KEY FINDINGS by yangxichun

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 26

									Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


This is a new Five Year Plan and it also contains a new annual action plan that describes how
CDBG, HOME and ESG funds have been allocated for Fiscal Year 2010. The U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires communities that receive any of the
following grants to complete a Consolidated Plan
     Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
     HOME Investment Partnership Grant Funds
     Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG)

This Action Plan also reviews the needs of the current economic crisis, how the CDBG, HOME
and ESG funds will be used to mitigate some of those needs.

URBAN COUNTY
The Salt Lake Urban County includes unincorporated Salt Lake County, and the cities of Alta,
Bluffdale, Cottonwood Heights, Draper, Herriman, Holladay, Midvale, Murray, Riverton,
South Jordan, and South Salt Lake.

SALT LAKE COUNTY CONSORTIUM
The Salt Lake County Consortium includes the Urban County, and the Cities of West Jordan,
Sandy, Taylorsville, and West Valley. Included as part of the Salt Lake County Consortium
Consolidated Plan are the Action Plans of Salt Lake County, Sandy, Taylorsville, West Valley
City, and West Jordan. These action plans identify how approximately seven million dollars of
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnership Program, and
Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) funds will be spent. Salt Lake County is the lead agency for
the Urban County and the Consortium will disperse the funds to Urban County cities, and
Consortium HOME program cities, respectively, and to service providers for projects identified
in the One-Year Action Plan.

The development of this five year plan comes when the national and local economies are under
stress. Many of the Salt Lake County communities and households are facing tough challenges.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and Salt Lake County’s Initiatives:
To mitigate the impact of the current financial and housing crisis, Salt Lake County has
developed several new initiatives and will use funding from the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 to provide funding for programs that will create jobs, make
housing and businesses more energy efficient and help families buy homes and keep their
homes. These initiatives hereby become part of Salt Lake County’s five year plan and the
Action Plan for 2010.

Green Job Creation Initiative: Salt Lake County has initiated a Green Job creation effort.
Round table discussions have been held with the CEO’s of the largest corporations in Utah and
Salt Lake County. Salt Lake County will be working the local utility companies (Rocky
Mountain Power and Questar) to be a partner in the development of energy related jobs.

Foreclosure Prevention Initiative: In April of 2009, Salt Lake County held a round table with
the local and state banks, credit unions and mortgage companies, developers, and finance
agency to develop a coordinated effort in providing foreclosure counseling and foreclosure
assistance.


Executive Summary                       Page   1
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010



Foreclosed Properties Initiative: Salt Lake County has been working with the State of Utah
concerning implementation of a Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Salt Lake County has
approximately 43percent of all foreclosed homes in the State of Utah and 66percent of all
foreclosed homes that are valued at less than $200,000 in the State of Utah.

Community Development Block Grant – Recovery Initiative: Salt Lake County received
$657,688 through Title XII of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA).
The County has committed to spend these funds on infrastructure projects that benefit low and
moderate income neighborhoods in the unincorporated County, Murray, Midvale and South
Salt Lake. These jobs will assist with the job creation and retention objectives of the Recovery
Act.

Homeless Prevention Initiative
Research on best practices indicates that the best way to be successful in providing homeless
services is a two pronged approach. First, is the prevention of homelessness; second, is rapid
re-housing for those who have become homeless. In Salt Lake County, there are a number of
reasons families/individuals may become homeless. Some of these include loss of job/benefits,
family break-up, medical emergency, release from an institution, eviction or foreclosure,
substance abuse/mental health problems and youth aging out of state custody.

Annually there are about 10,000 people who become homeless each year in Salt Lake County.
Given the current economic situation, there are an estimated 4,000 – 5,000 others who could
potentially become homeless. These include families who are doubled up with friends and
relatives, youth aging out of state care and individuals who may lose or have lost their job and
those whose housing is in foreclosure. This also includes households/individuals that have may
have received an eviction notice or utility shut notice.

When an individual family is about to become homeless, they often contact certain people or
organizations for help. These include family, friends, churches, food pantries, housing
authorities, Workforce Services, 2-1-1 and other private providers. The services they seek are
often for a short period of time and are immediate such as rental, legal, utility, and credit repair
assistance. Acquiring these services often allows them to remain in their current homes
without becoming homeless.

Those who have recently become homeless have similar needs yet their immediate goal is to get
back into housing as quickly as possible. Both in prevention and in rapid re-housing,
supportive services (case management) are critical. Without appropriate case management
people often don’t know where to turn for help or have difficultly in navigating through a
complex system of applying for and receiving assistance.

During the next five years, Salt Lake County will work with its partners on a variety of goals.
They include:
    Preventing individuals/families from becoming homeless
    Rapidly re-house individuals/families that become homeless




Executive Summary                         Page   2
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


      Developing a service system that works efficiently and is accessible using the strengths
       and resources of existing organizations.
      Develop an assessment tool(s) to ensure those most in need of prevention and rapid re-
       housing services are referred to and have access to services.

Funds under the American Recovery Reinvestment Act (ARRA) where allowable will be used
for these purposes. Measures of success will include whether or not people facing homelessness
have been able to stay in their homes (prevention) and whether or not those who have become
homeless are back in housing (re-housing).

ENERGY $MART PROGRAM
Home Performance-Critical Needs
Salt Lake County has committed CDBG program income and Rental Rehabilitation program
income for the Critical Needs Home Improvement Program. Loans will be provided to
households at or below 80% of median income living in the unincorporated area of Salt Lake
County. The funding will be available for the provision of loans to cover the cost of critical
needs renovations for single family homes and 1 to 12 rental housing unit projects. The
primary focus of this program is on the funding of critically needed home improvement items.
These items include but are not limited to items that do not meet code, health and safety
concerns. Most common items of need are:
            replacement of water lines, sewer lines
            electrical problems
            plumbing
            accessibility, damaged sidewalks, and driveways, steps, back porches
            mold, radon gas, and other health hazards
            live-ability

Home Performance-Lead Safe Housing
Salt Lake County has received an allocation of Lead Hazard Control Grant funds. This funding
covers the cost of controlling hazards in single family homes and rental housing throughout
Salt Lake County. The funding is provided as a grant to cover the costs of lead assessments,
risk assessments, lead based paint control, and abatement of housing components with lead
based hazards. It is a requirement of the program that each household have living in the house
or visiting the house at 12 hours a week a child under the age of six. It is also a requirement
that all homeowners have income that is at or below 80% of the area median income.

Goals: It is estimated that by the end of 2011, 280 housing units will have been inspected and
lead hazard control completed on 260 housing units.

