Archive for the ‘Commercial Property’ Category

A Respite From The Large Singapore Office Supply in 2016

Thursday, April 3rd, 2014

JLL estimates that close to 4 million sq ft of new office space is expected to complete in Singapore in 2016, a historical high since 1997, and exceeding the 10-year average annual island-wide demand of 1.5 million sq ft. The large pipeline in 2016 thus poses some concerns for the market.

With more than half the supply pipeline in 2016 – almost 2.5 million sq ft – attributed to a single office space project jointly developed by the Singapore and Malaysian governments following a land-swap deal in 2010, the vacancy level in the CBD could rise.


Source: JLL Research 4Q13

However, from the chart depicting the upcoming completions from 2014 to 2017, it should be noted that the Singapore office market is expected to face a supply drought in 2015 and 2017. These periods of limited new supply could thus provide some respite from a potential oversupply situation in 2016, should the construction duration of the other projects quicken or be delayed.

Already, several office developers have reportedly been observed to make regular revisions to the target completion dates of their projects, even when developments are well into their final phase of development. Some examples in recent years include MND Building, which was completed earlier than initially expected, and Orchard Gateway that saw its initial 2013 target completion delayed to 2014.

With the bulk of the supply pipeline being in the CBD, the market is also likely to experience a quicker take-up due to its prime commercial location and better office specifications that are available to office occupiers. Along with efforts by the government to transform the CBD to include more lifestyle amenities, these factors could thus support the Singapore office market in mitigating the large oversupply situation in 2016.

About the author
Cedric Chng is the Senior Research Analyst for JLL, based in Singapore.

The Potential Reinvention Of South Sydney

Wednesday, February 5th, 2014

When considering the characteristics of a strong commercial office precinct, success is not only determined by aspects of the market like modern, efficient floor space or the relative affordability of rent. Peripheral factors like access to public transport nodes, the surrounding employment catchment pool and geographical amenity also play a major part in corporate office location rationale.

The evolution of Sydney’s metropolitan commercial office precincts solidified in the last quarter of the 20th century. The CBD, Sydney’s core market, is the 5.0 million sqm white-collar heart of the city, accommodating the majority of national and international finance, legal and insurance firms. Across the bridge to the north, commercial precincts stretching along an arc across the North Shore from North Sydney, through St Leonards and Chatswood and ending in Macquarie Park have become synonymous with the telecommunications, pharmaceutical and technology sectors.

What about South Sydney? Located just 7 kilometres from the Sydney CBD, the South Sydney office precinct, clustered around Mascot, is the gateway precinct to economically important Sydney Airport and Port Botany and has long been associated with Sydney’s Logistics and Transport sector. In the last decade or so, new road infrastructure, large development land holdings and the relative affordability of the outer west has seen the departure of many industrial occupiers from South Sydney’s industrial areas (many taking their office operations with them). There has been a noticeable impact on the small South Sydney office market – vacancy has ballooned to 20.5%.

South Sydney needs a new identity and it has a lot of factors in place to achieve it.

Traditionally a blue-collar, working class area, the whole of South Sydney has undergone significant gentrification over the last two decades. New South Wales Government “in-fill” initiatives, which set targets of 60%-70% of all new housing to be built in established areas from 2005-2031, has created significant population growth within South Sydney. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) reported a 41.5% increase in the population of the City of Sydney local government area over the 2001-2011 period (which incorporates the South Sydney suburbs of Alexandria, Zetland and Waterloo). The City of Botany Bay, which incorporates the southern commercial areas of Mascot, Botany and Rosebery, grew by 12.0% over the same time period.

Demand for inner-city living has attracted the demographic of a younger, highly-educated, more affluent population. For example, people with a bachelor degree or higher increased 44% in the five-year period from 2006-2011 (ABS Census) in the suburb of Alexandria and an 18.4% increase was recorded in Mascot.

The South Sydney precinct has New South Wales’ top three ranked universities within a 10km radius and is serviced by growing social amenity in areas like Danks Street and Alexandria. With an increasing population of young, well-educated workers and comparative rental affordability when measured against established commercial office locations such as the CBD and Sydney Fringe, South Sydney has an opportunity to significantly grow its commercial office base in the coming decade and even reinvent itself as an innovation hub, competing to accommodate Sydney’s creative, media and technology industries in the future.

