Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-28-10
City of Lakeville Community and Economic Development Memorandum To: Economic Development Commission From: David L. Olson, Community and Economic Development Director Copy: Steve Mielke, City Administrator Adam Kienberger, Economic Development Specialist Date: May 28, 2010 Subject: May Director's Report The following is the Director's Report for May of 2010. Building Permit Report The City issued building permits with a total valuation of $18,670,734 through the end of April. This compares to a total valuation of $19,704,970 during the same period last year. The City total valuation of commercial and industrial permits through April was $727,000 which compares to $1,047,500 through April of last year. The City also issued permits for 14 single family homes in April with a total valuation of $3,481,000. This compares to permits for six single family homes with a total valuation of $1,590,000 through April of last year. It should be noted the City has issued permits for 56 single family homes through the end of April compared to 21 during the same period last year. Development Updates New businesses that have recently opened in Lakeville include Up North Trading Company, Grain Handler, and Print Solutions all located in Airlake Industrial Park and Min Garden restaurant in the McStop area, Manic Ceramic in the Southfork Shopping Center and a new Sprint Store in the Argonne Village Shopping Center. Closure of Berry Plastics The City received notice on Mayl3th from the Corporate Offices of Berry Plastics that the company has decided to close the Lakeville plant located at 8235 220 Street by no later than August 13 of this year. This decision was a result of Berry Plastics acquiring another plastics company that included a plant that manufactures the same type of plastic film that is produced at the Lakeville plant. This newly acquired plant has newer production equipment and as a result the Company made the decision to close the Lakeville facility. There are approximately 95 employees in Lakeville. City staff has had discussions with Corporate staff at Berry Plastics to inquire about their plans for the marketing of this property in the future. The company has not made any decisions regarding this issue yet but indicated a willingness to share this information when it becomes available. Foreclosure Update Attached is the monthly foreclosure summary for Dakota County as provided by the Dakota County CDA. There were a total of 34 Sheriff Sales in Lakeville in April. Foreclosure rates are up considerably compared to the same period last year. There have been a total of 112 Sheriff's Sales in Lakeville through April of this year compared to 257 for the entire year in 2009. City Inspection staff are currently monitoring 85 vacant and /or damaged homes in Lakeville. City Council Adoption of New Zoning Ordinance The City Council adopted the Zoning Ordinance update at its May 17 meeting. This City Council action now brings the Zoning Ordinance in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan that was approved by the City in December of 2008. The updated Zoning Ordinance is now in the process of being codified which will take approximately 30 -60 days. Any questions regarding the new ordinance can be directed to the Planning Department at 952 - 985 -4420. Latest City of Lakeville Population Estimate The City recently received the latest population and household estimates for Lakeville as compiled by the Metropolitan Council. The estimated population for Lakeville as of April 1, 2009 was 55,772 and the estimated number of households was 18,585. I hope everyone has an enjoyable and safe Memorial Day Weekend. w O 0 ° o 0 0 O s O O O O O O c a� a �m�x� 1 ? '- , \O �--. w Cn ao N C.n Vi N to o c��; moowwaa O O D 00 \O N oo rn oo �c ? 0 0o O O O Cn O cA O N LA cA Cn LA 0 0 0 0 coo Cn O J In cc oil -�5 o 0 0- 3�'dd� -+z n G a f C �. CD CD CD o 0 7 o� C w� a w n� ' 0 y CD r- r. , 0 W cn C 3 3 8 F 0 O qQ O s D w G CD CD ., o f7 a co o O G a o � ~ aro CD CD ti m a II _° H trl v B B S o 0 0 CD CD C' . a E v� a�a 0. a M i x CD aC VO w ` C l e a °. O ° y O ° O N M. E. (D 0 8 CD 0 CD "Sj w K CD QQ a (� o' D a ro X N c 2. a x C7 m b a �' o a c a w CrQ A) W � a; CD y C a 0 x d M �' CD CD CD .�0.. d C. 0 G 0 ;_I Ga m . n 9 n 2 Ste{ N N N W a i CA W ?� J W \O N N ? V1 t N A 00 J O Cn �O �O Vi J �O LA ? \O c 4 O N o O O N N gypp- . . O w �- O O )O O w� O � N O O O O O . y m0.. Z x > c�ii c-A 0 0 VA O tt.A 0 0 0 0 0 0 v LA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O S ��i'J' A � O C w . w w 0. A cn V O C\ d C O pp p� O C O O O O O a o" O O O O O w O N O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O p p p p p p pp O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O z Z n b i n � w N -ei y O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O 0 0 O O 0 o o o 0 0 o 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ca 0 C) O 0 0 — 0 6 CrJ 0 N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O — O O —0 O O Oo O O � O w O 0 ° o 0 0 O s O O O O O O c ' N ? '- , \O �--. w Cn ao N C.n Vi N to O O D 00 \O N oo rn oo �c ? 0 0o O O O Cn O cA O N LA cA Cn LA 0 0 0 0 coo Cn O J In cc oil 0 0 0 0 0 0 C.n O O O O Vi O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O LA O O O O r�ry�yy F+ O C CC��77 z � w o• o S o 0 0 0 0 o o 0 S ° o ° O c ° o ° O ° o $ o ° O c c c o o coo= z O x z W � � C O C C C C C N C Oo C C O O C O C C C C C C C C C O� C C w C g C i N N N W a i CA W ?� J W \O N N ? V1 t N A 00 J O Cn �O �O Vi J �O LA ? \O c 4 O N o O O N N gypp- . . O w �- O O )O O w� O � N O O O O O ► pO p LA p LA LA O O O O C 0 0 c�ii c-A 0 0 VA O tt.A 0 0 0 0 0 0 v LA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O S ��i'J' A � O C w w A cn V O C\ O pp p� O C O O O O O o" O O O O O w O N O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O p p p p p p pp O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O z Z ro b i w N -ei y O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O 0 0 O O 0 o o o 0 0 o 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ca 0 C) O 0 0 — 0 6 CrJ 0 N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O — O O —0 O O Oo O O � O a v� v�r^��ati rA - 3cp En wwwcn cn q) wx000 rr; 5xxo- n- n�,n��n u p o + w c y a te. o� 5 r. c c�c Cn G y y y (R o a C fD c�c c °� c c v Ctl ° ° °° o � � � fD •n cn ro `^`" Y �' '° � � ° ° i - ° m .ate. CD CL CD k n c c r� s w c c ril w ° o � a �• Q , o0 0 � o � o• � CD a ^ :; �^ a0 ., a fD a E . y a N � C y A 0 A C N 0 O O �--� � �D W 0 � O � � O O �O 0 0 Cn N W C1 W W �O LA O L", w 00 00 W A w t.A \D w —1 W w J w O to v 00 O 00 O O O �z D O O �c O W \0 O O Vi O vi \0 �c �c �c \D . . :"" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cn C to D O O CA coo O W A O C cn O A Cn O O Cn O Cn Cn O N cn C C O O %A O O Cn Cn O O to O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O C �Q O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O cc LA N W CJ� W .