North American Industrial Outlook Q4 13

Thinking in “3-D”
GOING BEYOND TRADITIONAL 2-D (SUPPLY &
DEMAND) IS ESSENTIAL TO UNDERSTANDING
INDUSTRIAL TRENDS
HIGHLIGHTS
NORTH AMERICA
WWW.COLLIERS.COM
Q4 2013 | INDUSTRIAL
N.A. INDUSTRIAL MARKET
SUMMARY STATISTICS, Q4 2013
US
Q4
2013
US
Q1
2014*
Canada
Q4
2013
Canada
Q1
2014*
VACANCY
NET ABSORPTION    
CONSTRUCTION
RENTAL RATE**
*Projected, relative to prior period
**Warehouse rents
MARKET INDICATORS
Relative to prior period
US CAN NA
VACANCY RATE (%) 8.08 4.41 7.69
Change from Q3 2013 (%) -0.25 0.17 -0.20
ABSORPTION (MSF) 52.5 2.0 54.5
NEW CONSTRUCTION (MSF) 24.3 4.6 29.0
UNDER CONSTRUCTION (MSF) 104.9 10.4 115.3
ASKING RENTS
PER SF (USD/CAD) US CAN NA
Average Warehouse/
Distribution Center
4.84 7.99 5.33
Change from Q3 2013 (%) 1.0 3.0 1.5
K.C. CONWAY, MAI, CRE Chief Economist | USA
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• Industrial investors must also go beyond the 2-D of land and sea movement of goods to a 3-D
analysis of capital, physical location, and physical design.
• E-commerce is inextricably linking retail and industrial real estate. Transportation efficiencies
are driving the where, what, and how much of industrial warehouse space.
• 3-D printing will further accelerate the convergence of retail and warehouse real estate. How
will 3-D printing revolutionize where goods are manufactured, distributed and warehoused?
Already we are seeing the impact of 3-D printing on shoe manufacturing. As more and more
materials are made available for 3-D printing applications, a broader array of manufactured
goods can be made “just in time,” in proximity to customers, with less need to store and
distribute goods. How much of what we buy at a store could be made on demand and on site,
to exact specifications, without the need for a finished product supply chain or distribution
centers? Look out, Amazon!
• North American industrial vacancy continues to decline. In the markets Colliers tracks, Q4
vacancy declined another 20 basis points to 7.69%, based on strong U.S. absorption. Vacancy
in the primary 65 U.S. markets declined from 8.33% to 8.08%. The vacancy rate in Canada
increased slightly from 4.25% to 4.41%, due to new supply.
• U.S. industrial warehouse vacancy is lowest in the Western region at 6.50%, and second-
lowest in the Midwest region at 8.01%, followed by the South (8.98%) and Northeast (9.28%).
• Q4 2013 absorption was positive across all U.S. regions, and strongest in the South (17.9 MSF)
and West (16.1 MSF). Q4’s 52.5 MSF of net absorption brought the U.S. total for CY2013 to
188.4 MSF. Canadian markets accounted for only 2.0 MSF of net absorption, for a North
American total of 54.5 MSF net absorption in Q4 2013.
• Top 5 MSAs for CY2013 absorption: Dallas, LA – Inland Empire, Chicago, Atlanta, and the Port
of Los Angeles. Inland markets continue to outpace port markets in absorption, and have for the
past four quarters.
• Still no signs of overbuilding risk on the horizon. Although North America added 29.0 MSF of
new supply in Q4 2013 (vs. 21.1 MSF in Q3), only 45% of that new supply was speculative. In
CY2013, the 65 major U.S. industrial markets absorbed more than twice the new supply added
(188 MSF absorbed, vs. just 80 MSF of new supply).

HIGHLIGHTS | Q4 2013 | INDUSTRIAL | NORTH AMERICA
P. 2 | COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL
Industrial Economic
Indicators
In the early 2000s (2002–2006), there was a
noteworthy uptick in manufacturing activity in
the United States. This uptick was first noted
in Congress’s annual report regarding Foreign-
Trade Zones (FTZs), but went relatively unno-
ticed by most industry participants until the past
couple of years as we emerged from the finan-
cial crisis. As the graph below from the latest
Congressional FTZ report shows (next update
in August 2014), the U.S. resurgence in manu-
facturing began around 2002. In 2009, there
was a short-lived pull-back in this manufactur-
ing surge, but the upward trend then resumed
in 2010 and has maintained a high single-digit
to low double-digit growth rate since.
Sq. Ft. By Region
Absorption Per Market (SF)
q3 '13 - q4 '13
7,200,000
3,600,000
720,000
-720,000
-3,600,000
-7,200,000
4 billion
2 billion
400 milion
Occupied Sq. Ft.
Vacant Sq. Ft.
9.0% vac.
8.0% vac.
NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL VACANCY, INVENTORY AND ABSORPTION | Q4 2013
SOURCE: Colliers International
Industrial #1
for 2014
2009
Multifamily
MeanScore
Retail Hotel Office Industrial
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
2010 2011 2012 2013
Source: AFIRE
AFIRE | RANKING OF U.S. PROPERTY TYPES | 2014 SURVEY
What is behind this manufacturing renaissance, and why is it relevant to
industrial real estate? The interest among manufacturers in returning to
the U.S. was initially fueled by a concern over patent protection. It wasn’t a
viable business model to chase low-cost labor across the globe, only to
discover that the foreign land to which you relocated your plant, equipment
and proprietary systems had little regard for intellectual property rights,
and would alter the product slightly and claim the output as its own.
Onshoring gained momentum during the financial crisis as the Federal
Reserve’s accommodative monetary policy also gave manufacturers an
added currency advantage to manufacture in the United States. After all,
why manufacture cars or electronics in a country with an unfavorable ex-
change rate, like Japan? And then more recently, as the U.S. became the
low-cost energy nation, manufacturing and transportation costs became
more favorable than in Europe or Asia. The confluence of these three de-
velopments has revitalized manufacturing in the U.S.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011
Any doubt that the U.S. is becoming a
manufacturing & energy export
powerhouse again?
Source: U.S. Foreign-Trade Zones Board
FOREIGN-TRADE ZONES: EXPORTS | 1991–2011
Colliers took notice of this change from the get-go and was first of its peers
to forecast that industrial real estate would be the star performer among
commercial property types as far back as 2011—while the herd instinct was
to stay corralled in multifamily real estate. This prediction has been vindi-
cated by: i) stellar industrial property performance numbers in both CY2012
and CY2013; ii) increasing recognition of industrial real estate performance
by leading industry trade groups such as the Urban Land Institute (ULI),
NAIOP, and the Counselors of Real Estate; and iii) foreign investors, who—
in the 2014 Association of Foreign Investors in Real Estate (AFIRE) report
(see diagram above)—identified industrial real estate as their top choice for
investment for the first time in a decade.

COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL | P. 3
The Economic Indicators
Explain the “Why”
Do the leading economic indicators—GDP, PMI, job growth—support this
bullish move into industrial real estate? After all, haven’t recent revisions to
GDP and employment been to the downside? Hasn’t the appeal of industrial
real estate been chilled by the “Frozenomics” of the brutal temperatures of
this past winter, and the Federal Reserve’s decision to extract quantitative
easing (QE)?
A “3-D” analysis of these leading industrial indicators reveals how the bull-
ish case remains strong. The fundamentals of industrial real estate are the
strongest they have been in more than a decade, as the U.S. and other re-
gions of the world remake their supply chains in response to growth in e-
commerce, expansion of the Panama Canal, and evolution of manufacturing
applications from 3-D printing technology.
THE FIRST DIMENSION: GDP
A year ago, Colliers correctly forecast that GDP growth would start off
rather anemic (1.0–1.5 percent range) and finish strong (2.5–3.0 percent)
due to the front-loaded fiscal headwinds on the calendar. And, that’s ex-
actly what happened: 2013 started with 1.1 percent GDP growth in Q1 and
averaged just 1.8 percent during 1H2013. GDP then accelerated in Q3 to 4.1
percent before slowing to 2.4 percent in Q4, following the government
shutdown. For 2H2013, GDP averaged 3.25 percent—or the long-term av-
erage rate from 1950–2012.
2014 is likely to see a similar pattern of weakness in the first half followed
by strength in the second half, but for very different reasons.
In 2014, Federal Reserve monetary policy will be the primary influence on
GDP, as the unintended consequences of ending QE are revealed: currency
crises and higher interest rates in emerging markets that suppress demand
for U.S. exports. In addition, the uncharacteristically cold winter of 2014,
which has busted local and state budgets for de-icing roads and snow
removal, and whacked the transportation and manufacturing industries,
will likely result in at least a 50- to 100-basis-point hit to GDP when the
numbers are tallied. The good news is that state and local government
tax receipts are trending up and should be able to absorb it; and sup-
pressed retail sales, like autos, will more than likely be deferred into the
second half of 2014, resulting in a much stronger GDP. The one cautionary
note, though, is that 2H2013 GDP was elevated largely by a build-up in
1 Industrial #2 Last Year
2 Office #4 Last Year
3 Retail #3 Last Year
4 Multifamily #1 Last Year
5 Hotel #5 Last Year
AFIRE | TOP 5 PROPERTY TYPES | 2014 SURVEY
4.1
2.4
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
2
-2.7
-2
-8.3
-5.4-5.4
-0.4-0.4
1.3
3.93.9
1.6
3.93.9
-1.3-1.3
2.82.82.82.8
3.23.2
1.41.4
4.94.9
3.73.7
1.2
2.82.8
0.1
1.1
2.52.5
4.1
2.4
CY 2013 GDP
averaged 2.5%
2008 2010 2012 2014
Source: www.tradingeconomics.com | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
U.S. GDP GROWTH | 2008–2013 (FEBRUARY 2014 REVISIONS)
inventories that did not clear in Q4 2013. Although manufacturing will need
to slow during 1H2014 (more in response to excess inventories than to
“Frozenomics”), the latest revisions to GDP show that there is strength in
key areas such as durable goods and fixed investment. These categories,
along with strength in residential construction and automobile sales, will
be accretive to GDP and industrial real estate, adding more credence to
the forecast that 1H2014 GDP will be below trend but 2H2014 GDP will be
robust and above trend. The Colliers forecast for GDP growth in 2014 is
2.0 percent to 2.5 percent.
LINE
2ND ESTIMATE OF 2013 GDP.
Q4 GDP REVISED DOWN TO 2.4%.
2011 2012 2013
1 GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (GDP) 1.8 2.8 1.9
2 Personal Consumption Expenditures 2.5 2.2 2.0
3 Goods 3.4 3.3 3.6
4 Durable Goods 6.6 7.7 6.9
5 Nondurable Goods 1.9 1.4 2.0
6 Services 2.1 1.6 1.1
7 Gross Private Domestic Investment 4.9 9.5 5.5
8 Fixed Investment 6.2 8.3 4.5
9 Nonresidential 7.6 7.3 2.8
10 Structures 2.1 12.7 1.4
11 Equipment 12.7 7.6 3.1
12 Intellectual Property Products 4.4 3.4 3.4
13 Residential 0.5 12.9 12.1
U.S GDP | 2011–2013 (FEBRUARY 2014 REVISIONS)
Source: AFIRE

THE SECOND DIMENSION: PMI
Unlike GDP data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), the Institute
for Supply Management’s PMI provides more specific insight into the indus-
trial sector of the economy. The latest ISM data indicates that the impact of
“Frozenomics” is exaggerated, and the manufacturing economy is working
its way through 2H2013’s excess inventory. ISM’s January and February
2014 reports show that inventories are correcting quicker than anticipated
and new orders continued to grow despite the harsh winter weather.
The concerning note from the February data is that export growth appears
to be slowing as the currency crises in Argentina, Turkey and other emerg-
ing markets unfold. The Fed needs to walk a tightrope in 2014 between
extracting QE and not tanking the economies of emerging markets which
buy so much of our output. Slowing exports are a key metric to keep an eye
on in 2014.
MONTH PMI MONTH PMI
Feb 2014 53.2 Aug 2013 56.3
Jan 2014 51.3 Jul 2013 54.9
Dec 2013 56.5 Jun 2013 52.5
Nov 2013 57.0 May 2013 50.0
Oct 2013 56.6 Apr 2013 50.0
Sep 2013 56.0 Mar 2013 51.5
AVERAGE: 53.8
HIGH: 57.0 | LOW: 50.0
PMI | PAST 12 MONTHS
Source: ISM
“A PMI in excess of 43.2 percent, over a period of time, generally indicates an expansion
of the overall economy. Therefore, the February PMI indicates growth for the 57th con-
secutive month in the overall economy, and indicates expansion in the manufacturing
sector for the ninth consecutive month. [Bradley Holcomb, ISM chair] stated, ‘The past
relationship between the PMI and the overall econmy indicates that the PMI for January
and February (52.3 percent) corresponds to a 3 percent increase in real gross domestic
product (GDP) on an annualized basis.’”
MANUFACTURING AT A GLANCE | FEBRUARY 2014
INDEX
SERIES INDEX
(FEB)
SERIES INDEX
(JAN)
PERCENTAGE
POINT CHANGE
DIRECTION RATE OF CHANGE
TREND
(MONTHS)
PMI 53.2 51.3 +1.9 Growing Faster 9
New Orders 54.5 51.2 +3.3 Growing Faster 9
Production 48.2 54.8 -6.6 Contracting From Growing 1
Employment 52.3 52.3 0.0 Growing Same 8
Supplier Deliveries 58.5 54.3 +4.2 Slowing Faster 9
Inventories 52.5 44.0 +8.5 Growing From Contracting 1
Customers’ Inventories 46.5 44.0 +2.5 Too Low Slower 27
Prices 60.0 60.5 -0.5 Increasing Slower 7
Backlog of Orders 52.0 48.0 +4.0 Growing From Contracting 1
Exports 53.5 54.5 -1.0 Growing Slower 15
Imports 53.5 53.5 0.0 Growing Same 13
OVERALL ECONOMY Growing Faster 57
Manufacturing Sector Growing Faster 9
THE THIRD DIMENSION: EMPLOYMENT
What does employment data indicate about the health of the manufacturing,
trade and transportation sectors, that directly impacts the demand for in-
dustrial real estate?
The three primary monthly employment reports—ADP (private industry
employment), Challenger, Gray and Christmas (job cuts), and the Bureau of
Labor Statistics (private and government jobs)—are saying different things.
ADP and Challenger are telling us that private employment is stronger than
BLS reports suggested in January and February. (In fact, it’s averaged
monthly growth of 185,000 jobs over the past six months—not bad, private
sector!) The BLS jobs reports are all over the map due to constant recal-
culation of the Labor Participate Rate. ADP reports that private hiring has
actually been pretty good despite the weather, and that some deferred
hiring will likely materialize in the spring.
Sep
13
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Thousands
Feb
13
M
ar13
Apr13
M
ay
13
Jun
13
Jul13
Aug
13
Sep
13
Oct13
Nov
13
Dec
13
Jan
14
Feb
14
198
154
124
141
190
161
151
185 184
215
215
127
139
ADP 3-month average is 152K private jobs/month
ADP 6-month average is 185K private jobs/month
Source: ADP, Inc; Moody’s Analytics
CHANGE IN NONFARM PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT | U.S.
Source: ISM

