plans for our metro area for decades. With a visioning process called Wasatch Choices 2040 (facilitated by Envision Utah), which began with a huge citizen involvement effort, and its renewal, The Wasatch Choice for 2040, WFRC and MAG are also thinking about how growth patterns can help us maintain our quality of life for the coming decades.
Cities Should Explore What’s on the MapWFRC and MAG encourage cities to explore a mix of activities and walkable development to reduce the need for long drives and provide residents with what they want out of life: more time for what matters most, affordability, family, improved health, and the pride of living in a world-class region.
Regional Role Convergence Local RoleImplementationCapacity
Comprehensive
Plan
ning
Public Input
Fore
cast
s/Modeling Coordination
CentersCenters are historical and emerging regional destinations
of economic activity. The vision suggests that these centers
should expand to provide ever-broadening choices for
residents to live, work, shop and play; a mix of all of these
activities is welcome. Centers should work with the long-
term market, helping provide opportunities to residents who want to live close
to work, walk or bike to shop, and have both great transit and road access –
desperately needed as our population ages, gas prices and congestion increase, and
housing prices inch upward.
Downtown Salt Lake City is the metropolitan center, serving as the hub of business and cultural activity in the region. It has the most intensive form of development
for both employment and housing, with high-rise development common in the central business district. It will continue to serve as the finance, commerce, government, retail, tourism, arts, and entertainment center for the region. The metropolitan center benefits from pedestrian friendly streetscapes and an urban style grid network. Downtown Salt Lake is the central hub for public transportation in the region. Auto access is prevalent with access to several major highways and thoroughfares.
Metropolitan Center Floor Area Ratio 1 to 1020 to 200 Housing units per acre
Urban Centers are the focus of commerce and local government services benefiting a market area of a few hundred thousand people. Urban
Centers will be served by high-capacity transit and major streets. They are characterized by two- to four-story employment and housing options.
Urban Center Floor Area Ratio 0.75 to 420 to 100 Housing units per acre
Town centers provide localized services to tens of thousands of people within a two to three mile radius. One- to three-
story buildings for employment and housing are characteristic. Town centers have a strong sense of community identity and are well served by transit and streets.
Town Center Floor Area Ratio 0.5 to 1.510 to 50 Housing units per acre
Station Communities are geographically small, high-intensity centers surrounding high capacity transit stations. Each helps
pedestrians and bicyclists access transit without a car. Station Communities vary in their land use: some feature employment, others focus on housing, and many will include a variety of shops and services.
Station Community Floor Area Ratio 0.5 to 2.520 to 100 Housing units per acre
Main Streets are a linear town center. Each has a traditional commercial identity but are on a community scale with a strong sense of the immediate neighborhood. Main streets prioritize pedestrian-friendly features, but also benefit from good auto access and often transit.
Main Street Community Floor Area Ratio 0.5 to 1.510 to 50 Housing units per acre
A Boulevard Community is a linear center coupled with a transit route. Unlike a Main Street, a Boulevard Community may not necessarily have a commercial identity, but may vary between housing, employment, and retail along any given stretch. Boulevard Communities create a positive sense of place for adjacent neighborhoods by ensuring that walking and bicycling are safe and comfortable even as traffic flow is maintained.
Boulevard Community Floor Area Ratio 0.35 to 1.00 to 50 Housing units per acre
GreenspaceGreenspace rings our valleys, connects our cities, and
provides space for civic and social functions in our towns
and neighborhoods. The Wasatch Choice for 2040 affirms that
our natural resources and working lands provide immense
benefits. We should safeguard them to preserve our regional
food system, protect our water quality, and maintain our recreational opportunities.
These lands also provide needed wildlife habitat, help to clean our air, and provide
relief from our urban environment. Even closer to home, our parklands and
greenways provide critical gathering spaces, recreational amenities, and connection
to the natural world.
Regional Greenways The Bonneville Shoreline Trail, the Jordan River Parkway, and the Provo River Parkway
Regional Connections
Links between greenways and major population centers
Green Context The Wasatch Mountains, the Oquirrh Mountains, the Great Salt Lake, and Utah Lake.
Vision Benefits:The Wasatch Choice for 2040 is a vision for how growth should unfold in our region.
When compared with a baseline (a projection of current trends in the future),
The Wasatch Choice for 2040 exhibits distinct benefits:
• Walkable communities: new homes are about twice as likely as today’s homes to
have convenient access to places to work, shop, play and learn.
• More growing up, less growing out: 40% more of our growth – compared to
recent trends -- fills-in existing communities and revitalizes business districts.
This enables more biking, shorter commutes, better air quality, and makes the
most of existing infrastructure.
• Real options for commuters: Average household transit use in 2040 could
be 45% higher than today, making commuting more affordable and providing
residents with more ways to get around.
• More open land stays open: Over the next 30 years, 24 fewer square miles
convert to buildings and streets enabling us to have more green infrastructure
and open land, with benefits ranging from more places for families to play, more
local farmer’s market food, better water quality, and more wildlife habitat.