•• O LA J N 00 Vi Cn Cn 00 p O O J O C� A Cn O O O A 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O 01 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 S O O O O O O O O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O o O O o O O pO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O g O O C 0 O cc O O C O C 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O O O O w O w (.A w 0 CIi O O O O CJi 00 O O O N O 00 O O O O O N w O N A 0 C N N w �- _A A_ 0� vi w N N LA W W 00 w - j W W W �O O Oo N a0 O w O O O O w to O �c O O 00 A \O O \O O O� O lO O \O O \O O O O O O �° 00 O N \0 cc . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O VA W VA O W O O O O w O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O S O O O O C O c!i O O O O Vi O N c.n 00 O N cr W A pp pp w �c O O N cn O \�O N O O O O A O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Cn vi O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O coo O O O O O O coo 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O C O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C C C O O O C C O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O C O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O N O O p O I O O O Cn O O p O O O O O O O O O O OI O O O O O O O O O O O - O O O S O O O Oi v O O O O O O w w O C N n O O CI O O O IOI O O IO O O O O O O O O OI O O O O coo O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p O 0 p O 0 p O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t!i O N U O N O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w 0 vi c.n O O O� N N N N 00 w 0 J O O J vOi \C \.c to O CA LA O C U O g O O O O O O O O N I � W f G\ 90 gy N �p - Oc O O O w c�ii 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O C C O C O c OI O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O p O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O C-A 00 to w_ O O O O N 91 0 0 0 0 0 0 N p O O O O tin PO 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r1 a a o Vi Cn ,0 ai CA -3 b Qq Cn v� ro b C7 f7 VI 'n ti y o 0 > C C n c ° ; • .re co co D C �• „ ° a w w d a c co t o . 0 CD to ° c o o eo E E CD } -- w• ° o o w y CD CD eD ro ° OQ � r CM w 'o N w =+' CD B v o• C CD w P N CA oo O N Un N w O O O O O 00 O O UA C� O w O O O O C� CA N J J i--• A W N J O 01 CJi CA J O --j LA w \0 W W W W �D 0 0 0 ! O !-h O CJi O vA O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o O O O J 0 0 W O �o O O O O N v 0 0 0 O O C O O C C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O C Cn CA C C C LA O cn .A 0 0 0 0 0 in O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 \.° 00 W O� p C w O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O c C�i� 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 A O O O O J O O O O O O O O p O O O 0 0 0 0 p p 0 O p p 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O N O O p O I O O O Cn O O p O O O O O O O O O O OI O O O O O O O O O O O - O O O S O O O Oi v O O O O O O w w O C N n O O CI O O O IOI O O IO O O O O O O O O OI O O O O coo O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p O 0 p O 0 p O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t!i O N U O N O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w 0 vi c.n O O O� N N N N 00 w 0 J O O J vOi \C \.c to O CA LA O C U O g O O O O O O O O N I � W f G\ 90 gy N �p - Oc O O O w c�ii 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O C C O C O c OI O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O p O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O C-A 00 to w_ O O O O N 91 0 0 0 0 0 0 N p O O O O tin PO 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O y 0 m 00 0 b 0 0 S 0 b 0 N J N A O O O p , O C O O O O A N N A J LA N A W(7) O A w O O W C O N CN O --' ' N O O J D cn A A 00 J J Cn J J LA O N Cn IC N �O Cn �O A W o O o 00 J V, �c 00 �o O O O O O O� O A o A A 0 0 0 Cn 0 0 0 LA O lJ C Cn O C w C CA O C O LA O LA O O O C O C O N C J O O J Y a 0 0 0 0 0 0 G\ O O C C Cn O O O O O Cn C C O C C 0 0 0 0 to O to O O LA i d d C C n y a =° o ° n o cr ° E c, m c n B o � : n X E. e . �_ a p. n m n x w fl o o B 0 B 0 B= m CrJ (D r. a n a o S �c ,co, ao co cc O w w A w t.A w 0 a s l J C B y 7 O C O D pp S N C N pO p C O O O O O 0 T o ° F o O O O O O \O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o' Q a '� CD o m r vo y w n. o y o a o n n w. =° '� �, CL M a 2 m< r cn w z °o M = A D •� n E tJ CD 9 ° a �' O - pPpcAi p!11pp o� v ID O C C S C C �-° O C = C O O g O O\C O O C O ° 0 0 0 0 O o O O O 000 0 C —� O O CD = CL oa na z ° C - A C C Cn O N N N O A A 0 0 o i i to Cn N W r N V1 W J W A C� A 00 N A Cn O J - --• N N �O 00 Cn J w �O �c w w C N c.n N C P, N O DD O N O •-• O w O N �c �c Oo w �c J A �c . F C \O c!l 00 0 to C cn C O J C W C N 0" to (A pp O N N. in W -.1 ? cn 00 � C!� O O O C t 0 Cn 0 0 0 0 cc 0 0 0 CJi C In C Cn LA C W O O CD O C O ►r 0o to C � O N w 00 �c > ' C _ Vi - A O 00 A N A 00 J �D A � - • - to W cn 00 C� �c w J O O A Oo O� C� O to O p O O C C _N p O p A O N O O O O O O O O O O O N z O O O O O J O O O O O C D O C O C O O O O H CD p p p p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ;� = C� i i i b 7 ., z Q 00 N N N 00 w w O O O O O O J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 J c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �c O O O O O C C O O O O O O O W C O J J O w �O to �c 00 CrJ O Oo N O O O O C C — C O C C O O O O O C C C O O C O w 0 0 �C A C 00 00 O A N N A J LA N A W(7) O A w O O W C O N CN O --' ' N O O J D cn A A 00 J J Cn J J LA O N Cn IC N �O Cn �O A W o O o 00 J V, �c 00 �o O O O O O O� O A o A A 0 0 0 Cn 0 0 0 LA O lJ C Cn O C w C CA O C O LA O LA O O O C O C O N C J O O J 0 0 0 0 0 0 G\ O O C C Cn O O O O O Cn C C O C C 0 0 0 0 to O to O O LA i N � O ray ~ CrJ O W J A O w w A w t.A w 0 Cn cn :4 Oo �O A O 1 N �c Vc oo c.n N L.A C O y O C O D pp S N C N pO p C O O O O O 0 N Z O O O O O \O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ►3 '� O"• p p p p p p p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Z Mo r w z A D •� bd. tJ < �' O - pPpcAi p!11pp o� O C C S C C �-° O C = C O O g O O\C O O C O ° 0 0 0 0 O o O O O 000 0 C —� O O C - A C C Cn O N N N O A A 0 0 C i i to Cn N W r N V1 W J W A C� A 00 N A Cn O J - --• N N �O 00 Cn J w �O �c w w C N c.n N C P, N O DD O N O •-• O w O N �c �c Oo w �c J A �c . F C \O c!l 00 0 to C cn C O J C W C N 0" to (A pp O N N. in W -.1 ? cn 00 � C!� O O O C t 0 Cn 0 0 0 0 cc 0 0 0 CJi C In C Cn LA C W O O O C O ►r 0o to C � O N w 00 �c > ' C _ Vi - A O 00 A N A 00 J �D A � - • - to W cn 00 C� �c w J O O A Oo O� C� O to O p O O C C _N p O p A O N O O O O O O O O O O O N z O O O O O J O O O O O C D O C O C O O O O H CD p p p p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Z i i i b 7 z Q 00 N N N 00 w w O O O O O O J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 J c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �c O O O O O C C O O O O O O O W C O J J O w �O to �c 00 CrJ O Oo N O O O O C C — C O C C O O O O O C C C O O C O w 0 0 �C A C 00 00 O aa� cn cnr �1 cn -3 w CA w w w cn ul w cp w h 000 rrr xxn�~��nn�n a m C m d w e ee C f F. c '. S o vc C, CD < y <° -^^ co w° c o a C �' o o g c q eD a m cc (7 CD co 77 o , ,. 