There's a significant construction pipeline in the U.S. with 1 million apartment homes underway, expanding current inventory by roughly 5%. When examining vacancy rates, we see that they've risen from a low of 5.0% in 2021 to 7.8% by Q3 2023. Despite this, the multifamily sector initially saw high demand post-pandemic and a cooling period was expected. In 2021, the US absorbed a remarkable 536,000 apartment units, more than any previous year. However, construction starts have dropped by over 60%, indicating a likely short-lived oversupply. Renting has become $400 a month cheaper than a 30-year fixed mortgage, excluding taxes, maintenance, insurance, etc. National rent growth has slowed to 1.3% in Q3 2023. Maintaining occupancy is crucial to maximize a building's potential, considering the declining rental prices.
In Denver specifically, we have seen permitting fall to zero in 2023 which is very representative of the short-lasting "oversupply" that Denver will experience heading into 2024-25.
Realtor-Broker | Residential Sales | Client Services |CNA Certification |Elder Care
3wIt’s ok if you disagree. I won’t be offended. But I simply don’t see how Built for Rent benefits renters, nor do I see how it benefits individuals seeking to own SFR. I see how it benefits real estate investors ….yet again. This doesn’t help renters position themselves down the road to save for mortgages or increase credit scores for mortgages (unless the owners are paying extra to report to credit bureaus.) This also doesn’t add regular SFR inventory for buyers. Yes it’s good for new construction industry and investors but I’m just not seeing a long or even short term solution to the SFR affordability epidemic that is currently putting homeownership out of reach while inventory remains painfully low and values painfully high.