Selling Land in Tucson Arizona: What You Need to Know

Research the Local Market & Property Values Before you begin looking for a real estate broker or placing your land on the market, it is important to do some research on the local market and property values. The value of your land will depend on its location and any amenities it has (such as water access). Knowing what other similar properties have sold for in the area can help you determine a fair asking price and get an idea of how much money you may be able to make from selling your land. Find a Real Estate Broker Once you have researched the local market and determined a fair asking price for your land, it's time to start looking for a real estate broker who can help you sell it. When selecting a real estate broker, make sure they have experience working with buyers and sellers in Tucson, Arizona so they are familiar with all of the relevant laws and regulations that apply to buying or selling property in this area. You should also make sure that they are licensed by the State of Arizona before signing any paperwork with them. Understand Your Legal Responsibilities When selling your land in Tucson, there are certain legal responsibilities that must be met. For example, if there is any hazardous material on the property such as asbestos or lead paint, it must be disclosed before listing your property on the market. Additionally, there may be zoning regulations or other restrictions which could affect how much money you can make from selling your land or which buyers may be interested in purchasing it. It is important to understand these legal responsibilities before listing your property so that everything goes smoothly during the sales process. Conclusion: Selling land in Tucson can be complicated but with some research and preparation it doesn’t have to be stressful! Understanding what factors will affect the sale of your land (such as local market conditions), finding an experienced real estate broker who knows all of the applicable laws and regulations, and understanding any legal responsibilities associated with selling will help ensure that everything goes smoothly during the sales process. With these tips in mind anyone considering selling their land in Tucson should feel confident about getting started!

Location Is Everything When it comes to real estate investment, location is everything. In Tucson, there are several areas that have proven to be strong investments for commercial properties over the years. These include downtown Tucson, along with the University District and Fourth Avenue area, which both have seen an influx of new businesses recently. If you’re looking for a more suburban area to invest in, there are also plenty of options available—from North West Tucson all the way out to South East Tucson. Take your time researching each neighborhood before making any decisions as some may be better suited for different types of businesses than others. Analyze Your Finances Carefully Before you make any investments, make sure you take some time to analyze your finances carefully. This includes understanding your cash flow needs as well as any potential risks or costs associated with owning a commercial property in Tucson. You should also consider the tax implications of owning real estate here—there are certain deductions that may be available depending on how your business is set up and where you decide to purchase a property. Finally, it’s important to thoroughly research any potential lenders or financiers before making any commitments as their interest rates can vary drastically from one another. Understand Your Target Market Finally, before you make an investment in commercial real estate in Tucson it’s important that you understand your target market—who will be using this space? Is it primarily going to be used by local residents or out-of-town visitors? Knowing who will be using your space will help you decide what type of property would be best suited for them—as well as help determine pricing and other important factors like amenities and features that may attract more customers or tenants down the line. Conclusion: Investing in commercial real estate can be a great way to grow your wealth and provide income for yourself or your business. However, it’s important that investors do their homework before jumping into anything—location matters greatly so choose an area carefully; analyze finances thoroughly; and understand who your target market is before committing either money or time into anything related to investing in commercial real estate in Tucson, Arizona! Good luck!

