JLL_The Leaderboard _The Top 18 Distribution Markets in the U.S.

The Leaderboard: The Top 18 Distribution Markets in the United States

Why 18? JLL believes that focusing solely on the largest distribution markets only validates what corporate occupiers and developers already know. The largest distribution markets in the country are, not surprisingly, located in close proximity to the largest domestic population centers. In our experience, site selection decisions are becoming much more regionalized as occupiers push deeper into the U.S. population, hence our 18 market aggregations. So it is the markets on the second half of this list, the lesser known secondary markets, that we think have the most interest and appeal.

Borrowing from the golfing world, we have patterned our study on 18 markets (or holes). We have broken down the study to focus on both the “front nine” and the “back nine.”

The front nine is important to understand and critical to supply chain execution, but it consists mostly of what we would call the “usual suspects”. Those core industrial markets that dominate from a distribution and site selection perspective: Chicago, the Inland Empire, New Jersey, etc.

Most corporate occupiers, investors and developers are familiar with playing some or all of the front nine. However, some do not have as much experience with the back nine. The back nine represents secondary, regional distribution markets that have core supply chain strengths, which make them attractive options from a logistics and operating cost perspective. They still represent opportunities to consider as part of a physical supply chain network or investment platform.

JLL’s First Annual Research Study

Summer 2016

Why not a typical “Top 10” list?

Given demand by both our corporate occupier and

investor developer clients, JLL has developed an

innovative annual research study that is focused on

identifying the Top 18 distribution markets in the U.S.

2 | The Leaderboard: The Top 18 Distribution Markets In The United States

As transportation costs continue to escalate upward, as sustainability goals take on more importance, and as customer service requirements continue to get more competitive—these supply chain influencers will lead corporate occupiers to have more facilities closer to their customers. If these trends continue, the focus on the real estate infrastructure of the “back nine” markets will become even more intense.

Increasing transportation costs and more demanding service requirements are pushing companies to be closer to their customers

JLL developed a new and proprietary model to complete our rankings of the Top 18 distribution markets.

The JLL Industrial Research team, working closely with various JLL specialty practice groups (e.g., Supply Chain & Logistics Solutions, Business & Economic Incentives, Labor Analytics, Project Development Services, Capital Markets), along with JLL Industrial real estate professionals nationwide, identified and applied 32 specific metrics to weight and rank industrial warehouse and distribution market performance from a supply chain and logistics perspective based primarily on important site selection influencers such as population and demographics, labor availability, wage rates and other costs, energy costs, transportation and multimodal infrastructure, industrial real estate leasing market and investment variables, as well as local tax and economic incentive opportunities.

JLL actively tracks and closely monitors 50 of the top Class A industrial markets throughout the U.S. and has aggregated data from a variety of internal and external sources, consulting and project-related assignments and market intelligence, as well as local “on-the-ground” resources, to understand the current dynamics and trends for each of these individual markets. Markets were clustered to mirror a natural site selection decision process, so that adjacent or competitive markets could be properly associated and not overemphasize any one U.S. region.

JLL intends this to be an annual study. This 2016 publication represents our first annual release.

Handicapping the course (the methodology behind the madness)


1. New Jersey/New York Metro Area

2. Southern California

3. Central and Eastern Pennsylvania

4. Chicago Metro (including Milwaukee)

5. Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex

6. Atlanta

7. The Mideast (Indianapolis, Columbus and Cincinnati)

8. The Mid-Atlantic (Baltimore, Washington, DC Metro, Richmond and Hampton Roads)

9. Southeast Texas (Houston and San Antonio)

The “Front Nine”

The Scorecard (results and findings)Following is the 2016 list of the Top 18 distribution markets in the U.S. as compiled and ranked by JLL.

HOLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 OUT

PARHANDICAP

The “Front Nine” U.S. distribution markets

Why are the front nine the most obvious ? Here is a breakdown of these major markets and why they fit as they did into our ranking (and why some of them made their way onto the fairway). As mentioned earlier, access to population and consumers is critical, but we have also factored in labor metrics, general “cost of doing business” leverage from taxes and municipal incentives, and the impact from local industrial warehouse and distribution real estate fundamentals on both site selection and investment perspectives.


