GREATER PHOENIX BLUE CHIP • NOVEMBER 2001 VOLUME 13 • NUMBER 4 • NOVEMBER 2001 ........................................................................................... PAGE 1 ™ B L U E • C H I P • E C O N O M I C • F O R E C A S T ......................................................................................................................................................... Residential and commercial markets face uncertainty The uncertainty due to the economic recession and the effect of the Sept. 11 tragedy is evident in the most recent Greater Phoenix Blue Chip Real Estate Consensus Survey. Three quarters of data are available for 2001, yet the estimates for single family permits range from 26,500 to 36,000 units. This is a very wide spread of estimates by historic standards. For 2002, the range is from 18,000 to 33,500 single family units. Overall, the consensus calls for only a minor decline this year. The consensus for next year, however, drops by more than 15 percent, with a modest recovery expected in 2003. Multi-family units are also expected to decline. Yet, vacancies in multi-family are expected to increase to 7.9 percent, 8.2 percent and 8.3 percent in 2001, 2002 and 2003, respectively. Significant declines in construction are anticipated in commercial markets. Almost 3.9 million square feet of office space are expected to be built in 2001, but that number drops by more than half (1.6 million square feet) next year and is expected to decline even further (1.0 million square feet) in 2003. This is because vacancy rates in the office market are expected to increase dramatically in 2001. The fourth quarter 2000 vacancy rates were 10.8 percent, but are expected to increase to 15.6 percent and 16.3 percent for 2001 and 2002, respectively. A slight recovery in vacancy rates to 14.7 percent is likely in 2003 for the office market. Construction declines also are expected in the retail market. The consensus calls for construction dropping from almost 4.0 million square feet to 2.0 million and 1.9 million square feet, respectively, in 2001, 2002 and 2003. Absorption in the three years of the consensus forecast is expected to be 1.9 million square feet, 1.5 million square feet and 1.6 million square feet, respectively. Vacancy rates are not expected to be a major problem in retail. The industrial market also is expected to drop as absorption slows this year from 4.9 million square feet to about 3.9 million square feet in 2002. Vacancy rates in industrial, while moving up slightly, remain relatively stable over the next three years. Thus, only the office market appears to have a significant problem in terms of vacancy rates and recovery time, which could extend to 2004. Overall, the survey indicates not only heightened uncertainty, but that all sectors of residential and commercial construction are expected to decline next year (2002) and, with the exception of single family housing, declines will continue into 2003. This is bad news for construction employment, which apparently will lag going into the recession and lag coming out. – E.P. Panel's first look at 2003: Gradual recovery for metro area Economic forecasting involves analysis of the past and present to help predict the future. The events of Sept. 11 rendered the past and current economic data largely useless, for a few months at least. It is clear that the Greater Phoenix economy will be negatively affected, but the scope and duration of the impact is unknown. Nationally, the third quarter had been drawing close to negative territory; after Sept. 11, a negative quarter was virtually certain. The forecast for the fourth quarter has shifted from a mild positive to more