3 S» ° ? =° ` o :0 $ o m o �° c 7r c a ro T' o b oo 9 g =: c 0 fD b CS" .. m y w .. r c� .� co co cn a y c ,b c r cn Q c❑ \ cc n o a m, c d v co o a z cn ; a U � � C: � X P o � 0 0 CD CD CL ° y ti o a °= an a 0 °0 C CD Z ,a � < ;c ° y C 3 a a cn U O O O -1 O U O �-- O N N O w 0 �° ►� A �--� O A N C O N O C-4 w t-A - 00 W -4 CN �c J w -j �D Q\ w �° J 00 O (-A W U W U -j W J N �+ W w J J �c C O O 00 C w O Ic A O 00 O �- �c 00 �c O 0o �c O O �D �D O O — 10 O �c t!i O O� 0 0 0 0 Q\ c.n 0 0 0 0 0 0 vi O i/i 0 0 Vi C cr 0 0 0 0 0 i.n 0 0 0 to to to to O (-A O C O O C C C O 00 O O O O �c O C O C cc O O C C C O O O C O O O C O C C O O 'A p O p U U A U O N O O O O O O O O V O O O O O O p O 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 C O O C O O O C O O O C O O C C O O O O C O O O O O O C O O O O O C O O C O C C O O O O O O O O C C O O O C O O O O O C O O O O O O C O C O C O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O p O p O O O O O O p O O p O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W . 00 0 0 0 0 00 �1 \.c C T O N [J .A - 7 W . C w-1 W 000 000 �1 w J �c w 00 cn (.A N J J A J �c w J w W 00 �o cn O Cl O O vA vA 00 �c �c �c O 00 �c A 00 O to O J O �c �o O �c -4 �c 1.0 �c O O O A .-. 0o w O O �o i.n LA �c O C O �c J -- Q\ O to O O "c is (-A 0 0 t.A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to to C to C p O C Vi Vi J LA 0 0 tr O O O U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O C O 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 O O -j O O O O O ON ON C W U A N O O N �- U N N 00 00 N U N Vl W -1 U N N \c �c 00 O ON 00 C O U ON N A O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O coo O O O O O O O O U U O O O O O O O O O O O O p O p O p O p CD O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O C O C C O p O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O C 0 C 0 0 O O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 C O 0 O C O C 0 0 O 0 C C 0 0 O C O O O I S O O O O -- O O O O O S O O O O S S C J O � S S O O w to O O O O O O O I S S S O O O O O O O O �- 0 0 0 0 0 �c 0 0 0 0 0 Cn 0 0 0 0 0 0 O S O O O O O O O O O O I S S S S S S S S S S N 00 J O O C!� w 0 � w �- O v O O A O O O O.4 w oo vi 0 0 0 to O C cn cr to c.n O O O O O O C D C O O � N J N Vi O W O W V 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O S O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A i w o C O O w 00 C�ii t O S S O S w O O S A J N W O N W 00 Vi 00 Cl� A Vt lA 00 � 00 � DD 0 0 0 0 Oo O O O N O O O O O O S S S O OI O O O IOI O O IO O) O O O IOI O O O 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O S O O O O O O C O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � is co � � r v� <x_ 5xxG�G��?n co o ` C co C co C � � -, o C 0 0 mo ❑ o a C co co cc ., o o o CrQ y ~ CD ^ `� X O n 00 cct vOi b R v ^ . C F 7 O 7 N w C 7 F 5 c G T m y n 5 a a� r A' � F Di 1 f� 1 �9 ti a fD M O w 0 %n oo W O O C w O� N O A � �] N W �•-' O� N N CA Cl1 O -- J W W J W J W A W J CA J 00 D\ O n- . . . O C C O O O O . . O O O O O ( -A n J . . . . . Cn C cn 0 0 0 N O O . . . . 0 C O (.A Cn LA O O w O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �- O O 0 0 w W O O O O O O O O O W 0 O LA W W 00 00 Cn W -1 �c 00 A 00 00 (A \O 00 W W N 00 �7 J A O\ W �c O O J w O Cn as .A —1 �c O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O :-1 O -1 O O O O O, O O O O O O C 00 �c O O Cn 00 O coo O O C O O O O O O O O cc O O C O O O O S C O O O O O O S O S S O 0 0 0 O cc O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O C O O O O C O O O O O O O I S O O O O -- O O O O O S O O O O S S C J O � S S O O w to O O O O O O O I S S S O O O O O O O O �- 0 0 0 0 0 �c 0 0 0 0 0 Cn 0 0 0 0 0 0 O S O O O O O O O O O O I S S S S S S S S S S N 00 J O O C!� w 0 � w �- O v O O A O O O O.4 w oo vi 0 0 0 to O C cn cr to c.n O O O O O O C D C O O � N J N Vi O W O W V 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O S O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A i w o C O O w 00 C�ii t O S S O S w O O S A J N W O N W 00 Vi 00 Cl� A Vt lA 00 � 00 � DD 0 0 0 0 Oo O O O N O O O O O O S S S O OI O O O IOI O O IO O) O O O IOI O O O 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O S O O O O O O C O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 I 00 O O OI O O O O O O O O O �r O O O O O O O O O OI O O O O O O O AI J J O Oo O O O is O O C O O O O A A O O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o a c o � C y CD y ^ � l�l r � Q r Q+ d dQ � N 00 I 00 O O OI O O O O O O O O O �r O O O O O O O O O OI O O O O O O O AI J J O Oo O O O is O O C O O O O A A O O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O CDA Dakota County Community Development Agency ****00**************Q* To: Dakota County Cities From: Dan Rogness, Director of Community Revitalization Date: May 17, 2010 Re: Foreclosure Update NOME OWNERSHIP' C0K24C&:0k& First Quarter Minnesota Foreclosure Update According to a report recently released by HousingLink, Minnesota foreclosures were at the highest level in the first quarter of 2010 than in the past six quarters with a total of 6,716 foreclosures that took place. The last time the foreclosure number was higher was in the third quarter of 2008 when 6,807 sheriff sales occurred. The Q 1 2010 number increased almost I I percent over the previous quarter, and 28 percent over the same period last year. This is the fourth quarter in a row where foreclosures have increased in Minnesota. Change in Foreclosures Quarter 1 2009 — Quarter 1 2010 Sixty -five Minnesota counties saw an increase in foreclosures, 19 counties saw a decrease and three counties had the same number of foreclosures from the first quarter of 2009 compared to the first quarter of 2010. Dakota County saw a rise in foreclosures in the first quarter of 2010. From January to March 2010, 545 foreclosures occurred. In the same period in 2009, 397 foreclosures took place, which is an increase of about 37 percent. At this point, the trend appears to be continuing. Dakota County had 176 foreclosures in April, up from 126 in April of 2009, a 40 percent increase. The first four months of 2010 have had nearly 200 more sheriff sales than the first four months of 2009 — 721 sheriff sales vs. 523 sales in 2009. In fact, the start of 2010 looks very much like the start of 2008, which saw 724 sheriff sales from January — April. The HousingLink report can be viewed at http:// www. housinglink .org!Files /HousingLink_01 10_MN ForeclosureUpdate.pdf Q 1 2009 Q 1 2010 Percent change Minnesota 5,236 6,716 28.3 Twin Cities 3,316 4,041 21.9 Greater Minnesota 1,920 2,675 39.3 Sixty -five Minnesota counties saw an increase in