Home Performance with ENERGY STAR-ENERGY $MART PROGRAM
Salt Lake County has allocated and committed HOME, CDBG, EECBG and Rental
rehabilitation program to the Home Performance with ENERGY STAR program. Funding is
provided to cover the cost of energy audits, construction over sight, the cost of the energy
efficiency retrofit and the close out of the project. Each project that receives funding must have
an estimated savings of at least 20% from the current level of usage. The primary focus of this
program is the Kearns, Millcreek, White City and Magna neighborhoods.


Executive Summary                         Page   3
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


Neighborhood revitalization and stabilization:
The unincorporated communities of Kearns, Magna, White City and Millcreek have significant
challenges. Each of these communities have higher incident of foreclosure, job loss and general
decline in the value of homes. The Green Job Initiative, Idea House, Webster School, will use
county funds as well as funds from EECBG, weatherization and other energy funds from the
State Energy Office. The current lead hazard control program, housing rehabilitation program
as well as the emergency repair program will implement a program to make every housing unit
as energy efficient as possible in the communities of Kearns, Magna, White City and Millcreek.

Webster School Cottages Initiative
As part of the effort to revitalize Magna and Kearns, Salt Lake County has started the
development and construction of the Webster School Cottages. These homes will be built to be
highly energy efficient. The goal is to have each home end up with a Home Energy Rating
System (HERS) rating of 50. They will also have porches that will be compatible with the other
homes in the neighborhood.

Summary of Five Year and Annual Objectives and Outcomes
Decent Housing-Affordability:
Home Improvement Program: 2,000 households over five years or 400 households annually
will receive some form of emergency repair, minor home repair or a home improvement loan
Rental Housing: We anticipate building 300 Affordable Rental Housing Units over five years
or 60 units annually Rental Housing for Homeless and Special Needs: 400 units over five years
or 80 units annually of rental housing units will be built for the chronic homeless, seniors and
those with special needs Tenant Based Rental Assistance: 300 homeless households or
households at risk of becoming homeless over five years, or 60 households annually will receive
short term rental assistance
Suitable Living Environment; Availability and Accessibility;
Capacity of Nonprofit Organizations: 175 nonprofit organizations over five years, or 35
annually will receive funding for operations, and/or building improvements. Infrastructure,
Neighborhood, and Park Improvements: 30 projects over five years or 6 annually will be
funded and completed

Creating Economic Opportunity and Sustainability
Economic Development: 30 businesses over five years or 6 annually will receive some form of
assistance

Summary of Strategic Plan
The strategic plan section of the Consolidated Plan lists a strategy for each high priority need
identified. The current economic crisis is being mitigated at a local, state and national level.

Priority will be given to the funding of projects and programs that meet the most critical needs:
    Homelessness: The Ten Year Plan to end chronic homelessness will be implemented.
    Special needs housing for those with accessibility needs, the elderly and other special
       needs will be developed.



Executive Summary                        Page   4
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


    Making homes more energy efficient will be emphasized. Energy Star and Critical
     Home Improvement Program: Funding will be provided for the financing of energy
     efficiency, emergency, and critical home improvements.
    Lead Safe Housing Program: CDBG funds will be combined with Lead Hazard funding
     to continue the Lead Safe Housing Program. The Lead Safe Housing Program provides
     funding to make single and multiple family housing units lead safe. The program will
     also continue its community outreach and education program.
    Neighborhood Revitalization: Priority will be given to funding projects and programs
     that will facilitate the revitalization of Millcreek, Magna and Kearns. The Idea House
     concept will be expanded.
    Economic Development: Priority will be given to the funding of projects and programs
     that will create jobs for low to moderate income households.

Evaluation of past performances
Summary of activities for the last fiscal year
CDBG, HOME and ESG funds were committed to a broad range of programs and projects
benefiting low to moderate income households.

Community Development Block Grant Program:
 Home Improvement/Emergency Home Repairs were completed on 200 homes.
 Accessibility and Fair Housing: Education was provided to landlords. Technical assistance
was provided to developers of rental housing. The required monitoring of all existing HOME
rental housing developments was completed.
 Housing Counseling, Foreclosure Prevention, Homeless Prevention and Landlord/Tenant
Mediation was provided to over 300 households to help clients obtain, retain or maintain their
housing.
 31 Nonprofits received assistance for capacity building, counseling services and 13 Agencies
received assistance for building improvements.
 Five Neighborhood/infrastructure improvement projects were completed
 15 Businesses received loans for assistance for economic development.
 Seven of the small cities in the Urban County program utilized funds to work on
community plans and studies to assist the residents of their cities and improve the living
environment for the low-moderate income residents.

Emergency Shelter Grant Program: All Agencies matched these funds at 100% and the
accomplishments include:
 5 Agencies received operating assistance. These agencies assisted a total of 739 households.
 4 agencies were provided funding for essential services covering the costs of counseling and
   supportive services for 191 homeless and chronic homeless clients.
 1 Agency was provided prevention assistance to assist 39 clients remain or retain their
   housing, preventing homelessness.

HOME Investment Partnership Program: Over the last year the following was
accomplished:
 One rental housing development with 110 units was rehabilitated.


Executive Summary                       Page   5
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


 Down-payment assistance through HOME and ADDI helped 10 households buy a home.

Resources (91.220(c)(1)) :
Low Income Housing Tax Credits: In the most recent round of allocation, fourteen projects
received a total of $4,736,970 in annual low income housing tax credits. This should generate
an investment of nearly $20,000,000 into affordable housing.

Homeless: Salt Lake County Continuum of Care received $3,114,516 for the funding of services
and projects.

State of Utah Homeless Trust Fund: Receives approximately $2,000,000 from donations off tax
returns filed by individuals.

Section 8: Housing Authority of the County of Salt Lake County:
       Vouchers        2,144
       Public Housing     513

West Valley City Housing Authority:
      Vouchers          513
      Public Housing     18

Olene Walker Housing Loan Fund: Typically the Olene Walker Housing Loan Fund has just
under $2,250,000 in State General funds and over $5,200,000 in HOME funds.

Measurement of Performance: In the Strategic Plan each high priority need has a strategy,
goals and objectives. Each year the actual output and outcomes will be compared with the
identified objectives. The annual CAPER report will also do an analysis of whether the funded
programs and projects are meeting the goals and are having the outcomes that were expected.
Outcomes for activities included in action plan table, i.e. availability/accessibility, affordability,
sustainability. (91.220(c)(3))

The allocation of funds was determined by the respective Citizen Advisory Committee
recommendations, input received on the needs of the community and studies that were
completed. Each City of the Urban County held public hearings concerning the allocation of
their portion of CDBG funding. See Map on page 11 for location of low- to moderate-income
households.