Choice for 2040
HEBERVALLEY
MIDWAY
CHARLESTON DANIEL
HEBER
SNYDERVILLE BASIN
NEW PARK
SNYDERVILLE
PARK CITY
MORGANVALLEY
MOUNTAIN GREEN
ENTERPRISE
MORGAN
BOXELDER
BRIGHAM CITY
PERRY
MANTUA
Brigham City Airport
OGDENVALLEY
EDEN
LIBERTY
HUNTSVILLE
PINEVIEW RESERVOIR
STANSBURYPARK
GRANTSVILLE
Tooele Army Depot
TOOELE
TOOELEVALLEY
I-84
I-15
I-80
I-80
UINTA NATIONAL
FOREST
WEST
MOUNTAIN
LAKE
MOUNTAINS
MOUNT TIMPANOGOS
WILDERNESS AREA
LONE PEAK
WILDERNESS AREA
OQUIRRH
MOUNTAINS
TWIN PEAKS
WILDERNESS AREA
WASATCH-CACHE
NATIONAL FOREST
WASATCH-CACHE
NATIONAL FOREST
WASATCH-CACHE
NATIONAL FOREST
FARMINGTON BAY
WATER FOWL
MANAGEMENT AREA
ANTELOPE
ISLAND
UINTA NATIONAL
FOREST
PINEVIEW
RESERVOIR
PLEASANT VIEW
NORTHOGDEN
FARRWEST
PLAINCITY
OGDEN
WESTHAVEN
MARRIOTT-SLATERVILLE
ROY
SUNSET
WESTPOINT
CLEARFIELD
LAYTON
SOUTHWEBER
UINTAH
KAYSVILLE
FRUITHEIGHTS
CENTERVILLE
WESTBOUNTIFUL
WOODSCROSS
NORTHSALT LAKE
MURRAY
MIDVALE
COTTONWOODHEIGHTS
HOLLADAY
SANDY
DRAPER
BLUFFDALE
RIVERTON
HERRIMAN
SOUTH JORDAN
WEST JORDAN
Salt LakeCounty
DavisCounty
WeberCounty
HOOPER RIVERDALE
WEST VALLEY
CLINTON
SALT LAKE CITY
Hill Air Force Base
Weber StateUniversity
University of Utah
Salt LakeInternational Airport
MunicipalAirport
CorrectionsFacility
SYRACUSE
CEDARHILLS
ALPINE
HIGHLAND
AMERICANFORK
PLEASANTGROVE
SARATOGASPRINGS
OREM
LINDON
SPRINGVILLE
MAPELTON
SPANISHFORK
SALEM
PAYSON
GENOLA
GOSHEN
FARMINGTON
BOUNTIFUL
EAGLEMOUNTAIN
PROVO
VINEYARD
UtahCounty
SLCCMain Campus
SOUTHSALT LAKE
TAYLORSVILLE
HARRISVILLE
SOUTHOGDEN
WASHINGTONTERRACE
McKay-DeeHospital
IMCHospital
ALTA
CampWilliams
Utah ValleyUniversity
Brigham YoungUniversity
Provo MunicipalAirport
OgdenAirport
GREAT SALT LAKE
UTAH LAKE
SANTAQUIN
215
80
15
15
15
15
84
84
215
80
80
15
15
16
§̈¦15
MMaaiinn
SStt
GGeennttiillee SStt
FFoorrtt
LLnn
MMaaiinn
SStt
FF oorr tt
LL aann e
e
GGeennttiillee SStt
FF oorr tt
LL aann ee
LLaayyttoonn PPrrkkwwyy
MMaaiinn
SStt
222255EE
SSppuurrlloocckkSStt
RRoosseewwoooodd LLnn
117755EE
770000 SS
2255EE
GGeennttiillee SStt
442255 SS
222255WW
EEllmm SStt
112255EE
440055 SS
885500SS 997755 SS
110000WW
22 88 00
WW
LLiibbeerrttyy AAvvee
GGrreeeennDDrr
777755 SS
993355 SS
335500 SS
220000EE
DDaawwssoonn SStt
557755 SS
AAssppeenn SStt
DDaawwssoonnSStt
LLaarrssoonn LLnn
992255SS
225500EE
WWiill l
l ooww
SS tt
117755WW
WWeeaavveerr LLnn
MMoorrggaann SStt
330000EE
MMeel looddyySStt
112255WW
PPaarrkk AAvvee
LLaarrssoonn LLnn
EEl ll li issoonnSStt
880000 SS
KKnnoowwllttoonn
HHaawwtthhoorrnnee DDrr
OO
wweennssSStt
CC rroo
ssssSStt
WWaassaattcchh DDrr
FFl li innttSStt
CChhuu
rrcchh
SS tt
990000
SS
990000 SS
CChh uu
rr cchh
SS tt
Fort
L ane
Antelope Dr
InterchangeMain Street Area²
500 0 500250Feet
SILL, JOHN S
Medical Campus
Layton City Mixed Use/ Transit-Oriented Development
FrontRunner Station
MedicalOffice
Pedestrian Tunnel
Layton Parkway
I-15
Downtown Housing
Mixed Use/ Office
19
13
afford a parking structure, either the quality of the building must be reduced, the rents must go up, outside funds must be received, or the project just won’t go forward. To the extent that market conditions cap rents, too often the building quality suffers. Increasingly communities are realizing that the initial burden of structured parking is a major deterrent to quality infill development, and are assisting with that expense. The parking challenge is somewhat alleviated by proximity to transit, especially transit that serves many destinations, including jobs. Extensive research in many markets, and recently validated by the new parking standards from the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers, widely acknowledged as the industry experts and the organization that sets transportation and parking standards used by most municipalities) shows much lower driving and parking usage than in non-‐transit settings. Evidence shows that when transit is located in mixed-‐use districts, parking requirements drop from 20-‐50% or more, depending on the site. This is due to normal turnover in the course of a day, the mix of building uses, and the phenomenon that people self-‐select to live and work in jobs where they have an opportunity to use transit. Accordingly, TOD parking ratios can be much lower than conventional suburban standards. If the Hub District is to become a national model for this type of high-‐quality development, an aggressive TOD parking strategy is recommended.