foreclosures, 19 counties saw a decrease and three counties had the same number of foreclosures from the first quarter of 2009 compared to the first quarter of 2010. Dakota County saw a rise in foreclosures in the first quarter of 2010. From January to March 2010, 545 foreclosures occurred. In the same period in 2009, 397 foreclosures took place, which is an increase of about 37 percent. At this point, the trend appears to be continuing. Dakota County had 176 foreclosures in April, up from 126 in April of 2009, a 40 percent increase. The first four months of 2010 have had nearly 200 more sheriff sales than the first four months of 2009 — 721 sheriff sales vs. 523 sales in 2009. In fact, the start of 2010 looks very much like the start of 2008, which saw 724 sheriff sales from January — April. The HousingLink report can be viewed at http:// www. housinglink .org!Files /HousingLink_01 10_MN ForeclosureUpdate.pdf Ho CDA Dakota County O W N S RS H I P k Community Development Agency W ! (2✓ 006604*00*069066090649 Dakota County Stats — April 2010 • # of Sheriff Sales in April — 176 (compared to 126 in April 2009) • Total Sheriff Sales for 2010 — 721 (compared to 523 in Jan. - April, 2009) • # of Notices of Pendency Filed in April — 308 • Total Notices of Pendency Filed for 2010 — 1,250 A Notice of Pendency is filed by a mortgage company's attorney as official notification that the foreclosure process has begun. Not all of these result in Sheriff Sales. Pages 3 and 4 of this PDF file have Sheriff Sale and Notice of Pendency statistics for each city. Mapping Using Dakota County GIS http://gis.co.dakota.mn.us/website/dakotanetgis The Dakota County Office of GIS is updating the 2010 Foreclosures and Notice of Pendency layers on a monthly basis. If you need assistance using this Web page, please call Randy Knippel or Mary Hagerman with the Office of GIS at (952) 891 -7081. In The News Provided in this PDF file are a few notable foreclosure articles that were published in the last month. Among the points of interest: • Banking executives from the four largest mortgage companies in the country, Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America and Wells Fargo are reluctant to help troubled homeowners by forgiving a portion of principle mortgage balances. They are reducing the amounts trouble homeowners owe, but only in limited cases because consumers who are paying on -time are likely to see reductions as unfair. The Congressional Oversight Panel said that the Obama administration projects only I million families will receive lower monthly payments from the Making Home Affordable Program, even though 6 millions families are more than two months behind on their mortgage payments. Borrowers who do get their payments lowered may still be at risk for losing their homes because the payments still remain high and many borrowers are facing new financial strains. A record number of foreclosures also took place on a national level during the first quarter of 2010. • Not only was there a surge in sheriff sales during the first quarter in Minnesota, but also a surge in other foreclosure related activity. If you have any concerns, please call me at (65 I) 675 -4464 or send me an e-mail at drogness __dakotacda.state.mn.us U • v • 0 • Q • y • E • • O • • u • R E • +d LLL • O • O • aU• Q U O N 'i a Q C L 0 E 3 to H 4J 0 s. _ N O u d i Q T s N O% O c;% co N I-D M uY O% N c �p O O'N M O% N Ln N 1�. — M — N — Ln N — O — M L1 ^ ap w N: o O: a, v � Ln M � _ a M N N! d' O'. Z v O! 4 J'' CL ai d0 Q Q N N N o— V- M O 'O I-� I'. r-. � (d !'N N M M `p N N N O N _ OD 1L ^ M N N 'D N— N M 0p M M N CO I� N N= N M O �', H 'J 41 4+ ul V; d Q 4.1 > i 2 = = CL 4 IL �' > �_ � (� d = p O H V J. Q.i t�E _ ++ = d+ (A Q F- Q m tw W L U. == J O N = &I as IA O H d L A d 'u 'c E c 0 W co d L A N C U N d t N 0 O 0 Cl UN 0 Y L A +� o CA N u v N C O u d C C O � U a Ln N %0 d — C Ln O 4 D C V 0 L- 2 0 bA L QO O A U -0 d � A o � A c o A _N C 5 c C 0 C 0 LL c. O _ 4 z © � O = W N Q 0 • m U • %O N N M N Q1 N Q • C. LT C • CD O 0% N1 L11 E • • 1� M O • N • • N N �_ 4-0 Q • ap 0.— • � U �• u E ai o • • 'o ou: a� CL O 0 M M N co Ln co C C% L n 1� �o w N— O Z a m C% %O N N M N co N %O C. LT cc CD O 0% N1 L11 N Ln 1� M N N Ln N O% N N O� ap r4 O M M N co Ln co C C% L n 1� �o w N— Co O Zo *O c% Ln Lm M Ln C) O Ln N N.^ V : a7 0 Q Z 4J V' 0 4! de `b0 3 Q �i �2 Q M N N O M to Ln V M ^ N Ln %D N M' M N M — N U M N— N L - I co N V r 1 ODD � C4 h d0 •� Ln s c d 4 J IA c coo U) V td • E N d d O C 0 � N F N L Ln 7 a7 O QmWLL= =J��th 0 C N L N An � L � 4 • t�0 O � u o 2 � V Z C 7 b�0 E .O O W -0 s H N u u O d � N d 7 � N E O 3 V C w U L L b O L V C � O u d U a ,1 O O aL C � � C o IA tv O d Y c M L 0 c C 3 a N C C m .- E u c N . L?0 •�9 N L Cl- 0 —O E 0 fE V Z d 4= 0 C y C A O d y N o o N 3 fA u Z H O O Z E � id N W w ZtLL V1 u U d a C O U N C C O U 0- L %0 N N - C Ln 0 �O V E u Z o N L tm 4 O U u d O a+ Cd 7 - p O c O M N_ GGGG 1 1 c N O E I- 0 LL http: / /www.startiibune.com/ lifestyle /younnoney /90898729.html ?page =2 &c =y Page 1 of 2 StarTrlbunexom Minnesota housing market can't shake foreclosures Despite an uptick in prices and a more balanced supply of homes on the market -- signs that the housing market may have turned the corner -- foreclosures continued to increase across the nation in the first quarter. During the first three months of 2010, 16 percent more households received a foreclosure - related filing such as a default notice or a scheduled sheriffs sale than in the first quarter of 2009, according to RealtyTrac's foreclosure market report. Foreclosure - related filings rose 7 percent compared with the last quarter of 2009. Ten states -- led by California, Florida and Arizona -- account for nearly three- quarters of the nation's foreclosure activity, the report found. In Minnesota, one in every 253 households received a foreclosure- related notice in the first quarter -- an increase of 28 percent over last year's first quarter and flat with the fourth quarter of 2009. Still, foreclosure - related notices were 13 percent lower than they were in the third quarter last year, when filings peaked in the state. Minnesota is 26th - highest in the nation for the rate of foreclosure - related notices received. Ed Nelson, spokesman for the Minnesota Homeownership Center, has said he expects that the number of homeowners who ultimately lose their homes to foreclosure will be similar to what was seen in 2009, when 23,019 foreclosures occurred. That was down 12 percent from 2008. Separately, the government's Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) announced Wednesday that 57,000 more homeowners had their mortgages modified in March, bringing the total of troubled borrowers with RAMP loan modifications to more than 1.1 million. In Minnesota, there were 13,852 active trial modifications and 4,948 permanent modifications granted in March for a total of 18,800. Of