About the author
Rick Warner is the Strategic Research Analyst for Jones Lang LaSalle, based in Sydney, Australia.

Shanghai’s New Land King

Thursday, September 19th, 2013

Two weeks ago Sun Hung Kai won an auction for a development site in Shanghai with a bid of US $3.5 billion. This was the second largest amount ever paid for a single development site in China.

Over the last several years we have been retained to conduct market studies on this particular site by several different developers from around the world, although never by SHK. The site is located in Xujiahui, a key retail precinct in the Southwest part of the CBD. It is perhaps the last large scale site for mixed use development in a prime location, hence the intense interest.

Although in the CBD, Xujiahui has never been considered an important office location, but from a retail perspective there are few places that rival it in Shanghai. From our perspective, the key challenge for this site – given that it has both office and retail components – was to not get bogged down in trying to compete with the Premium Grade A offices in the core CBD, but focus on maximising the retail potential.

In the end, it makes perfect sense that SHK was able to make the highest bid. They have a strong asset management team on the ground and have executed extremely well in Shanghai so far. ifc in Pudong is one of the best mixed-use projects in all of China and ICC in Puxi is nearing completion, with the shopping mall having just opened. If anyone was going to be able to bet big on hitting a home run with a large retail project in Xujiahui, it is SHK, plus it fits their profile for this kind of development with a large catchment area and multiple metro lines converging underneath.

Whether SHK choose eventually to sell the office portion of the project to owner occupiers, we won’t know for a long time, but this investment can be taken as a big vote of confidence in the future of the retail market in Shanghai. They clearly believe that they can develop another large successful scheme and not dilute the catchment area of their existing projects.

About the author
Michael Klibaner is the Head of Research for Jones Lang LaSalle in Greater China, based in Hong Kong.

Perspectives On Commercial Real Estate Portfolio Allocation in India

Tuesday, September 17th, 2013

Many factors influence decisions about buying or leasing property. Real estate costs represent a significant business expense. Not only Fortune 500 companies but also mid and small-cap companies are undertaking portfolio reviews because they impact any future own versus lease decision. We look at some key factors for occupiers in their decision-making.

Flexibility: Two things are desirable for an occupier: first, taking advantage of the property cycle and second having assurance and comfort of critical functions not getting disturbed owing to end of lease tenures. This can be achieved by ensuring flexibility through a combination of owned and leased assets with specified allocations to ownership and short-term, medium-term and long-term leases. This type of allocation ensures that occupiers can vacate sites with near-term lease expirations at any time. Alternatively, some percentage of ownership acts as a hedge against increasing leasing costs.

Capital Allocation: It is important to separate the real estate capitalisation decision from the business unit site location decision. Often, business units are measured on a financial reporting basis and skewed towards an ownership preference based on the lower expense profile associated with a long depreciable life and the low or no cost of capital charge. A more efficient approach is to charge business units with a fair cost of capital on capital employed and apply a suitable depreciable life. In addition, occupiers also need to substantiate the following capital allocation implications:

  • Is there sufficient cash reserve on the balance sheet?
  • Is the short- and medium-term capital expenditure significant against reserves?
  • Is the hurdle rate higher than property yields?
  • Property Market Implication: Timing plays a vital role in an occupier’s decision to buy or lease. While cyclical lows in financial indicators of rents and capital values support owning or leasing of commercial assets, owning a property is typically for a longer holding period and the cyclical peak discourages buying and supports short-term leasing with renegotiation clauses. The occupier’s decision to occupy or lease is influenced by the following property market implications:

  • Is the micromarket susceptible to significant property cycle risks?
  • Are there significant environment management issues related to ownership?
  • Are there significant restrictive covenants applicable?
  • In the period from 2Q10 to 3Q11, India’s office real estate provided a strategic window of opportunity for both buying and leasing commercial real estate, with both rents and capital values at their cyclical lows. From 2010 to mid-2013, the country’s leasing and buying volumes together breached the 100 million sq ft mark, and this is forecast to cross 120 million sq ft by end 2013. Market conditions are likely to remain generally neutral in the short-term, although the latter part of 2013 is likely to see moderate increase in rents and capital values in select locations and further strengthening is expected post 2013. The Bangalore office market is expected to lead the recovery, followed by Mumbai and NCR-Delhi.