likely negative. First quarter 2002 prospects hinge on the duration of overt military action in Afghanistan. The longer consumers and businesses are distracted by nightly news reports of military activity, the longer it will take the economy to recover. The forecasts for 2001 and 2002 have been revised downward, with most of the impact reflected in 2001. Employment growth already had slowed through August as manufacturers laid off staff as well as contract help (business services). The postattack prospects for a near-term recovery in manufacturing have dimmed. The Greater Phoenix area has dropped significantly in the employment growth rankings. Tourism and the hospitality industry, along with airlines and the airports, are likely to bear the brunt of the post-attack declines in the metro area. The metro area’s tourism industry is more sensitive to business spending than the tourism industries in the rest of the state; it is possible that many of the canceled meetings and conventions will be rescheduled, which would mean a boost either late this year or early next. The panel was also asked to give a first look at 2003. The forecast suggests that the economy will see gradual improvement, rather than a dramatic rebound. — T.C. CONSENSUS FORECAST FOR 2003 Annual Percent Change from 2002 Population................................... Personal Income......................... Retail Sales ................................ Wage & Salary Employment....... Manufacturing Employment........ Construction Employment .......... Service Employment................... National CPI ............................... Unemployment Rate................... 2.8 6.2 6.3 3.2 1.9 2.6 4.1 2.7 3.8 BANK ONE ECONOMIC OUTLOOK CENTER • ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY PAGE 2 ........................................................................................... GREATER PHOENIX BLUE CHIP • NOVEMBER 2001 GREATER PHOENIX ECONOMIC FORECAST FOR 2001 ANNUAL PERCENT CHANGE 2001 FROM 2000 SOURCE Arizona Public Service ASU - Bank One Economic Outlook Center CH2M HILL Department of Economic Security ECON-LINC Elliott D. Pollack and Co. H.C. Reardon Economics Joint Legislative Budget Committee Lancaster Consulting The Maguire Company Protitlement Salt River Project U of A - Eller College VisionEcon Consensus Population 2.8 2.7 L 2.7 L 2.9 2.7 L 2.8 2.8 2.9 2.7 L 2.8 2.8 3.0 H 2.9 3.0 H 2.8 Personal Income 6.1 6.0 5.0 L 6.9 H 5.4 6.0 5.3 6.2 6.0 6.6 6.4 6.1 6.2 5.0 L 5.9 Retail Sales 4.7 4.0 4.2 7.0 H 5.0 2.7 3.0 2.0 L 4.9 5.7 5.5 5.7 5.3 6.0 4.7 Wage & Salary Empl. 1.8 1.7 2.1 3.2 1.0 L 1.2 1.9 2.7 3.1 3.6 H 3.0 1.8 2.7 2.0 2.3 Manufacturing Empl. (1.0) (1.5) (1.0) 0.8 (2.0) L (2.0) L (2.0) L 0.0 0.8 1.8 H 0.5 (1.0) 0.6 0.5 (0.4) AVERAGE RATE FOR 2001 Construction Empl. (2.5) (4.0) (5.0) L 2.3 0.0 1.0 2.0 (2.0) (5.0) L 0.0 (3.0) 3.3 2.7 3.4 H (0.5) Services Empl. 3.1 2.0 1.5 4.9 H 1.7 3.0 2.0 2.5 4.2 4.8 4.2 0.0 L 2.9 2.5 2.8 National CPI 2.4 2.7 2.2 L 2.9 2.7 2.2 L 3.1 2.8 2.5 2.3 2.7 2.8 3.2 H 3.0 2.7 Unemployment Rate 3.9 3.8 4.8 H 3.2 L 3.8 3.3 4.5 3.7 3.9 3.5 3.4 3.7 — 3.8 3.8 GREATER PHOENIX ECONOMIC FORECAST FOR 2002 ANNUAL PERCENT CHANGE 2002 FROM 2001 SOURCE Arizona Public Service ASU - Bank One Economic Outlook Center CH2M HILL Department of Economic Security ECON-LINC Elliott D. Pollack and Co. H.C. Reardon Economics Joint Legislative Budget Committee Lancaster Consulting The Maguire Company Protitlement Salt River Project U of A - Eller College VisionEcon Consensus Population Personal Income Retail Sales Wage & Salary Empl. 2.7 2.6 L 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.6 L 2.7 2.7 3.0 H 2.7 3.0 H 2.8 5.8 5.8 5.2 L 7.7 H 5.4 6.0 5.7 5.9 