the 165,217 HAMP modifications started by Wells Fargo, 30,014 were permanent and 9,162 were pending permanent status. Add the modifications that Wells Fargo has approved using its own standards to the government total, and the bank had a combined total of 523,336 modifications. However, a report by the independent Congressional Oversight Panel found the 1 Print Powered By lV Forr atC? namics° httD://www.starttibune.com/temvlates/fdct)?1271437641238 4/16/2010 http: / /www.startribune.com/ lifestyle /yourmoney /90898729.html ?page =2 &c =y Page 2 of 2 i r I I I program falls short and leaves many homeowners struggling to make ends meet. In a report released Wednesday, the panel said that the administration projects only 1 million families will end up with lower monthly payments as a result of the program. Six million families are more than two months behind with their payments, and 200,000 more families receive foreclosure notices each month. Elizabeth Warren, who heads the independent panel set up by Congress, warned that borrowers who have their monthly payments lowered as a result of the program still could lose their homes because the payments remain high and many Americans are facing new financial strains. "Redefault signals the single worst form of failure" by the Treasury Department, said Warren, who is a professor at Harvard Law School. 'Billions of taxpayer dollars will be spent and families will nonetheless lose their homes." The Associated Press contributed to this report. Kara McGuire • 612- 673 -7293 Print Powered By . FormatDynamics" bttn://www.-,taft6bune.com/temT)Iates/fdcD?l 271437641238 4/16/2010 Big banks see fairness issue with mortgage aid - Mortgage Mess Page 1 of 2 Big banks see fairness issue with mortgage aid Representatives object forgiving some debt to keep owners in their homes By Alan Zibel The Associated Press updated 4:35 p.m. CT,Tues., April 13, 2010 WASHINGTON - Top banking industry executives are skeptical about helping troubled borrowers by forgiving a portion of their debt. The executives told lawmakers on Tuesday they are reducing the amount that troubled borrowers owe on their home loans only in limited cases. That's because consumers who are paying their mortgages on time are likely to see such reductions as unfair, the executive said. David Lowman, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase's mortgage business, told the House Financial Services Committee that large -scale mortgage principal reduction "could be harmful to consumers, investors and future mortgage market conditions" Chase estimates that reducing home loan balances so that no homeowners would owe more than the value of their homes would cost up to $900 billion, with $150 billion of that borne by the government. program over the past year. Democrats blame the industry. But Republicans say the Obama administration should abandon the effort and focus on creating jobs. "The market needs to find its own footing free of government intervention and manipulation so we can revive our economy and get on with a full housing market recovery," said Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the committee's senior Republican. Last month, the Obama administration launched a plan to reduce the amount some troubled borrowers owe on their home loans and give jobless homeowners a temporary break. Administration officials cautioned that the plan won't stop all foreclosures or help all troubled homeowners. Instead, they say it will help the Obama administration meet their original target, announced last year, of helping 3 million to 4 million borrowers avoid foreclosure. Such programs "could raise issues of fairness," agreed Sanjiv Das, Citigroup's top mortgage executive. The pair appeared in front of the Senate committee with top executives from Bank of America and Wells Fargo & Co. The four mortgage companies are the largest in the country and have come under fire for not doing enough to help borrowers as part of the Obama administration's $75 billion mortgage relief program, which has failed to make a big dent in the problem. Only 170,000 homeowners have completed loan modifications out of 1.1 million who began the Print Powered By FormatD namics" http: / /www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36471220 /ns/business- mortgage mess /print/l /displaymode... 4/14/2010 Big banks see fairness issue with mortgage aid - Mortgage Mess Page 2 of 2 msnbc.com The four big banks at Tuesday's hearing are also the main holders of second mortgages such as home equity loans. During the housing boom, business boomed for so- called "piggyback" mortgages — second loans that allowed consumers to make a little or no down payment. These loans may be worth little or nothing, but banks are reluctant to release their claims or reduce the value of those loans on their books. Complicating matters, many borrowers are choosing to pay their second mortgages ahead of their primary ones. So banks have little incentive to modify those loans as long as homeowners are still paying on time. The Treasury Department has launched a program to modify second mortgages. That program was delayed for months but the four big banks signed on after pressure from the Obama administration and lawmakers. Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. URL: httli: / /www.msnbc.msn. com/id/36471220/ns/business- rnortgage_ mess/ MSN Privacy. Legal© 2010 MSNBC.com Print Powered I By FormatD namics" httD: / /www.msnbc.msn. com/ id/36471220 /ns/business- mortsa2e mess /Drint/l /disnlavmode... 4/14/2010 Panel: Obama's mortgage aid plan helps few - Mortgage Mess Page 1 of 3 Panel: Obama's mortgage aid plan helps few Many who have monthly payments lowered could still lose homes By Alan Zibel and Daniel Wagner The Associated Press updated 9:19 a.m. CT,Wed., April 14, 2010 WASHINGTON - A watchdog panel overseeing the financial bailouts says the Obama administration's flagship mortgage aid program lags well behind the foreclosure crisis and leaves too many families out. The Congressional Oversight Panel says in a report released Wednesday that the administration projects only 1 million families will end up with lower monthly payments as a result of the program. The report says 6 million families are more than two months behind with their payments, and 200,000 more families receive foreclosure notices each month. A year and a half after launching the program, "Treasury is still fighting to get its foreclosure programs off the ground," Elizabeth Warren, who heads the independent panel set up by Congress, told reporters Tuesday. administration has continued adjusting and expanding the program as the crisis deepens "We strongly agree with the (panel's) assessment that foreclosures are at an unacceptable high rate, which is why this program has been designed to prevent avoidable foreclosures," Treasury spokeswoman Meg Reilly said in a statement. She