• The home of some of the most densely populated centroids in the country, the New York and New Jersey Metro Area is also the largest seaport on the East Coast (which could grow with the newly opened expansion of the Panama Canal). It is an immensely important driver of industrial space which cascades down from the Port and Meadowlands submarkets through a corridor of industrial markets that include the big-box hub Exits 8A and 7A submarkets.

• While real estate costs are higher nearer to the Northern New Jersey and New York population nexus, the region also provides diversity in site selection options as well as labor availability and costs that are not extreme, although a few related metrics like unionization rates tend to slightly offset an overall strong labor score in our model.

• An ability to service cities up and down the eastern seaboard is a strength as well as providing connections to the Central and Eastern Pennsylvania markets.mentioned earlier, access to population and customers is critical, but we have also factored in labor metrics, general “cost of doing business” leverage from taxes and municipal incentives, and the impact from local industrial warehouse and distribution real estate fundamentals on both site selection and investment perspectives.

• The gateway market for Asia Pacific trade through the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the region boasts a massive population base and serves as the hub not just for regional distribution in the western U.S., but for many of the goods and materials that funnel out to other cities around the U.S.

• Population density thins significantly as you begin including longer drive times away from the core Southern California submarkets, and Southern California doesn’t have the benefits of the metro adjacencies that the more concentrated markets in the Northeast have.

• Warehouse and distribution real estate costs can be high (and available options few) in infill markets—but between the distribution submarkets of Los Angeles and the Class A big-box opportunity of the Inland Empire, the region provides significant strategic balance, the ability for efficient throughput of cargo and access to much of the rest of the country. Additionally, stock of prime product, investment return potential and development activity give the market our best score for industrial real estate metrics.

New Jersey/New York Metro Area

Southern California


• This vast geographic area offers distribution access to a broad swath of the U.S. populace, in many different directions via several modes of transit. The fact that it has the reach to other large cities—as well as the transportation infrastructure, good civilian labor force metrics, reasonable cost-of-living scores and, importantly, a cost-effective basis for logistics real estate for a market of its size—helps propel this market into the upper echelon of the front nine.

• Relative to the New York/New Jersey market in our survey, the Central and Eastern Pennsylvania region provides more “large-block” development opportunities and a lower average land basis, as well as a beneficial business operating environment—at the likely sacrifice of increased transportation or service costs.Central and

Eastern Pennsylvania

• Chicago is a not-too-distant fourth, an “easy par” market when considering a Midwestern location or core investment opportunity. It draws more regionalized and large users looking to hit a large geographic footprint, especially with intermodal capabilities (see below). When comparing it to the mega-region of the U.S. Northeast Corridor, Chicago captures the second largest population cohort over a longer trucking drive-time period, but it does not have the broader population density of a New Jersey or Central Pennsylvania market—or the population growth potential that other larger markets do.

• Regardless, it is still the winner when it comes to intermodal (in Joliet, for example), Class I rail and other infrastructure benefits (like O’Hare International Airport), and it remains the central node for much freight and cargo in the country.

• Combining its drive-time proximity to not just its own captive population but also much of the nation’s greater consumer base and its substantial base of prime, Class A warehouse and distribution product, Chicago ranks right up with its peers as a “necessary” supply chain market, with the second highest real estate metrics in our model.

• Milwaukee is an interesting satellite market for Chicago, and while labor costs are a little higher than its larger companion, it is a tight market with few Class A space options available.

Chicagoland and Milwaukee

Outside of being proximate to some of the largest shares of the domestic population base, the New Jersey/New York corridor, Southern California and Central and Eastern Pennsylvania all have complementary indicators in our model and trade off many of our individual labor and transportation variables—exchanging strong scores in access to labor for wage costs and dense distribution options for development potential and other costs of locating in or investing in these core markets.

They all end up with total scores in our rankings in a tight cluster, and it will be interesting to track their performance over time in subsequent versions of our annual JLL study.


• In our model, scores for the Dallas/Fort Worth area were very balanced across all indicators. Home to a huge population base, the DFW Metroplex is forecasted to grow by the greatest overall differential in the U.S. over the next five years.

• Adding to this sense of balance is a significant, lower-cost labor force market, as well as a growing attractiveness for business and headquarters operations given its strong pro-business environment. Moreover, the region has a core of Class I rail lines and intermodal operations that connect it with other major and regional markets around the country—in addition to an interstate network and major air cargo capabilities.

