Mini-Workshop: GAPS! in practice with 7-Eleven Corporation

Could the shift to sustainability shrink your investment footprint right under your nose?

Here’s a cautionary case study from a real life business, plus a tool to help with early detection of fatal shifts in your pipeline.

The shift to sustainability is driving many jurisdictions to rethink land use on a major scale. That can make structuring an investment program covering several markets quite complex. While land use changes happen all the time, they usually address site specific issues. Investors are very rarely confronted with the possibility of regional land use changes by multiple jurisdictions at once, due to a mega-trend like sustainability.

The sweeping nature of these changes, and the negative consequences to your program if you can’t stay in front of them, are two reasons why you need to employ better tools during program underwriting to detect broader shifts within your investment case; those that might be beyond the information analyzed in typical real estate market analysis studies.

7-Eleven moves to the suburbs

The case of 7-Eleven, covered in the May Harvard Business Review, highlights that problem in a former era - when the shift to suburbs went undetected by the real estate intensive convenience store operator.

Briefly, 7-Eleven had followed an investment strategy of locating stores on roads that connected residential areas with commercial business districts. As suburbs became more popular, many cities removed those roads or they were simply less traveled by suburban-focused consumers, forcing 7-Eleven to locate in shopping centers, where other retailers, such as Target, started mimicking its late business hours and drawing away shopper traffic.

7-Eleven’s U.S. stores’ productivity decreased over the subsequent years as the company gradually lost access to many of its preferred sites and was forced into tougher competition in strip malls and neighborhood shopping centers. The article’s author notes that 7-Eleven’s business in Japan did very well, however, since those stores remained accessible within walkable neighborhoods.  The entire 7-Eleven corporation was eventually bought by one of its very successful Japanese franchisees.

The GAPS! Map

If you’ve attended the recent Competitive Edge Workshops in San Francisco or were at the National Community Development Lending School in New Orleans, you learned how the GAPS! Map tools can help you to develop your business case for the potential value-add that a green or energy efficiency strategy can bring to your investment program.

The GAPS! framework helps practitioners structure the sustainability-driven assessment that is critical for real estate underwriting because sustainability exerts dynamic influences on nearly every facet of a project. The graphic here presents an overview of the tool.

The “P” in GAPS! stands for ‘PIN’ down the causes.  The GAPS framework looks at the sustainability challenge as a complex business “problem”, with root causes that need to be discovered and “solved” via mitigation within the green investment strategy.

Pinning down the causes refers to investigating factors within and external to the project as well as the capabilities of the team that will implement the green strategies. A full description of the available tools is beyond the scope of today’s article, but the case of 7-Eleven highlights the usefulness of one aspect of the assessment. The outcomes are qualitative and quantitative factors that will positively and negatively affect the success of the project.

To evaluate the factors external to the project, you have to investigate the ways that sustainability might exert influence on the social, regulatory, political and of course, environmental forces operating around the project or in the market area where invest.

Typical real estate analysis focuses on real estate specific market factors, but ignores broader regulatory or political action in adjacent markets. It is always assumed that this information is only relevant when it is priced into the real estate, but that is often not the case. If a negative trend has progressed to the point where it can be priced into real estate within your target markets, then it may be too late for you to avoid the damage. You’ll have to either accept that price, rework your investment plan to include countermeasures or leave that market.

With Pinning down the causes, you would have to ask yourself about possible sustainability interactions at a broader level and determine how that might harm or help your green building project, markets, or doing business as usual (conventional investment) if that’s your focus.

The 7-Eleven case highlights the fact that 7-Eleven never connected the dots between the mega-trend of people moving to the suburbs and how that might lead them into direct combat with category killers in suburban strip malls and neighborhood shopping centers.

If the 7-Eleven management team had applied Pinning down the causes within their investment strategy, they might have been able to turn a challenge to their business model, such as consumers moving away to the suburbs, into a bigger opportunity in urban areas:

• Instead of simply following consumers out to the suburbs one market at a time, and getting into a long destructive war with big box category killers, they could have stepped back and noted where the broader trend of suburb life was most prominent and made the decision to capture business in areas that would remain permanently “urban,” where the category killers cannot obtain sites due to their larger store format.
• It took a very long time for many retailers to understand how population density in urban areas is a big plus for retailers. 7-Eleven could have seen these urban shoppers as being a prime customer segment that had been largely overlooked by the category killers (for the first few years anyway).