Parking Spaces / 1,000 SF of Building Development Typical TOD Hub District Residential 2 ½-‐1 Self-‐parks ion site Retail 3-‐15 1 ½-‐3 1 ½-‐ Office/Institutional 5-‐6 1 ½-‐3 1 ½-‐
The lower ratios work well but will require careful parking structure management, a strategic mix of uses to create the right day and night balance, and metered on-‐street parking with enforcement.
7. Parking Structure Cost: Parking structures cost anywhere between $14,000-‐$20,000/space for above-‐grade structures depending on whether they are at least 50% open air, simple concrete construction, or enclosed and “wrapped” with first floor retail, or upper floor development as well. (Below grade
20
Zone Regulation ChartTable 5-2
LOT SIZE:
Minimum Lot Area (Sq ft)
Setbacks: Lots
PRINCIPAL USES:
Minimum Front Yard
Minimum Side Yard (Int)
Minimum Side Yard (Street)
Minimum Rear Yard
Distance between structures onsame lot, " , ..'" i"" '0 '
ACCESSORY l.JSES:
Minimum Front Yard
Minimum Side Yard (Int)
Minimum Side Yard (Street)
IRear Yard
ADJACENT TORESIDENTIAL ZONES
Reart
SideS
HEIGHT
Principal Uses (Max)
Accessory Uses (Max)
Minimum Allowable, '.
LOT COVERAGE
Maximum for all BuildinlZ,s
Minimum Landscaping
B-RP
20,000
20'
10'
20'
10'
o, .'
SO'
10'
l'
10'
20+
20+
100'
20'
10'
40%
2S%
P-B
10,000
2S'
I'
0'
0'
o,
30'
1'
0'
l'
20'+
3S'
3S'
10'
50%
10%
CP-I
20,000
20'
0'
20'
0'
o
"
25'
1'
0'
1'
20'+
40'
40'
10'
40%
10%
CP-2
20,000
20'
0'
20'
0'
o
25'
1'
0'
l'
20'+
40'
40'
10'
50%
10%
CP-3
20,000
0'
0'
0'
0'
o
2S'
l'
0'
l'
20'+
60'
40'
10'
60%
10%
C-H
20,000
0'
0'
0'
0'
o
2S'
l'
0'
1'
3S''-
20'+
60'
40'
10'
60%
10%
M-I
o
0'
20'
0'
o
25'
l'
0'
l'
3S'+
20'+
60'
60'
10'
60%
M-2
o
30'
0'
30'
0'
25'
l'
0'
l'
35'+
20'+
100'
100'
10'
60%
MU
o
0'
0'
0'
0'
0'
• 0'
100%
MU- '*TOD
o
0'
0'
0'
0'
0'
100%
VThose numbets whICh include a plus (+J sIgn after tlieihltiOicate. that fOYevery fo'Otof1'1eight above 35' on principal' uso'~ructutes;;and lI!jove 2'0' on accessory structure~ an atfditionar one foot (l'!j' of sef15ackWltl be required?
f\Comrnercial uses adjaeertrto muIdI5te familyresidetiHal devetoI5rnents'oftwo (2)'$.tories onfiote may reduce the rear yard~setbaCk to a miniftiUlfl{jrzO'7 '
3 Each lot or parcel in the M-I zone shall have a front yard of not less than IS', In addition, any building having a height greaterthan twenty feet (20') shall have an additional foot offront yard for every foot of height above twenty feet (20').
21
3
Investment Utah Market Overview
NAI WEST Year End Report 2011© NAI WEST 2012. All Rights Reserved
Industrial InvestmentIndustrial activity increased 67% for the year with sales volume showing a positive 53% gain over 2010 numbers. Cap rates strengthened in most industrial sectors but vary widely depending on product type, length of lease and financial credit. Class A cap rates at 7.69% are at or near historic levels. The total sales volume reflects a severely supply constrained marketplace.
Multifamily InvestmentThe multifamily sector was the star performer for the year despite a scarcity of product. Activity remained the same as 2010 but the sales volume surged 128% for the year. Institutional sales accounted for more than half the total volume at cap rates generally below 6%. Experts believe the rental rates will steadily increase for at least two years until new product is added and the markets return to a more historical norm. The increased rental growth projections are signs that we are still faced with an anemic housing sector and perhaps a demographic shift away from home ownership. Demand will remain high for just about all product types. Large, class A and B product will command lower cap rates than the smaller 20-100 unit complexes.
Office InvestmentThe number of office investment transactions completed in 2011 rebounded sharply, up 64% with a percentage gain in total volume of 281% year over year. The sales figures were buoyed by an unusual number of large transactions. Office capitalization rates showed the disparity in product types with class A rates nearing 7% while the entire sector showed an overall average of 8.72%. Class A office fundamentals continued to improve, while B and C product saw little improvement with most sales valued well below replacement costs.
Retail InvestmentRetail sales volume increased 55.28% over 2010 thanks to a number of large shopping center transactions and numerous single credit tenant transactions. The majority of these sales were in the $1,000,000 to $2,000,000 range purchased with cash or favorable financing. Cap rates have continued to strengthen as competition for solid quality retail investments has driven pricing up.
