| Summary | National Percentile | Rank vs Metro |
|---|---|---|
| Housing | 55th | Good |
| Demographics | 56th | Good |
| Amenities | 12th | Fair |
Multifamily Valuation
| Property Details | |
|---|---|
| Address | 3402 SW 31st Dr, Gainesville, FL, 32608, US |
| Region / Metro | Gainesville |
| Year of Construction | 1976 |
| Units | 100 |
| Transaction Date | 1984-04-01 |
| Transaction Price | $1,800,000 |
| Buyer | SERENOLA PINES APARTMENTS INC |
| Seller | --- |
3402 SW 31st Dr Gainesville Multifamily Opportunity
A high share of renter-occupied housing in the surrounding neighborhood supports a deep tenant base, according to WDSuite’s CRE market data, with occupancy showing improvement in recent years.
Situated in Gainesville’s Urban Core, the property benefits from a neighborhood rated B+ that leans heavily renter-occupied (neighborhood measure, not the property), signaling depth for multifamily demand and potential leasing stability. Restaurant density ranks 14 out of 114 neighborhoods in the Gainesville metro, making it competitive among Gainesville neighborhoods and supportive of daily convenience, though other amenities such as groceries, parks, and pharmacies are thinner locally.
Within a 3-mile radius, population and household counts have grown and are projected to expand further, pointing to a larger tenant base over the next several years. The area skews young (a sizable 18–34 cohort), which can favor smaller, efficiency-oriented floor plans; the asset’s smaller average unit size may align with this demand profile. These dynamics, based on CRE market data from WDSuite, suggest steady renter pool expansion rather than dependence on in-migration spikes.
Neighborhood rents sit above the metro median (rank 19 of 114), and the neighborhood’s median home value trends on the lower end nationally (29th percentile), which can introduce some competition from ownership options. At the same time, rent-to-income ratios indicate noticeable affordability pressure in the neighborhood context, underscoring the need for disciplined lease management to support retention and occupancy.
The property’s 1976 construction is older than the neighborhood’s average vintage (1993), which points to clear value-add and capital planning considerations. Investors can evaluate targeted renovations to improve unit efficiency and finishes, helping the asset compete against newer stock while balancing operating costs in a neighborhood where occupancy has generally trended upward.
Safety indicators for the neighborhood sit below the national average (31st percentile nationwide), and the location ranks 64 out of 114 within the Gainesville metro—below the metro median. Recent trends show improvement: estimated violent incidents have declined year over year (67th percentile nationally for improvement), while property offenses have been relatively stable. Interpreting these measures at the neighborhood level (not the property), investors typically plan for standard security, lighting, and operational protocols consistent with Urban Core assets.
This 100-unit asset offers exposure to a renter-heavy Urban Core neighborhood where restaurant access is competitive among Gainesville submarkets and occupancy has improved, according to CRE market data from WDSuite. A younger, expanding renter base within a 3-mile radius supports demand for efficient layouts, aligning with the property’s smaller average unit size.
Built in 1976, the community presents clear value-add potential through targeted renovations and system updates to enhance competitiveness against newer stock. While neighborhood rent levels are above the metro median, affordability pressure and thinner non-restaurant amenities suggest disciplined revenue management and resident retention strategies will be important to sustain performance.
- Renter-heavy neighborhood supports deep tenant base and leasing durability
- Young, growing 3-mile renter pool aligns with smaller, efficient units
- 1976 vintage presents value-add and modernization opportunities
- Above-metro rent positioning with improving neighborhood occupancy
- Risks: affordability pressure, thinner grocery/park amenities, and below-metro safety rankings