IBJNews

Denver firm snaps up Greenwood property for $15.7 million

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Denver-based firm has purchased a 450,000-square-foot distribution center in Greenwood for $15.75 million, in another sign of the improved health of the Indianapolis area’s industrial market.

Industrial Income Trust purchased the 13-year-old property at 700 Commerce Parkway from Cohen Asset Management Inc., a real estate firm based in Beverly Hills, Calif. The sale closed on June 28, according to IIT.

The distribution center sits on 23 acres and is 100-percent leased. Its two tenants are Celadon Group Inc. and Genco Marketplace Inc.

The property sparked a lot of bids from the investment community, said Jason Haas, chief operating office for Cohen Asset Management.

“The Indianapolis market has one of the lowest vacancy rates in the United States, which has sparked a lot of institutional interest in this Midwest market,” Haas said in a prepared release.

Several recent deals point to healthy demand for Indianapolis-area industrial space. For example, Opus Development Corp., a Minnesota-based real estate firm, is starting development of two industrial buildings in Plainfield totaling a massive 925,000 square feet.

IBJ reported Monday that California-based Transpacific Development Co. recently purchased a 1.1 million-square-foot distribution building in the AmeriPlex at Indianapolis business park.

Terms of the deal were not disclosed. If the building sold at the same price per square foot as the Greenwood distribution center, the transaction would have been in the neighborhood of $38.5 million.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Is that all Greenwood has for development?
    I cannot believe that with the location and infrastructure of Greenwood, the only thing they can get is another warehouse deal? What is going on in Greenwood? This makes no sense.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT