November 10, 2026
By: Gary L. Redwine, as published by The National Law Review
Georgia’s Department of Economic Development recently reported that the State posted its second consecutive record year for business investment in fiscal year 2026. The Global Commerce team supported 436 new locations and expansions, representing roughly $35.2 billion in investment, up from $26.3 billion the year before, including an estimated 25,300 new jobs. Seventy-five percent of those projects were outside the 10-county Atlanta metro region.
The Port of Savannah closed out its second busiest year on record in 2025, handling nearly 5.7 million TEUs, trailing only 2022. The Georgia Ports Authority is in the process of expansion, with a new inland rail terminal set to open later this year.
The headlines have covered the growth well. What they’ve missed is what this growth looks like from the closing table. For attorneys, the practical consequence is that deals in these markets now start earlier and carry more moving parts. Clients in these markets are counting on counsel to set expectations, sequence the work, and flag problems before they become delays. Looking ahead, deals in Georgia’s secondary markets are likely to be shaped by three forces: whether the lenders and other professionals involved have the capacity to take on the work, how well clients understand the process, and how much routine contract work new technology can handle without losing careful human review.
Every Sector, One Market
Most real estate cycles are driven by one or two asset classes at a time. Industrial demand follows a port expansion. Multifamily demand follows population growth. Hospitality follows tourism. That kind of sequencing is predictable, and practitioners can usually plan around it.
Georgia’s secondary markets are not following this pattern right now. Industrial, multifamily, hospitality, and mixed-use development are all accelerating at once, in the same corridors, competing for the same capital and the same limited local resources.
The lenders, law firms, title companies, and local planning departments supporting these transactions were not built for that kind of simultaneous demand. This gap is where the real complexity lives.
Part of the complexity is capacity. When this much activity lands in the same markets at once, the first question is whether the lender, the title company, and the other parties actually have the bandwidth to take on one more deal, and on what timeline. That is a diligence question for counsel to answer before the parties commit to the schedule, not after.
More Capital, More Layers
I represent lenders and developers through these transactions, and the shift in deal complexity over the past two years has been significant.
Lenders that once concentrated their Georgia exposure in one property type are now underwriting industrial, multifamily, and hospitality deals in the same submarket, sometimes for the same borrower. That competition for capital is changing how deals get structured.
Financing arrangements that used to be reserved for major metro markets are now common in Georgia’s secondary markets. Mezzanine debt layered beneath senior loans. Delaware Statutory Trust structures used to pool capital from multiple investors. Cross-collateralized loans that tie several properties together under one facility. Five years ago, a straightforward conventional loan was the default in these markets. Today, layered capital stacks are becoming routine.
This shift raises the stakes in terms of papering such transactions. More parties and properties in a deal means more room for gaps and mistakes in terms of due diligence. These gaps and mistakes tend to surface at the worst possible time, during a default or a refinance.
Borrower leverage has shifted as well. A developer who already holds clout in a hot submarket has real negotiating power. Loan covenants, draw schedules, and guaranty structures that used to be standard in secondary market deals are now contested. Practitioners should expect negotiations that look more like a major metro transaction than those typical of a secondary market deal.
The Approvals Can’t Keep Up
The second constraint is procedural, not financial. Every transaction depends on a chain of local steps: title searches, boundary surveys, zoning hearings, site plan reviews, and building permits. Each step relies on offices staffed for a certain volume of work.
When one county is processing an industrial park, an apartment community, and a retail rezoning at the same time, the bottleneck is seldom political opposition. It is bandwidth and capacity. Zoning boards that meet monthly are managing pipelines that would need biweekly meetings to keep pace. Survey firms are booked out for weeks. Local title companies are stretched thin.
Closings become delayed not because of a substantive legal issue, but because the local planning department could not move approvals through fast enough to match the transaction calendar.
Coastal markets carry an additional layer. Wetland permitting under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is a routine part of industrial development along the Georgia coast, and for good reason. But the regulatory timeline does not shorten just because deal volume increases. A developer who models a coastal closing on Atlanta-area assumptions may find the process takes longer. Unless that timeline is built into the purchase agreement and the construction loan from the outset, deal economics can erode before construction begins.
These constraints are not unique to Georgia. Any secondary market experiencing this kind of multi-sector growth eventually hits the same friction points. Georgia is hitting them faster, because the boom is unusually broad and diverse.
When a bottleneck hits, the most useful thing counsel can do is be transparent about it. Clients who have not been through this kind of transaction often do not know what the process involves, so walking them through the steps, the realistic timelines, and where delays tend to occur matters as much as the legal work itself. It also helps to make sure the client’s own house is in order early, because transactions like these often surface issues no one knew about at the outset. Even something as simple as a written checklist, showing the client where the deal stands and where the holdups are, can go a long way.
Building for the Market You’re In
Georgia’s fundamentals—port infrastructure, tax policy, available land, and population growth—are strong. The state has been ranked the No. 1 place to do business in the United States for 12 straight years by site selection consultants who make such calls for a living. Transactional friction will not cool this market.
Anyone looking to close a deal in the current market will need to navigate the market’s complexity.
Four things stand out.
First, start with title. It remains one of the most important items to check and is the natural place to begin diligence, particularly when a deal involves several parties, properties, or layers of financing.
Second, build regulatory, environmental, and similar timelines into the deal from the outset of the transaction, not midway through the diligence process when the clock is running and expectations have been set. Assume coastal transactions, like those in Savannah or Brunswick, will take longer than comparable deals in metropolitan areas.
Third, multiple layers of financing are the norm and not the exception when engaging in secondary Georgia markets. Confirm early that the lender and other parties have the capacity to take on the work on your timeline.
Fourth, set realistic closing timeframes with the client. For example, a zoning approval that takes six weeks in a fully staffed metropolitan department can take considerably longer in a secondary market.
New technology will also play a growing role. As tools built for the legal community continue to develop, some steps in the contract process can be partly automated, which can speed up the review process. But faster is not always safer. These tools do not replace careful, manual handling of the work, and the risks that come with moving quickly are real, especially in transactions with this many parties and layers. Treat new tools as an aid to careful review, not a substitute for it.