If you are looking at Tucson, Arizona, as a potential investment opportunity, then this guide is for you. Tucson provides investors with many unique opportunities to capitalize on the area’s growing economy and its desirable location. Let's take a look at what makes investing in commercial real estate in Tucson an attractive option. The Benefits of Investing in Commercial Real Estate in Tucson Tucson is an ideal location for those looking to invest in commercial real estate. In recent years, the city has experienced a period of significant growth that has made it one of the most sought-after markets in the Southwest. The city also boasts a low cost of living compared to other major cities around the country, making it an attractive option for businesses and residents alike. Additionally, the area offers investors numerous tax breaks and incentives that can help make investing more profitable. Real Estate Market Trends in Tucson The real estate market in Tucson is diverse and full of potential. For example, office space rental rates continue to increase due to high demand from new businesses moving into the area. Similarly, retail rents are also increasing due to a booming tourism industry and strong local economy. Moreover, multi-family investments have performed well due to an influx of millennials and retirees looking for affordable housing options nearby. Finally, industrial space remains highly sought after due to its proximity to major transportation hubs like Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport and Tucson International Airport. Tips for Investing Successfully When investing in commercial real estate in Tucson it is important to keep several key tips in mind. First and foremost, conduct thorough research into local laws and regulations before making any decisions or investments so that you can minimize risk while maximizing returns on your investment dollars. Additionally, consider working with a qualified local broker who can provide insight into current market trends as well as guidance on finding the right property at the right price point for your business objectives. Lastly, be sure you are prepared financially by having enough capital on hand before taking on any investment opportunity so that you can reduce financial stress during your ownership period. As outlined above, there are numerous benefits associated with investing in commercial real estate in Tucson Arizona—from its favorable tax climate to its bustling tourism industry—making it a great place for both novice and experienced investors alike to capitalize on their investments today! By keeping these tips in mind when researching your investment options here—including conducting thorough research beforehand and partnering with experienced local brokers—you can maximize your profits while minimizing risk associated with such investments long-term! Good luck!

The commercial real estate market in Tucson has been steadily growing over the past few years, and now is an excellent time to invest. Here’s why you should consider investing in Tucson commercial real estate. The Economy is Thriving Tucson’s economy has been steadily improving since 2009, and it shows no signs of slowing down anytime soon. This means that the demand for commercial real estate is high, making it a great opportunity for investors looking to make a profit. Some of the main industries driving growth in Tucson are technology, healthcare, aerospace, and tourism. All of these industries have seen significant growth over the past several years and have contributed to the city’s overall economic prosperity. Low Cost of Living The cost of living in Tucson is significantly lower than many other large cities in the U.S., which makes it an appealing option for potential tenants who may not be able to afford high rents elsewhere. This can be beneficial for investors because it means they can charge lower rents while still making a decent return on their investment. Plus, with so much more money left over after paying rent each month, tenants may be more likely to spend money at local businesses which could help drive up property values even further. Low Taxes Tucson has some of the lowest tax rates in the country which makes it a great place to invest in commercial real estate without worrying about being hit with a hefty tax bill each year. For example, there are no state income taxes or inheritance taxes; only property taxes and sales taxes apply here. This means that investors can enjoy higher returns on their investments without having to worry about being taxed out of them! As you can see, investing in Tucson commercial real estate has many advantages for both buyers and sellers alike. With its thriving economy, low cost of living, and low taxes it’s no wonder why so many people are choosing this city as their next investment destination! If you’re thinking about investing in commercial real estate in Tucson then now is definitely the time to do it – don’t miss out on this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity!