said the program was not designed to prevent every foreclosure, and "we cannot help those who simply bought a home they could not afford." The report comes a day after top banking industry executives expressed skepticism about a new plan designed to help troubled borrowers by forgiving a portion of their debt. The executives told lawmakers on Tuesday they are reducing the amount that troubled borrowers owe on their home loans only in limited cases. That's because consumers who are paying their mortgages on time are likely to see such reductions as unfair, they said. Warren warned that borrowers who have their monthly payments lowered as a result of the program still could lose their homes because the payments remain high and many Americans are facing new financial strains. "Redefault signals the single worst form of failure" by the Treasury Department, said Warren, who is a professor at Harvard Law School. "Billions of taxpayer dollars will be spent and families will nonetheless lose their homes." The main program gives money to mortgage investors and collection companies that reduce borrowers' monthly payments. Treasury highlighted the panel's finding that the Print Powered By -d I Formatpynamics" httn• /hxnxnxr mcnhn mcn cnm /ir1116i014R1 /nc/hrncinPec- mnrtoauP mPCC /mint /1 /dicnlavnnnrle... 4/140010 Panel: Obama's mortgage aid plan helps few - Mortgage Mess Page 2 of 3 Such programs "could raise issues of fairness," said Sanjiv Das, Citigroup's top mortgage executive, who appeared in front of the House Financial Services committee with top executives from Bank of America, Wells Fargo & Co. and JPMorgan Chase. David Lowman, chief executive of Chase's mortgage business, told lawmakers that large -scale mortgage p rincipal reduction "could be harmful to consumers, investors and future mortgage market conditions." Chase estimates that reducing home loan balances so that no homeowners would owe more than the value of their homes would cost up to $900 billion, with $150 billion of that borne by the government. Many homeowners aren't satisfied. After the hearing was over, dozens of activists from the Boston -based Neighborhood Assistance Corp. of America chased Lowman through the marble- floored hallways of the Rayburn House Office Building, pressing him to do more to help troubled homeowners. He did not respond to their requests for a meeting and eventually left the building with the assistance of police. The four mortgage companies represented at the hearing are the largest in the country and have come under fire for not doing enough to help borrowers as part of the Obama administration's $75 billion mortgage relief program. Through March, more than 230,000 homeowners have completed loan modifications. That's about 21 percent of the 1.1 million borrowers who began the program over the past year, the Treasury Department said Tuesday. Last month, the administration expanded the program, launching a plan to reduce the amount some troubled borrowers owe on their home loans and give jobless homeowners a temporary break. But the details of those programs are expected to take months to work out. President Barack Obama's housing secretary, Shaun Donovan, said in a speech to a group of mortgage bankers Tuesday that administration did not foresee how much effort it would take for the mortgage industry to launch the program. Many mortgage companies, he said, "were too slow to make the investments in systems and staff needed" to put the program in place. But he noted that many families are getting relief. Republicans, however, say the Obama administration should abandon the effort and focus on creating jobs. "The market needs to find its own footing free of government intervention and manipulation so we can revive our economy and get on with a full housing market recovery," said Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the committee's senior Republican. Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. URL: http: / /www.msnbe.msn. com/ id/36501481 /ns/business- mortgage_ mess/ httn- / /xxnxnu mcnhr men rnm /irlPIA'it11 ASZI /neMiicinace_mnrfaaaP mPCc /nnnt /1 /rlienlaxnnnrlP All A11010 Foreclosure rates surge, biggest jump in 5 years - Mortgage Mess Page 1 of 2 Foreclosure rates surge, biggest jump in 5 years `On pace to see more than 1 million bank repossessions this year' By Alex Veiga The Associated Press updated 10:08 a.m. CT,Thurs., April 15, 2010 "We're finally seeing the banks start to process the inventory that has been in foreclosure, but delayed in processing," Sharga said. "We expect the pace to accelerate as the year goes on." LOS ANGELES - A record number of U.S. homes were lost to foreclosure in the first three months of this year, a sign banks are starting to wade through the backlog of troubled home loans at a faster pace, according to a new report. RealtyTrac Inc. said Thursday that the number of U.S homes taken over by banks jumped 35 percent in the first quarter from a year ago. In addition, households facing foreclosure grew 16 percent in the same period and 7 percent from the last three months of 2009. More homes were taken over by banks and scheduled for a foreclosure sale than in any quarter going back to at least January 2005, when RealtyTrac began reporting the data, the firm said. "We're right now on pace to see more than 1 million bank repossessions this year," said Rick Sharga, a RealtyTrac senior vice president. Foreclosures began to ease last year as banks came under pressure from the Obama administration to modify home loans for troubled borrowers. In addition, some states enacted foreclosure moratoriums in hopes of giving homeowners behind in payments time to catch up. And in many cases, banks have had trouble coping with how to handle the glut of problem loans. Reversing trend These factors have helped slow the pace of foreclosures, but now that trend appears to be reversing. In all, more than 900,000 households, or one in every 138 homes, received a foreclosure - related notice, RealtyTrac said. The firm based in Irvine, Calif., tracks notices for defaults, scheduled home auctions and home repossessions. Homeowners continue to fall behind on payments because they've lost their job or seen their mortgage payment rise due to an interest -rate reset. Many are unable to refinance because they now owe more on their loan than their home is worth. The Obama administration's $75 billion foreclosure prevention program has only been able to help a small fraction of troubled homeowners. About 231,000 homeowners have completed loan modifications as part of the Obama administration's Print Powered By FrmatD ramics" httn / /�znznv mcnhr mcn mPCC /nrint /1 /disn1nvmndP 411 5 / ?