| Summary | National Percentile | Rank vs Metro |
|---|---|---|
| Housing | 64th | Best |
| Demographics | 60th | Best |
| Amenities | 28th | Good |
Multifamily Valuation
| Property Details | |
|---|---|
| Address | 201 Ham Ln, Uvalde, TX, 78801, US |
| Region / Metro | Uvalde |
| Year of Construction | 2008 |
| Units | 69 |
| Transaction Date | --- |
| Transaction Price | --- |
| Buyer | --- |
| Seller | --- |
201 Ham Ln Uvalde Multifamily Investment
Neighborhood-level occupancy is strong and renter demand is deep in this part of Uvalde, according to WDSuite’s CRE market data, supporting stable tenancy for well-positioned assets.
This neighborhood ranks 1 out of 14 within the Uvalde metro (A+ rating), signaling a locally competitive location for workforce-oriented apartments. Neighborhood occupancy is reported at 99.5% and ranks 1 of 14, indicating tight conditions that have historically supported lease stability compared with many U.S. areas.
Renter-occupied housing concentration at the neighborhood level is high (ranked 1 of 14), which points to a sizable tenant base and consistent multifamily demand. Median rent-to-income is relatively manageable for the area (low national percentile), which can aid retention, while the ownership market’s elevated value-to-income ratio (high national percentile) suggests Uvalde’s for-sale costs may reinforce reliance on rental housing rather than draw tenants away.
Within a 3-mile radius, WDSuite data shows modest recent population growth with a larger increase in households and a forecast calling for further population expansion and more households over the next several years. For investors, a growing household count generally supports a larger renter pool and helps sustain occupancy and leasing velocity.
Amenity access is mixed. Cafes per square mile trend above national norms (higher national percentile), while other everyday services such as parks, childcare, and pharmacies are thinner in immediate proximity. For most Uvalde submarkets, car access remains the primary mobility mode; assets that emphasize on-site conveniences and parking typically compete well in this context. Housing stock skews newer than much of the nation, and this property’s 2008 vintage is newer than the neighborhood average year of 1989—supporting competitive positioning versus older inventory while still warranting planning for mid-life system updates as part of a measured commercial real estate analysis.
Neighborhood-level crime metrics are not available in this dataset. Investors should benchmark property and neighborhood safety against broader Uvalde and Texas trends and review multiple sources for a complete view. When comparable areas show stable or improving conditions, assets often benefit through resident retention and insurance planning, but conclusions should be based on corroborated, current data.
Built in 2008, the asset is newer than the neighborhood’s average vintage, offering competitive positioning relative to older stock while calling for prudent mid-life capital planning. Tight neighborhood occupancy and a high share of renter-occupied units indicate durable demand drivers, and within 3 miles, increasing households and projected population growth point to a larger tenant base that can support leasing stability. According to CRE market data from WDSuite, local rent-to-income appears relatively manageable while ownership costs are comparatively high for the area, a combination that can sustain renter reliance without eroding retention.
Operationally, investor focus should center on maintaining competitive finishes, parking and on-site conveniences given mixed amenity density nearby. With disciplined expense control and selective upgrades, the property can compete for demand in a tight local rental market while acknowledging standard small-metro risks such as employer concentration and limited transit.
- Tight neighborhood occupancy and high renter concentration support demand depth
- 2008 vintage outcompetes older local stock; plan for mid-life system updates
- Household and population growth within 3 miles expand the tenant base
- Manageable rent-to-income alongside higher ownership costs favors renter retention
- Risks: small-metro employer concentration, thinner nearby amenities, and data gaps on safety