5.4 6.3 6.2 6.2 5.9 5.6 5.9 4.5 4.9 5.0 6.9 H 5.2 5.0 4.5 4.0 L 4.7 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.3 6.2 5.4 2.1 L 2.8 2.5 3.7 H 2.6 2.5 3.1 2.8 2.5 3.4 3.4 3.3 2.8 2.8 2.9 AVERAGE RATE FOR 2002 Manufacturing Empl. Construction Empl. Services Empl. (0.8) 0.7 (1.0 )L 1.4 1.0 2.0 H 2.0 H 1.0 0.8 1.6 2.0 H 1.0 1.2 2.0 H 1.1 (3.5) (5.0) (5.0) 1.1 (5.0) (10.0 )L 0.0 (0.5) (10.0) L 0.0 (5.0) 1.5 (0.3) 4.0 H (2.7) 3.6 4.5 2.2 L 5.5 H 4.0 5.0 4.5 3.6 3.6 4.8 4.8 3.5 3.7 4.5 4.1 National CPI Unemployment Rate 2.1 2.5 2.4 2.8 3.0 H 2.5 2.3 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.6 2.3 2.7 1.4 L 2.4 3.8 3.7 4.4 H 3.0 L 3.8 3.5 4.2 3.7 4.2 3.5 3.6 3.1 — 3.8 3.7 Data sources for Maricopa County (Greater Phoenix area): population, Arizona Department of Economic Security; personal income, Bureau of Economic Analysis; retail sales, Arizona Department of Revenue; wage and salary employment, manufacturing employment, construction employment, service employment and unemployment rate, GREATER PHOENIX HISTORICAL DATA SOURCE 2000 Percent Change 1999 Percent Change 1998 Percent Change *Estimated Population (thousands) 2,882 3.1 2,794 3.3 2,706 3.2 Personal Income (millions) 81,711* 7.7* 75,869 9.7 69,172 10.1 Retail Sales (millions) 27,825 10.4 25,207 7.9 23,360 7.8 Wage & Salary Empl. (thousands) 1,487.2 4.8 1,418.8 5.5 1,344.2 5.6 Manufacturing Empl. (thousands) 161.8 -2.9 166.7 5.2 158.5 4.5 Construction Empl. (thousands) 112.3 7.6 104.4 11.8 93.4 5.5 Services Empl. (thousands) 486.2 9.0 446.2 5.2 424.0 7.3 National CPI 166.6 2.2 163.0 1.6 160.5 2.3 Unemployment Rate 3.0 2.6 3.0 GREATER PHOENIX BLUE CHIP • NOVEMBER 2001 ........................................................................................... PAGE 3 METROPOLITAN PHOENIX REAL ESTATE CONSENSUS FORECAST RESIDENTIAL 2001 2002 2003 Singlefamily Permits Multifamily Permits Year-end Apt. Vacancy Apt. Absorption Singlefamily Permits Multifamily Permits Year-end Apt. Vacancy Apt. Absorption Singlefamily Permits Multifamily Permits Year-end Apt. Apt. AbsorpVacancy tion ASU Real Estate Center CB Richard Ellis Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Griffin Consulting Grubb & Ellis Marcus & Millichap Protitlement U of A, Eller College 32,000 26,500 30,000 28,000 — 36,000 33,500 31,200 8,000 7,200 7,500 6,500 8,500 9,000 5,200 6,200 8.5% 7.9 8.0 7.2 8.5 7.5 7.5 — 6,000 4,500 6,000 5,800 4,500 6,000 4,100 — 24,000 18,000 27,000 25,500 — 33,500 29,000 26,800 7,500 5,000 7,000 5,750 4,500 7,500 4,600 4,400 8.0% 8.7 9.0 6.9 9.0 8.0 8.2 — 6,250 3,500 4,500 5,900 3,000 6,000 3,800 — 27,000 21,000 30,000 30,000 — 34,000 28,000 25,100 7,250 3,500 6,000 6,000 4,500 8,000 4,500 5,000 7.5% 8.2 9.0 7.0 9.2 8.5 8.0 — 6,575 5,000 6,000 5,750 2,000 6,500 4,000 — Consensus 2000 Actuals 1999 Actuals 31,029 32,511 33,252 7,263 8,009 7,759 7.9% 6.8 5.9 5,271 6,225 5,017 26,257 5,781 8.3% 4,707 27,871 5,594 2000 year-end inventory: 798,278 (single-family) 306,386 (multi-family) 8.2% 5,118 METROPOLITAN PHOENIX REAL ESTATE CONSENSUS FORECAST OFFICE (Millions of Square Feet) 2001 Construction Leaseable Year-end Vacancy 2002 Absorption Construction Leaseable Year-end Vacancy 2003 Absorption Construction Leaseable Year-end Vacancy Absorption CB Richard Ellis Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Grubb & Ellis Lee & Associates Marcus & Millichap PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Protitlement 4.0 4.0 2.3 4.9 3.5 4.5 3.1 14.0% 15.5 16.0 14.4 18.5 15.0 12.8 1.2 1.0 0.5 1.9 -0.5 3.0 2.2 1.6 1.7 1.4 1.5 2.5 1.0 2.4 15.5% 17.5 16.5 13.0 18.2 17.0 13.5 0.6 1.0 1.0 1.9 0.2 1.5 1.8 0.4 1.0 1.2 0.9 1.9 1.0 2.3 14.2% 15.5 15.5 11.1 16.7 15.0 13.0 1.1 2.0 1.5 