• All of these factors play into the substantial scoring of the industrial real estate market in our modeling. While vacancy is up recently as the development market heated up relative to its 10-year average, the region is home to a number of Class A space options at lease rates that provide cost savings compared to other major U.S. markets.

Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex

• With a strong environment for doing business and a substantial and growing population center, Atlanta is the major anchor market of the southeast U.S.

• Atlanta has connections to the seaport market in Savannah, the fourth most active container port in the U.S., as well as three Class I intermodal rail terminals in Atlanta, keeping its infrastructure score in our rankings from falling too far relative to some other major supply chain locations. It also acts as a hub market in the entire Southeast, connecting to other markets like Charleston and Jacksonville, among others.

• Logistics real estate remains affordable, and prime space leasing options are more abundant when compared to other major markets—and like the others on our list ahead of Atlanta, development activity has heated up in the last 18 months, responding to continued demand for Class A space and to replenish a base of available stock that has been leased up in a strong 2015 and 2016.

• As a result, vacancy has remained in good shape despite increased speculative construction, and average rents lend potential for further large-block leasing activity. Affordable land costs per buildable square foot also give Atlanta another boost to keep development going as long as demand allows.

Atlanta

“Scratch” Our first six markets are easy “par” markets when it comes to placing distribution hubs for many large corporate occupiers, or for investors gravitating toward prime core, high-grade warehouse and distribution product.

Dallas/Fort Worth, Atlanta and our next two markets in the “front nine” all score in a close band in our model—some benefiting in certain metrics, others in different ones—but all compose some of the most important industrial real estate markets in the U.S., as is the seventh market on our “course.”

Rounding out our “straight down the fairway” play are three interesting but very deserving logistics markets.


• All of the Mideast markets have the “long drive” reach to touch much of the country in a day’s drive time. And while it may not have the median income of many other markets, it has a solid cost-of-living score, as well as a labor force cost advantage. It may not have the rail capabilities of other major logistics markets—but its number of interstate connections and air cargo options give it a boost.

• From a real estate perspective, Indianapolis has a significant stock of Class A space, has not been overbuilt, has a relatively low land cost basis and has a more affordable average lease rate that attracts warehouse and distribution operations.

• As with many of our Mideast cities, infrastructure and connectivity within the U.S., cost of living, favorable labor rates and relatively inexpensive real estate or development options benefit the Columbus market. Intermodal and inland port capabilities like Norfolk Southern’s Rickenbacker terminal, closely combined with air cargo facilities, also continue to help make Columbus an important U.S. distribution location.

• Similarly to Indianapolis, Columbus also supports an important base of Class A logistics product at rents that could continue to attract occupier attention.

• The Cincinnati metro area has a low vacancy and a sizeable foundation of warehouse and distribution real estate and the ability to reach an extended portion of the Midwest population base.

• Not without its own cargo airport capabilities (hence the news about Amazon quietly using the market to initiate operations), Cincinnati can also tap into Louisville’s UPS all-points international air cargo hub. Over and above this, Cincinnati benefits from a strong reputation for ease of doing business, creating a commendable environment for taxes and economic incentives.

• While possibly not an obvious selection for the “front nine” for those not already in the market, the DC/Baltimore metropolitan area has one of the best population and demographics ratings in our study, and while the cost of living is high, the region benefits from one of the highest median incomes in the country.

• Along with Baltimore’s major seaport that could service larger container vessels even before the expanded Panama Canal opened, as well as the region’s several international airports with cargo capabilities, Baltimore and Washington, DC are home to a strong network of interstate highways, rail lines, and intermodal capacity—giving it stable inland connectivity to other markets along the eastern seaboard, as well as into Ohio or other Midwest markets via double-stacked rail.

• The Richmond and Hampton Roads areas do not have the local populace to stand out alone in our statistical model, but they are able to reach other mid-Atlantic markets within a relatively easy drive time. Similarly, they have a good network of interstate connections, Class I rail and (in Norfolk) a major U.S. seaport. Also, the greater Tidewater region is expected to see some significant population growth by 2020.

The Mid-Atlantic (Baltimore, Washington, DC Metro, Richmond and Hampton Roads)

The Mideast (Indianapolis, Columbus and Cincinnati)


• In the last of our “front nine” markets, Houston is a large population draw and a major port market—for energy, commodities and breakbulk product.