Estimated amount of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit persons of low-
and moderate-income. (91.220(l)(1)(iv)): It is estimated that at least 94 percent of those assisted
will be households at or below 80 percent of the area median income.




Executive Summary                          Page   6
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


                              CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
Citizen Participation and input received was used to update the Five Year Salt Lake County
Consortium Consolidated Plan and develop the 2010 Action Plan:

        Salt Lake County updated its Citizen Participation Plan in December 2007. This Plan
helps determine and prioritize the needs of the communities within the County’s jurisdiction
and involves the public in the Consolidated Plan process. A copy of this plan was distributed to
each of the 11 Cities that participate in the Urban County Program and is available on our web
page at: www.crd.slco.org/communityDev/PlansReports.html

       Needs Hearing/focus group meetings were held on the needs of those with disabilities,
and accessibility needs.

        Consulted with Salt Lake County Housing Authority, West Valley City Housing
Authority, Housing Services of Utah Valley, Community Action Program, Assist Inc.,
advocates for the disabled, seniors, and the homeless. Included in this process were
representatives from all the Cities of the Urban County as well as the HOME Consortium
Cities.

       An online survey was made available to the public. Salt Lake County Community
Resources and Development visited 15 community councils throughout Salt Lake County and
gave a presentation on the Consolidated Plan process and asked for input.

                    Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds
The County utilized the newly developed combined application for “Soft Costs”. This effort to
streamline the application process for both the Cities as well as the Non-Profit Agencies that
apply for these funds has worked well. As a result of this process, the County accepts all the
applications for “Soft Costs” and then distributes the applicable applications to each of the
Cities. The Cities manage their own application process for the remaining eligible activities for
their jurisdictions according to the guidelines outlined in the Citizen Participation Plan.

The County RFP was published in the newspaper on Sunday, November 1, 2009. The deadline
for submission was Tuesday, December 15, 2009. Two application training meetings were held
to help applicants through this new process and receive public comment on this process. One
training was held on November 16 and the second on November 23, 2009. The RFP included
the CDBG Program and the Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Program.

During the training the requirements to apply for the CDBG and ESG Programs were
reviewed. This review included information about the combined “Soft Cost” application and its
requirements and the application process for the remaining funds. Direction was given
regarding the need to apply to the County as well as directly to each Participating City as
desired. The training included an overview of the general rules required by HUD for the
CDBG program. We identified the National Objectives and Eligible Activities; outlined the
HUD Outcome Performance Measurement System explaining the three Objectives and three
Outcomes; and explained who was eligible to apply.



Executive Summary                        Page   7
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


We reviewed the three Priority Activity Categories listed in Salt Lake County Consolidated
Action Plan and reminded applicants that projects needed to address one of these categories to
be given consideration for funding. The categories included Affordable Housing, Homeless
Activities, and Targeted Communities.

To further support the programs and partnerships developed throughout the County,
applications for Homeless Activities also needed to show a link to the current Salt Lake County
Continuum of Care Program and/or the Ten Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness. This
process maintains consistency in providing programs and services and helps avoid the
duplication of services. It also promotes better use of the funds available from the federal
government.

After applications were received, the Community Development staff reviewed them for
compliance with HUD regulations and completeness. We then distributed the applications
addressed to each of the participating cities to the appropriate jurisdiction to be considered for
funding through their public process. The Salt Lake County Community and Economic
Development Advisory Council (CEDAC) met weekly from January through March to review
all the applications according to the evaluation criteria outlined in the RFP. The Council then
gave their preliminary award recommendations to the Mayor.

The Housing Needs Public Hearing was held December 10, 2009 prior to the application
deadline for the HOME, CDBG & ESG programs to receive input on the housing needs of Salt
Lake County. Fair Housing was reviewed. The Consolidated Annual Performance and
Evaluation Report was also made available for review. Twenty people from agencies and the
community attended this meeting. Comments received can be found in Appendix I.

On Monday, April 12, 2010 at 3:30:00 p.m., a Public Hearing was held to accept public
comment on the draft Action Plan, and the CDBG, ESG & HOME program funding
recommendations. The Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report was also
made available for review. The Mayor met with CEDAC after the Public Hearing and
reviewed the priorities and comments received at the public hearing. The Mayor then made his
final funding decisions for the three programs.

Urban Cities: During February through April, each of the Participating Cities released
requests for applications, held public hearings, and made their decisions about which agencies
would receive funding from their CDBG allocation. Each City then provided their respective
information to the County to be included in the 2010 Consolidated Action Plan for submission
to HUD. A schedule of all the Public Hearings was available on the web page for CRD to assist
agencies with better access to this information.

                                        HOME Funds
On December 10, 2010 a Request for Applications was released. Eleven applications for funding
were received. The Salt Lake County Consortium Housing Committee devoted extensive time
to the review of proposals. Each applicant was invited in to give a presentation. Six of the
applications were allocated funds.




Executive Summary                         Page   8
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


Consortium Cities: The members of the consortium, Sandy City, West Valley City,
Taylorsville, and West Jordan went through a selection process to decide how to allocate their
portion of HOME funds.

                               Emergency Shelter Grants
                                     ESG Funds
The Emergency Shelter Grant was again included in the RFP process this year. The RFP was
published in the newspaper on Sunday, November 1, 2009. The deadline for submission was
December 15, 2009. Two application training meetings were held on November 16 and 23,
2009 to help applicants through this process and to receive public comment on this process.
The eligibility requirements for this program were reviewed including the 100 percent match
requirement; the confidentiality requirements; HUD’s definition of homeless as defined in 42
U.S.C. 11302; and the requirement to provide for the participation of at least one homeless or
formerly homeless person(s) in a policy-making function within the organization.

This year a combined panel made up of members from each of the three Citizen Review
Committees reviewed all the applications that addressed the issue of homeless services and
homeless prevention. The purpose of this review was to better coordinate funding resources
and to identify possible duplication of services. This group also provided information back to
their respective panels on the programs and services available to assist residents dealing with
issues relating to all aspects of homelessness. This was found to be very beneficial to all the
groups and gave them better information for their individual program reviews.

To further support the programs and partnerships developed throughout the County,
applications for Emergency Shelter Grant funds needed to show a link to the current Salt Lake
County Continuum of Care Program and the Ten Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness.
This process maintains consistency in providing programs and services and helps avoid the
duplication of services. It also promotes better use of the funds available from the federal
government.