8.00%
9.00%
10.00%
5.00%
6.00%
7.00%
Average Cap Rates
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Industrial 7.60% 7.89% 8.54% 8.38% 7.97%
Multifamily 6.17% 6.62% 7.63% 6.89% 6.35%
Office 8.11% 8.19% 8.43% 8.63% 8.72%
Retail 7.61% 7.85% 9.05% 8.67% 8.28%
22
19NAI WEST Year End Report 2011© NAI WEST 2012. All Rights Reserved
15.95%
15.50%
16.00%
16.50%
17.00%
13.99%
12.82%
14.39% 14.38% 14.35%
12.00%
12.50%
13.00%
13.50%
14.00%
14.50%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Vacancy Rate
15.00%50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
(250,000)
(200,000)
(150,000)
(100,000)
(50,000)
‐
Net Absorption
Q1 2
01
0
Q2 2
01
0
Q3 2
01
0
Q4 2
01
0
Q1 2
01
1
Q2 2
01
1
Q3 2
01
1
Q4 2
01
1
$15.00
$17.00
$19.00
$21.00
$23.00
$5.00
$7.00
$9.00
$11.00
$13.00
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Overall A B C
Actual Average Lease Rates (FS)
$105.00
$125.00
$145.00
$165.00
$185.00
$5.00
$25.00
$45.00
$65.00
$85.00
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Overall A B C
Actual Average Sales Price PSF
50
60
70
80
90
0
10
20
30
40
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Overall A B C
Number of Transactions (Lease & Sale)
2011 Stats by SF class
Product Type Average Lease Rates # of Deals Leased SF Average Sale Price PSF # of Deals Sold SF
Class A $16.54 10 26,412 $- 0 -
Class B $14.76 48 159,874 $100.76 10 59,143
Class C $11.11 10 17,182 $41.48 3 70,400
Property Name Buyer/Tenant Sf Type City Class
455 East 25th Street 455 25th Street LLC 57,556 sale Ogden C
Ogden City Plaza- Lot 1 TPUSA, Inc. 47,300 renewal Ogden B
Corporate Headquarters South Citicorp North America, Inc. 22,258 lease Roy B
CCI Building Weber State University 14,000 sale Clearfield B
Wasatch Building Main Street Investment, LLC 12,448 sale Bountiful B
Notable Transactions
Office Davis and Weber Counties Market Overview
* All lease rates are quoted as full service and are based upon completed lease, sublease and renewal transactions.
Quick Stats
2011 2010 Change
Vacancy 14.35% -0.03%
# of Leases 68 7.94%
Actual Lease Rates $14.56 -5.75%
Leased SF 203,468 10.80%
# of Sales 13 -7.14%
Actual Sales $PSF $87.08 -10.37%
Sold SF 129,543 -15.88%
23
29NAI WEST Year End Report 2011© NAI WEST 2012. All Rights Reserved
RetailDavis and Weber Counties Market Overview
9.34%
9.67%
8.94%
9.08%9.00%
9.50%
10.00%
7.67%
7.00%
7.50%
8.00%
8.50%
Direct Vacancy
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
80
100
120
0
20
40
60
Number of Transactions Lease & Sale
2008 2009 2010 2011
0.33% 0.48%0.63%0.48% 0.29%
0.34%
8.50%
9.00%
9.50%
10.00%
10.50%
8.94% 8.96% 9.08%
6.00%
6.50%
7.00%
7.50%
8.00%
Vacancy Overview
Q4 2010 Q2 2011 Q4 2011
Direct Vacancy Occupied Availability Sublease Availability
$18.42
$16.02
$17.00
$18.00
$19.00
$15.02 $15.32 $15.19
$12.00
$13.00
$14.00
$15.00
Actual Average Lease Rates (NNN)
$15.00$15.43
2008
2007
2006
2009
2010
2011
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
(60,000)
(40,000)
(20,000)
‐
20,000
40,000
Net Absorption
60,000
Q3
20
10
Q4
20
10
Q1
20
11
Q2
20
11
Q3
20
11
Q4
20
11
$152.77
$143.13
$161.52
$153.16$150.00
$160.00
$170.00
$124.05 $122.04
$100.00
$110.00
$120.00
$130.00
$140.00
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Actual Average Sales Price PSF
2011 Stats by SF increment
SF Increments Lease Rate # of Deals Leased SF Sales $PSF # of Deals Sold SF
0 - 4,999 SF $18.15 66 120,678 $191.49 9 23,287
5,000 - 9,999 SF $11.93 12 80,216 $55.56 1 6,750
10,000 - 19,999 SF $14.20 5 56,534 0 -
20,000 - 39,999 SF $10.19 2 43,789 $90.32 1 25,466
40,000+ SF $6.41 1 40,295 1 57,556
Property Name Buyer/Tenant Deal Type City SF
Gateway Crossing Confidential Investment Sale Bountiful 198,000
El Toro Building 455 25TH STREET LLC sale Ogden 57,556
Cal Ranch CAL RANCH STORES lease Layton 40,295
Layton Crossing South Petsmart lease Layton 22,736
The Commons at Ogden Petsmart lease Ogden 12,259
Notable TransactionsQuick Stats
2011 vs 2010 Change
Vacancy 9.08% 0.14%
# of Leases 86 -10.42%
Actual Lease Rates $15.43 1.61%
Leased SF 341,512 39.49%
# of Sales 12 -14.29%
Actual Sales $PSF $153.16 -5.18%
Sold SF 113,059 13.56%
24
Concessions No Concessions
Rental Rate