• The current state of the oil and gas markets provides for a greater leasing opportunity, with a number of Class A space options available despite a still-tight overall vacancy rate. This proves to be important, especially given its large population catchment area and growth potential over the next five years.

• While surprising, San Antonio is proximate to other Texas markets (the greater DFW area) within less than a day’s trucking drive time. And while this may not be a significant enough warehouse and distribution market for site selection decisions, compared to locating closer to the Dallas/Fort Worth market, keeping San Antonio in the mix relative to Houston is warranted. Expected population growth in the next five years and median hourly wages make it a market to watch in the future.

Southeast Texas (Houston and San Antonio)


10. Honky Tonk Triangle (Louisville, Memphis, Nashville)

11. The Carolinas

12. Florida

13. Minneapolis

14. The Heartland Markets (Kansas City, St. Louis)

15. Northern California and Reno

16. The Desert Markets (Las Vegas, Phoenix)

17. The Mountain Region (Denver, Salt Lake City)

18. The Pacific Northwest

The “Back Nine”

The Scorecard (results and findings)

HOLE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 IN

PARHANDICAP

The “Back Nine” U.S. distribution markets


• While it doesn’t have the same captive local population as some of the front nine markets, Memphis is the home of FedEx’s global “SuperHub” and five Class I rail lines (the most in the country outside of Chicago)—transportation infrastructure which positions it well as a vital logistics node in the U.S. It also has the labor force that has made it an e-commerce juggernaut.

• The industrial real estate market in the greater Memphis region also provides leasing options, affordability and development potential—all of which are important components of our scoring.

• Nashville is growing and is expected to continue to grow. Population increases by 2020 place it near major, urbanized U.S. markets. Likewise, one-day drive-time capabilities and both transportation and manufacturing location quotients—in addition to favorable labor metrics (wages and unionization)—all push Nashville onto our leaderboard.

• Like its base of residents, Nashville’s industrial real estate market is growing. Average annual completions are intensifying, and Class A leasing options are good relative to average leasing rates when compared to other U.S. markets.

• Louisville gives an overall boost to this cluster of logistics-centric markets, with its proximity to more of the Midwest, Great Lakes and central markets like St. Louis in an approximate half-day or day’s truck time. Not to mention it is the central home for UPS.

• It’s real estate market boasts average Class A rents and land values per buildable square foot that are right around or just under the median U.S. levels, which, considering its adjacency to other U.S. logistics markets, likely means more potential for leasing activity and development in Louisville in the future.

Honky Tonk Triangle (Louisville, Memphis, Nashville)

• How do the Carolinas make it so high on the leaderboard? Connectivity, transshipment and labor costs. The region may not be a population powerhouse like some of the other major markets, but the area scores high for cost of living and for both transportation and production location quotients (relative to the national average).

• At the same time, it has the interstate network, rail capacity, seaport connections (Port of Charleston) and proximity along the eastern seaboard to touch other major population markets. Likewise, forecasted per capita growth in Charlotte and Greensboro/Winston-Salem over the next few years is on pace with many of our “front nine” markets.

• Vacancy in Charlotte has been higher than the U.S. norm, but it had also been decreasing in 2015 before hitting a soft patch early in 2016. Both markets are sizeable-enough logistics markets, on par with Phoenix, Indianapolis, Memphis or Kansas City—and while the industrial real estate scores for the Carolinas might not be as high as some of these other markets, their solid, consistent scores across the board, but especially in population and demographics and labor, help nudge them into the number 11 spot.

The Carolinas


• The markets throughout Florida have the transportation and infrastructure connectivity to one another and within the Southeast, but they are unique among other U.S. logistics markets when considering the impact of the peninsula on transshipment and the movement of freight or cargo through to end-supply-chain customers. It is a market to continue to observe, as it has committed to new infrastructure investment projects that should push up its transportation score in our index in the future.

• Labor costs, unionization rates and blue-collar workforce availability all score very favorably in our model, but in the end they are limited by a smaller aggregate population for all the major cities we track within the state.

• Serving the regional economy, the market does not have the same level of prime, Class A stock that some of the “front nine” markets have, but it is not dissimilar to many of the major U.S. markets in the “back nine.”