Applicants were required to identify the source of funding that would be used for the required
dollar for dollar match for this program. The matching funds identified this year by the
applicants will come from clients, churches, The Department of Work Force Services, The
United Way, Valley Mental Health and private donations. The Salt Lake County Community
and Economic Development Advisory Council (CEDAC) reviewed the applications according
to the evaluation criteria outlined in the RFP then gave their preliminary award
recommendations to the Mayor. This program was included in the Public Hearing held on
Monday, April 12, 2010.




Executive Summary                        Page   9
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010



II. COMMUNITY PROFILE
                                     Population Growth
  From April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2008 the Salt Lake County Population grew by 124.264 from
                                    898,387 to 1,022,651

                              Salt Lake County Consortium
                                                   Absolute
                                                   Change Change
                                                    2005-   2005-
                                  2005     2008      2008   2008
                    Consortium 800,188 840,953 40,765       4.8%
                      Urban
                      County    447,771 457,614     9,651    2%
                    Sandy City 89,664 96,660        6,996    7%

                    Taylorsville
                        City     58,009 58,785         776       1%
                    West
                    Jordan       91,444 104,447       13,003     12%
                    West
                    Valley City 113,300 123,447       10,147     8%

                                   Salt Lake Urban County
                                       2005         2008 Absolute
                                                          Change
                                                          2005 to Percentage
                                                             2008     change
          Urban County              447,771      457,614    9,843         2%
          Alta Town                     365          374        9      2.4 %
          Bluffdale City              6,569        8,016    1,447       18%
          Cottonwood Heights         34,000       35,418    1,418         4%
          Draper City                35,119       42,317    3,437       17%
          Herriman City              11,226       16,689    5,463       32%
          Holladay                   19,319       25,676    6,200       25%
          Midvale                    27,170       28,129      959         4%
          Murray                     44,555       46,201    1,646       3.5%
          Riverton                   32,089       39,751    7,662       19%
          South Jordan               40,209       51,131   10,922       21%
           South Salt Lake           21,411       21,547      136        .6%
          Balance of Salt Lake Co. 177,739       141,305   6,434       -26%




Executive Summary                     Page 10
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


A major component of any population growth is the net migration in or out of a city or county.
The number of households went from 240,367 in 1990 to 300,289 in 2003 to 315,483 in 2005

Of the nearly 211,000 owner households in 2009 in the Salt Lake County 25,850 were minority
households. Thus, twelve percent of all home owners in the study area are minority households
Tables 21. Sixty-four percent of these minority households are Hispanic. Minority home
owners have housing problems at a significantly higher rate than is typical for all home owners.
Forty-five percent or 11,558 of the 25,858 minority home owners had housing problems and 48
percent of all Hispanic home owners had housing problems Table 22.(see page)

                                     Table 21
                     Home Owners by Racial and Ethnic Group in
                                 Study Area – 2009
                                          All          White     Minority Hispanic
<30% AMI                                      8,628        7,394    1,238      791
30-50% AMI                                  14,213        11,514    2,694    2,112
50%-80% AMI                                 33,811        26,914    6,894    4,915
>80% AMI                                   154,147       139,061  15,077     8,769
Total                                      210,847       184,974  25,858   16,592
Source: HUD CHAS 2009 and James Wood.




Executive Summary                       Page 11
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


Residential Construction and Real Estate Sales
Salt Lake County and the study area (Salt Lake County excluding Salt Lake City) have suffered
a severe contraction in new construction and existing homes sales. From 2006 through 2008
new home construction in the study area dropped 55 percent and the sale of existing homes fell
38 percent. However, it appears that the market hit bottom in 2008 as new home construction
(single-family, condominium, town homes and twin homes) was up 39 percent and sales of
existing homes were up about 2 percent in 2009. New residential construction totaled 4,248
dwelling units and sales of existing homes totaled 7,652 homes in 2009.

The glut of unsold new homes has been absorbed in Salt Lake County over the past year. The
federal tax credit for home owners and Utah’s Home Run Grant program has been
instrumental in attracting home buyers and clearing the market of excess inventory.

Construction of new apartments has increased dramatically in the past two years. In 2009
permits were issued for 2,111 new apartment units in the study area, an all-time high.
Apartment development and rental properties will play an increasing role in the study area’s
housing market.

Housing Prices
Over the long-run housing prices in Salt Lake County increased at a rate of 4.5 to 5 percent
annually. However, in the short-run prices can be much more volatile. Between 2004 and 2007
the median sales price of an existing home in Salt Lake County rose 62 percent. Since the peak
(3rd qtr. 2007) prices have fallen about 12 percent and are expected to decline another 3-5
percent in 2010 before price stabilization occurs. The median sales price of an existing home in
Salt Lake County was $230,000 in 2009.

The median price of new homes in Salt Lake County increased from $203,400 in 2003 to
$382,800 in 2009. Despite the housing slump new home prices have continued to increase
every year and now equal an 88 percent increase since 2003. In general, very few new homes
are affordable to moderate income families in the study area.

Existing condominiums offer an affordable housing alternative for moderate income families.
In 2009 the median sales price for condominiums was $173,752 in the study area. Sales of
1,243 units were recorded in 2009. The median sales price for condominiums in the study area
has never exceeded $200,000.

New condominiums, town homes and twin homes also offer affordable home ownership
opportunities for moderate income households. In 2009 the median sales price of a new
condominium was $173,125.

Rental rates have declined demand as for rental housing has dropped due to the high rates of
job loss. Overall rental rates are down 4.2 percent in the past year the vacancy rate is up from
6.8 percent to 8.6 percent. The average price in 2009 for a one bedroom units is $639, for a two
bedroom two bath unit $895 and for a three bedroom $989.


Weak Housing Market Conditions


Executive Summary                       Page 12
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


The recession has resulted in a loss of net in-migration for Salt Lake County. In 2008 the
county had net in-migration of 3,000 persons but by 2009 net in-migration had fallen to zero.
The projection for 2010 is another year with no net in-migration. This represents a reduction
in the demand for housing of at least 1,000 units. The projections show that net in-migration
will resume in 2011 adding about 500 new households.

Foreclosures are at an all-time high for Utah. In the fourth quarter of 2009, 3.3 percent or
14,400 homes were in the foreclosure process statewide. At least 5,000 of these homes are
likely located in the study area. Foreclosures will dampen demand for new homes and put
downward price pressure on the housing market. All indications are that the number of
foreclosures will continue to rise through 2010 and then begin to subside in 2011.