Vacancy
0
2
4
6
8
10
500
600
700
800
Ren
Vaca
Ren
Vaca
Rat
y
Rat
y
11100908070605040302
$715
$630
$593
$592$606
$670
5.1
%
$701
$609
$701
$711
5.8
%
8.3
%
9.5
%
9.7
%
7.4
%
5.7
%
4.6
%
5.9
%
8%
Studio $440 $1.28 $444 $1.29 $395 $1.15
1 Bed 1 Bath $619 $1.00 $609 $0.98 $597 $1.01
2 Bed 1 Bath $672 $0.76 $689 $0.78 $678 $0.79
2 Bed 2 Bath $813 $0.84 $816 $0.86 $875 $0.86
3 Bed 2 Bath $834 $0.72 $857 $0.79 $841 $0.72
OVERALL $701 $0.81 $711 $0.84 $701 $0.84
Year-End2009
Year-End2010
Year-End2011
OVERALL
Studio $354 $0.99 $406 $1.22 $375 $1.03 $395 $1.15
1 Bed 1 Bath $550 $0.66 $568 $1.08 $621 $0.97 $597 $1.01
2 Bed 1 Bath $667 $0.70 $673 $0.80 $684 $0.81 $678 $0.79
2 Bed 2 Bath $749 $0.75 $782 $0.75 $920 $0.91 $875 $0.86
3 Bed 2 Bath $832 $0.73 $905 $0.64 $839 $0.73 $841 $0.72
OVERALL $733 $0.71 $628 $0.85 $736 $0.84 $701 $0.84
10-49
Units 50-99
Units
100+
Units Overall
PROPERTY
SIZE
53.8%62.22%
33.2%53.5%
Rental RateVacancy Rate
25
1 5 ARA • Multi-family Brokerage & Counseling Services • 801-531-1221 • www.ARAusa.comJanuary 2012
J a n u a r y 2 0 1 2
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Studio 1 Bed 1 Bath
2 Bed 1 Bath
2 Bed 2 Bath
3 Bed 2 Bath
OVERALL
$1.1
5 (s
q. f
t.)$1
.25
$1.2
6
$1.2
9
$1.0
1 (s
q. f
t.)
$1.0
2
$0.8
2
$1.0
5
$0.7
9 (s
q. f
t.)$0
.85
$0.7
2
$0.8
8
$0.8
6 (s
q. f
t.)
$0.8
5
$0.7
3
$0.9
1
$0. 7
2 (s
q. f
t.)$0
.81
$0.7
1
$0.8
8
$0.8
4 (s
q. f
t.)$0
.88
$0.7
5
$0.9
4
$395
$581
$474 $5
15
$597 $6
54
$579
$685
$678
$678
$654
$758
$879
$829
$756
$910
$841 $9
03$8
07$1
,059
$701 $7
53$6
55$7
91Utah repeats this year as Forbes Best State for Business and Careers in their sixth annual look at the business climates of the 50 states. No state can match the consistent performance of Utah. It is the only state that ranks among the top 15 states in each of the six main cat-egories rated. Utah high-lights include energy costs 31% below the national avg. and employment growth that has averaged 0.6% the past fi ve years. Compare that to the U.S. as a whole where job growth has averaged negative 0.6% since 2005. Businesses are getting the message on Utah. Proctor & Gamble, ITT, Home Depot and Boeing all announced expansions in Utah this year. The Goldman Sachs offi ce in Salt Lake City is its second biggest in the Americas with more than 1,000 employees and signifi cant expansion expected over the next four years.Technology companies par-ticularly have had Utah on their radar as an affordable alternative to California with overall business costs in Utah 10% below the national average. Adobe Systems, eBay, Electronic Arts and Oracle have all expanded in Utah in recent years.Companies are also at-tracted by Utah’s population growth which is one of the fastest in the country and provides a burgeoning work-force. “Utah has a young, dynamic economy with a vi-brant high-tech sector,” says Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics.Source: Forbes, Nov. 22, 2011
Wasatch FrontRents By Unit Type and Property Class
Wasatch FrontRents/Vacancies By County
Wasatch FrontRents by Unit Type
Davis County Utah County
Weber County Salt Lake County
County
Salt Lake
Davis
Utah
Weber
OVERALL
Year-end2009
Year-end2010
Avg Dollar/ VacRent Sq. Ft. Rate
$739 88¢ 8.6%
$701 81¢ 8.0%
$701 83¢ 7.0%
$639 73¢ 9.0%
$724 86¢ 8.5%
Avg Dollar/ VacRent Sq. Ft. Rate
$755 89¢ 6.2%
$711 84¢ 5.1%
$716 84¢ 5.5%
$640 73¢ 6.8%
$738 87¢ 6.1%
Year-end2011
Avg Dollar/ VacRent Sq. Ft. Rate
$791 94¢ 5.2%
$701 84¢ 5.8%
$753 88¢ 5.0%
$655 75¢ 6.5%
$769 91¢ 5.4%
Category Rent $/Ft Vac Rent $/Ft Vac Rent $/Ft Vac Rent $/Ft Vac
Studio N/A N/A N/A $482 $1.32 5.6% $435 $1.10 7.5% $481 $1.26 6.2%
1 Bed 1 Bath $815 $1.11 5.9% $646 $1.02 4.5% $553 $0.95 4.5% $672 $1.04 4.8%
2 Bed 1 Bath $831 $0.88 7.4% $747 $0.86 5.8% $633 $0.77 4.9% $720 $0.84 5.7%
2 Bed 2 Bath $1,019 $0.97 5.7% $842 $0.86 5.0% $708 $0.66 6.4% $893 $0.89 5.2%
3 Bed 2 Bath $1,178 $0.92 5.7% $935 $0.81 5.8% $764 $0.59 5.5% $973 $0.83 5.8%
OVERALL $927 $0.99 6.3% $753 $0.89 5.1% $615 $0.80 5.0% $769 $0.91 5.4%
CLASS A CLASS B CLASS C OVERALL
Note: All data is for traditional rental housing. Numbers do not include seasonally adjusted student housing properties.
