Explore

260128 Storage Depot Meeting Notes

View 7 of Agenda 2

View 7 of Agenda 2

Done

Topic

Notes

Date

Added by

West Valley homeless issue, sealing vacant units, do we need motion sirens, cameras are being damaged, night light audit

Wed, Aug 13

Pics of West Valley Office; having property rekeyed

Wed, Aug 13

Unrentable, pics of units

Wed, Aug 13

Hampton Lender Obligations, asphalt, metal grates and roofing which is done, sent email to Cohen for more info

Wed, Aug 13

Look into unit mix at Taylors, occupancy down unit occupancy flat

@Ernest Gomez

⁠

Wed, Aug 13

🔴 Tier 1 – Highest Financial Impact (Largest NOI Gaps)

Wed, Sep 24

Griffin, GA (SSD): Severe Q3 occupancy loss (-31 units). NOI drag from high delinquency write-offs + vacancy.

Wed, Sep 24

Greenville, SC (GLS): NOI miss from occupancy losses (net -13 units Q3), revenue below budget, expenses slightly elevated.

Wed, Sep 24

SSD Portfolio Low Occupancy Sites (collectively): Harpersville, Thomson, Monteagle – while smaller individually, combined drag on SSD’s NOI (largest portfolio shortfall).

Wed, Sep 24

🟠 Tier 2 – Moderate Impact, Needs Focus

Wed, Sep 24

Hampton, GA (TSP): Occupancy dropped YoY, net -6 in Q3. NOI below plan despite TSP portfolio gains elsewhere.

Wed, Sep 24

Elizabethton, TN (SSD): Q3 net -11 units due to seasonal/student churn; revenue dip in short term.

Wed, Sep 24

Panama City, FL (SSD): Occupancy improved YoY but flat in Q3, leaving revenue short of budget.

Wed, Sep 24

🟡 Tier 3 – Lower Impact but Watch List

Wed, Sep 24

Danville, IL (TSP): Occupancy stagnant ~70%; NOI underwhelming. Smaller revenue site, but opportunity cost if not improved.

Wed, Sep 24

Monteagle, TN (SSD): Flat occupancy ~60%, NOI lagging. Small site, so limited financial impact, but symbolic of execution issues.

Wed, Sep 24

There are no rows in this table

⁠

Portfolio YoY Performance (Corrected)

(Portfolio rollups are weighted using Total Units for Unit Occupancy and Occupied Units for Occupied Rate.)

Table 38

Table 38

Portfolio

Props

Total Units

Occupied Units

Unit Occ 2025 (W)

Unit Occ 2026 (X)

Δ (Y)

Occupied Rate 2025 (AB)

Occupied Rate 2026 (AA)

Δ (AC)

# Props Negative Unit Occ

# Props Negative Occ Rate

GLS

457

339

74.2%

74.7%

-0.5%

$21,263

$22,477

5.7%

SDU

417

337

80.8%

79.3%

1.5%

$24,602

$26,755

8.6%

SSD

3,242

2,251

69.4%

70.1%

-0.6%

$17,961

$19,380

8.4%

T10

1,640

1,261

76.9%

75%

1.9%

$14,122

$16,249

15.2%

There are no rows in this table

⁠

✅ Big picture: Occupied Rate is up YoY across all portfolios, but SSD and T10 have the most properties with negative Unit Occupancy YoY.

⁠

Properties Performing Negative YoY (Corrected)

❌ Negative YoY by Unit Occupancy (Y < 0) and/or Occupied Rate (AC < 0)

Table 39

Table 39

Portfolio

Property

Occ Units

Total Units

Unit Occ 2025

Unit Occ 2026

Δ Unit Occ

Occ Rate 2025

Occ Rate 2026

Δ Occ Rate

GLS

Storage Depot - Greenville (GLS)

216

310

69.7%

73.2%

-3.6%

$20,542

$21,849

+6.4%

SDU

Storage Depot of Utah - Layton (SDU)

134

171

78.4%

81.2%

-2.8%

$21,399

$22,864

+6.8%

SSD

Storage Depot - Cleveland (SSD)