An important component of the demand for housing, particularly new housing is generated
internally as buyers living in the market move-up to higher priced homes. However, the
possibility of moving up has been diminished by the decline in housing prices. Consequently,
many homeowners have negative equity, which prevents or slows moving up. First America
CoreLogic estimates that in the Salt Lake Metropolitan Area, 18 percent of the 225,000
mortgages are in a negative equity position, which weakens the demand for housing.

Housing Inventory
The study area has a total housing inventory at the beginning of 2010 of 284,370 units
comprised of 215,149 owner occupied units and 63,683 renter occupied units. Seventy-seven
percent of all occupied housing units are owner occupied and 23 percent are renter occupied.

                                            Table 1
                                  Housing Inventory – 2010
                                                    Salt   Study Area
                                                   Lake    (Excl. Salt
                                                  County Lake City)
                        Total Housing Units      366,365      284,370
                        Total Occupied Units     352,447      274,529
                         Total Vacant              13,918        9,841
                        Total Owner Units        256,529      215,149
                         Owner Occupied          251,398      210,846
                         Vacant Owner Units         5,131        4,303
                        Total Renter Units       109,836       69,221
                        Renter Occupied          101,049       63,683
                         Vacant Rental Units        8,787        5,538
                        Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2000, Bureau of
                        Economic Research, Univ. of Utah and James
                        Wood.




Executive Summary                        Page 13
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


Five-Year Projections of Housing Need for Owners, Renters and Special Needs
Populations
The six types of households with the greatest need for affordable housing have been identified
and included in Table 3. The number of very low income renters with severe housing burdens
far exceeds any other type of households. The number of very low income renters with severe
cost burdens is projected to increase by 2,100 in the next five years.

                                           Table 3
                       Estimates and Projections of Owners and Renters
                           with Greatest Affordable Housing Need
      Income                                          Cost                       Projected 5-
       Group                    Tenure               Burden Households           year Increase
   Very Low
 1 Income             Owner                              Severe         6,800                750
   Very Low
 2 Income             Renter                             Severe         9,800              2,100
   Very Low           Owner: Elderly and Extra
 3 Income             Elderly                         Moderate          3,100                350
                      Renter: Elderly and Extra
 4 Low Income         Elderly                         Moderate          1,000                200
   Very Low           Transitional Housing
 5 Income             (countywide)                       Severe         500+               200+
   Very Low
 6 Income             Homeless (countywide)*             Severe       1,000+               200+
Source: James Wood.

HOUSING MARKET CONDITIONS IN SALT LAKE COUNTY
An overview of housing market conditions in Salt Lake County and the study area (Salt Lake
County excluding Salt Lake City) are presented in this section. Current housing market
conditions provide a context for the housing needs assessment. This section begins with a
discussion of new construction and real estate sales trends followed by a review of the
resurgence in the development of rental housing. The section closes with an examination of
the determinants of housing demand and the threats to the long-term stabilization of the local
housing market.

New Home Market
Salt Lake County and the study area appear to be recovering from the most severe housing
contraction since the Great Depression. Between 2005 and 2008 new residential construction
in Salt Lake County dropped 54 percent from 7,746 units to 3,555 units Figure 1 and Table 1.
In the study area (Salt Lake County excluding Salt Lake City) new home construction declined
55 percent over the three year period. Most encouraging is the rebound in 2009. New home
construction for both Salt Lake County and the study area are up significantly, a 29 percent
increase for the county and a 39 percent increase for the study area. The new residential
construction gains in the 2009 were achieved and benefited statistically by comparisons with
extremely low levels of new home activity in 2008 as well as federal and state relief to the home
building industry through grants and tax credits.



Executive Summary                        Page 14
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


                                             Figure 1
                                 Permits Issued for New Homes in
                                 Salt Lake County and Study Area
                    (Single-family, condominiums, town homes and twin homes)

                        9,000
                        8,000
                        7,000
                        6,000
                        5,000
                        4,000
                        3,000
                        2,000
                        1,000
                            0
                                0


                                        1

                                                2


                                                        3


                                                                4

                                                                        5


                                                                                6


                                                                                        7

                                                                                                8


                                                                                                        9
                             0


                                    0

                                            0


                                                    0


                                                            0

                                                                    0


                                                                            0


                                                                                    0

                                                                                            0


                                                                                                    0
                            0


                                    0

                                            0


                                                    0


                                                            0

                                                                    0


                                                                            0


                                                                                    0

                                                                                            0


                                                                                                    0
                           2


                                    2

                                            2


                                                    2


                                                            2

                                                                    2


                                                                            2


                                                                                    2

                                                                                            2


                                                                                                    2
                                                Salt Lake C ounty                   Study Area

              Source: Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Utah.

                                             Table 1
                       Permits Issued and Percent Change in New Homes in
                                 Salt Lake County and Study Area
                    (Single-family, condominiums, town homes and twin homes)

                                     Salt
                                     Lake                 %                     Study              %
                                    County              Change                  Area            Change
                        2000          4,666                  ---                  4,220              ---
                        2001          5,429               16.4%                   4,701           11.4%
                        2002          5,406               -0.4%                   5,066            7.8%
                        2003          7,399               36.9%                   7,172           41.6%
                        2004          6,491              -12.3%                   6,004          -16.3%
                        2005          7,746               19.3%                   6,757           12.5%
                        2006          6,200              -20.0%                   5,890          -12.8%
                        2007          4,512              -27.2%                   3,853          -34.6%
                        2008          3,555              -21.2%                   3,047          -20.9%
                        2009          4,586               29.0%                   4,248           39.4%
                        Source: Bureau of Economic and Business Research,
                        University of Utah.

Are the gains in new residential construction just a temporary surge due to Utah’s Home Run
Grant program and Federal Tax Credit for first-time homebuyers? Grants and tax credits for
home buyers certainly have played a role in the recent improvement of the home building
market. It is no coincidence that new home permit data began improving markedly after the
introduction of these two programs in the spring of 2009.
Anecdotes from builders provide numerous stories about grants and tax credits helping reduce
their unsold inventory. In some cases the grants and tax credits were used on “newly
constructed” homes; homes that had been completed but unsold while in other cases home


Executive Summary                                   Page 15
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


buyers used the incentives to purchase homes that were still under construction but unsold.
Unlike the Federal Tax Credit program, Utah’s Home Run Grant program was targeted for the
new, unsold home market. Grants were only used for new homes. In the first round (March-
June) 1,650 Home Run grants of $6,000 each were awarded to qualified buyers. The second
round (August-November) awarded 2,000 grants by its expiration date November 30, 2009.