    Moderately rising rents and capital values have given occupiers in India an unusually long window so far for decision-making, and with supply correction in place, this window will not be available for long. Hence occupiers must take their real estate decision sooner than later to ensure benefits of the current situation.

    About the author
    Karan Khetan is the Assistant Manager for Jones Lang LaSalle in India, based in Mumbai.

    Re-position proposition: Sydney CBD

    Thursday, September 5th, 2013

    Sydney’s Opera House is 40 years old this year. But 25% of Sydney’s CBD office stock is even older. With my recent arrival from New Zealand, I had anticipated a modern CBD office landscape that reflected the largest city in a country that has recorded 21 years of continuous economic growth. However, almost half of the Sydney CBD office stock reflects design characteristics of the 1980’s or earlier. The age profile of Sydney’s stock suggests scope for a major refurbishment cycle. Closer analysis of all these factors presents a clear re position proposition for many of Sydney’s aged office assets.

    Generally office buildings require a major refurbishment every 20-25 years to remain competitive. Timing of when to offer the re-positioned asset back to the market is crucial to leasing success. The lifecycle of the building, property cycles and economic conditions are also key aspects to consider to mitigate the future risk profile for any potential asset re-positioning.

    Property cycles are a pivotal influence on the timing of any re-positioning project. These include the spread between prime and secondary vacancy rates, rental levels and cap rates. Trends in each of the three metrics can act as a good guide as to when to re-position.

    For example, the yield gap between prime and secondary office assets currently sits at a historically wide 225 basis points for the Sydney CBD. This may present opportunities for investors with a higher risk tolerance to enter the market and purchase secondary assets that have vacancy risk already priced in. Applying a thorough refurbishment program and re-positioning the asset to a higher standard, with the ability to realise future rental and capital value growth, is an attraction for ageing secondary assets with short WALE.

    With 46% of Sydney office buildings in excess of 30 years, a high proportion of buildings are beginning to reach their anticipated lifespan. In some cases, obsolescence is a reality for office building owners. With the domestic economy expected to grow below-trend over the 13/14 financial year, we believe landlords of office in Sydney should be formulating a strategy to protect the value of their ageing property assets.

    We expect that the wide spread between prime and secondary assets is likely to persist over the next few years. The divergence between prime and secondary assets, and the market conditions that currently exist, give a strong case for a re-positioning strategy. If a thorough refurbishment process is undertaken and the product differentiated with an improved lobby, end of trip facilities and services, the building will be competitive with competing properties in the market. By rejuvenating a building owners are able to extend the life of the asset and optimise the building’s investment performance.

    About the author
    Jonathon Bayer is the Senior Research Analyst for Jones Lang LaSalle in Australia, based in Sydney.

    Moving Further East On Hong Kong Island – Which Companies Are Likely to Make The Next Move?

    Friday, August 16th, 2013

    At a recent dinner, some of my friends shared their experiences of having their place of work being relocated out of Central to locations such as Hong Kong East and Wanchai/Causeway Bay. As they shared their stories, some of my other friends at the table who have enjoyed their work lives (as well as social lives) in Central asked me whether I have heard of anything regarding their companies moving in the near future. This ultimately circled around onto a discussion of which companies would likely be next to make the move.

    From an industry sector perspective, we have already seen first-hand, several larger banks and accounting firms move part or all of their offices out of the traditional CBD in recent years. While I believe that this trend will continue, another industry sector that may look to make the move is the legal services sector.

    Much like the banking sector, the legal services sector has traditionally been located in Central. Of the top 43 international law firms in Hong Kong, all are located in Central. However, in recent years, we have slowly seen some firms making the move away from Central, most notably to Wanchai and more recently to Causeway Bay. The move out of Central is being driven by a combination of high rents and the development of new modern office buildings in locations outside of Central.

    Many law firms remain in Central to stay close to their clients and courts. Hence the move away from Central, so far, has been from smaller firms whose practice areas are less focused on financial markets (e.g. Intellectual Property, Shipping, Construction, etc). Larger firms considering a move, like most of the banks, would likely relocate only part of their offices to locations outside of Central as they would still need to maintain offices close to their key clients.