Both of these ideas are strategic in nature. If a company remains too “close to the ground” in its market analysis and underwriting, it will not see the bigger trends that will impact the long-term success of its investment program.

Using Pinning down the causes forces the investors to ask the bigger, tougher questions in addition to the traditional real estate analytics, to make sure that the project is in sync with larger influences or the investor has at least had an early warning of problems on the horizon that she should make sure to protect her strategy against or possibly turn into a brand new opportunity.

These and many more aspects of using the GAPS tools and frameworks for investment programs and project underwriting are covered during our workshops on green finance. Make sure you are signed up for Pacesetter, our newsletter, so that you’ll get announcements of upcoming classes.

Heard at ULI Boston: Four Forces Shaping Green CRE

There was fresh energy among folks recently at ULI’s 2010 Spring Council Forum in Boston — market opportunities are slowly coming back, but it would be a mistake for your firm to simply repeat all your old moves from the last cycle.

I heard four comments that represent the mood and actions of investors on green real estate now:

Here’s a synopsis of the forces I see those comments representing:

“The other shoe’s dropped, but no one heard it.”

Your plan → Get going on your green portfolio strategies, you’re already behind.

Professionals finally acknowledged that a) rumors of 30%-40% loss of value in commercial real estate are, for the most part, overstated and b) there is currently too much capital in the market chasing too few deals. The latter point has been creating the paradox of deals trading at aggressive cap rates amid a recession.

In the opening session, Equity Office Chairman Sam Zell explained the paradox. When real estate markets tumbled, investors had expected banks to dump lots of deeply discounted properties into the markets, which investors would snap up at rock bottom prices.

Wrong assumption. Instead, banks have focused on working out troubled loans and strategically offloading REO assets one-at-a-time, and as a last resort. That has given the market time to gradually readjust pricing, preventing fire sales.

Reality: on-going one-off REO sales cushioned the velocity and depth of property value loss. The practice has also frustrated distressed players, forcing them to compete for REO deals against high net worth individuals and other sources with more patient capital, willing to pay more. This way has helped the banks to achieve better than predicted pricing on their sold assets and the market again saw no drastic fall in commercial real estate pricing.

In response to the question of why so many investors still talk about doing distressed deals, in the face of this very different reality, one panelist replied “the other shoe has already dropped, but no one heard it”.

Lots of investors have been delaying their investments in green initiatives, n waiting for the market to return to health. The good news is that the market is now not as bad as everyone thought. That’s also the bad news — all the players with dough have already gotten started, so you need to keep up.

“Every day, 1MM square feet of real estate is being LEED-certified.”

Your plan → The shift to green is happening much faster than you might think. You need to speed up your firm’s own shift to keep up.

Doug Gatlin, of the US Green Building Council spoke at our Responsible Property Investing Council Meeting, about the current stats on LEED. Here’s one: LEED certifications are running at 1,000,000 sf/day, even during an economic downturn. One council colleague, calculating a corresponding value of several hundred million dollars per day, said this fact would definitely influence his market conversations in favor of green building.

There’s still quite a way to go before we can say that market transformation from LEED has really happened. One main premise behind Architecture 2030 goals is that the US either renovates or builds new a net 10 billion square feet of real estate each year. The 365 million square feet annualized velocity currently being LEED-certified represents 3.65% of the estimated 10B in annual square footage built or renovated in the US — so there’s much progress to be made.

Theory: For green building to influence leasing and investment activity in a market, the “tipping point”, “competitive mix” and “OS” factors have to all be balancing and reinforcing each other in healthy levels. A sufficient concentration of LEED-certified square footage in a sector can be enough to influence investment activity in that sector towards green buildings (tipping point). Note that “sufficient” needn’t be that much in absolute numbers.

That, plus LEED maintaining its relevance and dominance as a green building rating standard (competitive mix) and regulatory support on federal, state and local levels (operating system or “OS”) are the keys to further increasing green building volume. The lack of competitive mix and OS in a market or for a real estate asset class will result in no tipping point being achieved in the area being studied.

The tipping point and OS factors are already a particular force on investment real estate in some gateway metros. For example in San Francisco, brokers have been publishing their own reports showing higher occupancies in LEED-certified buildings. There are already whole classes of global investors who publicly refuse to buy inefficient buildings. So this force is already at work, even with a small proportion of US real estate earning LEED certification to date.