Amazon’s pullout of its HQ2 plan from New York City came down to opposition from local politicians over corporate incentives and residents who didn’t want the e-commerce giant in their Long Island City neighborhood. But it shouldn’t have a long-lasting impact on the city’s commercial real estate market. That is the assessment of real estate experts, several of whom were caught by surprise by Amazon’s quick abandonment of New York after a very public one-and-a-half-year national search that pitted large metro areas around the country against each other to provide the most appealing package of incentives, talent and real estate to lure the corporate giant and 25,000 jobs. “When I saw that Amazon was floating this idea of leaving, I thought there was too much traction to go back, yet here we are,” says Victor Rodriguez, senior market analyst with research firm the CoStar Group. Part of the problem was that New York’s $3 billion incentive package for Amazon was agreed upon essentially behind closed doors between the New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and touched off a firestorm of protests and opposition at the local city council and neighborhood level. “I don’t believe there will be any long-term negative impacts (on commercial real estate),” Rodriguez says. Still, had Amazon gone through with the HQ2 plan, there would have been gains that now won’t be realized. One area that won’t see the gains is the retail market in Long Island City, Rodriguez notes. High-paying tech employees would have attracted more retail to the neighborhood. The multifamily sector also won’t see the growth that it would have in that area if Amazon had followed through with its plans, he says. Still, New York City remains known as a tech, financial and media hub and will continue to draw companies to relocate and to expand there in the future, Rodriguez notes. “New York was healthy before Amazon came along and I think it will continue to be healthy; it would have been great addition to have another tech giant in the city of New York.” But the Amazon project may have also been too big for the neighborhood it chose, according to Barbara Denham, a senior economist in the research and economics department at research firm Reis Inc. “Selecting Queens was like putting a square peg in a round hole. They were just too big for that neighborhood,” she says. For its part, Amazon said in a blog post “that while polls show 70 percent of New Yorkers support our plans and investment, a number of state and local politicians have made it clear that they oppose our presence and will not work with us to build the type of relationships that are required to go forward with the project we and many others envisioned in Long Island City.” Amazon already has 5,000 employees in Brooklyn, Manhattan and Staten Island, and will continue growing those teams, the company said. It also said it wouldn’t re-open the HQ2 search and will proceed with the other half of its HQ2 project in Northern Virginia, its plans for an office in Nashville, Tenn. and growth across other, already existing offices. On Feb. 12, two days before Amazon pulled out of New York, local leaders in Dallas held an Amazon post-mortem event sponsored by the Urban Land Institute and hosted by HKS Architects to talk about the behind-the-scenes details of the search there. The city received two visits from Amazon and believed it was shortlisted for selection, but ultimately got knocked out because it lacked the tech talent that New York and Northern Virginia could provide, according to Mike Rosa, senior vice president, economic development, for the Dallas Regional Chamber, which led DFW’s bid. “We’ve never hung up the phone with Amazon,” Rosa said during the event before it was known Amazon would pull out of New York City, but after the Washington Post story about that possibility had published . “If they were to readjust their decision … they certainly know who to call,” he said. New York city leaders should have encouraged Amazon to go to Hudson Yards, a new development on the west side of Manhattan that was more in scale with the e-commerce giant’s plans, according to Denham. At full build-out, Hudson Yards will have 18 million sq. ft. of commercial and residential space, more than 100 shops and restaurants, and about 4,000 residences. About 2 million sq. ft. of office space there is scheduled to be delivered this year. New York City has long opposed corporate incentives and hasn’t passed a sizable incentive deal on that scale since the 1990s, Denham adds. Even the deals passed back then were unpopular. The perception was that “a highly profitable company asking for $3 billion in tax incentives smacked of considerable greed, which is why there was so much pushback against the plan,” she notes. “The governor and the mayor should have recognized that there would be this reaction, given the magnitude of both the size of the company and the size of the incentives.” Amazon’s quick abandonment of the deal sends a signal that a corporate expansion of that scale could have a difficult go of things in New York, according to Greg Willett, chief economist with RealPage, a provider of property management software and services. “But again, it’s really unusual to have a deal this big, so does it do any big picture long-term damage to the New York real estate market? Probably not.” About TCD Commercial Charlene Grambling is the Managing Director of TCD Commercial Investments. She is an apartment and 1031 exchange specialist who also offers experience in net leased, office, warehouse, special use – including houses of worship—in the West Hills, Ventura, Oxnard and surrounding Los Angeles County area. She can be reached at 818.288.2564 This article was first published in the The National Real Estate Investor