The Best States For Business
26
1 7 ARA • Multi-family Brokerage & Counseling Services • 801-531-1221 • www.ARAusa.comJanuary 2012
J a n u a r y 2 0 1 2
After a low number of sales transactions during 2010 and the fi rst half of 2011 for 100+ unit communities, the sales volume during the fourth quarter of 2011 showed strong improvement.
1,800 units traded during the fourth quarter of 2011 for a total transaction volume of more than $185 Million. Notable transactions were Royal Farms (366 units), Royal Ridge (328 units), Irving Schoolhouse (232 units) and Alpine meadows (222 units).
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac continue to be the main source of apartment lending. All of the fourth quarter transactions were fi nanced with new agency debt. The low interest rates and inter-est- only options make Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the preferred lending option.
Cap rates have com-pressed over the last 12 months. The following is a basic outline of cap rates for the different as-set classes.
Class A -- 5.75% - 6.25%Class B -- 6.0% - 6.5%Class C -- 6.5% - 7.0%
LARGER PROPERTY REPORTSales of 100+ Unit Properties
SALT LAKE COUNTYAverage Cap Rate Average Price per Property/Sq FT
Average Property Age Average Price per Unit/Units Sold
Total Sales Volume/Number of Sales Salt Lake County Sales Summary
0
50
100
150
200
111009111009111009111009Overall Class A Class B Class C
$13,
650,
000
$192
,882
,758
$134
,150
,000
$94,
532,
000
$69,
125,
000
$87,
782,
758
$30,
700,
000
$105
,100
,000
(2 s
ales
)
(7 s
ales
)
(5 s
ales
)
(2 s
ales
)
(4 s
ales
)
(1 s
ale)
$80,
882,
000
(3 s
ales
)
Million
N/A
$34,
325,
000
(2 s
ales
)
N/A
(5 s
ales
)
(3 s
ales
)
0
50
100
150
200
111009111009111009111009OVERALL Class A Class B Class C
$192
,882
,758
$134
,150
,000
$94,
532,
000
N/A
$69,
125,
000
$13,
650,
000
$87,
782,
754
$30,
700,
000
$105
,100
,000
$34,
325,
000
1,92
8 u
nit
s (6
.2%
cap
)
1,55
6 u
nit
s
(7.2
% c
ap)
1,14
0 u
nit
s (6
.7%
cap
)
760
un
its
(7.5
% c
ap)
232
un
its
(7.8
% c
ap)
1,02
6 u
nit
s (6
.4%
cap
)
276
un
its
(6.2
% c
ap)
902
un
its
(6.0
% c
ap)
520
un
its
(7.5
% c
ap)
$80,
882,
000
908
un
its
(6.6
% c
ap)
Million
N/A
Sales of 100+ Unit Properties
0
10
20
30
40
50
111009111009111009111009OVERALL Class A Class B Class C
19
17
14
2322
14
N/A
50
9
26
33
N/A
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
111009111009111009111009OVERALL Class A Class B Class C
$82,
923
$100
,042
$86,
215
$90,
954
$89,
077
$85,
558
$111
,232
$
(1,1
40 u
nit
s)
(1,9
28 u
nit
s)
(1,5
56 u
nit
s)
(760
un
its)
(908
un
its)
(1,0
26 u
nit
s)(276
un
its)
$58,
836
(232
un
its)
$116
,518
$66,
010
(520
un
its)
Thousand
N/A
N/A
(902
un
its)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
111009111009111009111009OVERALL Class A Class B Class C
6.7%
6.2%
7.2%
6.0%
7.8%
6.4%
6.2%
N/A
6.6%
7.5%
7.5%
N/A
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
111009111009111009111009OVERALL Class A Class B Class C
$18,
906,
400
$27,
554,
679
$26,
830,
000
$34,
562,
500
$26,
960,
667
$21,
945,
689
$30,
700,
000
$
$6,8
25,0
00
$87.
64 (p
er s
f)
$118
.35
(per
sf)
$102
.03
(per
sf)
$95.
38 (p
er s
f)
$89.
07 (p
er s
f)
$103
.17
(per
sf)
$125
.29
(per
sf)
$80.
04 (p
er s
f)
N/A
$17,
162,
500
$99.