“Operators need the track record to execute on both traditional real estate and sustainability strategies.”

This was a fund manager’s answer to my question about what made her choose to invest with a certain real estate operator, who had brought her a deal with an extensive energy retrofit including adding renewable energy in the business plan.

With capital markets slowly thawing and the velocity of green building certifications growing, it’s time to ask yourself if you’re company will attract capital with a mandate for sustainable real estate. Fund managers are now speaking out about needing to work with partners who can execute on a sustainability plan.

Additionally, you’ll need to assist the equity partner with understanding the value-add from green strategies being pursued, that will come from your local expertise.  The good news is that right now the market is wide open. Most of the US investment real estate firms who have achieved any progress on greening buildings have done so with a few buildings and many are still just focusing on low hanging fruit.

With the projected high increases in energy and water costs, nimble regional operators have a great chance at building a great track record on greening buildings that can get them hired over larger competitors. Plus, its a big market, anyway, with lots of room for more players. Remember what I said above, about 10B sf real estate being built and renovated in the US each year plus all the money out there chasing too few deals?

“We’re serious about being green, but we’re skipping commissioning on all our buildings.”

Your plan → Ignore free lunches. Compete via consistently delivering the best building performance possible.

This was said by an owner’s rep of an institution presenting their multi-billion dollar portfolio of institutional assets. He added:

“We are making our space LEED certifiable. We’re doing many things according to LEED for existing buildings, like green cleaning and updating the systems in our buildings, but we’re saving a couple hundred thousand dollars by skipping commissioning.”

“Pennywise and pound foolish” - even tired clichés are still true. If you attended our recent Competitive Edge workshop, Financial Considerations for Energy Efficiency Retrofits, you learned that Lawrence Berkeley National Labs (LBNL) research shows that on median costs of just $0.30/sf, commissioning alone achieved energy savings of 16%, with a 1.1 year payback and 91% ROI.

This means that our investor friend’s portfolio could probably deliver many more dollars in performance, which will literally go to waste via a) the properties remaining exposed to more energy price risk (current price plus escalations) than is warranted, b) not achieving the level of upfront energy savings that might have been possible, c) being in for longer-term, higher capital expenditures on their major systems since their performance was never audited to a commissioning standard.

Why is this unfortunate mindset a force on green building investing?  Actually — it’s pervasive to the point of being an archetype. You’ll find a similar mindset in a certain percentage of companies in every industry and at every point in the economic cycle. As the market matures, the economic downside of their inaction will become more apparent

Those of us who know better have to consistently incorporate building performance data into underwriting and valuation, and adjust prices accordingly. When a certain percentage of investors find themselves taking discounts at sale and losing enough tenants, then they’ll change their minds, improve their O&M - and even save themselves a few more bucks the process.

Energy Star, rigourous performance data shall set you free

“Talk is cheap” might be a tired cliche, but there’s always someone around who seems to forget.

Not a week passes without another example of someone taking the easy way out on verifying green and/or energy efficient performance.   And anyone who cares about green building investing or even just making money from their buildings in the future should be vigilant about avoiding this particularly vicious delusion.

This week’s (most unfortunate) case in point is the US EPA’s EnergyStar appliance certification program, facing accusations of being vulnerable to manufacturer fraud by the General Accountability Office, as featured in the 26 March New York Times.

If you picture the emerging green real estate finance and investment ecosystem as being a giant computer, the US EPA’s EnergyStar Program is the “Intel inside” –  a powerful, branded technology within the nascent green investment “operating system” that drives the circulation of capital into and throughout the nearly $200 billion ecosystem, via providing the market standard in tools to collect and measure building energy data as well as certification regimes for the energy performance of most kinds of buildings and equipment.

EnergyStar is a big player, providing a sort of “software” that systemically links the value proposition of building energy savings throughout communities, environmentalists, investors, and citizens. Look at all the roles it plays in our green real estate finance and investment universe:

• Regulation: Building energy disclosure laws in California and Washington, D.C. are largely premised on the availability of and reliance on EnergyStar.  Regulating building energy disclosure as a part of market transformation is showing early promise in Washington, D.C. where practitioners attribute these new laws to the rise in green building certifications there.

• Green building certification: The US Green Building Council’s LEED 2009 rating systems require achieving an EnergyStar rating of 75 as a prerequisite to certification. Co-Star data (April 2009) indicates 433 million square feet of LEED-certified green building space in operation in California alone. The US Green Building Council estimated that green buildings will represent $180 billion in construction value by year-end 2009.

• Investment best practice: Within ULI’s CLUE 2009 study¹, nearly 80% of the respondents (investment funds, financial services, lenders) indicate that they perform “an explicit analysis of energy efficiency when completing a due diligence review on a project or transaction”.  Among larger property owners and managers, EnergyStar’s Portfolio Manager is as ubiquitous as Microsoft Excel for spreadsheets.

• Property Valuation: Lower exposure to energy supply and price risk is a key tenet supporting the lower operating costs, which partially drives the superior valuation of green and energy efficient (mostly defined as Energy-Star rated) homes and buildings. While we haven’t yet achieved sufficient transaction data to say with certainty the amount of valuation increase attributable to energy efficient buildings, we do know that lower operating costs are a key point of property value and value appreciation is an essential wealth creation mechanism in the United States (current economic climate aside).

• Monetary support: Closer to today’s focus, billions of dollars in taxpayer money and utility fees,  in the form of rebates and incentives, are allocated to support the purchase of EnergyStar-rated appliances and equipment within residential and commercial buildings.

With that in mind, the report about possible fraud vulnerabilities within EnergyStar’s appliance certification system should be a concern for anyone who builds, lives in or operates buildings in the United States.  It is not an understatement to say that the fortune of US green real estate finance and investment is directly linked to that of EnergyStar as a certification, data collection and reporting tool.

To be clear, I am not saying that EnergyStar Portfolio Manager, the energy data and benchmarking tool of choice commercial building owners, is faulty due to the appliance snafu. However, the residential and commercial real estate industry directly relies on EnergyStar-certified appliances and equipment, as well as the taxpayer-funded rebates attached to them. The growth of the green finance and investment industry in the United States, still very much at an early stage, also relies on faith in EnergyStar’s positive reputation, which can be compromised by false performance data on the equipment it certifies.

Add to that the weight of political capital at risk within hundreds of cities with climate action and/or energy conservation goals, based in part on residents and businesses (like property owners) switching to EnergyStar-certified appliances and equipment over the next couple of decades.

EnergyStar, rigorous performance data shall set you free

Trust is built on truth. In green real estate English that means real, vetted performance data.  Smart homeowners and investors deserve the truth about the energy performance of everything and they’ll keep their money in their pockets until you proved it. Don’t forget that the speed of the internet economy can make everybody equally smart about performance data in an instant.

Like Intel chips in computers, EnergyStar is an extremely valuable technology within our green investment “operating system”. Our reliance on it drives billions of dollars of annual growth in green and energy efficient buildings (even in a recession economy).

Nipping appliance certification concerns in the bud is not only a big deal for the EPA, it is an imperative for for the real estate finance and investment industry.

I hope that EnergyStar and the broader real estate industry will recognize what, not to mention how much, we stand to lose if we don’t take swift action to make sure that every aspect of it’s programming and reputation represent the platinum standard in energy performance data, measurement and certification.

¹Sorry to footnote a blog post, but I couldn’t find a link to the ULI 2009 CLUE report anywhere on their site, despite some intense searching. If you do want to look up this citation, and have the study handy, look at survey question #5, on page 8. I only have it in hardcopy form.

How Green Multifamily Helps Bank CRA Ratings

(that’s “New Orleans” for  non-Southerners).

I am conducting workshops on Underwriting Green Multifamily Development this week at the 2010 National Community Development Lending School (”NCDLS”), hosted by the San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank.

NCDLS takes place within the National Interagency Community Reinvestment Conference, a big national event for community development professionals, Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) officers, lenders, investors, non-profits and intermediaries.

This is the first time that the topic of underwriting green multifamily developments is part of the NCDLS curriculum. We’ll share more tips from the course for you in Tuesday’s Pacesetter (subscribed, yet?)

A main point we are stressing in workshops is that green multifamily investments fulfill a far larger set of objectives than just better quality housing (which, of course, is a great start). We’ll be educating colleagues on how sustainably-designed apartments help regulated financial institutions to go beyond simply fulfilling CRA requirements. Done right, green apartments can materially improve bank CRA examination outcomes, which satisfies the institution’s broader business objectives.

But first, a short background: The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 was established to ensure that regulated financial institutions would have an obligation to help meet the credit needs of local communities in which they were chartered. Briefly, financial institutions demonstrate compliance with these laws by providing “qualified community development loans, investments and services.”