One of the best leading indicators of employment is job cuts. And the last
three Challenger Job Cut reports show that companies are not cutting
much labor. In fact, the December report showed the lowest amount of cuts
since 2000:
Source: Challenger, Gray & Christmas
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
35,000
45,000
55,000
Feb
14
Jan
14
Dec
13
Nov
13
Oct13
Sep
13
Aug
13
Jul13
Jun
13
M
ay
13
Apr13
M
ar13
Feb
13
Jan
13
Feb 2014: 41,835
(2nd lowest in 6 months)
Announced Job Cuts
Monthly, January 2013-February 2014
U.S. JOB CUTS | FEB 2014
The low level of job cuts means that GDP growth near 2.0 percent is going
to result in hiring later in 2014. Companies have cut so deep over the past
five years that there isn’t much left to cut, and employees are strained un-
der the weight of overtime and 60- to 70-hour work weeks. So which
economic sectors and real estate property types will likely benefit?
Industrial will be one of the beneficiaries, but office will not—Job cuts are
highest in the Financial sector and lowest in the Industrial Goods and
Transportation sectors:
TOP 5 SECTORS FEB 2014 YTD
1 Financial 9,791 14,608
2 Telecommunications 5,147 6,952
3 Retail 3,848 15,242
4 Food 3,022 4,101
5 Industrial Goods 2,622 4,051
TOP 5 INDUSTRIES FEB 2014 YTD
1 Retail 11,394 6,676
2 Computer 6,456 2,629
3 Financial 4,817 8,578
4 Transportation 3,072 2,761
5 Health Care/Products 2,658 2,610
U.S. JOB CUTS
(AAR.org) monthly Rail Time Indicators (RTI) report, a comprehensive
monthly primary data series of all that moves by rail, combined with mean-
ingful metrics such as U.S. freight traffic, changes in rail car capacity and
railroad employment, and growth in intermodal traffic. The latest February
data shows: i) overall rail traffic trending upward in sync with GDP; ii) in-
termodal volume up 1.1 percent in February 2014 compared with February
2013, despite the weather disruptions; and iii) CY2014 intermodal traffic
already on track to surpass the record set in 2013. With this kind of activity
on the railroads, one has to question any forecast of a systemic weakness
in manufacturing and industrial real estate.
COMMON-SENSE CHECKS:
RAIL ACTIVITY AND INDUSTRIAL ABSORPTION
The final industrial economic measures to examine are intermodal and
railroad activity, along with industrial warehouse space absorption. The
Cadillac of data in the first area is the Association of American Railroads’
4%
2%
0%
-2%
-4%
-6%
20%
10%
0%
-10%
-20%
-30%
20102009 2011 2012 2013
GDP (left scale) Rail Traffic (right scale)*
*Carloads excluding coal and grain + intermodal units.
Rail traffic excludes U.S. operations of Canadian railroads.
(% change year-over-year)
RTI | GDP VS. RAIL TRAFFIC | 2009–2013
Source: BEA, AAR
170,000
220,000
270,000
300,000
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
RTI | AVERAGE WEEKLY U.S. RAIL INTERMODAL TRAFFIC
Source: AAR
Source: Challenger, Gray & Christmas
Add to this perspective that in CY2013, industrial warehouse absorption was
positive across all regions of North America. The U.S. continues to absorb
more than two square feet of warehouse space (188 MSF in CY2013) for
every one square foot of new supply added (80 MSF added during CY2013).
Taken together, railroad activity, strong warehouse absorption, and declining
vacancy rates (inching down toward 7.5 percent) tells us that the our bullish
3-D outlook for industrial real estate passes the common-sense test.

NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL OVERVIEW | Q4 2013
MEASURE NORTH AMERICA CANADA UNITED STATES WEST/MIDWEST SOUTH NORTHEAST
# of Markets 77 12 65 35 21 9
Inventory (Millions SF) 16,099.4 1,730.0 14,369.5 8,026.4 4,148.6 2,194.5
% of N.A. Inventory 100.0 10.7 89.3 49.9 25.8 13.6
New Supply (Millions SF) 29.0 4.6 24.3 14.3 8.0 2.1
% of N.A. New Supply 100.0 15.9 84.1 49.2 27.7 7.1
YTD New Supply (Millions SF) 95.6 15.3 80.3 43.6 29.1 7.6
% of YTD New Supply 100.0 16.0 84.0 45.6 30.5 8.0
Vacancy (%) 7.69 4.41 8.08 7.29 8.98 9.28
Absorption (Millions SF) 54.5 2.0 52.5 27.7 17.9 6.9
% of N.A. Absorption 100.0 3.6 96.4 50.8 32.9 12.6
YTD Absorption (Millions SF) 198.9 10.5 188.4 104.0 64.6 19.8
% of YTD N.A. Absorption 100.0 5.3 94.7 52.3 32.5 9.9
Leadership Markets Calgary, Toronto, and
Vancouver led 2013
absorption (3.9 MSF,
3.3 MSF, and 1.6 MSF,
respectively)
Five lowest vacancy
rates by region:
West: Honolulu (2.7%),
Midwest: Omaha
(4.8%),
South: Houston (5.2%),
Northeast: Long Island
(5.1%).
West: Honolulu, SoCal
port & Inland Empire,
and Seattle have the
lowest vacancy rates
(2.7%–5.5%).
Midwest: 6 lowest
vacancy rates, all
below 7%: Omaha, KC,
Milwaukee, Columbus,
Grand Rapids,
Indianapolis.
Top CY13 absorption:
Dallas (17.1 MSF),
Atlanta (10.7 MSF),
Houston (7.0 MSF).
Houston (5.2%) and
Miami (6.5%) are the
only two markets with
vacancy rates
below 7%.
Philadelphia (6.9 MSF)
and New Jersey –
Central (5.6 MSF) were
the only 2 NE markets
with >5.0 MSF net
absorption in CY2013.
Only Long Island (5.1%)
and Pittsburgh (7.6%)
have vacancy rates
below 8%.
Laggard Markets Only Montreal, Winnipeg,
and Halifax had YTD
net negative absorption
in 2103.
Five highest vacancy
rates by region:
Northeast: Boston
(18.8%),
West: Phoenix (12.9%),
South: Memphis
(12.3%),
Midwest: Detroit
(10.7%).
West: CA's Central
Valley, NV and AZ
markets have the
highest vacancy rates
(10%–13%).
Midwest's highest
vacancy rates (all at
or above 8%): Detroit,
Chicago, and St Louis.
Only Birmingham had
negative absorption
in CY2013; Tampa
was only market with
<500K SF of net
absorption among
those markets with
net positive CY2013
absorption
Boston (18.8%) and
Washington, DC
(11.0%), are only 2 NE
markets with vacancy
rates >10%
Boston and Hartford,
CT, were only 2 NE
markets w/net negative
absorption in CY2013.
Behind the Statistics &
Beyond the Basics
SCOPE OF COLLIERS INDUSTRIAL OUTLOOK REPORT
Colliers monitors industrial property conditions in 77 North American
markets from Miami to Montréal, totaling 16.1 billion square feet of inven-
tory. Approximately 89 percent (14.3 billion square feet) of this inventory
is located in the United States, and 11 percent is in 10 primary Canadian
markets. Keep in mind that in 2H2013, inventory numbers declined slightly
for the United States (approximately 1.5 percent or 191 MSF from inventory
reported in 1H2013) due to a culling of specialty warehouse property types
(such as self-storage) to align MSA inventory levels with the industry trend
excluding these specialty warehouse property types from bulk and distribu-
tion warehouse measures. Colliers’ warehouse inventory totals at the MSA
level now correlate with other industry data sources such as CoStar. (This
inventory re-alignment was not necessary for Colliers’ Canadian markets,
as specialty warehouse property types were never included in our figures
for these markets.)
On a regional basis, the Midwest and South regions in the U.S. contain
more than half the total North American warehouse space (50 percent
percent, or 7.9 BSF) followed by the West at 24 percent (3.8 BSF),
Northeast at 14 percent (2.2 BSF), and then Canada at 11 percent (1.7 BSF).
But the rankings with respect to vacancy (Canada and West lowest at 4.4
percent and 6.5 percent, respectively, and South the highest at 9 percent)
and absorption (South the highest with 17.9 MSF in Q4 2013, Canada the
lowest at 2.0 MSF) are materially different from the inventory rankings.
Here again, traditional “2-D” analysis, based just on supply and demand
metrics such as vacancy and absorption, is insufficient. Behind the num-
bers are a broad array of variables, including: i) the remaking of the U.S.
supply chain in response to the growth in e-commerce; ii) expansion of the
Panama Canal lock system; and iii) transition of East Coast ports from
former military ports (Virginia, Charleston, and Jacksonville) to competitive
post-Panamax ready commercial ports capable of competing with the
dominant West Coast ports (such as Los Angeles and Long Beach).
Specifics pertaining to the vital statistics by region are presented in the
following table, along with context as to the leading and lagging markets
within each region:
Source: Colliers International