(Bloomberg)—If you’re looking for a career change, you might want to consider a move to Salt Lake City, Utah for the best range of job options. That’s one takeaway from LinkUp’s 4Q report which ranked Salt Lake City the highest in terms of job market diversification in 2018 among metropolitan statistical areas with a population over 1.1 million. Salt Lake City is home to a number of large businesses such as Zions Bancorp, the largest lender in the state of Utah, Extra Space Storage Inc., a self-managed real estate investment trust, health care concern Myriad Genetics Inc., discount e-commerce retailer Overstock.com Inc. and Instructure Inc., an online education provider, just to name a few of the city’s diverse employers. The Utah capital and most populous city attracts employers because of its strong labor-force growth, according to the report published Friday. Cities with more diverse job markets are less likely to be affected by a single company’s actions, according to Molly Moseley, CMO of job search engine LinkUp. "You can have a strong economy but if you focus on just one or two sectors, it’s not diversified." Moseley said. "If something were to happen, like one employer went under, that market could plummet." The value of diversification was "glaringly obvious" during the most recent government shutdown in Washington DC as the area suffered due to more than half of its jobs linked to the federal government, according to the report. Other large markets with high diverse rankings included Buffalo, N.Y., Sacramento, Calif., Oklahoma City and Austin, Texas. In addition to Washington, New York City ranked near the bottom of the list because there are 10 sectors that make up for more than 50 percent of job openings, according to Moseley. However, Amazon’s plans to open a new headquarters in Crystal City, Va., just across the Potomac River from the nation’s capitol, are likely to improve Washington’s ratings, the report said. Among the mid-markets, with a population from 542,000 to 1,100,000, the five most diversified are Spokane, Bridgeport, Scranton, Provo, and Oxnard. LinkUp calculated a region’s job market diversification report (JMDR) score using three metrics: distribution of sectors with job openings, distribution of companies with job openings and distribution of occupations with job openings. LinkUp’s report further broke down the regions into large, mid and small markets based on the top 150 markets (i.e. Metropolitan Statistical Areas as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget) based on U.S. population. To contact the reporter on this story: Shelly Hagan in New York at shagan9@bloomberg.net To contact the editors responsible for this story: Alex Tanzi at atanzi@bloomberg.net Wei Lu COPYRIGHT © 2019 Bloomberg L.P About TCD Commercial Charlene Grambling is the Managing Director of TCD Commercial Investments. She is an apartment and 1031 exchange specialist who also offers experience in net leased, office, warehouse, special use – including houses of worship—in the West Hills, Ventura, Oxnard and surrounding Los Angeles County area. She can be reached at 818.288.2564 This article was first published in the The National Real Estate Investor

The continued proliferation of e-commerce remains a boon for the industrial sector. In all, North American industrial absorption is forecast to register 495 million sq. ft. in 2019 and 2020, with 550 million sq. ft. of new product delivered by year-end 2020. IN addition, vacancies will remain at around 5 percent and average asking rents will rise from $6.24 per sq. ft. all the way to $6.68 per sq. ft. by the end of 2010. Those were some of the conclusions in Cushman & Wakefield's recently released 2019 North American Industrial Outlook , which line up with the sentiment expressed in NREI 's recent industrial research study . According to the firm, "Market conditions will encourage development in port-proximate markets, intermodal hubs, and inland population centers but supply will not overwhelm demand." In addition, "The greatest uptick in North American leasing activity in 2019-2020 will be in the 10,000-to-100,000 and the 300,000-to-500,000 sq. ft. segments. Leasing activity in the 10,000-100,000 sq. ft. range peaked in 2013 with many tenants signing leases that will rollover in 2019 and 2020. Although leasing in this size range has remained well above pre-recession levels, lease expirations will boost activity in the next two years." Using data from the report, here are a look at the industrial markets currently boasting the lowest vacancy rates as of C&W's preliminary numbers for the fourth quarter of 2018. Data in the slides also includes information on net absorption, leasing activity, vacancy rates, asking rents, total inventory, deliveries in 2018 and the total amount of space under construction as of the fourth quarter. Slides About TCD Commercial Charlene Grambling is the Managing Director of TCD Commercial Investments. She is an apartment and 1031 exchange specialist who also offers experience in net leased, office, warehouse, special use – including houses of worship—in the West Hills, Ventura, Oxnard and surrounding Los Angeles County area. She can be reached at 818.288.2564 This article was first published in the The National Real Estate Investor