    However, with the completion of the Wanchai Bypass in 2017, traveling time from Hong Kong East to Central will be reduced to about 8-10 minutes. This will directly affect some of these law firms, as they start to realise that they can carry out their day-to-day business easily in offices outside Central. The move out of Central will be further enhanced by the opportunities brought about by the completion of new high quality office supply that is scheduled to be completed on Hong Kong Island over the next several years. With a well-known international law firm having just recently committed to relocating to Hysan Place in Causeway Bay and with larger banks more warming to the idea of moving their front offices out of Central, other law firms are likely to follow in the near future.

    About the author
    Eric Chong is the Senior Analyst of Research for Jones Lang LaSalle in Hong Kong.

    Reformed Zones For Victoria – Who Will Be The Winners And Losers?

    Thursday, July 25th, 2013

    On the 1st July 2013, Planning Minister Matthew Guy began the rollout of new planning zones for all Victorian councils. The planning reform which has removed nine existing zones, created five new controls and altered 12 others, are some of the biggest changes since the late 1990’s.

    The former Business 1, 2 and 5 zones have been replaced by Commercial zone 1, with the old Business 3 and 4 zones consolidated to a new Commercial zone 2 – both coming into effect immediately. Three new residential zones have replaced the old controls, and councils have 12 months to implement these residential zones into their local planning schemes. So what are the consequences and opportunities the state may face?

    The new commercial zones seek to deregulate retail and commercial development and will allow investment in a much wider range of locations. The main effect of these changes will create a more competitive retail environment. Under the Commercial 1 zone, previous permit requirements for commercial and retail uses have been removed, combined with all floor space caps for shops and offices. The new Commercial 2 zone does not enforce maximum floor area restrictions for an office and allows use for small scale supermarkets and unrestricted retail (up to 1,800 sqm) without a permit. Industrial zones 1-3 will remain, but with changes to provide more flexibility for retail and office uses, including the removal of the default office floor space area restriction (500 sqm).

    The redefinition of zones provides for opportunities and consequences. New commercial zonings positively allow for an increase in the supply of land for commercial use, consolidating the number of commercial controls and the removal of floor space caps encourages business and commercial property development. The zones will allow for greater opportunity and competition for the retail sector, offering more flexibility for retailers to meet current and future needs. The change to Industrial 3 combined with the new Commercial 2 zone allows for supermarkets and unrestricted retail (up to 1,800 sqm) without a permit to set up in alternative locations previously prohibited. However, this could put smaller retailers at risk, notably those who rely on anchor tenants to attract foot traffic. By allowing a neighbourhood centre to arise anywhere there is Industrial 3 or Commercial 2, could somewhat dilute rental and asset prices of traditional neighbourhood (centres). By providing opportunity for anchor tenants to move to areas where they can capture discounted rental levels on what has traditionally been larger format land parcels, could result in a negative impact on land values in some areas, and could increase in values in others.

    The new residential controls – Neighbourhood, General and Growth zones aim to establish more certainty for where different types of development should occur and provide development opportunities – notably in Growth zones. Nevertheless, this will have opposing impacts for property values and impact on property development – now to be concentrated in specific areas only. Consequently, councils have 12 months to implement the new zones into their local planning schemes. Prolonged delays in the approval process will increase developers’ holding costs and the feasibility of certain schemes. Furthermore, those that fail to meet the timeline for the new zones will have their suburbs made General zones by default.

    The reformed zoning in Victoria requires occupiers and residents to ensure they seek clarity on changes to warrant the best outcomes for the State’s planning system and local economies. Measures have been drafted by Matthew Guy with his proposed “VicSmart” – a new streamlined assessment process for straightforward planning applications, to help ensure everyone benefits.

    About the author
    Kimberley Paterson is the Senior Analyst of Research for Jones Lang LaSalle, based in Melbourne, Australia.

    Is The Sydney CBD Office Market Immune From A Looming Downturn?

