Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Direct Vacancy Rate, Q1 2013
New York 9.2%
San Francisco 10.7%
Portland 11.1%
Seattle 12.3%
Indianapolis 12.4%
Richmond 12.5%
Austin 12.9%
Oakland 12.9%
San Francisco Peninsula 13.7%
Denver 13.8%
Pittsburgh 14.1%
Washington DC 14.2%
San Diego 14.2%
Boston 14.4%
Houston 14.6%
Baltimore 14.6%
Silicon Valley 14.8%
San Antonio 14.8%
Philadelphia 14.9%
Orange County 15.2%
Charlotte 15.2%
Minneapolis 16.4%
Hampton Roads 16.5%
Los Angeles 16.6%
Chicago 16.7%
Westchester County 16.8%
St Louis 17.0%
Ft Lauderdale 17.4%
Columbus 17.6%
Miami 18.0%
Cincinnati 18.3%
Jacksonville 18.3%
Atlanta 18.4%
Tampa 18.6%
Orlando 19.5%
Fairfield County 19.6%
Milwaukee 19.8%
Cleveland 20.0%
Dallas 20.5%
Sacramento 20.7%
New Jersey 21.6%
Phoenix 24.1%
West Palm Beach 24.2%
Detroit 26.6%
Net Absorption, Q1 2013 Net Change in Occupied Square Footage, 100,000+ sq ft
Seattle 1,646,400
New Jersey 1,369,500
Houston 1,200,200
Oakland 593,600
Atlanta 542,000
Sacramento 413,900
San Diego 399,600
Dallas 376,500
Portland 351,200
Orange County 324,500
Indianapolis 323,000
Chicago 18,800
San Francisco 295,300
Raleigh-Durham 256,000
Richmond 243,300
Boston 237,200
Miami 225,200
Westchester County 213,000
Tampa 189,200
Austin 144,200
San Antonio 132,400
Denver 125,200
Phoenix 113,200
I was actually expecting Dallas' office vacancy rate to be considerably lower, at least comparable to Houston. I'm shocked to see that Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, and Los Angeles have lower vacancy rates than Dallas.
I was actually expecting Dallas' office vacancy rate to be considerably lower, at least comparable to Houston. I'm shocked to see that Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, and Los Angeles have lower vacancy rates than Dallas.
I'm actually not. Dallas has a bad habit of over building based on speculation. They've been doing that for a while.
I'm actually not. Dallas has a bad habit of over building based on speculation. They've been doing that for a while.
Was gonna say that but thought it would be best to let someone from DFW to say it first. I think DFW overbuilds because they have more districts. Yes DFW has more districts than Houston. Houston just has many big ones.
Sometimes I wonder how Houston and Dallas downtowns still draw so much corporate energy with all these other business districts in the metros
ATL has actually decreased their vacancy rate while Houstons increased.
Houston fills quickly because they dont over build so they may end the year better than they started it.
You can really see the differences in many markets between suburban and downtown. Chicago's been in the middle of a huge push lately of suburban companies moving back downtown. The biggest market which is Class A space downtown has a vacancy of 11.7%. The suburban vacancy is now 20.9%.
Downtown had an absorption of 472,000sf, while the suburbs saw -82,000sf.
Are other cities seeing the suburban markets get beaten so much worse than downtown? From looking quickly I see Dallas is actually the opposite. Downtown is higher than suburban.
The same report provided by Colliers put the overall Twin Cities vacancy rate at 16.0%, with the Class A space sub-market at 12.8% (downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul have Class A vacancies of 10.8% and 11.8%, respectively). Net absorption was +221,078 YOY.
16% is very high, and much of that is in the Class B sub-market. There is a lot of local chatter amongst the regional city forums such as urbanmsp.com about a potential mini-boom of Class A office space, including the gratuitous "supertall" talk that always seems to accompany such discussions. I can't say I'm too fond of the idea of shifting the make-up of vacancy rates amongst sub-markets (in this case, from Class B to Class A) as opposed to reducing all of the rates, and I'd hate to see overall vacancies stagnate or increase due to overbuilding! Time will tell I suppose....
ATL has actually decreased their vacancy rate while Houstons increased.
Houston fills quickly because they dont over build so they may end the year better than they started it.
Actually here's the explanation for that:
Quote:
Office Posts Negative Absorption
Houston's office market slowed in Q1, according to data Avison Young released yesterday. We recorded 690k SF of negative absorption across the metro, compared with 837k SF of positive absorption in Q1 '12. Our vacancy rate rose 50 bps from the end of the year to 11.2%, and overall rents declined $0.21. But research director Jeannie Roberts tells us we shouldn't be alarmed; negative absorption was caused by large blocks of sublease space hitting the market after a record year of oil and gas M&A, and the trend won't continue. (For those who already opened up the Armageddon bunker, hopefully it's resealable.)
Not much of a surprise, every city has a few quarters even when they're booming due to things like mergers and acquisitions and such and for the energy industry the bulk of that happens in either Q1 or Q2. Also factor in that several of Houston's largest buildings under construction came online in Q1 of this year like 3001 and 3009 Post Oak just as two of several examples and have just now filled up.
Same story with Dallas, not a overbuilding thing just a bad timing of the year for these statistics. It'll fall to it's regular 16% and Houston to it's regular 11% soon enough and then improve as the economy is still taking off.
Here in Washington on the other hand, we're going to be seeing more caution. The end of this year to beginning of next year is going to be extremely tough for us, your city Houston is poaching from Washington and huge amounts too. Exxon's division will close here and 20,000 people and their families will relocate (from all over the country) to Houston, majority of whom work in Northern Virginia. So that will essentially put 1.3 million square feet here back on the market as they lose their main tenants.
Last edited by Trafalgar Law; 04-12-2013 at 03:06 AM..
The end of this year to beginning of next year is going to be extremely tough for us, your city Houston is poaching from Washington. Exxon's division will close here and 20,000 people and their families will relocate to Houston, majority of whom work in Northern Virginia. So that will essentially put 1.3 million square feet here back on the market as they lose their main tenants.
No room.
No more room!!!
Send them to DFW.
Too many Exxon workers here already
Lol, well DT Houston and other parts of the city will have vacancies too as many Exxon workers there are moving to the campus too
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