The percent gains in new home building in 2009 are probably due, in large part, to the second
round of the Home Run Grant program and the federal tax credit program for homebuyers.
The industry does face some strong headwinds in mounting foreclosures and an uncertain job
market but on the other hand household growth, low interest rates, the reduction of unsold
inventory and stable housing prices may be strong enough to support a recovery in 2010.

Existing Home Market
Salt Lake County’s real estate industry has been through two very difficult years. From 2006
to 2008 the number of existing homes sold dropped from 18,856 to 10,932, a decline of 42
percent Figure 2 and Table 2. The study area (Salt Lake County excluding Salt Lake City) has
also experienced a similar decline however not quite as steep. From 2006 to 2008 the number
of sales of homes in the study area declined from the all-time high of 12,095 to 7,509, a 38
percent decline over two years. Prior to the contraction, Salt Lake County’s real estate industry
enjoyed a long expansion; nine years (1998-2006) of increasing sales. The duration of the
expansion was unusual. In fact, historical data show that this nine year period of increasing
sales is the longest expansion for the county’s real estate industry on record—collection of
sales data began in 1953.
                                             Figure 2
                  Sales of Existing Homes in Salt Lake County and Study Area
                   (Single-family, condominiums, town homes and twin homes)

                      20,000
                      18,000
                      16,000
                      14,000
                      12,000
                      10,000
                       8,000
                       6,000
                       4,000
                       2,000
                           0
                            00

                                  01

                                        02

                                              03

                                                    04

                                                          05

                                                                06

                                                                      07

                                                                            08

                                                                                  09
                          20

                                 20

                                       20

                                             20

                                                   20

                                                         20

                                                               20

                                                                     20

                                                                           20

                                                                                 20




                                            Salt Lake C ounty         Study Area


                          Source: WFRMLS.
                                          Table 2
                            Real Estate Sales of Existing Homes
           (Single Family Homes, Condominiums, Town Homes and Twin Homes)



Executive Summary                             Page 16
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


                                   Salt
                                   Lake             %               Study           %
                                  County          Change             Area        Change
                      2000         11,518              ---             6,216          ---
                      2001         12,295            6.7%              6,672        7.3%
                      2002         12,585            2.4%              6,805        2.0%
                      2003         14,302           13.6%              8,112       19.2%
                      2004         15,476            8.2%              8,878        9.4%
                      2005         18,810           21.5%            10,846        22.2%
                      2006         18,856            0.2%            12,095        11.5%
                      2007         14,547          -22.9%              9,902      -18.1%
                      2008         10,932          -24.9%              7,509      -24.2%
                      2009         11,079            1.3%              7,652        1.9%
                      Source: Wasatch Front Regional Multiple Listing Service.

Sales Outlook - Sales data indicate that the number of listed home sales in Salt Lake County in
2009 was 10,932, up 1.3 percent. For the study area the number of sales was up 1.9 percent to
7,652 homes. This slight up-tick probably signals that 2008 was the bottom of the downturn
and a recovery is underway.
Salt Lake County Rental Market
A higher percentage of Salt Lake County residents are now homeowners than any time in
recent history. In 2008, the American Community Survey estimated 70 percent of all Salt Lake
County households were homeowners. The state of Utah ranks seventh among all states in
homeownership at 74.1 percent.
Despite the recent gains in homeownership rental housing remains a crucial component of the
housing market. And as a recent study from the University of Utah’s Metropolitan Research
Center shows the share of renters is expected grow steadily over the next 10 years. Nationally
32.6 percent of all households were renters in 2009 but by 2020 that share is expected to grow
to 36.5 percent. Arthur C. Nelson director of the university’s Metropolitan Research Center
predicts that “we’ll have far more renters in the future.” Over 50 percent of the 30.3 million
housing units added nationally from 2005 to 2020 will be rentals, Nelson predicts.
Salt Lake County has experienced a recent surge in apartment construction. The number of
apartment units receiving building permits was up 50 percent in Salt Lake County and 58
percent in the study area in 2009. Apartment units accounted for 53 percent of all new
residential construction in 2009 in Salt Lake County and in the study area.
The surge in new rental units is a break from the recent past. From 2000 to 2007 new
apartment units in the study area averaged about 600 units annually. In 2008 there were 1,332
new apartments units and in 2009 2,111 new units as the share of residential construction
captured by apartments increased substantially. Over the long-term construction of rental
housing has accounted for 20 to 25 percent of new residential units.
Although any threat of overbuilding in the rental market has been held in check by the long-
term (2000-2007) low level of new apartment construction nevertheless vacancy rates are on
the rise. The recession has hurt the rental market. Apartment managers report that job losses
are driving-up vacancy and turnover rates.



Executive Summary                              Page 17
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


Traditional apartment projects have been hurt by competition from the rental of condominium,
town home and investor owned single-family units. This last category gained prominence
during the housing boom as investors sought to take advantage of rising real estate values. In
most cases the condominium and town home units were originally intended as owner occupied
units but buyer interest never materialized consequently some developers have resorted to
renting units to generate revenue.
Lower levels of net in-migration and the doubling-up and overcrowding of renters is currently
hurting demand for rental units but these conditions are temporary. Over the next ten years
there will be a greater share of renters in Salt Lake County’s housing market and the average
number of new rental units added annually will increase from 600 units to over 1,200 units and
about 800 units in the study area, as the share of homeowners in Salt Lake County trends down
from its peak of 70 percent established in 2008.
Salt Lake County Housing Market and the Determinants of Demand
There are several important determinants of demand for housing. Some of the major
determinants are: household growth, employment trends, existing supply conditions, interest
rates and financial markets. This section discusses recent changes in demographic and
employment growth and the affect on the demand for housing. The above discussion of supply
conditions is augmented in this section with data and an examination of the growing number of
foreclosures in the local housing. Interest rates and financial markets are national conditions
therefore only mentioned in this section but a short discussion of negative equity and its impact
on demand in the local housing market is included.
Household Growth - Housing demand relies on household growth. Internal household growth
(marriages, divorces, and unmarried children leaving home) created over 6,000 households in
Salt Lake County in 2009 and 2010 Table 3. The household change for 2009 and 2010 assumes
no net in-migration for Salt Lake County Table 4. In 2009 about 4,200 owner and rental units
were added to the inventory, far short of the approximate 6,000 increase in new households. In
2009 this imbalance between supply and demand helped absorb the unsold new homes and
reduce the inventory of “for sale” existing homes. In 2010, household growth will begin to
materialize into pent-up demand but will not be fully realized due to the inability of households
to qualify for home ownership. Demand has also reduced demand due to doubling-up of renter
households as some move-in with friends and family.
The doubling-up of households is a direct result of the loss of 31,000 jobs in Salt Lake County
in 2009—the worst job market since the Depression Table 5. A loss of another 8,000 jobs is
projected for 2010. These weak labor market conditions present the greatest threat to the
rebound in real estate sales, new home construction and apartment occupancy. Job losses or
even slow job growth shrink the demand for housing by reducing net in-migration—a direct
source of new housing demand—forcing households to double-up and creating uncertainty for
potential home buyers. It is anticipated that by 2011 job growth will resume in Utah and Salt
Lake County. The expectation is that job growth in Salt Lake County in 2011 will be around
9,000, which should improve the demand for housing and support the recovery.
                                        Table 3
                          Total Households in Salt Lake County
                                           Total        Numeric
                                         Households     Change