48 (p
er s
f)
Million
N/A
$134
.93
(per
sf)
$35,
033,
333
27
1 0 ARA • Multi-family Brokerage & Counseling Services • 801-531-1221 • www.ARAusa.comJanuary 2012
DAVIS COUNTY
Bountiful
Clearfield
Layton
North Salt Lake
Year-End2009
Year-End2010
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$780 956 $0.82 6.6%
$692 901 $0.77 9.0%
$670 788 $0.85 7.7%
$776 925 $0.84 9.4%
Year-End2011
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$780 955 $0.82 4.8%
$702 895 $0.78 5.3%
$665 783 $0.85 5.4%
$825 942 $0.88 5.4%
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$874 976 $0.89 4.4%
$956 1,381 $0.69 5.8%
$636 751 $0.85 6.3%
$767 874 $0.88 5.0%
SALT LAKE COUNTY
Cottonwood Heights
Draper
Holladay
Midvale
Murray
Riverton
Salt Lake City
Sandy
South Jordan
South Salt Lake
Taylorsville
West Jordan
Year-End2009
Year-End2010
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$810 934 $0.87 12.4%
$939 963 $0.97 8.1%
$662 873 $0.76 10.7%
$781 857 $0.91 9.7%
$740 858 $0.86 9.1%
$859 1,004 $0.86 8.7%
$692 735 $0.94 6.7%
$842 869 $0.97 9.9%
$1,055 1,067 $0.99 8.5%
$604 737 $0.82 8.1%
$729 829 $0.88 11.8%
$771 903 $0.85 9.0%
Year-End2011
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$824 940 $0.88 6.1%
$929 963 $0.96 6.8%
$654 877 $0.75 4.9%
$812 867 $0.94 7.0%
$752 813 $0.92 6.5%
$841 1,043 $0.81 8.2%
$718 726 $0.99 4.6%
$853 876 $0.97 7.3%
$1,060 1,057 $1.00 8.8%
$631 729 $0.87 6.7%
$730 829 $0.88 7.6%
$798 924 $0.86 6.2%
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$872 916 $0.95 6.5%
$972 1,000 $0.97 4.0%
$756 983 $0.77 5.3%
$785 822 $0.95 6.7%
$818 925 $0.88 5.3%
$838 878 $0.95 5.2%
$763 712 $1.07 4.0%
$880 902 $0.98 6.2%
$1,100 1,078 $1.02 7.5%
$648 665 $0.97 5.0%
$694 781 $0.89 4.9%
$813 972 $0.84 5.3%
UTAH COUNTY
Orem
Pleasant Grove
Provo
Year-End2010
Year-End2011
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$770 923 $0.83 5.5%
$819 945 $0.87 6.9%
$622 689 $0.90 5.6%
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$814 907 $0.90 4.5%
$881 942 $0.94 5.1%
$623 713 $0.87 6.0%
Year-End2009
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$760 918 $0.83 7.0%
$782 952 $0.82 9.8%
$606 703 $0.86 5.4%
WEBER COUNTY
Ogden
Roy
Washington Terrace
West Haven
Year-End2009
Year-End2010
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$599 832 $0.72 9.1%
$720 948 $0.76 6.5%
$612 1,009 $0.61 8.4%
$790 933 $0.85 10.8%
Year-End2011
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$603 854 $0.71 7.5%
$729 949 $0.77 7.0%
$630 1,009 $0.62 8.2%
$795 935 $0.85 6.4%
Avg$ AvgSF $/SF Vac
$619 830 $0.75 6.1%
$745 1,011 $0.74 6.5%
$677 1,049 $0.65 6.7%
$742 885 $0.84 4.3%
Rents & Vacancies in Utah Cities
SALT LAKE COUNTY
WEBER COUNTY
UTAH COUNTY
DAVIS COUNTY
J a n u a r y 2 0 1 2
28
1 9 ARA • Multi-family Brokerage & Counseling Services • 801-531-1221 • www.ARAusa.comJanuary 2012
J a n u a r y 2 0 1 2
LARGER PROPERTY REPORT
Operating Expenses (50+ Units)
Operating ExpenseComparison by Age of Construction
Operating ExpenseComparison by Property Class
% of Total Per Sq. Ft. Per Unit Variance
Expense1999& Older
Payroll Costs 29.9% 29.0% $1.22 $1.09 $1,039 $996 -$43 Utilities 15.5% 16.3% $0.63 $0.61 $537 $560 $23Property Taxes 13.8% 13.6% $0.56 $0.51 $478 $467 -$11Repairs & Maintenance 12.0% 8.7% $0.49 $0.33 $417 $298 -$119Management Fee 10.1% 10.9% $0.41 $0.41 $350 $374 $24Turnover Costs 5.5% 4.0% $0.22 $0.15 $190 $136 -$54Advertising 4.9% 4.7% $0.20 $0.18 $170 $162 -$8Administrative Costs 4.1% 9.0% $0.17 $0.34 $143 $309 $166Property Insurance 4.3% 3.9% $0.18 $0.15 $149 $136 -$13OVERALL 100% 100% $4.08 $3.77 $3,473 $3,438 -$35
Reserves $378 $262 -$116TOTAL EXPENSES $3,851 $3,700 -$151
2000& Newer
1999& Older
2000& Newer
1999& Older
2000& Newer
% of Total Per Sq. Ft. Per Unit
ExpenseClass
A
Payroll Costs 26.9% 30.6% 28.9% $1.14 $1.23 $1.10 $1,039 $1,037 $934 Utilities 17.1% 14.9% 19.3% $0.72 $0.60 $0.73 $659 $505 $622Property Taxes 15.3% 13.4% 13.6% $0.65 $0.54 $0.52 $588 $455 $437Repairs & Maintenance 13.4% 11.0% 12.3% $0.57 $0.44 $0.47 $517 $371 $397Management Fee 8.7% 10.6% 8.6% $0.37 $0.43 $0.33 $336 $360 $278Turnover Costs 4.5% 5.4% 4.6% $0.19 $0.22 $0.18 $173 $184 $149Advertising 6.1% 4.8% 3.8% $0.26 $0.19 $0.14 $234 $162 $121Administrative Costs 4.2% 4.8% 4.6% $0.18 $0.19 $0.17 $162 $163 $147Property Insurance 3.9% 4.4% 4.3% $0.16 $0.18 $0.16 $149 $148 $140OVERALL 100% 100% 100% $4.24 $4.02 $3.80 $3,857 $3,385 $3,225
Reserves $293 $375 $318TOTAL EXPENSES $4,150 $3,760 $3,543
ClassB
ClassC
ClassA
ClassB
ClassC
Class A
ClassB
ClassC
Prime Source Wholesale Distributors, a local whole-sale distributor of parts for recreational vehicles, is in the process of expand-ing from 5,000 to 20,000 sf. Selling to dealers and retailers, the new space will allow more room to stock product and accommodate increased business.