• In South Florida specifically, average Class A rents and land values for development are quite high—not nearly as high as New Jersey and Los Angeles, but dramatically higher than most of the rest of the U.S., outside of densely developed, comparable markets like Oakland and the Washington, DC metro region. Rents are also elevated. But with a deep-water port able to accept fully loaded large vessels now transiting the newly expanded Panama Canal, on dock intermodal and the Port Miami Tunnel to ease congestion, the market is poised for the future.

• Tampa, Orlando and Jacksonville have higher vacancy rates within the state but also give the overall cluster in our rankings a boost by having a few more Class A leasable options available, as well as the land for more ground-up development at a good average cost per acre. These markets have the potential for future distribution and transportation growth with the planned Central Florida Intermodal Logistics Center, which is adjacent to the CSX Winter Haven Intermodal.

Florida

• Minneapolis may be a surprise player on our rankings—benefiting from a good cost of living, an affluent core of residents and a density of Fortune 500 companies, while having a population that is similar in size to many of the metropolitan areas further down in the “back nine” rankings.

• While it may lack some of the infrastructure indicators that inhibit logistics connectivity like similar markets further down our list, Minneapolis serves its Upper Midwest regional economy well with good scores on its blue-collar civilian labor force, but it may have higher relative costs both from a wage and real estate pricing perspective.

Minneapolis


The Heartland Markets (Kansas City, St. Louis)

• Rail connectivity helps put Kansas City higher on our list. While it may not have the drive-time population or labor analytics of other markets, it still proves to be the link of cross-border rail activity to Mexico and of interchanges with Canada. It has benefited from growth in the auto and supplier industry in the past few years as well.

• As such, Kansas City is home to a sizeable industrial real estate market, one that currently gives occupiers the ability to select between Class A options while at the same time giving developers or investors the opportunity to capture yield.

• St. Louis obtains very good, balanced scores in our study that track well along many of our indicator averages. It has strong access to concentric rings of the Midwest consumer base and an industrial real estate market with access to affordable tracts of buildable land and availability and rental rates that sit close to the U.S. median.

• The Northern California cluster, including Reno, encompasses a huge layer of the western U.S. population center, but it is also spread out over a vast geographic area. Given the Port of Oakland and the interstate network connecting many of the Northern California markets with other major metro areas, the regional cluster scores well in our rankings for transportation infrastructure. However, half-day or longer trucking drive times do not always capture the same range of the populace as do many of the other markets higher up on the leaderboard, and these markets can cross over one another or become competitive within the grouping.

• Oakland has a large local base of residents and consumers, similar to a few of the markets in our “front nine,” but also a higher-than-average cost of living, warehouse wage rates and other labor market indicators.

• Industrial real estate metrics for the cluster score well in our index, with all the markets outside of Oakland pricing competitively against the U.S. median. Land values are also lower in Reno, the North Bay submarkets, the Central Valley and Sacramento.

• With vacancy extremely tight in Oakland and very few new development options available, the Central Valley has emerged as a nexus for new “larger-block” construction, but even it is becoming a very tight market now as well. The Sacramento, North Bay and Reno markets offer up a little more site selection flexibility, with vacancy higher than the national average (except for in the North Bay).

Northern California and Reno


The Desert Markets (Las Vegas, Phoenix)

• Phoenix is an important local market with a population slightly below some of the bigger swingers earlier in our index, but like other markets in this set, it has limitations when considering longer truck driving times.

• Both Phoenix and Las Vegas have good labor availability and pricing metrics, but vacancy is elevated relative to many other markets around the country, although still stabilizing with rents now pushing higher. With the ability to build big-box product, the Desert Markets shouldn’t be counted out yet.

• Denver and Salt Lake City score well in our index from an industrial real estate perspective—with good rents, available land and business environments—but they have limits when it comes to bigger-box development, as they tend to serve as more regional distribution hubs.

• Population-wise, both markets are comparable to the Mideast and Carolina markets—but they lose the longer-range drive-time accessibility from which those markets benefit.

• Denver has also experienced recent rent growth in a tightening market, especially where development activity has not been all that intense in the last 18 months.

The Mountain Region (Denver, Salt Lake City)


• Similar to the Mountain Region in our study, the Pacific Northwest is an important piece of a supply chain “four corners” strategy. With a strong container port network between Seattle and Tacoma and important rail connections, the region can service the population centers in and around Seattle and Portland but also help move cargo to the center of the country.