1.9 1.0 1.0 2.0 Consensus 3.9 15.6% 1.2 1.6 16.3% 1.0 1.1 14.7% 1.4 2000 Actuals 1999 Actuals 3.1 4.0 10.8 11.4 3.1 2.8 2000 year-end inventory: 48.3 million square feet METROPOLITAN PHOENIX REAL ESTATE CONSENSUS FORECAST RETAIL (Millions of Square Feet) 2001 Construction Leaseable Year-end Vacancy 2002 Absorption Construction Leaseable Year-end Vacancy 2003 Absorption Construction Leaseable Year-end Vacancy Absorption CB Richard Ellis Grubb & Ellis Marcus & Millichap PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Protitlement 3.5 4.0 3.9 4.5 3.0 7.4% 6.0 10.0 11.0 8.4 1.2 3.6 –0.6 3.5 2.6 3.2 2.0 1.5 2.0 2.4 9.5% 6.5 10.0 10.0 8.8 1.0 1.8 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.4 2.0 1.6 1.5 2.5 10.2% 6.5 9.5 10.0 8.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.2 Consensus 2000 Actuals 1999 Actuals 4.0 2.7 4.0 8.6% 5.3 5.5 1.9 2.8 4.4 2.2 9.0% 1.5 1.9 9.1% 1.6 2000 year-end inventory: 93.6 million square feet PAGE 4 ........................................................................................... GREATER PHOENIX BLUE CHIP • NOVEMBER 2001 METROPOLITAN PHOENIX REAL ESTATE CONSENSUS FORECAST INDUSTRIAL (Millions of Square Feet) 2001 2002 2003 Construction 6.0 6.0 4.5 2.9 Leaseable Year-end Vacancy 9.5% 8.0 9.3 8.2 Absorption 3.0 0.5 5.0 2.0 Construction 4.8 3.0 4.3 3.3 Leaseable Year-end Vacancy 11.1% 8.3 9.0 7.5 Absorption 1.0 2.0 7.8 3.4 Construction 1.8 2.0 3.5 3.1 Leaseable Year-end Vacancy 10.7% 7.8 8.7 7.6 Absorption 2.4 3.0 7.8 3.1 Consensus 4.9 8.7% 2.6 3.9 9.0% 3.5 2.6 8.7% 4.1 2000 Actuals 1999 Actuals 6.5 9.5 7.4 8.1 CB Richard Ellis* Grubb & Ellis** Lee & Associates* Marcus & Millichap *All space over 5,000 sq. ft. 10.7 7.3 2000 year-end inventory: 196 million sq. ft. (CB Richard Ellis)* 208 million sq. ft. (Lee & Associates)* 220 million sq. ft. spec (Grubb & Ellis)** **Total Market (Space over 10,000 sq.ft) REAL ESTATE FORECAST PANEL Arizona Real Estate Center Arizona State University Jay Q. Butler CB Richard Ellis Jeff Cooledge Protitlement Steven Pritulsky PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Tom Kabat Lee & Associates Arizona Ken Crouse Elliott D. Pollack and Company Elliott Pollack Marcus & Millichap Tim Rios or Dave Wetta Griffin Consulting Brian J. Smargiassi The University of Arizona Eller College Marshall Vest Grubb & Ellis George Gramm ECONOMIC FORECAST PANEL Arizona Department of Economic Security Dan Anderson and Donald Wehbey ECON-LINC John Lucking Elliott D. Pollack and Company Elliott Pollack Arizona Public Service Pete Ewen and Brian Cary H. C. Reardon Economics Hank Reardon Arizona State University, Bank One Economic Outlook Center Tracy Clark Joint Legislative Budget Committee Staff Salt River Project Arlyn Herrera, Rebecca Holmes and Karen Wolfe Protitlement Steve Pritulsky Bank One Economic Outlook Center Tracy L. Clark, Economics Editor Elliott Pollack, Topics Editor Nancy A. Maneely, Editorial Coordinator Laura Carr, Graphic Designer Lancaster Consulting Dwight Duncan The University of Arizona, Eller College Marshall Vest The Maguire Company Alan Maguire Vision Econ Debra J. Roubik GREATER PHOENIX BLUE CHIP (ISSN 1042-6825) is published four times a year by the Bank One Economic Outlook Center, an affiliate of the L. William Seidman Research Institute in the College of Business at Arizona State University. The annual rate is $39. For information, call the Bank One Economic Outlook Center at (480) 965–5543. www.phoenixchamber.com Arizona State University vigorously pursues affirmative action and equal opportunity in its employment, activities and programs. • Not Printed or Mailed at State Expense • J. Doug Pruitt, Chairman Valerie Manning, President/CEO