    Monday, July 15th, 2013

    Demand across Australia’s CBD office markets (excluding the counter-cyclical Canberra office market) declined further through the first half of 2013 to the lowest levels recorded in 10 years. After recording negative 106,800 sqm of absorption in Q1/2013, a further 49,300 sqm of negative absorption was recorded in Q2/2013, taking half yearly totals to -156,100 sqm. The market downturn has been set-off by economic forecasts downgrading China’s GDP outlook and a national economy so far unresponsive to the Reserve Bank’s cash rate stimulus. However, the Sydney CBD only recorded a comparatively low -4,200 sqm of absorption in Q2/2013 and there are indicators that Sydney may navigate the remainder of 2013 a little better than other Australian CBD office markets.

    A sensitive indicator of the health of the office market is sub-lease vacancy. Companies shed space quickly at the onset of economic instability, so sub-lease statistics provide an immediate barometer reading of future business confidence. Sub-lease vacancy has been on the rise across Australia nationally over the last 18 months, led by the resource states, Queensland and Western Australia, which have felt the brunt of China’s diminishing appetite for our commodities. In the Brisbane CBD, Jones Lang LaSalle recorded a total of 63 individual tenant downsizing moves over the last 18 months in which a tenant shed more than 1,000 sqm. In Perth, there were 33. Sydney CBD wasn’t immune either: Jones Lang LaSalle recorded 43 individual tenant downsizing moves over the same period. But, adjusting for market size, with Brisbane CBD’s total stock equating to just 44% of the Sydney CBD, and Perth CBD even less at 33%, the Sydney CBD seems to have fared relatively well.

    Where most Australian CBD office markets take their cues from localised factors like the resources sector and the domestic banking sector, Sydney’s fortunes hinge more on global market performance and US GDP (as noted in 2012 Jones Lang LaSalle research paper Sydney CBD: Assessing the Downside Risk. [Ballantyne]). As Australia’s financial centre, Sydney is the Australian base to the majority of multi-national finance and insurance companies. For this reason the impact of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) was immediately felt in the Sydney CBD. Throughout 2008/09, Jones Lang LaSalle recorded a total of 77 individual tenant downsizing moves (> 1,000 sqm). But it’s also for this reason that the market could be immunised against this most recent slowdown.

    Sublease vacancy growth in the Sydney CBD has slowed, and at 1.7% is now the second lowest in Australia. Reporting from the June 2013 NAB Monthly Business Survey support this, with conditions in the finance and property sectors solidly improved. Having already been through a wave of blood-letting within the financial sector during the early parts of the Global Financial Crisis, Sydney may be buoyed by two major economies, the United States and Japan, which are recovering slowly but steadily. And while not completely immune from the current market downturn, Sydney’s ties to wider global financial markets could prove a shield against a resource-led downturn in the short-term.

    About the author
    Rick Warner is a Strategic Research Analyst for Jones Lang LaSalle, based in Sydney, Australia.

    Asset allocation And Australia’s Superannuation Industry

    Friday, May 31st, 2013

    One of the critical lessons of the global financial crisis for Australia’s superannuation industry has been the importance of asset allocation. The performance of fund returns over 1 (0.3%), 5 (-0.7% p.a.) and even 10 years (5.2% p.a.) have been less than stellar (Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority (APRA), 2012) and left many questioning their strong weightings to listed shares.

    According to APRA (2012) the current default strategy for an Australian superannuation fund is roughly 51% shares, 14% fixed interest, 9% cash, 2% listed property, 8% unlisted property and 16% to ‘other’ investments. While the default strategy does not provide any specific mention of direct real estate allocations, recent estimates suggest that large funds hold only around 4% of their portfolios in direct real estate assets (Reddy, 2012).

    Real assets are becoming a larger part of superannuation fund portfolios. While limited data exists on Australia’s superannuation funds future asset allocation strategies, anecdotal evidence suggests that their direct real estate holdings could increase to around 10.0%. At a global level, the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB) has increased its allocation to real estate from 4.3% in March-2007 to 10.6% in March-2012. At the same time, CPPIB has raised its allocation to infrastructure from 0.4% to 5.8%. The National Pension Service of Korea (NPS) has also indicated that alternative investments will account for more than 10.0% of its portfolio by 2016, an increase from its current level of 2.5%.