US CAN NA
Q1 2013 8.83 4.13 8.33
Q2 2013 8.66 4.39 8.20
Q3 2013 8.33 4.25 7.89
Q4 2013 8.08 4.41 7.69
VACANCY RATE | NORTH AMERICA
VACANCY
North American industrial vacancy continues to decline in markets tracked
by Colliers, inching toward 7.5 percent at the beginning of 2014. In Q4
2013, the North American industrial vacancy rate declined another 20 ba-
sis points from 7.89 percent to 7.69 percent. Vacancy for just the primary
65 U.S. markets declined from 8.33 percent to 8.08 percent. The decline
in the overall North American industrial vacancy rate came primarily from
strong absorption in the United States; in fact, the vacancy rate in Canada
increased slightly from 4.25 percent to 4.41 percent, due to new supply.
REGION MSA
Q3 2013
VACANCY
YE/Q4 2013
VACANCY
1 West Honolulu 2.6% 2.7%
2 West Los Angeles 3.0% 2.9%
3 West Bakersfield 4.1% 3.2%
4 West LA – Inland
Empire 5.0% 4.2%
5 West Orange County 4.5% 4.4%
6 Midwest Omaha, NE 5.1% 4.8%
7 Northeast Long Island 5.2% 5.1%
8 South Houston 5.3% 5.2%
9 West Boise, ID 5.2% 5.3%
10 West Seattle 5.2% 5.45%
WAREHOUSE MARKETS WITH THE LOWEST VACANCY RATES | U.S.
U.S. industrial warehouse vacancy is lowest in the Western region at 6.50
percent, led by California markets (Port of Los Angeles at 2.94 percent;
Bakersfield at 3.20 percent; and LA – Inland Empire at 4.20 percent).
Warehouse vacancy is second-lowest in the Midwest, at 8.01 percent, fol-
lowed by the South (8.98 percent) and Northeast (9.28 percent). In the
Midwest, Omaha (4.76 percent) and Columbus (5.58 percent) have the
lowest vacancy rates; Chicago continues to see improvement due to strong
absorption. In the South, Houston (5.18 percent), Miami (6.47 percent),
West Palm Beach, FL (7.11 percent), Columbia, SC (7.38 percent), and
Dallas (7.41 percent) are the only markets with vacancy below 7.50 per-
cent. In the Northeast, Long Island (5.12 percent), Pittsburgh (7.63 percent),
and Northern New Jersey (8.00 percent) have the lowest vacancy rates
Drilling down to the MSA level, vacancy continues to improve the most in
primary port cities—especially Southern California (Los Angeles), South
Florida (Miami), Texas (Houston), and inland distribution markets with
large intermodal facilities, developing inland ports or a dominance in air
cargo and e-commerce fulfillment (such as Atlanta, Columbus, Dallas,
Indianapolis, Kansas City, Memphis). Also of note are a pair of smaller in-
land markets on the rise: Greenville, SC, and Boise, ID.
These are all examples of markets that are aligned with Class I railroads,
have modern intermodal facilities and are connected to a post-Panamax
port. These will be Tier 1 warehouse markets where both tenant and capital
demand will remain the strongest. All but a few of the Q4 2013 warehouse
markets with the lowest vacancy rates fall into this category heading into
the First Post-Panamax Decade.
Beyond the top ten (above right), nine other U.S. warehouse markets have
Q4/YE 2014 vacancy rates below 7.0 percent: Columbus (5.6 percent),
San Francisco Peninsula (5.7 percent), Kansas City (5.9 percent), Portland
OR (6.2 percent), Oakland (6.4 percent), Milwaukee (6.46 percent), Miami
(6.5 percent), Grand Rapids (6.6 percent), and Indianapolis (6.7 percent).

ABSORPTION
Q4 2014 absorption was positive across all U.S. regions, and was stron-
gest in the South (17.9 MSF) and West (16.1 MSF), followed by the Midwest
(11.6 MSF) and Northeast (6.8 MSF). Q4 was another quarter with more
than 50 MSF of net absorption (52.5 MSF). North American CY2013 ab-
sorption fell just shy of 200 MSF (199 MSF). Canadian markets accounted
for only 2.0 MSF of Q4’s 54.5 MSF net absorption.
The top five MSAs for CY2013 absorption were (in order) Dallas, LA –
Inland Empire, Chicago, Atlanta, and the Port of Los Angeles. The stand-
out markets for net absorption during CY2013 by region were Dallas,
Atlanta and Houston for the South; the Port of Los Angeles, LA – Inland
Empire and Las Vegas in the West; Chicago, Columbus, and Cincinnati in
the Midwest; and Philadelphia, Central New Jersey and Cleveland in the
Northeast. The top three standout markets for net absorption in Q4 and CY
2013 by region are below:
As has been the case throughout 2013, inland markets are outpacing port
markets in absorption. The top five markets with respect to net warehouse
absorption the past four quarters have been predominantly inland distri-
bution markets, such as Atlanta, Chicago, Columbus, Dallas, Denver, LA –
Inland Empire, Memphis, and Philadelphia; the only port market in the top
five is Los Angeles. Manufacturers, distributors and retailers are moving
their supply chains inland to align with rail, intermodal, and air cargo for
e-commerce fulfillment, as well as seeking and cost and time efficiencies
due to ever growing environmental, transportation, regulatory (mainly ad-
verse to trucking), and impact assessment burdens that don’t exist inland
in markets such as Atlanta, Chicago, Columbus, Dallas, Denver, Greenville/
Spartanburg, Indianapolis, Kansas City and Memphis.
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
Construction activity is growing in response to: i) improved industrial real
estate metrics (occupancy, absorption, and rents); ii) added urgency to
obtain modern distribution space on the part of retailers and manufacturers
remaking their supply chains aligned with key post-Panamax ports, inter-
modal rail facilities, and air cargo/e-commerce fulfillment paths; iii) strong
investor demand for industrial real estate at a time when there is a dearth
of product for sale; and iv) recognition that as much as 40 percent of North
American warehouse space is functionally obsolete (low clear height, inad-
equate truck courtyards, etc.) and in need of replacement with modern
distribution centers with 30–36 foot clear ceiling height and modern me-
chanical and electrical systems to accommodate automated conveyor and
racking equipment/systems.
We’ve previously posed the question, should this increase in new construction
be a concern? While it’s worth monitoring in 2014, there are still no indica-
tions of overbuilding risk on the horizon. Although 28.9 MSF of new supply
was added throughout North America in Q4 (up one-third from 21.1 MSF in
Q3 2013), only 45 percent of that new supply was speculative. Build-to-suit
construction (as opposed to speculative building) is behind the increasing
supply of warehouse space—especially in the U.S., where approximately 60
percent of the 24.3 MSF of new supply in Q4 was build-to-suit. Furthermore,
the U.S. has been absorbing approximately 50 MSF of warehouse space
per quarter since 2011, compared with just 20 MSF of new supply. In CY
2013, the 65 major U.S. industrial markets absorbed 188 MSF of space
compared with just 80 MSF of new supply being added. In other words, the
U.S. industrial markets continue to absorb more than twice the new supply
being added.
The regions with the most new supply added in CY2013 were the South
(29.1 MSF) and Midwest (22.3 MSF), followed by the West (21.3 MSF) and
Northeast (7.6 MSF). The five North American markets with the most new
supply in CY2013 were Chicago (8.8 MSF), Houston (8.0 MSF), Dallas (7.3
MSF), LA – Inland Empire (5.8 MSF), and Phoenix (5.2 MSF).
US CAN NA
Q4 2013 52.5 MSF 2.0 MSF 54.5 MSF
YTD 2013 188.4 MSF 10.4 MSF 198.8 MSF
ABSORPTION | NORTH AMERICA
MSA
Q4 2013 NET
ABSORPTION
MSA
CY 2013
TOTAL
ABSORPTION
SOUTH
Dallas 7.2 MSF
SOUTH
Dallas 17.1 MSF
Houston 2.1 MSF Atlanta 10.7 MSF
Charlotte, NC 1.7 MSF Houston 7.0 MSF
WEST
LA – Inland
Empire
5.3 MSF
WEST
LA – Inland
Empire
15.0 MSF
Phoenix 2.5 MSF Los Angeles 9.8 MSF
Los Angeles 1.3 MSF Las Vegas 3.6 MSF
MIDWEST
Chicago 3.1 MSF
MIDWEST
Chicago 12.7 MSF
Columbus, OH 2.3 MSF Columbus, OH 5.1 MSF
Kansas City
MO-KS
0.9 MSF Cincinnati 4.0 MSF
NORTHEAST
Philadelphia 2.3 MSF
NORTHEAST
Philadelphia 6.9 MSF
Central New
Jersey
1.9 MSF
Central New
Jersey
5.6 MSF
Washington, DC 1.1 MSF Washington, DC 2.7 MSF
TOP 3 MARKETS BY REGION | ABSORPTION | U.S.