• While population growth is booming in the Pacific Northwest, it is the diminishing returns of being close to a wider geographic band of customers that keep Seattle and Portland lower on our list than generally presumed, in addition to higher costs of living and warehouse labor costs.

The Pacific Northwest

“The Sand Trap” Why didn’t major markets like Oakland, Phoenix, Denver and Seattle score higher?

Geographic boundaries, distance to other major markets, connectivity and population catchment are all significant factors. The immediate answers tend to vary, and while all are recognized as important U.S. industrial real estate markets with heavy localized populations, seaports, cargo airports and significant infrastructure, in many instances their labor markets, costs of doing business and expensive real estate push them onto the “rough” in our study—at the tail end of the Top 18.

©2016 Jones Lang LaSalle IP, Inc. All rights reserved. All information contained herein is from sources deemed reliable; however, no representation or warranty is made to the accuracy thereof.

About JLLJLL (NYSE: JLL) is a professional services and investment management firm offering specialized real estate services to clients seeking increased value by owning,occupying and investing in real estate. A Fortune 500 company with annual fee revenue of $5.2 billion and gross revenue of $6.0 billion, JLL has more than 280 corporate offices, operates in more than 80 countries and has a global workforce of more than 60,000. On behalf of its clients, the firm provides management and real estate outsourcing services for a property portfolio of 4.0 billion square feet, or 372 million square meters, and completed $138 billion in sales, acquisitions and finance transactions in 2015. Its investment management business, LaSalle Investment Management, has $58.3 billion of real estate assets under management. JLL is the brand name, and a registered trademark, of Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated. For further information, visit www.jll.com.

About JLL ResearchJLL’s research team delivers intelligence, analysis and insight through market-leading reports and services that illuminate today’s commercial real estate dynamics and identify tomorrow’s challenges and opportunities. Our more than 425 global research professionals track and analyze economic and property trends and forecast future conditions in over 65 countries, producing unrivaled local and global perspectives. Our research and expertise, fueled by real-time information and innovative thinking around the world, creates a competitive advantage for our clients and drives successful strategies and optimal real estate decisions.

AuthorsRichard H. ThompsonInternational DirectorSupply Chain & Logistics [email protected]

Aaron AhlburnSenior Vice PresidentGlobal Head of Industrial [email protected]

Increases in freight costs, trucking capacity concerns, labor availability, the impact of e-commerce, more competitive customer service requirements, talent management, global complexities, risk mitigation—these are just some of the operational concerns that keep corporate supply chain professionals up at night. When it comes to supply chain optimization, specifically distribution network strategy, companies must ultimately make site selection decisions that pin their strategy down to the ground.

However, that is not always easy.

A JLL global study of corporate real estate (CRE) professionals identified the following important findings:

• “Interaction and integration with other business functions and stakeholders is a growing need, but is the feature of only a few CRE teams.”

• Excellence in real estate requires a “shift from reactive and operationally focused ‘order takers’ to proactive, engaged and strategic ‘order-makers’. For this to occur, corporate real estate professionals need to interact regularly and intensively with stakeholders from the core business.”

• 45 percent of respondents regard lack of integration between real estate and business operations as one of the top three constraints to providing more strategic value-add.

• 72 percent of respondents note that there is increasing demand for real estate teams to actively challenge the business.

It is clear that the benefits of integrating supply chain strategy and real estate execution are significant and will add value to any process. JLL understands this well. Therefore, it is incumbent for real estate professionals to better understand end-to-end supply chain fundamentals—just as it is for supply chain practitioners to understand and integrate real estate as part of a strategic development team.

The gap between supply chain strategy and real estate execution is real and exists today. Those companies that work to more closely integrate the two important functions will create competitive advantage.

It is our hope that this annual study of the Top 18 distribution markets in the U.S. will serve as an insightful tool to support corporate supply chain practitioners, real estate professionals and investor developers in guiding their decision making.

Conclusions: The “19th hole”

http://www.jll.com/Documents/research/pdf/Global-Corporate-Real-Estate-Trends-2015-v1.pdf

JLL_The Leaderboard _The Top 18 Distribution Markets in the U.S.

Documents

Transcript of JLL_The Leaderboard _The Top 18 Distribution Markets in the U.S.