127

169

75.1%

84%

-8.9%

$14,292

$15,663

+9.6%

SSD

Storage Depot - Elizabethton TN (SSD)

153

216

70.8%

71.3%

-0.5%

$16,610

$16,975

+2.2%

SSD

Storage Depot - LaFollette TN (SSD)

231

288

80.2%

93.4%

-13.2%

$33,178

$33,643

+1.4%

SSD

Storage Depot - Okoboji IA (SSD)

100

132

75.8%

80.3%

-4.5%

$9,271

$10,260

+10.7%

SSD

Storage Depot - Phenix City AL (SSD)

132

177

74.6%

76.8%

-2.3%

$15,598

$14,456

-7.3% 🔴

SSD

Storage Depot - Thomson GA (SSD)

120

206

58.3%

62.4%

-4.2%

$12,310

$12,381

+0.6%

SSD

Storage Depot - Valley AL (SSD)

231

327

70.6%

72.5%

-1.9%

$21,553

$23,706

+10.0%

T10

Storage Depot - Albertville (T10)

158

253

62.5%

65.8%

-3.3%

$11,847

$13,356

+12.7%

T10

Storage Depot - Hampton (T10)

125

76%

87.2%

-11.2%

$12,838

$12,129

-5.5% 🔴

T10

Storage Depot - Hiawatha (T10)

87.8%

92.2%

-4.4%

$11,105

$12,124

+9.2%

T10

Storage Depot - Monroe (T10)

121

206

58.7%

62.6%

-3.9%

$8,838

$10,043

+13.6%

There are no rows in this table

⁠

🔴 Most concerning (negative in BOTH metrics):

Storage Depot - Phenix City AL (SSD) (Occ Rate down -7.3%, and Unit Occ down)

Storage Depot - Hampton (T10) (Occ Rate down -5.5%, and Unit Occ down)

🚨 Top 5 Worst YoY Declines (Biggest Risks)

Ranked by combined negative impact (Unit Occupancy decline magnitude + whether Occupied Rate also declined).

🔴 Highest Priority Issues

Table 40

Table 40

Rank

Portfolio

Property

Unit Occ 2025 → 2026

Δ Unit Occ

Occ Rate 2025 → 2026

Δ Occ Rate

Why It Matters

SSD

LaFollette TN (SSD)

80.2% → 93.4%

-13.2%

$33,178 → $33,643

1.4%

Large occupancy regression despite high rates → operational churn

T10

Hampton (T10)

76.0% → 87.2%

-11.2%

$12,838 → $12,129

-5.5%

🔴 Only T10 site losing on both fronts

SSD

Cleveland (SSD)

75.1% → 84.0%

-8.9%

$14,292 → $15,663

9.6%

Demand strong but units not sticking

SSD

Phenix City AL (SSD)

74.6% → 76.8%

-2.3%

$15,598 → $14,456

-7.3%

🔴 Revenue erosion despite occupancy

T10

Albertville (T10)

62.5% → 65.8%

-3.3%

$11,847 → $13,356

12.7%

Rate growth masking occupancy softness

There are no rows in this table

⁠

👉 Key insight: The most dangerous sites are not the lowest occupancy — they are the ones where occupancy is falling while revenue is flat or declining.

⁠

📊 Portfolio Health Dashboard (At-a-Glance)

YoY Risk Profile by Portfolio

Table 41

Table 41

Portfolio

Total Properties

% Negative Unit Occ

% Negative Occ Rate

Both Negative

Overall Risk Level

SSD

50% (7)

7% (1)

🔴 High

T10

44% (4)

11% (1)

🟠 Medium

SDU

50% (1)

🟢 Low

GLS

50% (1)

🟢 Low

There are no rows in this table

⁠

Portfolio Scorecard Summary

🟢 GLS: Small sample, stable, revenue growth intact

🟢 SDU: Slight occupancy wobble, but healthy pricing power

🟠 T10: Growth portfolio with emerging cracks

🔴 SSD: Portfolio growth hiding site-level underperformance

⁠

🎯 Actionable Takeaways (What to Do Next)

