'Window of opportunity' for investors with 2000 Census

Real Estate Weekly, Oct 31, 2001 by Natalie Keith

Real estate officials should base investment decisions on 2000 Census figures, not on estimates done in the years following the 1990 Census, said Doug Poutasse, chief investment strategist for AEW Capital Management.

"As you get further and further away from the 1990 Census, the less accurate the numbers are," Poutasse said. "There is better information out there and we need to get to it."

Although final tallies for some of the data gathered during the 2000 Census count is still being analyzed, real estate officials must make an effort to obtain the most recent information because of the discrepancies. For instance, the New York metropolitan area has about 550,000 more people than previously believed. This represents a 6 percent undercount, he said.

"There are 550,000 more potential tenants, shoppers and workers than previously believed," the reports states. "Top-down analysis based on even the most reliable third-party data has to be balanced against bottom-up, street level research from acquisition and asset management professionals. This is particularly important at finer levels of geographic detail where small changes in the absolute level of demand can 'make or break' investment performance."

AEW Capital Management, an investment management company specializing in real estate, compiled the report entitled "The 2000 Census: Snapshot in Time, Roadmap to the Future."

"Our job is to educate clients about where investment opportunities are," he said.

The office sector may not rely heavily on census figures because the number of office workers is easier to tabulate, but the retail and housing sectors base many decisions on population counts stemming from the census.

Poulasse said retailers and others use census data to understand the ethnic diversity and other aspects of the neighborhoods they serve.

"Different groups have a different sense of what a household is and they buy different goods," he said. "You have to make sure the rights products are available and that people know they are available."

The population of the United States rose to more than 280 million between 1990 and 2000, an increase of 13 percent or approximately 32 million people. In New York City, the population grew by 9 percent, slightly more than the growth rate for the New York metropolitan area as a whole, the report states.

"Despite the richness of the data collected, the window of opportunity to use the informational cornucopia by the census is all too brief," according to the report. "Within just a few years, an unfortunately short shelf life will have made this remarkable picture of America operationally obsolete."

It reaffirmed what many have been saying about the prevalence of "24-hour cities," like New York City, which thrived during the 1990s.

Overall, the median population growth for U.S. cities during the 1990s was 8.7 percent, more than twice the median growth of the 1980s. Three cities recorded population growth of more than 50 percent during the decade - Las Vegas, Nevada (85 percent); Piano, Texas (72 percent); and Scottsdale, Arizona (56 percent.) Five cities recorded population growth between 40 and 50 percent - Boise City, Idaho; Glendale, Arizona; Laredo, Texas; Bakersfield, Texas; and Austin, Texas.

Seven cities suffered population declines of more than 10 percent, including Hartford, Connecticut (13 percent); St. Louis, Missouri (12.2 percent); Baltimore, Maryland (11.5 percent); Flint, Michigan (11.2 percent); Buffalo, New York (10.8); Norfolk, Virginia (10.3 percent); and Syracuse, New York (10.1 percent.

Cities with "high human capital," or high levels of education, along with cities with a large number of foreign-born people, saw high levels of population growth. Although some feared that technology may have a negative impact on cities because it minimizes the requirement of workers to be located in a specific geographic location, the reverse seemed to be true during the 1990s. Authors of the report believe the trend will continue.

"Cities will continue to be economically and politically important for a long time to come. Technology may change the type of activities that will locate in cities, but technology is strengthening, not weakening, most cities," the report said.

For those seeking to invest in cities, understanding the mix of industries is critical, the report said.

"For core CBD office buildings, look for markets with complex information exchange requirements, and be wary of markets with a large exposure to manufacturing," the report states. "Gateway cities, places with large foreign-born populations, are more dynamic than other cities and likely will produce stronger long-term demand for commercial real estate."