Executive Summary                        Page 18
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


                              2000          297,064
                              2001          303,660          6,596
                              2002          308,344          4,684
                              2003          313,860          5,516
                              2004          319,826          5,966
                              2005          328,508          8,682
                              2006          335,664          7,156
                              2007          343,982          8,318
                              2008          353,182          9,200
                              2009          359,535          6,353
                              2010          365,857          6,322
                              2011          373,200          7,343
                              2012          381,619          8,419
                              2013          389,874          8,255
                              2014          398,265          8,391
                               2015        406,709            8,444
                             Source: Governor’s Office of Planning
                             and Budget and James Wood.

                                      Table 4
                           Net In-Migration of Households
                                               Salt Lake
                                                County
                                        2000       1,462
                                        2001          756
                                        2002      -1,196
                                        2003          -160
                                        2004          501
                                        2005       3,355
                                        2006       1,503
                                        2007       2,842
                                        2008       3,006
                                        2009            0
                                        2010            0
                                        2011       1,073
                                        2012       2,254
                                        2013       2,239
                                        2014       2,228
                                        2015        2,206
                                       Source:
                                       Governor’s Office
                                       of Planning and
                                       Budget.


                                        Table 5
                    Nonagricultural Employment in Salt Lake County
                                   and Salt Lake City
                                 Salt      Salt
                                Lake      Lake
                               County     City     Study Area
                        2001 544,727 212,444           332,283


Executive Summary                      Page 19
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


                           2002      533,715       208,149                325,566
                           2003      527,956       205,903                322,053
                           2004      535,274       208,757                326,517
                           2005      554,483       216,248                338,235
                           2006      579,771       226,111                353,660
                           2007      601,227       243,888                357,339
                           2008      602,880       245,649                357,231
                           2009      571,880       223,033                348,847
                           Source: Utah Department of Workforce Services and James
                           Wood.




Foreclosures – To date, the magnitude of the foreclosure problem in Utah is not nearly as
severe as some states, Utah ranks 23rd among all states with a fourth quarter foreclosure rate
of 3.30 percent Table 6. Although well down in the rankings the 3.3 percent represents the
highest level of foreclosure filings every reported in Utah. Of the 435,300 Utah mortgages
surveyed in the fourth quarter of 2009, 14,369 were in the foreclosure process. Particularly
troubling is the relentless rise of foreclosures filings in Utah over the past couple of years.
From the 4th quarter of 2007 to the fourth quarter of 2009 the number of homes in the
foreclosure process has increased by four times, rising from 3,557 to 14,369 Table 7.
Unfortunately the Mortgage Bankers Association does not provide data on the county level.
But since Salt Lake County accounts for about 40 percent of all housing units in the state it is
safe to assume that the trends and characteristics of foreclosure statewide also apply to Salt
Lake County.




Executive Summary                             Page 20
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


                                         Table 6
                         States Ranked by Percent of Mortgages
                      in Foreclosure Process (Fourth Quarter 2009)
                                        % of Mortgage      Number of
                                        Loans Serviced          Loans
                                                  with           with
                                           Foreclosure    Foreclosure
                    Rank State                  Filing         Filing
                       1 Florida                13.4%         461,472
                       2 Nevada                   9.8%         53,055
                       3 Arizona                  6.1%         70,299
                       4 New Jersey               5.8%         73,561
                       5 Illinois                 5.6%         96,290
                       6 California               5.6%        321,285
                       7 Ohio                     4.7%         69,270
                       8 Michigan                 4.6%         62,840
                       9 Hawaii                   4.5%          7,535
                      10 Maine                    4.4%          6,160
                      23 Utah                     3.3%         14,369
                          U.S.                    4.6%      2,034,722
                    Source: Mortgage Bankers Association.

                                            Table 7
                         Mortgages with Foreclosure Filings in Utah
                                                          Numeric
                                                          Increase
                                        Percent Number Prev. Qtr.
                             2007
                              1st qtr.     0.57     2,322
                              2nd qtr.     0.55     2,368        46
                              3rd qtr.     0.66     2,796       428
                              4th qtr.      0.8     3,557       761
                              Annual       0.65     2,760        ---
                                 2008
                              1st qtr.     1.02     4,402       845
                              2nd qtr.     1.23     5,347       944
                              3rd qtr.     1.43     6,298       952
                              4 th qtr.    1.79     7,891     1,593
                              Annual       1.36     5,985        ---
                                 2009
                              1st qtr.     2.36   10,301      2,410
                              2nd qtr.     2.85   12,409      2,108
                              3rd qtr.     3.03   13,325        916
                              4 th qtr.    3.30   14,369      1,044
                          Source: Mortgage Bankers Association.




Executive Summary                               Page 21
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


Although Utah’s foreclosure rate is currently well below the national rate it has historically
tended to rise above the national rate during recessions and housing contractions. During the
past two Utah recessions, 1988 and 2002, Utah’s foreclosure rate exceeded the national rate by
about 75 basis points, or three-quarters of one percent. Nationally the foreclosure rate is 4.6
percent. As in the past, Utah’s foreclosure rate will follow the national trend but the state is
unlikely to exceed the national rate this time around. The national rate has been pushed to an
extraordinarily high level due to the collapse of housing prices, massive overbuilding and huge
job losses in a few large states. These states are dominating the national numbers hence
skewing the numbers on the high side.
Nevertheless, all indicators point to another year of rising foreclosure in Utah. The annual rate
for 2010 will very likely reach 4 percent resulting in 17,400 homes in the foreclosure process;
nearly triple the previous high of 6,800 homes in 2002. Probably 7,000-8,000 of the expected
homes in foreclose in 2010 will be located in Salt Lake County and an estimated 5,000 would be
in the study area.
It is important to note that not all homes with foreclosure filings end-up dumped back on the
market. Many lenders and borrowers arrange a “work out” either through a short sale or loan
modification. In these cases, which may represents as many as 50 percent of foreclosure filings,
the property does not become part of the unoccupied housing inventory competing with home
builders new unsold inventory. Currently the best data available show that real estate owned
(REO) by a financial institution and now “for sale” in Salt Lake County totaled 268 units in
February 2010 Table 8. These data include homes owned by major banks and Freddie Mac but
not Fannie Mae. It is estimated that the REO number represents probably 60-70 percent of
“for sale” REO properties in Salt Lake County. West Jordan leads all cities in the study area
with 34 short sale homes.