11.8%
3.4% 2.9%
18.2%
50.0%
64.7%
40.9%
44.8%
72.7%
49.3%
81.8%
50.0%
23.5%
59.1% 51.7%
27.3%
47.8%
11.8%
3.4% 2.9%
18.2%
50.0%
64.7%
40.9%
44.8%
72.7%
49.3%
81.8%
50.0%
23.5%
59.1% 51.7%
27.3%
47.8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Contract Holding Steady Expand
M
idw
est
Northeast
South
W
est
Canada
U.S.
N.A.
OF THE LEASES SIGNED THIS QUARTER*, DID MOST TENANTS...?
*Excluding renewals % of reporting markets
72.7% 75.0%
66.7% 63.6%
18.2%
67.8%
60.0%
18.2% 12.5% 33.3% 36.4%
54.5%
28.8%
32.9%
9.1% 12.5%
27.3%
3.4% 7.1%
72.7% 75.0%
66.7% 63.6%
18.2%
67.8%
60.0%
18.2% 12.5% 33.3% 36.4%
54.5%
28.8%
32.9%
9.1% 12.5%
27.3%
3.4% 7.1%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
M
idw
est
Northeast
South
W
est
Canada
U.S.
N.A.
Down Same Up
3-MONTH FORECAST FOR VACANCY LEVELS (relative to current quarter)
% of reporting markets
1.7%
9.1%
2.9%
8.5%
7.1%
22.0%
45.5%
25.7%
62.7%
27.3%
57.1%
5.1%
18.2%
7.1%
1.7%
9.1%
2.9%
8.5%
7.1%
22.0%
45.5%
25.7%
62.7%
27.3%
57.1%
5.1%
18.2%
7.1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
U.S.
Canada
N.A.
Declining Bottoming No Clear Direction Increasing Peaking
CHARACTERIZE CURRENT INDUSTRIAL RENTS IN YOUR MARKET
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
M
idw
est
Northeast
South
W
est
Canada
U.S.
N.A.
5.6% 1.7% 1.4%
45.5%
37.5%
38.9%
31.8%
63.6%
37.3% 41.4%
54.5%
62.5% 55.6%
68.2%
36.4%
61.0% 57.1%
5.6% 1.7% 1.4%
45.5%
37.5%
38.9%
31.8%
63.6%
37.3% 41.4%
54.5%
62.5% 55.6%
68.2%
36.4%
61.0% 57.1%
Down Same Up
3-MONTH FORECAST FOR RENTS (relative to current quarter)
Conclusion
Think 3-D! Whether it is anticipating the changes to come in manufacturing and warehousing with just-in-time, to-exact-
specification, on-site manufacturing from 3-D printing and e-commerce, or thinking beyond the traditional two dimensions
(supply and demand) of real estate analysis, thinking 3-D is essential to understanding the “Why” behind industrial development
and investment trends in North America on the eve of the First Post-Panamax Decade (2015–2025). Investors and developers
that think beyond the 2-D land and sea movement of goods to a more robust 3-D analysis consisting of capital (interest rates,
cap rates and IRRs), physical location (proximity and connectivity to ports, intermodal facilities and e-commerce fulfillment), and physical design (clear
ceiling heights of 30–36 feet, larger truck courtyards, etc.) will be rewarded with higher yielding assets in less volatile markets. Why? The answer is
because e-commerce is inextricably linking retail and industrial real estate—and transportation efficiencies are driving the where (location), what (physi-
cal design), and how much (investment) industrial warehouse space is needed.

UNITED STATES | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY
MARKET
INVENTORY
DEC. 31, 2013
(SF)
Q4 2013
NEW SUPPLY
(SF)
YEAR-TO-DATE
NEW SUPPLY
(SF)
CURRENTLY UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
(SF)
NORTHEAST
Baltimore, MD 223,672,824 174,287 1,387,027 30,120
Boston, MA 151,813,772 269,676 400,031 1,186,000
Hartford, CT 95,613,351 - - 25,747
Long Island, NY 156,329,998 - - 592,698
New Jersey – Central 346,088,143 63,846 813,846 -
New Jersey – Northern* 366,830,742 216,253 216,253 -
Philadelphia, PA 413,578,215 917,300 3,096,830 3,598,963
Pittsburgh, PA 172,970,559 71,000 291,513 878,307
Washington, DC 267,560,236 411,698 1,397,754 1,489,271
Northeast Total 2,194,457,840 2,060,214 7,603,254 7,208,408
SOUTH
Atlanta, GA 615,376,189 353,400 4,252,513 4,884,856
Birmingham, AL 109,682,848 0 0 542,000
Charleston, SC 32,838,481 80,000 696,000 300,000
Charlotte, NC 322,662,534 101,932 611,180 230,905
Columbia, SC 38,851,763 0 0 1,688,500
Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX 730,032,865 3,098,259 7,310,809 7,764,133
Ft. Lauderdale-Broward, FL 110,073,937 122,175 473,789 687,535
Greenville/Spartanburg, SC 178,450,887 156,056 156,056 626,719
Houston, TX 483,638,295 2,170,623 8,045,817 4,447,149
Jacksonville, FL 122,763,661 0 101,770 0
Little Rock, AR 45,125,192 18,376 18,376 0
Louisville, KY 172,216,826 175,000 596,640 0
Memphis, TN 221,442,804 672,206 2,842,098 1,821,232
Miami, FL 209,360,512 318,788 1,818,914 1,010,819
Nashville, TN 112,559,484 0 0 2,086,660
Orlando, FL 131,487,967 0 245,000 1,394,258
Raleigh, NC 110,125,672 0 68,040 233,246
Richmond, VA 110,166,681 0 700,344 90,400
Savannah, GA 45,302,300 681,000 881,000 450,000
Tampa Bay, FL 196,247,216 0 206,019 1,149,378
West Palm Beach, FL 50,167,093 86,400 107,300 719,524
South Total 4,148,573,207 8,034,215 29,131,665 30,127,314
* Q3 data displayed for Northern New Jersey

UNITED STATES | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY
MARKET
INVENTORY
DEC. 31, 2013
(SF)
Q4 2013
NEW SUPPLY
(SF)
YEAR-TO-DATE
NEW SUPPLY
(SF)
CURRENTLY UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
(SF)
MIDWEST
Chicago, IL 1,315,748,886 4,027,126 8,841,787 9,800,982
Cincinnati, OH 244,809,912 0 1,250,563 3,000,000
Cleveland, OH 474,495,740 43,808 116,422 214,965
Columbus, OH 214,218,178 675,000 2,315,486 2,654,000
Detroit, MI* 531,466,219 0 0 0
Grand Rapids, MI 112,672,885 110,000 381,380 574,800
Indianapolis, IN 278,220,337 1,374,290 3,606,377 3,584,414
Kansas City, MO-KS 236,680,236 347,000 2,059,040 3,310,961
Milwaukee, WI 224,190,004 581,543 1,136,350 777,500
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 243,837,035 600,407 2,022,870 1,285,254
Omaha, NE 67,811,967 0 46,702 593,531
St. Louis, MO 269,217,579 0 527,094 727,500
Midwest Total 4,213,368,978 7,759,174 22,304,071 26,523,907
WEST
Albuquerque, NM 37,147,447 219,000 219,000 0
Bakersfield, CA 33,919,077 62,985 403,953 2,108,731
Boise, ID** 45,483,695 0 297,067 0
Denver, CO 215,414,847 0 1,081,024 2,563,129
Fairfield, CA 46,355,753 0 48,133 586,591
Fresno, CA* 48,600,000 0 0 0
Honolulu, HI 40,372,428 0 0 0
Las Vegas, NV 113,594,775 65,628 813,948 610,147
Los Angeles, CA 430,970,500 2,603,500 5,852,400 17,889,800
Los Angeles – Inland Empire, CA 896,082,715 494,100 1,927,200 2,212,085
Oakland, CA 141,658,055 0 0 949,365
Orange County, CA 183,230,500 209,700 491,600 0
Phoenix, AZ 275,913,459 2,465,477 5,190,681 4,048,425
Pleasanton/Tri-Valley, CA 16,425,488 0 0 0
Portland, OR 191,988,539 0 483,538 2,416,185
Reno, NV 81,929,299 0 19,035 524,800
Sacramento, CA 161,688,889 0 201,211 280,242
San Diego, CA 187,177,180 0 357,283 398,407
San Francisco Peninsula, CA 40,873,397 0 79,476 0
San Jose/Silicon Valley, CA 249,939,618 371,245 371,245 1,171,396
Seattle/Puget Sound, WA 261,174,899 0 1,914,813 3,409,989
Stockton/San Joaquin County, CA 95,615,825 0 1,547,353 1,900,160
Walnut Creek, CA 17,511,763 0 0 0
West Total 3,813,068,148 6,491,635 21,298,960 41,069,452
U.S. TOTALS 14,369,468,173 24,345,238 80,337,950 104,929,081
(continued)
* Q3 data displayed for Detroit, Fresno
** Boise tracks 5,000+ SF in Ada County and 2,500+ SF in Canyon County