🔴 SSD – Immediate Focus

Problem: Half the portfolio losing unit occupancy YoY Likely drivers:

Over-discounting on move-ins

Poor retention / post-rate increase churn

Unit availability issues (offline units, misclassified inventory)

Recommended actions:

Run a 30/60/90-day churn analysis on top 5 SSD decliners

Audit web rate vs street rate consistency

Prioritize autopay + insurance attachment at move-in

⁠

🟠 T10 – Protect Momentum

Problem: Strong revenue growth, but cracks forming underneath Watch list: Hampton, Albertville, Monroe

Recommended actions:

Cap discounts on sub-70% sites

Introduce step-up pricing instead of flat concessions

Tighten delinquency → occupancy bleed is often 30–60 days delayed

⁠

🟢 SDU & GLS – Maintain, Don’t Tinker

Problem: None systemic Goal: Preserve pricing discipline

Recommended actions:

Maintain rate cadence

Avoid unnecessary promos

Monitor occupancy weekly, not monthly

⁠

🧭 Executive Sound Bite (for leadership)

“Portfolio-wide revenue is up YoY, but SSD and T10 are masking site-level occupancy erosion. Roughly half of SSD locations are down in unit occupancy year-over-year, with two properties also showing revenue decline. These sites should be prioritized for retention, pricing discipline, and operational review to prevent 2026 revenue softness.”

✅ Properties with an increase in Total Units (2025)

LaFollette (SSD): 274 → 287 (+13)

Cahaba (SSD): 109 → 113 (+4)

Harpersville (SSD): 157 → 159 (+2)

McCalla (SSD): 255 → 257 (+2)

Cleveland (SSD): 168 → 169 (+1)

🚨 Bottom 5 Properties by Occupancy Decline (Confirmed)

⁠

Table 42

Table 42

Rank

Property

Portfolio

Δ Unit Occ

Δ Occ Rate

LaFollette TN

SSD

-13.2%

+1.4%

Hampton

T10

-11.2%

-5.5% 🔴

Cleveland

SSD

-8.9%

+9.6%

Okoboji IA

SSD

-4.5%

+10.7%

Hiawatha

T10

-4.4%

+9.2%

There are no rows in this table

⁠

🧱 90-Day Stabilization Plan (Bottom 5 Properties)

Phase 1 — First 30 Days: Stop the Bleed

Goal: Reduce churn & pricing leakage

Actions:

Pull last 90-day move-outs → identify top 3 unit sizes lost

Freeze broad concessions (replace with size-specific promos)

Require manager approval for discounts >10%

Enforce autopay at move-in (especially SSD sites)

⁠

Phase 2 — Days 31–60: Rebuild Occupancy Quality

Goal: Improve tenant mix & retention

Actions:

Adjust online rates to sit within top-3 competitors (not lowest)

Push insurance attachment to offset rate pressure

Run delinquency sweeps weekly, not monthly

Reopen / audit offline units (major SSD issue historically)

⁠

Phase 3 — Days 61–90: Restore Momentum

Goal: Sustainable growth without discounting

Actions:

Introduce step-up pricing (30-day teaser → market)

Resume measured rate increases on stabilized units

KPI review with on-site teams:

Net rentals

Autopay penetration

Insurance %

Graduate property off “watch list” once:

Unit Occ trend flattens

Revenue stabilizes for 45 days

⁠

🎯 Final Executive Takeaway

“Revenue growth remains strong across all portfolios, but SSD and T10 are showing early signs of occupancy erosion at the property level. Five sites account for the majority of downside risk. With targeted pricing discipline, retention focus, and operational cleanup, these assets can stabilize within 90 days without sacrificing rate integrity.”

View 7 of Agenda 2

Portfolio YoY Performance (Corrected)

Table 38

Properties Performing Negative YoY (Corrected)

❌ Negative YoY by Unit Occupancy (Y < 0) and/or Occupied Rate (AC < 0)

Table 39

🚨 Top 5 Worst YoY Declines (Biggest Risks)

🔴 Highest Priority Issues

Table 40

📊 Portfolio Health Dashboard (At-a-Glance)

YoY Risk Profile by Portfolio

Table 41