()1() Foreclosure rates surge, biggest jump in 5 years - Mortgage Mess Page 2 of 2 flagship foreclosure prevention program through March. That's about 21 percent of the 1.2 million borrowers who began the program over the past year But another 158,000 homeowners who signed up have dropped out — either because they didn't make payments or failed to return the necessary documents. That's up from about 90,000 just a month earlier. Last month, the administration expanded the program, launching a plan to reduce the amount some troubled borrowers owe on their home loans and give jobless homeowners a temporary break. But the details of those programs are expected to take months to work out. The big four The states with the highest foreclosure rates in the first quarter were Nevada, Arizona, Florida and California, with Nevada leading the pack, RealtyTrac said. Rising home prices and speculation fueled a wave of home construction there during the housing boom. But now the state, particularly around the Las Vegas metropolitan area, is saddled with a glut of unsold homes. Still, the number of homes in Nevada that received a foreclosure filing dropped 16 percent from the first quarter last year. All told, one in every 33 homes in Nevada was facing foreclosure, more than four times the national average, RealtyTrac said. Foreclosure filings rose on an annual and quarterly basis in Arizona, however. One in every 49 homes there received a foreclosure - related notice during the quarter. Florida, meanwhile, posted the third - highest foreclosure rate with one out of every 57 properties receiving a foreclosure filing. California accounted for the biggest slice overall of homes facing foreclosure — roughly 23 percent of the nation's total. One in every 62 properties received a foreclosure filing in the first quarter. Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. URL: http: / /www.msnbc.msn. com/id /36547572 /ns/business- mortgage_mess/ MSN Privacy. Lega1C 2010 MSNBC.com hthn'/hanlnx/ menlhr men All r%1101 0 Finance and Commerce - Minnesota business taxes 15th- lowest Business News May 4, 2010 Minnesota business taxes 15th - lowest by Dan Heilman Staff Writer Page 1 of 1 Minnesota's taxes on businesses are the 15th - lowest in the nation, according to a study conducted by Ernst & Young and the Council on State Taxation (COST), a national association of corporate tax attorneys. The study, Total State and Local Business Taxes 2009, also found that Minnesota's annual business taxes would have to be $940 million higher in order to reach the national average of the states. Minnesota's total state and local taxes on businesses in 2009 were 4.3 percent of the state's private sector Gross State Product. The national average for the states was 4.7 percent. In an earlier finding, COST said, because of deductions, Minnesota actually only collects 30 cents on the dollar of the 9.8 percent corporate income tax rate. COST said credits and exemptions under the Minnesota corporate net income tax totaled 70 percent. COST also gave Minnesota the second- highest score in the nation for fair, efficient tax administration. COST, an association of 600 corporate tax attorneys, tallies all state and local taxes imposed on businesses, including corporate income taxes and the extent that the individual income tax falls on business owners. The study measures the taxes paid as a portion of private business activity in the state and then ranks each state. Copyright 2010 Finance and Commerce All Rights Reserved U.S. Trust Building Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 333 -4244 http: / /www. finance - commerce.com /print.cfin ?recID= 16194 05/03/2010 Finance and Commerce - Lots to build on for Twin Cities homebuilders Page 1 of 2 Construction April 30, 2010 Lots to build on for Twin Cities homebuilders by Brian Johnson Staff Writer Residential figures improve again in April Local homebuilding blossomed in April as residential construction continued its comeback. In April, Twin Cities municipalities handed out 322 residential building permits for 391 new housing units, up from 132 permits and 271 units in April 2009, according to the Keystone Report, which tracks homebuilding permits in the 13 -county metro area. The total value of the April permits was $89.5 million, compared with $51 million a year ago. The permit numbers continue an encouraging trend. Throughout the year, monthly activity has compared favorably to previous -year numbers. And the year -to -date data through April (925 permits, 1,667 units, $308.6 million value) is a big improvement over the same period in 2009 (480 permits, 1,037 units, $191.7 million value). Year -to -date numbers are at their highest point since 2007, when builders took out 1,552 permits for 2,883 housing units in the first four months of the year. In 2010, March numbers were impressive but much of that was powered by a few large housing projects in a handful of cities. In April, the trend is more toward single - family, with unspectacular- but -solid numbers coming in throughout the metro. A dozen cities posted double -digit planned unit numbers in April. Blaine was busiest (36 permits, 39 units), followed by Maple Grove (28 permits, 29 units), Woodbury (16 permits, 27 units), Hugo (5 permits, 19 units), Anoka (2 permits, 19 units) and Shakopee (18 permits, 18 units). Federal tax credits for first -time homebuyers expire at the end of the month — a sales contract has to be signed by April 30 — and that's one thing that may have fueled April activity, according to Bryan Schafer, Blaine's community development director. "I think it's two things," he said. " Homebuilding is starting to come back in our area, and it's also ... the housing credit. We are all waiting to see, once the tax credit goes away, whether there is a big drop -off in permits or if we are able to chug through the summer" with increased homebuilding. "We definitely think it's a different spring than last year.... And in the Upper Midwest, you can't dismiss the impact of the weather." Ryan Jones, manager of the Twin Cities office of Metrostudy, a provider of market information for housing and related industries, said the tax credit has certainly played a role in the increased housing activity. However, Jones said he doesn't expect to see numbers "fall off the cliff" in May and June. Hopeful signs in the economy — fewer job losses, increased consumer confidence and other factors — may be playing a role in getting homebuyers off the fence, he said. "We could be surprised," he added. "There could be ... move -up buyers that are out there that have not been driven by tax credits. We could see a shift from buyers in entry level to that next tier, and they still want to take advantage of low rates that are out there before they inevitably start to inch their way back up." April leaders in housing units planned Blaine 39 Maple Grove 29 Woodbury 27 Hugo 19 Anoka 19 Shakopee 18 Twin Cities homebuilding permits (April) http: / /www. finance - commerce .com /print.cfin ?recID =16165 04/30/2010 Finance and Commerce - Lots to build on for Twin Cities homebuilders