UNITED STATES | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY | ABSORPTION AND VACANCY
MARKET
ABSORPTION
Q4 2013
(SF)
ABSORPTION
YEAR-TO-DATE
(SF)
VACANCY RATE
SEP. 30, 2013
(%)
VACANCY RATE
DEC. 31, 2013
(%)
NORTHEAST
Baltimore, MD 329,190 1,198,644 9.86 9.47
Boston, MA -1,164,519 -1,095,012 17.85 18.76
Hartford, CT 59,825 -376,153 9.29 9.22
Long Island, NY 143,612 1,659,911 5.21 5.12
New Jersey – Central 1,917,171 5,659,735 8.88 8.33
New Jersey – Northern* 1,883,982 1,821,144 8.46 8.00
Philadelphia, PA 2,265,628 6,947,161 9.15 8.81
Pittsburgh, PA 352,815 1,180,844 7.85 7.63
Washington, DC 1,096,098 2,778,377 11.28 11.01
Northeast Total 6,883,802 19,774,651 9.55 9.28
SOUTH
Atlanta, GA 1,333,272 10,753,140 12.19 12.02
Birmingham, AL -94,387 -97,837 8.97 9.06
Charleston, SC 464,053 1,137,712 9.54 8.34
Charlotte, NC 1,649,466 6,651,131 12.26 11.77
Columbia, SC -121,900 680,017 7.06 7.38
Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX 7,191,270 17,105,148 8.03 7.41
Ft. Lauderdale-Broward, FL 588,474 1,735,361 9.00 8.59
Greenville/Spartanburg, SC 329,405 1,257,381 8.88 8.78
Houston, TX 2,058,205 7,024,157 5.25 5.18
Jacksonville, FL -6,508 1,526,230 9.22 9.22
Little Rock, AR 403,568 613,782 11.20 10.09
Louisville, KY 252,561 506,393 7.70 7.64
Memphis, TN -659,567 3,333,364 11.75 12.32
Miami, FL 316,278 2,469,746 6.48 6.47
Nashville, TN 558,724 725,579 8.98 8.49
Orlando, FL 420,479 1,644,036 10.08 9.76
Raleigh, NC 521,637 882,431 10.09 9.62
Richmond, VA 971,175 3,538,409 9.86 9.17
Savannah, GA 1,522,659 2,046,943 11.06 9.03
Tampa Bay, FL -71,921 127,148 10.29 10.33
West Palm Beach, FL 302,191 955,447 7.56 7.11
South Total 17,929,134 64,615,718 9.25 8.98

UNITED STATES | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY | ABSORPTION AND VACANCY
MARKET
ABSORPTION
Q4 2013
(SF)
ABSORPTION
YEAR-TO-DATE
(SF)
VACANCY RATE
SEP. 30, 2013
(%)
VACANCY RATE
DEC. 31, 2013
(%)
MIDWEST
Chicago, IL 3,153,323 12,760,948 8.80 8.70
Cincinnati, OH 813,036 4,031,677 7.88 7.55
Cleveland, OH 354,141 3,892,005 7.94 7.96
Columbus, OH 2,287,901 5,156,281 6.35 5.58
Detroit, MI* 1,282,356 4,459,020 10.93 10.69
Grand Rapids, MI 522,717 1,034,648 6.94 6.57
Indianapolis, IN 864,155 1,015,863 6.80 6.74
Kansas City, MO-KS 874,562 3,737,945 6.09 5.86
Milwaukee, WI 643,615 2,843,310 6.50 6.46
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 111,545 3,339,560 7.74 7.69
Omaha, NE 36,835 267,389 5.06 4.76
St. Louis, MO 627,965 1,714,669 8.17 7.99
Midwest Total 11,572,151 44,253,315 8.18 8.01
WEST
Albuquerque, NM 444,096 581,836 9.89 9.34
Bakersfield, CA 350,442 365,314 4.06 3.20
Boise, ID -35,153 1,236,392 5.23 5.31
Denver, CO 1,033,799 2,914,568 6.61 5.46
Fairfield, CA 286,287 1,752,731 8.08 7.44
Fresno, CA* 0 300,000 8.64 8.64
Honolulu, HI -36,308 375,959 2.63 2.71
Las Vegas, NV 697,659 3,629,095 12.56 12.00
Los Angeles, CA 1,312,000 9,869,800 3.03 2.94
Los Angeles – Inland Empire, CA 5,329,100 14,955,700 4.99 4.20
Oakland, CA 715,091 2,769,786 6.86 6.35
Orange County, CA 601,200 1,771,000 4.48 4.41
Phoenix, AZ 2,573,698 3,445,245 13.13 12.90
Pleasanton/Tri-Valley, CA 55,496 559,414 6.40 6.06
Portland, OR 968,606 1,226,219 6.74 6.24
Reno, NV 210,663 438,378 10.81 10.55
Sacramento, CA 178,208 1,699,200 12.91 12.80
San Diego, CA 698,435 2,673,053 8.84 8.47
San Francisco Peninsula, CA 580,042 1,530,922 7.29 5.65
San Jose/Silicon Valley, CA 91,287 3,525,241 9.10 9.06
Seattle/Puget Sound, WA -136,206 1,456,392 5.21 5.45
Stockton/San Joaquin County, CA 230,865 2,433,526 11.76 11.52
Walnut Creek, CA -9,507 286,838 7.75 7.81
West Total 16,139,800 59,796,609 6.82 6.50
U.S. TOTALS 52,524,887 188,440,293 8.33 8.08
(continued)
*Q3 data displayed for Detroit, Fresno

UNITED STATES | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY | 3-MONTH FORECASTS, SALES PRICE & CAP RATES
MARKET
SALES PRICE
(USD PSF)
MEDIAN
CAP RATE
(%)
VACANCY
FORECAST
(3 MONTHS)
ABSORPTION
FORECAST
(3 MONTHS)
RENT
FORECAST
(3 MONTHS)
NORTHEAST
Baltimore, MD 55.01 6.19   
Boston, MA 71.00 6.50 
Hartford, CT 38.00 8.50 
Long Island, NY 72.85 8.00   
New Jersey – Central 59.76 7.00  
New Jersey – Northern* 43.37 7.00 n/a n/a n/a
Philadelphia, PA 68.33 7.10   
Pittsburgh, PA 50.00 7.75   
Washington, DC 65.38 6.24   
Northeast Average** 58.19 7.14
SOUTH
Atlanta, GA 38.81 8.00   
Birmingham, AL Close to zero
Charleston, SC 46.00 7.50   
Columbia, SC 37.00   
Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX 51.00 7.20   
Ft. Lauderdale-Broward, FL 70.00 
Greenville/Spartanburg, SC   
Houston, TX 65.00  
Jacksonville, FL 41.00 10.10 Close to zero
Little Rock, AR 65.45 9.00 Close to zero
Memphis, TN   
Miami, FL 95.00  
Nashville, TN 45.00 7.50   
Orlando, FL 50.00 7.50   
Richmond, VA 32.00  
Savannah, GA 34.00 8.50   
Tampa Bay, FL 29.81 8.50   
West Palm Beach, FL 68.00 8.00 Close to zero
South Average** 51.20 8.18
**Straight averages used
NOTE: Forecasts are for Warehouse/Distribution space.

UNITED STATES | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY | 3-MONTH FORECASTS, SALES PRICE & CAP RATES
MARKET
SALES PRICE
(USD PSF)
MEDIAN
CAP RATE
(%)
VACANCY
FORECAST
(3 MONTHS)
ABSORPTION
FORECAST
(3 MONTHS)
RENT
FORECAST
(3 MONTHS)
MIDWEST
Chicago, IL 53.00 6.15  
Cincinnati, OH 35.00 8.25 
Cleveland, OH  
Columbus, OH 26.88  
Detroit, MI* 12.50 n/a n/a n/a
Grand Rapids, MI 37.91 8.10   
Indianapolis, IN 53.50 6.75   
Kansas City, MO-KS 31.50  Close to zero
Milwaukee, WI 50.00 8.75  
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 55.00   
Omaha, NE   
Midwest Average** 39.48 7.60  
WEST
Albuquerque, NM 86.00 7.85 
Bakersfield, CA 38.00 10.00 
Boise, ID 51.61 
Denver, CO 63.35 8.31  
Fairfield, CA   
Fresno, CA* 42.00 9.00 Close to zero
Honolulu, HI   
Las Vegas, NV   
Los Angeles, CA 94.59 6.50 Close to zero 
Los Angeles - Inland Empire, CA 78.00 6.55   
Oakland, CA 80.00 6.50   
Orange County, CA 119.00 6.18 Close to zero 
Phoenix, AZ 66.00 8.30   
Pleasanton/Tri-Valley, CA 80.00 6.25 Close to zero
Portland, OR 89.71 6.12   
Sacramento, CA 42.02 7.58  
San Diego, CA 107.74   
San Francisco Peninsula, CA 275.00 7.00   
San Jose/Silicon Valley, CA 129.00 6.00   
Seattle/Puget Sound, WA 73.00 6.10   
Stockton/San Joaquin County, CA  
Walnut Creek, CA   
West Average** 89.12 7.22
U.S. AVERAGE** 63.24 7.50
(continued)
* Q3 data displayed for Detroit, Fresno