Once upon a time, buying single-family homes and renting them out was the default way individuals diversified their investment portfolios beyond stocks and bonds. Becoming a landlord generated steady income (albeit a small one in terms of yield), and (successful) individual investors could buy rental properties and simply sit back and watch their wealth grow. That model has been disrupted in recent years, as individual landlords have been increasingly marginalized by big institutional investors . The competitive pressure has led many individual real estate investors to exit the market. But legislative changes may offer a way back in. The rise of the institutional investor In 2001, almost 83 percent of single-family rental residences were owned by individual investors. In properties with between five and 24 units, that number was about 65 percent. Fast forward to 2015, when individual investor ownership of single-family residences had dropped to about 75 percent. For residences with between five and 24 units, the drop was even more precipitous: 38 percent. It can be difficult for individual investors to scale: as portfolios expand, what starts as a small, passive form of income expands into running a full-time business. Adding more rental homes means more work. But there’s something bigger at play. Since the Great Recession, homeownership rates have dropped dramatically, from 67.8 percent in 2008 to 63.6 percent in 2017. When banks started to foreclose on mortgages, institutional investors swooped in, leaving individual landlords with new, outsized competition. The behemoth on the corner Today’s individual investors are increasingly competing with public companies such as Invitation Homes. When Invitation Homes Inc. and Starwood Waypoint Homes merged last year, their combined worth was approximately $11 billion. The product of that merger, Invitation Homes, owns over 80,000 homes across the U.S.—that’s 0.5 percent of the country’s rentals—making it America’s largest landlord; and not a benevolent one. There are accounts of tenants getting eviction notices from Invitation Homes within days of being late on their rent or having their rent increase substantially with no advance notice as a condition to renew their lease. On the other hand, when a pipe breaks or the furnace goes out, big companies can leverage vertical integration to offer faster turnarounds on maintenance and repair issues. In an online world, renters’ property management expectations are rising . The local landlord may be nice to talk to, but he or she can’t compete with the efficiencies and level of service offered by a large company. From landlord to shareholder Competing with huge institutional investors might be intimidating, but there’s a flip side: While the residential real estate market is growing increasingly competitive, the commercial market is becoming more and more accessible. For years, institutional investors had the high-value commercial market cornered. Even smaller commercial deals went to what the industry refers to as “country club money”—wealthy individual investors who joined with friends or acquaintances to form investment partnerships. For everyone else not in the “club,” it was challenging to simply learn about commercial real estate deals, much less invest in them. In 2013, when Title II of the JOBS Act went into effect, commercial real estate sponsors were finally able to advertise their investments to a wider public. Information that was previously confined to backroom deals could be found on online investment crowdfunding platforms. In 2015, the last year for which there is reliable information, individual investors poured $484 million into real estate crowdfunding in the US, much of it into commercial real estate. These platforms are easy to navigate and allow individual investors a much more passive way of diversifying their portfolios . Rather than scouring residential listings, visiting homes, going through the purchase process and then finding a renter, the platforms allow investors to manage the entire process from their computers with minimum investment amounts as low as $10,000. In the same way that online stock trading has replaced the need for expensive private brokers, online real estate investing platforms are lowering barriers of entry to individual investors. So, instead of owning your rental home, that individual landlord may, in the future, own a fraction of your office building—or perhaps your local country club. Ian Formigle serves as vice president of investments at CrowdStreet, an online real estate investment crowdfunding platform. About TCD Commercial Charlene Grambling is the Managing Director of TCD Commercial Investments. She is an apartment and 1031 exchange specialist who also offers experience in net leased, office, warehouse, special use – including houses of worship—in the West Hills, Ventura, Oxnard and surrounding Los Angeles County area. She can be reached at 818.288.2564 This article was first published in the The National Real Estate Investor