Woodbury Corporation in Salt Lake City has plans to break ground this spring for a 60,000 square foot offi ce and laboratory building in Research Park, Salt Lake City. Construction should take eight to 12 months. Fifty percent of the struc-ture has been pre-leased to Blackrock Microsystems which draws on high-tech innovation that began with Bionic Technologies, a spin-off from the University of Utah in 1997. Blackrock provides enabling tools for the neuroscience, neural engineering and neuropros-thetics research and clinical community worldwide.
Ereplacementparts.com,an online retailer of parts for items such as power tools and appliances, is slated to make a signifi cant expansion move. The Sandy-based fi rm is moving its warehouse from approxi-mately 10,000 sf to 115,200 sf in Midvale where 60 people will be immediately employed once the move is complete. Plans are to em-ploy more than 100 people at the Midvale warehouse within the next couple of years, and as many as 300 workers by the end of the fi rm’s seven-year lease.
Source: The Enterprise, Dec. 19-25,, 2012; Jan. 2-8, 2012
Expansion in the Market
29
© C o p y r i g h t 2 012 - A l l R i g h t s R e s e r v e dwww.comre.com
YEAR-END 2011 | MARKET REVIEW Davis County
R E T A I L M A R K E T O V E R V I E W – F O u R T H Q u A R T E R 2 0 1 1
Type Total Market SF Surveyed Available SF Vacancy
Overall Average Low Rate
Overall Average High Rate
Overall Average
CAMsRegional Mall 750,000 66,482 8.86% n/a n/a n/a
Regional Center 1,396,367 75,564 5.41% $18.50 $28.67 $4.00
Community Center 3,701,609 396,467 10.71% $9.75 $16.06 $3.58
Neighborhood Center 1,144,264 113,154 9.89% $10.78 $17.00 $3.49
Anchorless Strip 1,063,647 267,680 25.17% $11.05 $14.19 $3.76
Total 8,055,887 919,347 11.41% $11.03 $15.45 $3.64
R e t a i l M a r k e t
Retail: Retail was a strong performer for 2011. Davis County saw new retailers move in as well as the expansion of existing ones.
Station Park, west of I-15 near the TRAX station in Farmington, is Davis County’s new power center. It has received a lot of attention and is rapidly growing. A new XD Cinemark Theatre Complex recently opened. Other retailers that opened this year include Harmon’s (first Davis County location), Marshalls (first Utah location), TJ Maxx, Ulta (first Davis County location), Sports Authority, Ross, Sally Beauty, Tilly’s (first Utah location), Chase Bank, and Famous Footwear. Restaurants coming soon include Johnny Rockets (first Utah location), Settebello Pizzeria and Park Stone – Wood Kitchen & Bar.
The following companies also entered or expanded in Davis County in 2011:
Deseret Book opened a new store in Layton.•
PetSmart will be relocating to a new location in Layton.•
Dick’s Sporting Goods entered the Davis County •market with a new 46,500 sf location in the Layton Hills Mall.
Gold’s Gym opened in Syracuse filling the vacant •Ace Hardware space.
Happy Hashi, a new sushi restaurant, is opening •near the Layton Hills Mall.
C-A-L Ranch opened in Layton filling the vacant •Dick’s marketplace store. This is their first Davis County location.
A new 107 room extended stay hotel opened in Layton.•
Kneaders opened a new location in Layton.•
Ream’s closed a 47,000 sf grocery store in August. In October, Big Lots announced that it will be relocating from its current location next to Layton Hills Mall into part of the Ream’s space on Main Street. It has also been announced that DSW Shoes will be closing their Davis County location in Layton at the end of December. This space has already been leased to Shoe Carnival.
In general, landlords are still offering incentives for retailers as the market remains very competitive. Vacancy rates are slightly higher than last year at this time, but are down from six months ago. Anchorless Strip Centers continue to struggle with the highest level of vacancy at 25.17%, while the larger anchored centers enjoy higher levels of occupancy with an average vacancy rate at 9.32%. Lease rates remain stable with average lease rates running between $11 and $15 per sf with very little change from six months ago.
Total Inventory Surveyed (SF) 8,055,887
Overall Average Asking Lease Rates $11.03 - $15.45
Vacancy 11.41%
Overall Average CAMs $3.64
R E T A I L M A R K E T I n d I C A T O R S