Even if only a fraction of the likely 5,000 homes in foreclosure in the study area end-up on the
market as REOs—price discounted homes—these homes would represent a substantial
competitive force for struggling home builders. In an environment where new home building
has fallen to such low levels, the increasing number of foreclosed properties will prolong Salt
Lake County’s housing slump and assuredly weaken the recovery and put downward pressure
on housing prices.

Short Sales – Another sign of distress in the housing market is short sales. Currently, in the
study area cities 22 percent of all listed and under contract homes (single-family,
condominiums, twin homes and town homes) are short sale homes Table 9. Of the 1,334 short
sales homes 1,155 or 79 percent are priced below $300,000 Table 10. West Jordan leads in
short sales homes with 257.




Executive Summary                        Page 22
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010



                                       Table 8
                               REO Homes in by City
                                   (February 2010)
                                                  REOs
                                                    on
                                                 Market
                             Bluffdale                2
                             Cottonwood
                             Heights                  1
                             Draper                  16
                             Herriman                 9
                             Holladay                 0
                             Kearns                   2
                             Magna                   15
                             Midvale                  5
                             Murray                   4
                             Riverton                14
                             Salt Lake City        115
                             Sandy                   12
                             South Jordan            16
                             South Salt Lake          0
                             Taylorsville             4
                             West Jordan             34
                             West Valley             19
                             Total                 268
                             Source: Zions Bank.




Executive Summary                   Page 23
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


                                                 Table 9
                                       Short Sale Listings in Cities
                                             (February 2010)

                                                               Short    Short Sale
                                                     Total      Sale     Listings
                                                    Listings Listings* <$300,000*
                    Bluffdale                             72         25           5
                    Cottonwood
                    Heights                                 162            26      18
                    Draper                                  503            15      66
                    Herriman                                395           132      99
                    Holladay                                219            17       6
                    Kearns                                  117            45      45
                    Magna                                   253            65      63
                    Midvale                                 214            37      34
                    Murray                                  311            47       6
                    Riverton                                327            72      63
                    Sandy                                   840           159     113
                    South Jordan                            661           148     106
                    South Salt Lake                           42            5       5
                    Taylorsville                            281            62      60
                    West Jordan                             945           268     257
                    West Valley                             727           211     209
                    Total                               6,069           1,334   1,155
                    *includes active and under contract listings.
                    Source: Wasatch Front Regional Multiple Listing Service.




Executive Summary                                  Page 24
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


                                           Table 10
                              Short Sale Listings as Percent of
                                   Total Listings by Cities
                                             Short Sale
                                            Listing as %
                                                  of        % of Short
                                                Total      Sale Listing
                                              Listings*    <$300,000*
                        Bluffdale                   34.7%         20.0%
                        Cottonwood
                        Heights                     16.0%         69.2%
                        Draper                      30.0%         43.7%
                        Herriman                    33.4%         75.0%
                        Holladay                     7.8%         35.3%
                        Kearns                      38.5%        100.0%
                        Magna                       25.7%         96.9%
                        Midvale                     17.3%         91.9%
                        Murray                      15.1%         12.8%
                        Riverton                    22.0%         87.5%
                        Sandy                       18.9%         71.1%
                        South Jordan                22.4%         71.6%
                        South Salt Lake             11.9%        100.0%
                        Taylorsville                22.1%         96.8%
                        West Jordan                 28.4%         95.9%
                        West Valley                 29.0%         99.1%
                        Total                       24.2%         78.6%
                        *includes active and under contract listings.
                        Source: Wasatch Front Regional MLS.

Negative Equity - An important component of the demand for housing, particularly new
housing is generated internally as buyers living in the market move-up to higher priced homes.
However, the possibility of moving up has been diminished by the decline in housing prices.
Consequently, many homeowners have negative equity, which prevents or slows moving up.
First America CoreLogic estimates that in Salt Lake Metropolitan Area 18 percent of the
225,000 mortgages in the area are in a negative equity position.

Credit Availability - New housing development as well as nonresidential development is being
hurt by the lack of credit due to generally difficult financial markets and also the weak
conditions of Utah’s banks. Utah’s banks do not fare well in comparisons to those in
surrounding states or the nation. State banking profiles produced by the San Francisco Federal
Reserve for the nine states in the 12th district show troubled balance sheets for Utah financial
institutions. Utah banks rank highest in the west in noncurrent loan rates, average net charge-
off rates and loan concentrations in construction and land development loans Table 11. In the
first quarter of 2009 Utah banks not only ranked number one in the district but also number
one in the country in the concentration of construction and land development loans (C&LD
loans). These loans in Utah banks accounted for 27 percent of total loans. Utah banks had an



Executive Summary                        Page 25
Salt Lake County Consolidated Action Plan 2010


average net charge-off rate of 2.41 percent and a noncurrent loan rate of 6.9 percent nearly
double the average of 3.8 percent for the 12th district banks.

                                          Table 11
                            Selected Bank Data for States in the
                      Twelfth District of the Federal Reserve System
                             Noncurrent         Avg. Net       C&LD** Loans
                             Loan as % of    Charge-Off as      as % of Total
                             Total Loans % of Total Loans          Loans
              Utah*              6.9%            2.41%              27%
              Alaska             3.2%            0.34%              13%
              Arizona            5.6%            2.30%              20%
              California         3.1%            1.23%              12%
              Hawaii             1.9%            0.71%               8%
              Idaho              2.9%            0.71%              20%
              Nevada             5.3%            2.01%              24%
              Oregon             4.0%            1.07%              16%
              Washington         4.4%            1.36%              19%
              12th District      3.8%            1.42%              16%
              *Only a few states have industrial loan banks. Utah has the highest number of industrial loan banks
              of any state therefore to standardized the comparisons Utah’s information excludes industrial loan
              bank data.
              **Construction and Land Development.
              Source: Federal Reserve Bank San Francisco.




Executive Summary                                    Page 26

								
To top