(Bloomberg Opinion)—During the past few years, it has become clear that housing affordability is a major challenge facing the U.S. Rent is consuming an increasing percentage of consumers’ paychecks: The problem has become especially acute in big cities and technology hubs like San Francisco: One of the most popular solutions being proposed is zoning reform. Rules that limit density — especially single-family zoning — restrict the amount of housing available near a city center, and make it difficult for people of modest means to live near transportation hubs and employers. When Minneapolis recently voted to end single-family zoning, it was hailed as a victory for racial and economic justice. Meanwhile, presidential candidate, Senator Elizabeth Warren, has made zoning reform a centerpiece of her housing affordability bill. Even Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson has vowed to attack restrictive zoning. But a new paper has zoning-reform advocates worried. The study, by urban planningdoctoral student Yonah Freemark, is entitled “Upzoning Chicago: Impacts of a Zoning Reform on Property Values and Housing Construction.” Freemark looks at recent changes in Chicago in 2013 and 2015 that permitted increased density and eliminated mandatory parking in certain areas of the city. He found that in those areas, land prices rose quickly, but new construction has yet to materialize. The study will certainly give ammunition to skeptics of the idea that building more housing will improve affordability. But the finding is limited in several ways. Most importantly, it doesn’t look at rents. It’s perfectly possible for upzoning to increase the value of land because it allows bigger buildings, with more rental units or condos, to be built on that land, while not increasing the rent that current tenants are paying. Second, it doesn’t measure the citywide effect of the reforms. But most importantly, the finding that construction didn’t increase raises the question of why prices went up. Why would a parcel of land become more valuable as the result of upzoning, if the buildings on that land remained the same? The obvious answer is speculation — because more dwelling space can now be built on that land, its value is higher, even if the buildings haven’t been built yet. It’s possible that the speculation is irrational — a local bubble — and that the construction will never materialize. But it’s also possible that construction simply takes more time to get started. Despite these limitations, the paper implies that increasing housing availability should involve more than just allowing more housing to be built on a parcel of land — it should involve strong incentives to build more units quickly. Newly elected California Governor Gavin Newsom has some ideas for how to do that. His plan involves a combination of tax credits and loans for housing developers and grants to local governments to help them meet density targets. In addition, the governor wants to withhold transportation funds from cities that don’t meet state-mandated housing requirements. It’s possible that administrative measures like these will succeed in prompting cities not just to upzone, but to spur housing construction. But if measures like these fall short, there are some more radical options that governments could pursue. The first is a land-value tax. This is basically an increased property tax with exemptions for construction and other improvements. The idea is to force urban landowners to use it or lose it — if they don’t develop their property, they would simply be taxed for holding unproductive land. The idea, first conceived by 19th century economist Henry George, would be difficult to implement in California, where the state’s infamous Proposition 13 creates an effective cap on property taxes. But other areas could experiment with this approach, as the cities of Washington and Pittsburgh have done with decent results. The second idea is public housing. In the middle of the last century, the U.S. built many housing projects for low-income Americans, but these became potent symbols of urban decay, riddled with crime and other social problems. But cities like New York City and San Antonio are now trying new approaches to make public housing safer, including better designs and more community programs. So far the results are encouraging. Finally, the government can assist people in creating housing co-ops — buildings owned and managed collectively by the residents. Without a landlord to take a cut of the cost of housing, co-ops can offer tenants greater affordability, stability and sense of ownership. City governments, through agencies like New York City’s Urban Homesteading Assistance Board, can encourage co-ops with loans or other financial assistance that allows tenants to buy out their buildings from their landlords. If cities really want to be assertive, they might be able to use eminent domain powers to force landlords to sell at a reasonable price, then resell cheaply to co-ops after using public money to spruce up the properties. So there are plenty of options to create more affordable housing in American cities. Upzoning by itself may not be a cure-all for the rent crisis, but it’s an important way to open the door for greater density to follow. To contact the author of this story: Noah Smith at nsmith150@bloomberg.net For more columns from Bloomberg View, visit Bloomberg view COPYRIGHT© 2019 Bloomberg L.P About TCD Commercial Charlene Grambling is the Managing Director of TCD Commercial Investments. She is an apartment and 1031 exchange specialist who also offers experience in net leased, office, warehouse, special use – including houses of worship—in the West Hills, Ventura, Oxnard and surrounding Los Angeles County area. She can be reached at 818.288.2564 This article was first published in the The National Real Estate Investor