    While industry funds are starting to re-assess their allocation strategies, less is said of the much larger and faster growing Self-Managed Super Fund (SMSF) sector. The SMSF sector has grown to become the country’s largest superannuation sector by number of funds and asset size. It comprises superannuation funds established and managed by individuals or families. As at 30 March 2010 there were around 423,000 SMSFs, equating to around 30% of all superannuation assets. SMSFs have been around for more than 30 years but have experienced rapid growth in the last few years. In the five years to June 2009 the sector grew from $132 billion to $332 billion, reflecting an annualised growth rate of 20.0%.

    The asset allocation decisions of SMSFs are not dissimilar to the industry funds. While data is difficult to obtain, Russell Investments’ annual report on the SMSF sector provides a good starting point. According to this report SMSFs currently have an average allocation as follows; 49.2% to shares, 4.7% to fixed interest, 25.6% to fixed interest, 2.6% to listed property trusts, 1.1% to unlisted trusts and 2.3% to direct commercial property. Notwithstanding some of the more technical difficulties, there may be a case for SMSFs to consider a greater allocation to direct commercial real estate. With large funds now making the move into the sector, time will tell if the SMSF sector will follow.

    About the author
    Luke Prokuda is a Research Analyst for Jones Lang LaSalle, based in Brisbane, Australia.

    Are Savings Just Thin Air?

    Thursday, April 25th, 2013

    On a trip back to Scotland a couple of weeks ago, what jumped out at me was how much better the air quality was in comparison to Hong Kong.

    This is far from a new topic, but realistically how do we address air quality in emerging Asia? In thinking of the interest groups and stakeholders involved this reminded me of the dilemma originally raised by ecologist Garrett Hardin. His theory tackled the socio-economic dilemma of a group of individuals when sharing a common resource. Known as “the tragedy of the commons,” this theory can be applied to a myriad of scenarios when society shares a common resource – in this case the wider environment.

    In its simplest sense, the theory references the practice of medieval common grazing by herdsmen for their cattle. It goes something like this. Any single herder will have a personal motivation to add one more cow to his herd, because even if the results of adding additional cattle to his herd cause overgrazing and damage to the pastures, the herdsman receives all the economic benefit of adding those additional cattle, whilst the damage to the lands is shared by all.

    Now, I’m not going to solve the air quality issues in Hong Kong in 500 words, but what is clear is that we all have a stake and responsibility in tackling these issues and this applies as much to real estate professionals just like myself. With a significant proportion of energy consumption being taken up by real estate, globally we have a duty and a responsibility to drive forward change to improve the impact we have on our “pastures.”

    Now what Hardin did not address in his paper was technology. Technology provides solutions to problems. Yes we can legislate, but the winning argument in relation to real estate in this debate in my mind is simply the bottom line. When businesses start to see the savings and benefits to their bottom line of adopting more sustainable new technologies in real estate, adopting new best practice will just become the natural course. Technology is already moving fast and the real estate industry has some brilliant technologies at hand already.

    The savings from sustainability are very real, not just on the impact we have on our “pastures” but on the bottom line. A great example is our new LEED Platinum office in Hong Kong. Our new office consumes 13% less energy per sq ft and better air quality has greatly improved the environment, indeed we’ve seen a 32% reduction in absenteeism.

    I’m not saying technology has all the solutions now and that the payback times and the investment are not prohibitive at times. However, what is true is that the more it’s adopted, the more the costs will come down making it a more viable option.

    A project we undertook in New York on the Empire State Building is a great example of how savings can be made even today. Not only did we deliver a project to improve sustainability which would pay for itself in three years by saving US$4.4m per annum in energy savings, the energy reduction and thus the impact on the planet, was in the region of 38%.

    So the lesson is this, not only is the technology here to save us from a similar “tragedy of the commons,” but it’s improving every day. The savings to the bottom line are real and it’s up to us as real estate professionals to promote best practice in our industry. We can’t solve transport and factory pollution; however, with a little effort from all stakeholders, there will be some very tangible benefits for the wider environment and also the bottom line of developers, tenants and landlords – our clients.

    About the author
    Roddy Allan is a Director, Asia Pacific Research for Jones Lang LaSalle, based in Hong Kong.