The actual performance requirements needed to comply with the CRA vary by institution size and charter, however, it’s enough to know here that regulators use CRA examinations to verify an institution’s compliance with these laws. Those examination results are considered whenever a financial institution applies to open a branch, merge with another institution or become a financial holding company, which are the key moves bank need to make in order to grow and survive.

The CRA examination can result in four possible ratings: “outstanding,” “satisfactory,” “needs to improve” and “substantial non-compliance.” In work and conversations with CRA officers and other professionals, we learned that many banks typically receive “satisfactory” ratings, but it is very hard to improve an examination rating from “satisfactory” to “outstanding.” If you take a look at the Cliff Notes version of CRA requirements here, especially those for large banks (assets > $1billion), receiving an “outstanding” across examination categories is not a matter of simply being “very good” at a few things, the institution has to be “excellent” at many requirements, which can be very challenging, particularly during a tough economy.

One of the toughest requirements to fulfill-let alone demonstrate excellence at-is in the “Product Innovation” category, where the large bank has to “make EXTENSIVE USE of  innovative and/or flexible lending practices in serving [assessment area] credit needs.” And this is where green multifamily investments help greatly.

» SF Federal Reserve Bank’s CRA page
» CRA page at Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute

Cliffhanger: Which of these investors will earn a green value premium?

Do you believe that achieving a value premium on green properties is possible? Even in the currently tough market?

Well, Jamestown and the State of California have both recently been in the press talking about how they expect to realize extra value from their commercial real estate via green and energy efficiency strategies.

Check out the articles and tell us if you think their projects should earn them greater returns than non-green market peers.

Jamestown: $3-$10 Million Portfolio-wide Retrofit Commitment

Jamestown has committed to greening its entire $4 billion commercial real estate portfolio. In the recent New York Times article about their efforts, they point to their European sensibilities as being the reason why they moved ahead with a portfolio-wide commitment to greening existing buildings.

When  you read through the savings and quick paybacks that they report achieving, it seems clear that their focus is on low-hanging fruit. After all, $3mm-$10mm in retrofit costs are peanuts on a $4 billion portfolio. The good news is that they report realizing immediate savings — meaning permanent increases to property net operating income.

Nonetheless, or perhaps because of that, they focus on the green/energy efficient building’s ability to attract the right kinds of tenants and assure the asset’s sale to a broader pool of buyers. The article showcases several recent efforts, including 999 Peachtree Street in Atlanta, GA, which recently earned LEED-Gold status.

We actively follow how German and other European investors are moving quickly to incorporate comprehensive acquisition and portfolio management sustainability programs. You can read previous posts about these investors’ enhanced criteria and due diligence here. More good stuff –> If you receive Pacesetter, our newsletter, you recently read and downloaded the new EECE study ranking global property funds according to reported and implemented energy efficiency practices.

State of California: Will Green Buildings Net Higher Sales Prices?

The State of California recently put a portfolio of 11 properties, totaling 7.3 million square feet, on the market for sale-leaseback transactions. The State is reporting that these properties, most of them being, in their words, “some of California’s most energy efficient and environmentally friendly properties” could sell for $2 billion, and would be “attractive to a market that is seeking sustainable, green designs.”

What makes this an item worth tracking is that the state official making that quote is also reported as saying that the sale will allow the State of California to “lock-in the lowest rental rates seen in years“.  Bids on the sale are due 14 April. It will be interesting to see the extent to which a green premium can be realized when market or transaction conditions stipulate particularly low rents.  The beauty of real estate is that it is not rocket science — there is no free lunch, and all trade offs come with their price. We are seeing and hearing that, in tough markets, green strategies help to hold back some amount of value deterioration, but are not necessarily rewarded with immediate upside.

That being said, there are multiple angles to watch here.  For instance, the concerns expressed recently by some investors about the mixed-use Boston property that attracted 27 bidders and might close at a “crazy” 6% cap rate.

Why the concern? That cap rate, indicating a valuation far higher than typical for the current point in the real estate cycle (even for Boston), reflects the current shortage of high quality properties combined with a lot of capital on the sidelines. This kind of activity raises fears of a liquidity bubble, even in these tough times, as investors pay up to win what few good deals are available.

That could be a strategy that helps Schwarzenegger shrink the state’s debt woes by more than they would typically recover from the assets.

Yes, the excitement continues!

« Previous Page — Next Page »