UNITED STATES | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY | RENTS AS OF DECEMBER 2013
MARKET
WAREHOUSE/DISTRIBUTION
SPACE
(USD PSF)
BULK
SPACE
(USD PSF)
FLEX/SERVICE
SPACE
(USD PSF)
TECH/R&D
SPACE
(USD PSF)
NORTHEAST
Baltimore, MD 4.64 4.42 11.25
Boston, MA 6.15 5.31 6.52 11.53
Hartford, CT 3.97 5.78 7.66 6.50
Long Island, NY 9.30 17.05
New Jersey – Central 4.98 4.52 11.44
New Jersey – Northern* 5.92 5.95 10.39
Philadelphia, PA 4.25 4.18 7.25 11.00
Pittsburgh, PA 4.44 4.44 11.81 11.81
Washington, DC 6.89 5.70 11.78 15.06
Northeast Average** 5.62 5.04 10.57 11.18
SOUTH
Atlanta, GA 3.23 3.00 7.27 9.73
Birmingham, AL 3.40 3.25 8.22
Charleston, SC 3.85 4.30 6.25 16.25
Charlotte, NC 3.28 3.39 8.61
Columbia, SC 3.48 2.95 8.17
Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX 3.30 2.75 7.25 8.60
Ft. Lauderdale-Broward, FL*** 6.32 5.94 11.26 13.88
Greenville/Spartanburg, SC 2.83 2.90 6.80
Houston, TX 5.54 4.57 9.30 14.25
Jacksonville, FL 3.81 3.55 8.45
Little Rock, AR 2.87 2.77 7.35
Louisville, KY 3.56 3.42 6.94 6.00
Memphis, TN 2.46 2.65 4.99 9.50
Miami, FL*** 8.26 7.59 10.63 12.00
Nashville, TN 3.20 3.01 8.00 7.50
Orlando, FL*** 4.50 4.31 8.82 8.55
Raleigh, NC 3.87 4.51 10.33
Richmond, VA 3.48 3.47 7.38 8.92
Savannah, GA 3.95 3.75 7.00 10.00
Tampa Bay, FL 4.40 4.30 7.20 5.83
West Palm Beach, FL*** 7.03 6.22 11.18 10.00
South Average** 4.12 3.93 8.16 10.07
*Q3 Data displayed for Northern New Jersey
**Straight averages used.
***Rents reported reflect blended average of all industrial service types (triple net, modified gross, etc.)

UNITED STATES | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY | RENTS AS OF DECEMBER 2013
MARKET
SPACE
(USD PSF)
BULK
SPACE
(USD PSF)
FLEX/SERVICE
SPACE
(USD PSF)
TECH/R&D
SPACE
(USD PSF)
MIDWEST
Chicago, IL 4.43 3.06 8.21
Cincinnati, OH 3.26 2.89 5.92 5.92
Cleveland, OH 3.37 2.90 8.30 3.22
Columbus, OH 2.75 2.75 5.05 5.05
Detroit, MI* 3.73 3.62 7.42 7.47
Grand Rapids, MI 3.31 3.31 4.30 4.30
Indianapolis, IN 4.50 3.28 6.65
Kansas City, MO-KS 4.27 3.53 8.89 7.36
Milwaukee, WI 4.75 3.95 5.80
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 4.53 4.53 6.76 7.10
Omaha, NE 3.96 4.57 7.12 4.85
St. Louis, MO*** 3.76 3.74 7.69
Midwest Average** 3.89 3.51 6.84 5.66
WEST
Albuquerque, NM 5.46 4.27 8.75 8.75
Bakersfield, CA 4.00 3.42 8.00
Boise, ID 5.10 6.36 6.54
Denver, CO 4.93 4.28 9.33 9.29
Fairfield, CA 4.84 5.61 7.09 8.12
Fresno, CA* 3.84 3.60 4.80 5.50
Honolulu, HI 11.88
Las Vegas, NV 4.92 4.34 6.24 9.72
Los Angeles, CA 6.55 6.25 9.69 12.69
Los Angeles – Inland Empire, CA 4.80 4.57 7.19 7.99
Oakland, CA 4.80 5.40 6.48 8.64
Orange County, CA 7.37 6.95 13.09 13.95
Phoenix, AZ 5.45 4.51 11.00 10.83
Pleasanton/Tri-Valley, CA 5.16 4.64
Portland, OR 5.21 5.27 9.97 10.86
Reno, NV 3.93 3.30 7.90
Sacramento, CA 3.72 3.48 8.78 5.52
San Diego, CA 8.04 7.08 10.44 15.12
San Francisco Peninsula, CA 10.80 10.80 22.92 22.92
San Jose/Silicon Valley, CA 6.60 6.16 9.24 16.32
Seattle/Puget Sound, WA 6.18 5.29 13.68
Stockton/San Joaquin County, CA 3.96 6.12 8.16
Walnut Creek, CA 3.00 13.44
West Average** 5.68 5.28 9.36 11.05
U.S. AVERAGE** 4.84 4.44 8.64 9.77
(continued)
*Q3 Data displayed for Detroit, Fresno
**Straight averages used.
***Rents reported reflect blended average of all industrial service types (triple net, modified gross, etc.)

CANADA | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY | INVENTORY, NEW SUPPLY & UNDER CONSTRUCTION
MARKET
INVENTORY
DEC. 31, 2013
(SF)
Q4 2013
NEW SUPPLY
(SF)
YEAR-TO-DATE
NEW SUPPLY
(SF)
CURRENTLY UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
(SF)
Calgary, AB 130,292,241 1,493,595 5,065,116 1,062,168
Edmonton, AB 82,268,125 368,163 1,722,429 2,266,663
Halifax, NS 7,624,537 10,200 10,200 0
Montréal, QC 348,564,380 605,000 635,000 180,000
Ottawa, ON* 28,134,055 64,000 64,000 47,500
Regina, SK 17,160,000 52,000 152,000 178,000
Saskatoon, SK 21,524,000 54,000 440,000 300,000
Toronto, ON 759,630,286 1,238,404 3,946,201 4,140,551
Vancouver, BC 185,122,410 408,838 2,734,383 2,125,457
Victoria, BC 9,001,303 0 78,790 0
Waterloo Region, ON 60,567,553 54,434 174,328 11,969
Winnipeg, MB 80,092,082 260,000 260,000 60,000
CANADA TOTALS 1,729,980,972 4,608,634 15,282,447 10,372,308
CANADA | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY | ABSORPTION AND VACANCY
MARKET
ABSORPTION
Q4 2013
(SF)
YEAR-TO-DATE
ABSORPTION
(SF)
VACANCY RATE
SEP. 30, 2013 (%)
VACANCY RATE
DEC. 31, 2013 (%)
Calgary, AB 1,191,518 3,960,338 5.65 5.82
Edmonton, AB 681,615 1,574,634 3.80 3.40
Halifax, NS -72,202 -100,589 10.15 11.21
Montréal, QC 83,605 -739,891 4.57 4.71
Ottawa, ON* 133,127 133,127 5.76 5.50
Regina, SK 100,000 193,000 3.51 3.21
Saskatoon, SK 120,000 537,000 4.42 4.18
Toronto, ON -722,779 3,360,820 3.68 3.99
Vancouver, BC 510,667 1,651,858 4.29 4.23
Victoria, BC 0 -33,423 4.50 4.50
Waterloo Region, ON -96,860 103,821 6.66 6.93
Winnipeg, MB 59,740 -187,592 3.45 3.69
CANADA TOTALS 1,988,431 10,453,103 4.25 4.41
*Q1 data displayed for Ottawa.
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
Indianapolis, IN
Los Angeles, CA
Atlanta, GA
Savannah, GA
New Jersey - Central
Chicago, IL
Los Angeles - Inland Empire, CA
Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX
Millions
YTD Absorption Q4-13 Absorption
ABSORPTION (SF) | SELECT U.S. MARKETS | Q4 2013 VS. YTD
-2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
Toronto, ON
Waterloo Region, ON
Halifax, NS
Victoria, BC
Winnipeg, MB
Montréal, QC
Regina, SK
Saskatoon, SK
Vancouver, BC
Edmonton, AB
Calgary, AB
Millions
YTD Absorption Q4-13 Absorption
ABSORPTION (SF) | CANADIAN MARKETS | Q3 2013 VS. YTD
Source: Colliers InternationalSource: Colliers International