Page 2 of 2 2010: 322 permits, 391 housing units 2009: 132 permits, 271 units 2008: 180 permits, 293 units 2007: 486 permits, 895 units Year -to -date through April 2010: 925 permits, 1,677 units, $308.6 million value 2009: 480 permits, 1,037 units, $191.7 million value 2008: 792 permits, 1,103 units, $288.7 million value 2007:1,552 permits, 2,883 units, $615.3 million value Source: Keystone Report Copyright 2010 Finance and Commerce All Rights Reserved U.S. Trust Building Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 333 -4244 http: / /www. finance- commerce.com/print.cfin ?recID =16165 04/30/2010 http: / /www. startribune. com/ local / north /93247804.htm1 ?elr= KArksUUUU I M 1 i Page 1 of 3 Cities plan ahead to meet residents where they live The Wax family – granddaughter Rachel Wax, mother Lois Wax and son Galen Wax — all have a place to call home in Blaine, from a rambler to senior housing. Suitable housing for all stages of life helps keep families, planners say. By MARIA ELENA BACA, Star Tribune Last update: May 9, 2010 - 10:45 PM Across half a century, three generations and a lifetime of changes, Blaine has been home to the Wax family -- which is exactly how the city likes it and wants it to be for other families. Lois Wax, 84, who raised five children with her now- deceased husband, Adolph, on the family farm in Blaine, lives at city -owned senior apartments. Son Galen, 54, lives on 9 acres in Blaine with his wife, Angela. Now, their daughter, Rachel, 24, and her fiance, Chad, plan to start their married life in a rambler, not far away. The family, with members in three stages of life in three types of homes, could be poster children for a concept called "life cycle housing." Blaine and other cities are striving to make available the housing, the amenities and a culture that people need throughout their lives; in return, cities get stability, value and an engaged resident base. "We want to make sure everyone who is in Blaine can stay in Blaine," said Community Development Director Bryan Schafer. "If you're starting your employment life, we want to make sure we have homes for those young workers. And as you mature through that process, we have that move -up home available. And when you're done with that process, your move -down home is available, too." Having a diversity of ages and household Advertisement Print Powered By FcarmatDynamics" http://www.startribune.com/templates/fdcp?1273516743350 05/10/2010 Marlin Levison, Star Tribune http: / /www. startribune. com /local /north/93 2478 04.html ?elr= KArksUUUU P�Wi il. Page 2 of 3 types gives a community vitality, said Becky Yust, professor of housing studies at the University of Minnesota. But there are other, practical reasons not to create a city made up just of, say, detached single - family homes. "In ecology, you might call this a monoculture," Yust said. "There's just one type of housing, and one type of family structure, and it just doesn't continue to necessarily work as the needs of one stage of life are different from another stage of life. Communities are challenged to provide the kind of services and amenities across that entire age range." Not sole factor, but a big one Housing isn't the only factor that drives where people live, of course. Quality and proximity of schools and jobs, sense of safety, retail, transit and recreational opportunities also loom large. But it's a big factor. "The type of housing [a city] has creates that macroenvironment in which that allows for those other things to happen," Yust said. "You've got to have the people and the housing and around that, based on the households you have, that will characterize the schools and issues of transit and safety." To some extent, a diversified housing stock also helps insulate cities from shifts in demographics and economics. "From a social aspect, we find a benefit in having a lot of different types and incomes and backgrounds of people makes the community more interesting," said Kersten Elverum, Hopkins' director of economic development and planning. "From an economic perspective, we have always been cautious about having too much of any one product type, so when that market is weak you're not overly impacted." Ideally, in fully developed cities like Hopkins, housing passes from one generation to the next, and there's something there for each stage of life. Hopkins is noted for having everything from multi - family rentals in a walkable, transit - friendly city center, to modest single - family neighborhoods and sprawling executive houses on its fringes. The city has long collaborated with homeowners to make houses work for them, using home improvement grants and consulting help. Advertisement Print Powered By ormatQynamics" http://www.startribune.com/templates/fdcp?1273516743350 05/10/2010 http: / /www. startribune.com/ local / north /93247804.html ?elr= KArksUUUU NO do Ull Page 3 of 3 "We're preserving our housing stock with programs aimed at keeping people in place," said Kersten Elverum, the city's director of economic development and planning. "If their home isn't big enough, instead of moving from Hopkins, we'll let you make your house meet your needs." Serving the cycles Elsewhere in the metro area, Shoreview, like other upscale suburbs, has struggled with the bookends of life. But the city recently built senior - oriented apartments and townhouses, which have been split evenly between empty - nesters and young singles, said Community Development Director Tom Simonson. Young families -- long -term residents who drive the retail base and who are the heart of school and community programs -- likely are drawn in by the city's parks and trails, a convenient location and good schools, but they might be turned off by the need to update mid - century houses, he said. The city recently introduced its Home Energy Improvement Loan Program, offering loans of as much as $20,000 aimed at helping homeowners prepare for resale, and for new residents who want to make updates. "In a city like Shoreview and other first- and second - ring suburbs, we don't have large tracts of land to develop any longer," he said, "so [we're asking,] how can we help provide incentives in existing neighborhoods to support reinvestment and look at redeveloping areas to provide different housing in the future ?" In Blaine, the Wax family planned a Mother's Day gathering at Galen's 9 -acre spread, which he bought in 1988 because he wanted to give his three kids space to run, much as he had growing up on the farm. He and Angela are already planning their retirement, someplace with access to transit, shopping, and family members clustered in the north metro. "In my heart of hearts, I don't think we're ever going to get that far away from each other," he said. Maria Elena Baca • 612- 673 -4409 Advertisement Print Powered By atD namic! " http: / /www.startribune.com /templates /fdcp ?1273516743350 05/10/2010