@Michelle Reid Both LTR and STR strategies are viable and currently producing good results in the current market, which isn't easy to find everywhere else.

Quote from @Brandon Croucier: 20% down is terrific on land.It’s a non income producing asset which has increased volatility, typically I see 65 LTV max on land as of late.Thank you Brandon!

I put the cash from the refi back into more mutlifamily units that produce more rental income. 

However, you will find it difficult being that both of you are W-2 with your main activity to produce income being outside the real estate profession.

There is a case for buying well-located solid assets that produce immediate current cash flow at reasonable leverage. 

This implies the higher ratio areas actually produce lower cash flow over long holds.- it does not forecast rent growth or appreciation into the calculation.Those are not areas i desire to invest.  

The refi or additional debt of any kind will impact the current performance of your property I'm never a great fan of selling a good producing property - unless I am certain I can improve the overall performance of my portfolio. 

The marketer (guru) severely understates the amount of capital, time, and knowledge needed to produce successful results.And the above mentioned are the BEST case; not even mentioning the guru strategies that are fraudulent, illegal, unethical, and plain not realistically achievable.  

Why would one choose value adds that produce lower returns than can be achieved in other markets?

If you purchase a rent ready RE investment this could be 0%, but at the opposite extreme a good brrrr can produce the now elusive infinite return (I have achieved this on most of my RE investments but believe it is very challenging in the current market to bp not be cash negative after the refi to extract the added value.I expect to make an offer this week.