*Q1 data displayed for Ottawa.
CANADA | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY | FORECASTS, SALES PRICE & CAP RATES
MARKET
SALES PRICE
(CAD PSF)
MEDIAN
CAP RATE
(%)
VACANCY FORECAST
(3 MONTHS)
ABSORPTION
FORECAST
(3 MONTHS)
RENT FORECAST
(3 MONTHS)
Calgary, AB 160.00 7.00  
Edmonton, AB 155.07 6.00  
Halifax, NS 
Montréal, QC 62.00 7.50 Close to zero
Ottawa, ON* 110.00 7.50 n/a n/a n/a
Regina, SK 190.00 7.15 Close to zero
Saskatoon, SK 155.00 7.15  
Toronto, ON 94.00 6.30   
Vancouver, BC 180.00 5.15   
Victoria, BC 195.00 7.50 Close to zero
Waterloo Region, ON 76.00 Close to zero
Winnipeg, MB 80.00 7.50 
CANADA AVERAGES** 132.46 6.88
CANADA | INDUSTRIAL SURVEY | AVERAGE ASKING RENTS
MARKET
SPACE
(CAD PSF)
BULK
SPACE
(CAD PSF)
FLEX/SERVICE
SPACE
(CAD PSF)
TECH/R&D
SPACE
(CAD PSF)
Calgary, AB 9.25 7.50 12.00 12.00
Edmonton, AB 8.00 7.63 10.13 16.00
Halifax, NS 8.15 10.56 10.50 15.00
Montréal, QC 4.75 4.25 6.00 8.00
Ottawa, ON* 8.25 7.50 8.50 11.00
Regina, SK 11.00 10.00 12.00 14.00
Saskatoon, SK 11.00 10.00 13.00 15.00
Toronto, ON 5.07
Vancouver, BC 8.08 7.48 9.49 14.00
Victoria, BC 11.50 10.00 13.50 13.50
Waterloo Region, ON 4.53 3.67 8.28 8.28
Winnipeg, MB 6.25 5.25 10.95 12.75
CANADA AVERAGES** 7.99 7.62 10.40 12.68

INDUSTRIAL VACANCY RANKINGS | US
MARKET
VACANCY RATE
DEC. 31, 2013
(%)
Honolulu, HI 2.71
Los Angeles, CA 2.94
Bakersfield, CA 3.20
Los Angeles – Inland Empire, CA 4.20
Orange County, CA 4.41
Omaha, NE 4.76
Long Island, NY 5.12
Houston, TX 5.18
Boise, ID 5.31
Seattle/Puget Sound, WA 5.45
Denver, CO 5.46
Columbus, OH 5.58
San Francisco Peninsula, CA 5.65
Kansas City, MO-KS 5.86
Pleasanton/Tri-Valley, CA 6.06
Portland, OR 6.24
Oakland, CA 6.35
Milwaukee, WI 6.46
Miami, FL 6.47
Grand Rapids, MI 6.57
Indianapolis, IN 6.74
West Palm Beach, FL 7.11
Columbia, SC 7.38
Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX 7.41
Fairfield, CA 7.44
Cincinnati, OH 7.55
Pittsburgh, PA 7.63
Louisville, KY 7.64
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 7.69
Walnut Creek, CA 7.81
Cleveland, OH 7.96
St. Louis, MO 7.99
New Jersey – Northern* 8.00
U.S. AVERAGE 8.08
New Jersey – Central 8.33
Charleston, SC 8.34
San Diego, CA 8.47
Nashville, TN 8.49
Ft. Lauderdale-Broward, FL 8.59
Fresno, CA* 8.64
Chicago, IL 8.70
Greenville/Spartanburg, SC 8.78
Philadelphia, PA 8.81
Savannah, GA 9.03
Birmingham, AL 9.06
San Jose/Silicon Valley, CA 9.06
Richmond, VA 9.17
Hartford, CT 9.22
Jacksonville, Fl 9.22
Albuquerque, NM 9.34
Baltimore, MD 9.47
Raleigh, NC 9.62
Orlando, FL 9.76
Little Rock, AR 10.09
Tampa Bay, FL 10.33
Reno, NV 10.55
Detroit, MI* 10.69
Washington, DC 11.01
Stockton/San Joaquin County, CA 11.52
Charlotte, NC 11.77
Las Vegas, NV 12.00
Atlanta, GA 12.02
Memphis, TN 12.32
Sacramento, CA 12.80
Phoenix, AZ 12.90
Boston, MA 18.76
INDUSTRIAL VACANCY RANKINGS | CANADA
MARKET
VACANCY RATE
DEC. 31 2013
(%)
Regina, SK 3.21
Edmonton, AB 3.40
Winnipeg, MB 3.69
Toronto, ON 3.99
Saskatoon, SK 4.18
Vancouver, BC 4.23
CANADA AVERAGE 4.41
Victoria, BC 4.50
Montréal, QC 4.71
Ottawa, ON** 5.50
Calgary, AB 5.82
Waterloo Region, ON 6.93
Halifax, NS 11.21
COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL
601 Union Street, Suite 4800
Seattle, WA 98101
TEL +1 206 695 4200
FOR MORE INFORMATION
K.C. Conway
Chief Economist | USA
TEL + 1 678 458 3477
EMAIL kc.conway@colliers.com
CONTRIBUTORS
Jeff Simonson
Senior Research Analyst | USA
Jennifer Macatiag
Graphic Designer | USA
Cliff Plank
National Director | GIS & Mapping
Aaron Finkelstein
Communications Manager | USA
482 offices in
62 countries on
6 continents
United States: 140
Canada: 42
Latin America: 20
Asia Pacific: 195
EMEA: 85
• $2 billion in annual revenue
• 13,500 professionals and staff
• 1.12* billion square feet under
management
• $71 billion USD in total transaction
value
*Together, Colliers International and FirstService
manage 2.51 billion square feet of property—
second-largest in the world.
Copyright © 2014 Colliers International.
The information contained herein has been obtained from sources
deemed reliable. While every reasonable effort has been made to
ensure its accuracy, we cannot guarantee it. No responsibility is
assumed for any inaccuracies. Readers are encouraged to consult
their professional advisors prior to acting on any of the material
contained in this report.
Accelerating success.
Glossary
Absorption – Net change in occupied space over a given
period of time.
Bulk Space – Warehouse space 100,000 square feet
or more with minimum ceiling heights of 24 feet. All
loading is dock-height.
Flex Space – Single-story buildings having 10- to
18-foot ceilings with both floor-height and dock-height
loading. Includes wide variation in office space
utilization, ranging from retail and personal service,
to distribution, light industrial and occasional heavy
industrial use.
Inventory – Includes all existing multi- or single-tenant
leased and owner-occupied industrial warehouse, light
manufacturing, flex and R&D properties greater than or
equal to 10,000 square feet.
New Construction – Includes completed speculative
and build-to-suit construction. New construction quoted
on a net basis after any demolitions or conversions.
Service Space – Single-story (or mezzanine) with
10- to 16-foot ceilings with frontage treatment on one
side and dock-height loading or grade-level roll-up
doors on the other. Less than 15 percent office space.
Tech/R&D – One- and two-story, 10- to 15-foot ceiling
heights with up to 50 office/dry lab space (remainder in
wet lab, workshop, storage and other support), with
dock-height and floor-height loading.
Triple Net Rent – Includes rent payable to the landlord,
and does not include additional expenses such as
taxes, insurance, maintenance, janitorial and utilities. All
industrial and high-tech/R&D rents in this report are
quoted on an annual, triple net per square foot basis in
U.S. and Canadian dollars.
Vacancy Rate – Percentage of total inventory available
(both vacant and occupied) as at the survey date
including direct vacant and sublease space.
Warehouse – 50,000 square feet or more with up to
15 percent office space, the balance being general
warehouse space with 18- to 30-foot ceiling heights.
All loading is dock-height.
*Q3 data displayed for Detroit, Fresno, Northern New Jersey.
**Q1 data displayed for Ottawa.

North American Industrial Outlook Q4 13

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (19)

Similaire à North American Industrial Outlook Q4 13

Similaire à North American Industrial Outlook Q4 13 (20)

Plus de Coy Davidson

Plus de Coy Davidson (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

North American Industrial Outlook Q4 13